- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Letters

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Featured in Physics
  • Open Access

Interferometric Amplification and Suppression of External Beam Shifts

Carlotta Versmold1,2,3,*, Jan Dziewior1,2,3, Florian Huber1,2,3, Elina Köster1,2,3, Gregory Reznik4, Lev Vaidman4,5, and Harald Weinfurter1,2,3,†

  • *Contact author: carlotta.versmold@physik.uni-muenchen.de
  • †Contact author: h.w@lmu.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 253802 – Published 17 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/fggq-yhz8

Abstract

Interferometers are known for precise measurements of the effects inside of them. Here we show that placing a Dove prism in one of the interferometer arms allows for also detecting minute effects happening outside the device. We derive how the additional reflection in one arm can amplify small tilts or displacements of the input beam in the dark output port of the interferometer, in analogy to weak value amplification. The experiment demonstrates a clear improvement of the measurement signal. Moreover, in the bright output port, small disturbances in the input beam get largely filtered, thereby enabling beam stabilization with a fully passive device.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

synopsis

How to Measure a Tiny Beam Shift

Published 17 December, 2025

A quantum trick based on interferometric measurements allows the ultrasensitive detection of the motion of a laser beam.

See more in Physics

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (43)

  1. B. E. A. Saleh and M. C. Teich, Fundamentals of Photonics, 1st ed. (Wiley, New York, 1991), 10.1002/0471213748.
  2. C. A. Putman, B. G. De Grooth, N. F. Van Hulst, and J. Greve, A theoretical comparison between interferometric and optical beam deflection technique for the measurement of cantilever displacement in AFM, Ultramicroscopy 42–44, 1509 (1992).
  3. V. Delaubert, N. Treps, M. Lassen, C. C. Harb, C. Fabre, P. K. Lam, and H.-A. Bachor, TEM10 homodyne detection as an optimal small-displacement and tilt-measurement scheme, Phys. Rev. A 74, 053823 (2006).
  4. R. C. Pooser and B. Lawrie, Ultrasensitive measurement of microcantilever displacement below the shot-noise limit, Optica 2, 393 (2015).
  5. Y. Aharonov, D. Z. Albert, and L. Vaidman, How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1351 (1988).
  6. J. Dressel, M. Malik, F. M. Miatto, A. N. Jordan, and R. W. Boyd, Colloquium: Understanding quantum weak values: Basics and applications, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 307 (2014).
  7. A. N. Jordan, J. Martínez-Rincón, and J. C. Howell, Technical advantages for weak-value amplification: When less is more, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011031 (2014).
  8. J. P. Torres and L. J. Salazar-Serrano, Weak value amplification: A view from quantum estimation theory that highlights what it is and what isn’t, Sci. Rep. 6, 19702 (2016).
  9. Y. Mori, J. Lee, and I. Tsutsui, On the validity of weak measurement applied for precision measurement, J. Phys. B 53, 015501 (2019).
  10. D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, N. Yunger Halpern, H. V. Lepage, A. A. Lasek, C. H. W. Barnes, and S. Lloyd, Quantum advantage in postselected metrology, Nat. Commun. 11, 3775 (2020).
  11. O. Hosten and P. Kwiat, Observation of the spin Hall effect of light via weak measurements, Science 319, 787 (2008).
  12. P. B. Dixon, D. J. Starling, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Ultrasensitive beam deflection measurement via interferometric weak value amplification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 173601 (2009).
  13. D. J. Starling, P. B. Dixon, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Optimizing the signal-to-noise ratio of a beam-deflection measurement with interferometric weak values, Phys. Rev. A 80, 041803(R) (2009).
  14. O. S. Magaña-Loaiza, M. Mirhosseini, B. Rodenburg, and R. W. Boyd, Amplification of angular rotations using weak measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 200401 (2014).
  15. G. I. Viza, J. Martínez-Rincón, G. B. Alves, A. N. Jordan, and J. C. Howell, Experimentally quantifying the advantages of weak-value-based metrology, Phys. Rev. A 92, 032127 (2015).
  16. J. Dziewior, L. Knips, D. Farfurnik, K. Senkalla, N. Benshalom, J. Efroni, J. Meinecke, S. Bar-Ad, H. Weinfurter, and L. Vaidman, Universality of local weak interactions and its application for interferometric alignment, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 2881 (2019).
