- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Quantum speedup from nonclassical polarization

Tim Aßbrock*, Jan Sperling, and Laura Ares

  • Theoretical Quantum Science, Institute for Photonic Quantum Systems (PhoQS), Paderborn University, Warburger Straße 100, 33098 Paderborn, Germany

  • *Contact author: tim.assbrock@uni-paderborn.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 8, L032018 – Published 3 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/mflc-2mzq

Abstract

We develop a framework for identifying nonclassical speedups in systems with polarization, likewise spin degrees of freedom. By confining the dynamics to the manifold of angular momentum coherent states, which act as the classical reference in this case, we compute the speed limit that bounds the rate of change of the state achievable without generating quantum coherence. A comparison with the unrestricted quantum speed limit enables the quantitative identification of speedups arising from polarization nonclassicality. We apply this framework to the cross-Kerr interaction, demonstrating a persistent speedup scaling as O(N) with the photon number N, with a parity effect in favor of even photon numbers. The results establish polarization nonclassicality as a genuine dynamical resource, linking quantum coherence to quantum-enhanced evolution speeds in nonlinear photonic systems.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (70)

  1. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010).
  2. C. Fabre and N. Treps, Modes and states in quantum optics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 035005 (2020).
  3. C. Gross, Spin squeezing, entanglement and quantum metrology with Bose–Einstein condensates, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 45, 103001 (2012).
  4. A. Celi, A. Sanpera, V. Ahufinger, and M. Lewenstein, Quantum optics and frontiers of physics: The third quantum revolution, Phys. Scr. 92, 013003 (2017).
  5. J. L. O’Brien, A. Furusawa, and J. Vučković, Photonic quantum technologies, Nat. Photon. 3, 687 (2009).
  6. J. Wang, F. Sciarrino, A. Laing, and M. G. Thompson, Integrated photonic quantum technologies, Nat. Photon. 14, 273 (2020).
  7. C. Noh and D. G. Angelakis, Quantum simulations and many-body physics with light, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 016401 (2017).
  8. Y. Hasegawa, Unifying speed limit, thermodynamic uncertainty relation and Heisenberg principle via bulk-boundary correspondence, Nat. Commun. 14, 2828 (2023).
  9. J. Preskill, The Physics of Quantum Information, Proceedings of the 28th Solvay Conference on Physics, edited by D. J. Gross, A. Sevrin, and P. Zoller (World Scientific, Singapore, 2023), pp. 6–28.
  10. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum limits to dynamical evolution, Phys. Rev. A 67, 052109 (2003).
  11. M. Benyoucef, Recent advances in photonic quantum technologies, Adv. Quantum Technol. 8, 2400628 (2025).
  12. A. K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on Bell's theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991).
  13. P. W. Shor, Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer, SIAM J. Comput. 26, 1484 (1997).
  14. L. K. Grover, A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC'96 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1996) pp. 212–219.
  15. L. Mandelstam and I. Tamm, The uncertainty relation between energy and time in non-relativistic quantum mechanics, in Selected Papers, edited by B. M. Bolotovskii, V. Y. Frenkel, and R. Peierls (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1991), pp. 115–123.
  16. J. Anandan and Y. Aharonov, Geometry of quantum evolution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1697 (1990).
  17. S. Deffner and S. Campbell, Quantum speed limits: From Heisenberg's uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 453001 (2017).
  18. F. Yasmin and J. Sperling, Entanglement-assisted quantum speedup: Beating local quantum speed limits, Phys. Rev. A 110, 012424 (2024).
  19. J. M. Epstein and K. B. Whaley, Quantum speed limits for quantum-information-processing tasks, Phys. Rev. A 95, 042314 (2017).
  20. D. P. Pires, E. R. deAzevedo, D. O. Soares-Pinto, F. Brito, and J. G. Filgueiras, Experimental investigation of geometric quantum speed limits in an open quantum system, Commun. Phys. 7, 142 (2024).
  21. B. Yadin, S. Imai, and O. Gühne, Quantum speed limit for states and observables of perturbed open systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 230404 (2024).
  22. D. Shrimali, B. Panda, and A. K. Pati, Stronger speed limit for observables: Tighter bound for the capacity of entanglement, the modular Hamiltonian, and the charging of a quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A 110, 022425 (2024).
  23. D. Shrimali, S. Bhowmick, and A. K. Pati, Quantum speed limit on the production of quantumness of observables, Phys. Rev. A 111, 022445 (2025).
  24. T. Nishiyama and Y. Hasegawa, Speed limits and thermodynamic uncertainty relations for quantum systems with the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. A 111, 012214 (2025).
  25. D. Wei, H. Liu, Y. Li, F. Gao, S. Qin, and Q. Wen, Quantum speed limit for time-fractional open systems, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 175, 114065 (2023).
  26. B. Hinrichs, M. Lemm, and O. Siebert, On Lieb–Robinson bounds for a class of continuum fermions, Ann. Henri Poincaré 26, 41 (2025).
  27. N. Carabba, N. Hörnedal, and A. del Campo, Quantum speed limits on operator flows and correlation functions, Quantum 6, 884 (2022).
  28. M.-X. Luo, Quantumness speeds up quantum thermodynamics processes, iScience 27, 109722 (2024).
  29. C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer, Phys. Rev. D 23, 1693 (1981).
  30. The LIGO Scientific Collaboration, A gravitational wave observatory operating beyond the quantum shot-noise limit, Nat. Phys. 7, 962 (2011).
  31. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009).
  32. L. Ares, N. Prasannan, E. Agudelo, A. Luis, B. Brecht, C. Silberhorn, and J. Sperling, Photonic entanglement and polarization nonclassicality: Two manifestations, one nature, arXiv:2407.07477.
  33. J. Sperling and I. A. Walmsley, Classical evolution in quantum systems, Phys. Scr. 95, 065101 (2020).
  34. A. Luis and A. Rivas, Angular-momentum nonclassicality by breaking classical bounds on statistics, Phys. Rev. A 84, 042111 (2011).
  35. P. W. Atkins and J. C. Dobson, Angular momentum coherent states, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 321, 321 (1971).
  36. A. M. Perelomov, Generalized coherent states and some of their applications, Sov. Phys. Usp. 20, 703 (1977).
  37. R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear Optics, 4th ed. (Academic Press, San Diego, 2020).
  38. R. Khan, F. Massel, and T. T. Heikkilä, Cross-Kerr nonlinearity in optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. A 91, 043822 (2015).
  39. S. Khorasani, Solution of cross-Kerr interaction combined with parametric amplification, Sci. Rep. 9, 1830 (2019).
  40. X. L. He, Y. Lu, D. Q. Bao, H. Xue, W. B. Jiang, Z. Wang, A. F. Roudsari, P. Delsing, J. S. Tsai, and Z. R. Lin, Fast generation of Schrödinger cat states using a Kerr-tunable superconducting resonator, Nat. Commun. 14, 6358 (2023).
  41. I. Fushman and J. Vuckovic, Analysis of a quantum nondemolition measurement scheme based on Kerr nonlinearity in photonic crystal waveguides, Opt. Express 15, 5559 (2007).
  42. D. J. Brod, J. Combes, and J. Gea-Banacloche, Two photons co- and counterpropagating through N cross-Kerr sites, Phys. Rev. A 94, 023833 (2016).
  43. M.-X. Luo, H.-R. Li, and H. Lai, Quantum computation based on photonic systems with two degrees of freedom assisted by the weak cross-Kerr nonlinearity, Sci. Rep. 6, 29939 (2016).
  44. K. Nemoto and W. J. Munro, Nearly deterministic linear optical controlled-NOT gate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 250502 (2004).
  45. T. Opatrný and D.-G. Welsch, Coupled cavities for enhancing the cross-phase-modulation in electromagnetically induced transparency, Phys. Rev. A 64, 023805 (2001).
  46. M. Fleischhauer, A. Imamoglu, and J. P. Marangos, Electromagnetically induced transparency: Optics in coherent media, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 633 (2005).
  47. K. M. Beck, M. Hosseini, Y. Duan, and V. Vuletić, Large conditional single-photon cross-phase modulation, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113, 9740 (2016).
  48. I.-C. Hoi, A. F. Kockum, T. Palomaki, T. M. Stace, B. Fan, L. Tornberg, S. R. Sathyamoorthy, G. Johansson, P. Delsing, and C. M. Wilson, Giant cross-Kerr effect for propagating microwaves induced by an artificial atom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 053601 (2013).
  49. T. Baumgratz, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Quantifying coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 140401 (2014).
  50. J. Sperling and I. A. Walmsley, Quasiprobability representation of quantum coherence, Phys. Rev. A 97, 062327 (2018).
  51. J. Sperling and W. Vogel, Quasiprobability distributions for quantum-optical coherence and beyond, Phys. Scr. 95, 034007 (2020).
  52. J. Sperling, L. Ares, and E. Agudelo, Quasiprobabilities from incomplete and overcomplete measurements, arXiv:2511.04274.
  53. M. Bohmann, E. Agudelo, and J. Sperling, Probing nonclassicality with matrices of phase-space distributions, Quantum 4, 343 (2020).
  54. K. C. Tan, S. Choi, and H. Jeong, Negativity of quasiprobability distributions as a measure of nonclassicality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110404 (2020).
  55. T. Linowski and L. Rudnicki, Relating the Glauber-Sudarshan, Wigner, and Husimi quasiprobability distributions operationally through the quantum-limited amplifier and attenuator channels, Phys. Rev. A 109, 023715 (2024).
  56. J. Schwinger, On angular momentum, Technical Rep. NYO-3071 (Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, Nuclear Development Associates, Inc., USA, 1952).
  57. S. Deffner and E. Lutz, Energy–time uncertainty relation for driven quantum systems, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 46, 335302 (2013).
  58. S. Deffner and E. Lutz, Quantum speed limit for non-Markovian dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 010402 (2013).
  59. M. M. Taddei, B. M. Escher, L. Davidovich, and R. L. de Matos Filho, Quantum speed limit for physical processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 050402 (2013).
  60. D. P. Pires, M. Cianciaruso, L. C. Céleri, G. Adesso, and D. O. Soares-Pinto, Generalized geometric quantum speed limits, Phys. Rev. X 6, 021031 (2016).
  61. S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439 (1994).
  62. M. G. A. Paris, Quantum estimation for quantum technology, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 07, 125 (2009).
  63. N. Margolus and L. B. Levitin, The maximum speed of dynamical evolution, Physica D 120, 188 (1998).
  64. A. C. da Silva, Lectures on Symplectic Geometry, Lecture Notes in Mathematics Vol. 1764 (Springer, Berlin, 2001), pp. XII+220.
  65. J. E. Marsden and T. S. Ratiu, Introduction to Mechanics and Symmetry: A Basic Exposition of Classical Mechanical Systems (Springer, New York, 1999).
  66. J. E. Marsden, S. Pekarsky, and S. Shkoller, Discrete Euler-Poincaré and Lie-Poisson equations, Nonlinearity 12, 1647 (1999).
  67. D. D. Holm, J. E. Marsden, and T. S. Ratiu, The Euler-Poincaré equations in geophysical fluid dynamics, in Large-Scale Atmosphere-Ocean Dynamics II: Geometric Methods and Models (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge [England], 2002), pp. 251–300.
  68. J. Pinske, L. Ares, B. Hinrichs, M. Kolb, and J. Sperling, Separability Lindblad equation for dynamical open-system entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 113, L010403 (2026).
  69. L. Ares, J. Pinske, B. Hinrichs, M. Kolb, and J. Sperling, Restricted Monte Carlo wave-function method and Lindblad equation for identifying entangling open-quantum-system dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 113, 012220 (2026).
  70. J. Dajka, J. Łuczka, and P. Hänggi, Distance between quantum states in the presence of initial qubit-environment correlations: A comparative study, Phys. Rev. A 84, 032120 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 8, L032018– Published 3 August, 2026
  • Received 25 March 2026
  • Accepted 1 July 2026
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