  17. S. P. Walborn, G. H. Aguilar, P. L. Saldanha, L. Davidovich, and R. L. d. M. Filho, Interferometric sensing of the tilt angle of a Gaussian beam, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033191 (2020).
  18. L. Xu, Z. Liu, A. Datta, G. C. Knee, J. S. Lundeen, Y.-Q. Lu, and L. Zhang, Approaching quantum-limited metrology with imperfect detectors by using weak-value amplification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 080501 (2020).
  19. H. W. Dove, Das Reversionsprisma und seine Anwendung als terrestrisches Ocular und zum Messen von Winkeln, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 159, 189 (1851).
  20. J. Leach, M. J. Padgett, S. M. Barnett, S. Franke-Arnold, and J. Courtial, Measuring the orbital angular momentum of a single photon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 257901 (2002).
  21. C. C. Leary, L. A. Baumgardner, and M. G. Raymer, Stable mode sorting by two-dimensional parity of photonic transverse spatial states, Opt. Express 17, 2435 (2009).
  22. S. Slussarenko, V. D’Ambrosio, B. Piccirillo, L. Marrucci, and E. Santamato, The polarizing Sagnac interferometer: A tool for light orbital angular momentum sorting and spin-orbit photon processing, Opt. Express 18, 27205 (2010).
  23. D. Fu, Y. Zhou, R. Qi, S. Oliver, Y. Wang, S. M. H. Rafsanjani, J. Zhao, M. Mirhosseini, Z. Shi, P. Zhang, and R. W. Boyd, Realization of a scalable Laguerre–Gaussian mode sorter based on a robust radial mode sorter, Opt. Express 26, 33057 (2018).
  24. L. Vaidman, Past of a quantum particle, Phys. Rev. A 87, 052104 (2013).
  25. A. Danan, D. Farfurnik, S. Bar-Ad, and L. Vaidman, Asking photons where they have been, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 240402 (2013).
  26. B.-G. Englert, K. Horia, J. Dai, Y. L. Len, and H. K. Ng, Past of a quantum particle revisited, Phys. Rev. A 96, 022126 (2017).
  27. U. Peleg and L. Vaidman, Comment on “Past of a quantum particle revisited”, Phys. Rev. A 99, 026103 (2019).
  28. J. R. Hance, J. Rarity, and J. Ladyman, Weak values and the past of a quantum particle, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023048 (2023).
  29. M. A. Alonso and A. N. Jordan, Can a Dove prism change the past of a single photon?, Quantum Stud. Math. Found. 2, 255 (2015).
  30. L. Vaidman and I. Tsutsui, When photons are lying about where they have been, Entropy 20, 538 (2018).
  31. G. Reznik, C. Versmold, J. Dziewior, F. Huber, S. Bagchi, H. Weinfurter, J. Dressel, and L. Vaidman, Photons are lying about where they have been, again, Phys. Lett. A 470, 128782 (2023).
  32. Q. Yuan and X. Feng, Photons can tell “contradictory” answer about where they have been, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 138, 70 (2023).
  33. G. Reznik, C. Versmold, J. Dziewior, F. Huber, H. Weinfurter, J. Dressel, and L. Vaidman, Comment on “Photons can tell ‘contradictory’ answer about where they have been”, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 1 (2024).
  34. L. Vaidman, Lying particles, Front. Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 1362235 (2024).
  35. J. Harris, R. W. Boyd, and J. S. Lundeen, Weak value amplification can outperform conventional measurement in the presence of detector saturation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 070802 (2017).
  36. L. Vaidman, Weak value controversy, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 375, 20160395 (2017).

  37. The value of the normalization N does not remain the same from equation to equation.

  38. Note that, instead of using a Dove prism, the same inversion effect could be achieved by adding an odd number of reflections in one arm, for example, using a K-prism or a cat-eye reflector [39].

  39. M. Dobosz, Interference sensor for ultra-precision measurement of laser beam angular deflection, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 115003 (2018).

  40. For example, for pure pre- and postselection states |ψ⟩ and |ϕ⟩, the weak value of an operator O is given by (O)w=⟨ϕ|O|ψ⟩/⟨ϕ|ψ⟩.

  41. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/fggq-yhz8 for three sets of audio files.
  42. L. Vaidman, A. Ben-Israel, J. Dziewior, L. Knips, M. Weißl, J. Meinecke, C. Schwemmer, R. Ber, and H. Weinfurter, Weak value beyond conditional expectation value of the pointer readings, Phys. Rev. A 96, 032114 (2017).
  43. C. Versmold, J. Dziewior, F. Huber, E. Köster, G. Reznik, L. Vaidman, and H. Weinfurter, Data for “Interferometric amplification and suppression of external beam shifts”, 10.5281/zenodo.17193220 (2025).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 253802– Published 17 December, 2025
  • Received 29 July 2025
  • Accepted 23 October 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation