- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review X

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
  • Open Access

Incoherent Imaging with Spatially Structured Quantum Probes

Anthony J. Brady1,2,*, Zihao Gong3, Alexey V. Gorshkov1,2, and Saikat Guha3

  • *Contact author: ajbrad4123@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. X 16, 041030 – Published 2 November, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/v3td-r5q6

Abstract

Incoherent imaging, including fluorescence and absorption microscopy, is often hindered by weak signals and resolution limits—notoriously, Rayleigh’s curse. We introduce a framework for incoherent quantum imaging in the perturbative (weak-signal) regime that leverages spatially structured quantum probes and multiplexed quantum readout to overcome these limitations. We propose a novel twin-beam echo protocol that maps absorption and fluorescence onto distinct idler and signal modes that carry thermal-like signatures characteristic of passive imaging. This yields an explicit architecture for simultaneous absorption and fluorescence imaging at the quantum limit and allows passive-imaging methods to be directly repurposed for active quantum imaging. As a corollary, we show that subdiffraction absorption imaging with quantum probes evades Rayleigh’s curse, whereas classical probes remain provably afflicted. Remarkably, the same protocol supports displacement-field reconstruction of multiple quadratures (e.g., oscillators’ positions) and pertains to both conventional and subdiffraction imaging. We further identify Fock states in a structured spatial mode basis as a non-Gaussian alternative with comparable performance. Though primarily developed for optical imaging, our framework suggests broad applications to phononic and acoustic imaging, and to reconstructing forces, fields, or charge distributions with an array of mechanical oscillators.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Popular Summary

Imaging faint and closely spaced features is hindered by two prominent challenges: weak signals and classical resolution limits. We consider a quantum-optical imaging technique that uses spatially structured “twin beams” for illumination and detection, mapping fluorescence and absorption signals onto distinct detection channels. This structure enables quantum-enhanced imaging of both processes and connects naturally with spatial-mode-resolved imaging techniques. Crucially, we show that quantum-optical probes can overcome Rayleigh’s curse in subdiffraction absorption imaging, where classical probes become fundamentally limited. More broadly, our framework applies to reconstructing the random displacements of an array of mechanical oscillators, establishing connections between quantum-enhanced imaging and sensing across photonic and mechanical platforms.

Article Text

References (133)

  1. M. A. Taylor and W. P. Bowen, Quantum metrology and its application in biology, Phys. Rep. 615, 1 (2016).
  2. H. Defienne, W. P. Bowen, M. Chekhova, G. B. Lemos, D. Oron, S. Ramelow, N. Treps, and D. Faccio, Advances in quantum imaging, Nat. Photonics 18, 1024 (2024).
  3. N. Aslam, H. Zhou, E. K. Urbach, M. J. Turner, R. L. Walsworth, M. D. Lukin, and H. Park, Quantum sensors for biomedical applications, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 157 (2023).
  4. F. Casola, T. van der Sar, and A. Yacoby, Probing condensed matter physics with magnetometry based on nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamond, Nat. Rev. Mater. 3, 17088 (2018).
  5. J. Rovny, S. Gopalakrishnan, A. C. B. Jayich, P. Maletinsky, E. Demler, and N. P. de Leon, Nanoscale diamond quantum sensors for many-body physics, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 753 (2024).
  6. R. Schnabel, N. Mavalvala, D. E. McClelland, and P. K. Lam, Quantum metrology for gravitational wave astronomy, Nat. Commun. 1, 121 (2010).
  7. W. Jia, V. Xu, K. Kuns, M. Nakano, L. Barsotti, M. Evans, N. Mavalvala, and members of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration, Squeezing the quantum noise of a gravitational-wave detector below the standard quantum limit, Science 385, 1318 (2024).
  8. S. M. Vermeulen, T. Cullen, D. Grass, I. A. O. MacMillan, A. J. Ramirez, J. Wack, B. Korzh, Vincent S. H. Lee, K. M. Zurek, C. Stoughton, and L. McCuller, Photon-counting interferometry to detect geontropic space-time fluctuations with GQuEST, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011034 (2025).
  9. C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 035002 (2017).
  10. S. Pirandola, B. R. Bardhan, T. Gehring, C. Weedbrook, and S. Lloyd, Advances in photonic quantum sensing, Nat. Photonics 12, 724 (2018).
  11. M. Genovese, Real applications of quantum imaging, J. Opt. 18, 073002 (2016).
  12. P.-A. Moreau, E. Toninelli, T. Gregory, and M. J. Padgett, Imaging with quantum states of light, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 367 (2019).
  13. F. Albarelli, M. Barbieri, M. Genoni, and I. Gianani, A perspective on multiparameter quantum metrology: From theoretical tools to applications in quantum imaging, Phys. Lett. A 384, 126311 (2020).
  14. M. Tsang, R. Nair, and X.-M. Lu, Quantum theory of superresolution for two incoherent optical point sources, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031033 (2016).
  15. M. Tsang, Resolving starlight: A quantum perspective, Contemp. Phys. 60, 279 (2019).
  16. C. Lupo, Z. Huang, and P. Kok, Quantum limits to incoherent imaging are achieved by linear interferometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 080503 (2020).
  17. Y. Wang and S. Zhou, Limitations of Gaussian measurements in quantum imaging, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 120201 (2025).
  18. T. Gefen, A. Rotem, and A. Retzker, Overcoming resolution limits with quantum sensing, Nat. Commun. 10, 4992 (2019).
  19. S. L. Mouradian, N. Glikin, E. Megidish, K.-I. Ellers, and H. Haeffner, Quantum sensing of intermittent stochastic signals, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032419 (2021).
  20. A. Dey, S. Mouradian, C. Lupo, and Z. Huang, Quantum-optimal frequency estimation of stochastic ac fields, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 130802 (2025).
  21. T. Macr𝚤, A. Smerzi, and L. Pezzè, Loschmidt echo for quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A 94, 010102(R) (2016).
  22. S. P. Nolan, S. S. Szigeti, and S. A. Haine, Optimal and robust quantum metrology using interaction-based readouts, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 193601 (2017).
  23. S. C. Burd, R. Srinivas, J. J. Bollinger, A. C. Wilson, D. J. Wineland, D. Leibfried, D. H. Slichter, and D. T. C. Allcock, Quantum amplification of mechanical oscillator motion, Science 364, 1163 (2019).
  24. S. Colombo, E. Pedrozo-Peñafiel, A. F. Adiyatullin, Z. Li, E. Mendez, C. Shu, and V. Vuletić, Time-reversal-based quantum metrology with many-body entangled states, Nat. Phys. 18, 925 (2022).
  25. M. Kamble, J. Wang, and G. S. Agarwal, Quantum metrology of absorption and gain parameters using two-mode bright squeezed light, Phys. Rev. A 109, 053715 (2024).
  26. A. Monras and Matteo G. A. Paris, Optimal quantum estimation of loss in bosonic channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 160401 (2007).
  27. M. Aspachs, G. Adesso, and I. Fuentes, Optimal quantum estimation of the Unruh-Hawking effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 151301 (2010).
  28. M. Tsang, Quantum noise spectroscopy as an incoherent imaging problem, Phys. Rev. A 107, 012611 (2023).
  29. G. Adesso, F. Dell’Anno, S. De Siena, F. Illuminati, and L. A. M. Souza, Optimal estimation of losses at the ultimate quantum limit with non-Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 79, 040305(R) (2009).
  30. A. Monras and F. Illuminati, Measurement of damping and temperature: Precision bounds in Gaussian dissipative channels, Phys. Rev. A 83, 012315 (2011).
  31. R. Nair and M. Gu, Fundamental limits of quantum illumination, Optica 7, 771 (2020).
  32. Z. Gong, N. Rodriguez, C. N. Gagatsos, S. Guha, and B. A. Bash, Quantum-Enhanced transmittance sensing, IEEE J-STSP 17, 473 (2023).
  33. R. Nair, Quantum-limited loss sensing: Multiparameter estimation and bures distance between loss channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 230801 (2018).
  34. F. Wolf, C. Shi, J. C. Heip, M. Gessner, L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. Schulte, K. Hammerer, and P. O. Schmidt, Motional Fock states for quantum-enhanced amplitude and phase measurements with trapped ions, Nat. Commun. 10, 2929 (2019).
  35. W. Górecki, A. Riccardi, and L. Maccone, Quantum metrology of noisy spreading channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 240503 (2022).
  36. H. Shi and Q. Zhuang, Ultimate precision limit of noise sensing and dark matter search, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 27 (2023).
  37. J. W. Gardner, T. Gefen, S. A. Haine, J. J. Hope, J. Preskill, Y. Chen, and L. McCuller, Stochastic waveform estimation at the fundamental quantum limit, PRX Quantum 6, 030311 (2025).
  38. S. Pirandola and C. Lupo, Ultimate precision of adaptive noise estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 100502 (2017).
  39. R. Nair and M. Gu, Quantum sensing of phase-covariant optical channels, arXiv:2306.15256.
  40. C. Lupo and S. Pirandola, Ultimate precision bound of quantum and subwavelength imaging, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 190802 (2016).
  41. A. H. Kiilerich and K. Mølmer, Input-output theory with quantum pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 123604 (2019).
  42. F. Albarelli, E. Bisketzi, A. Khan, and A. Datta, Fundamental limits of pulsed quantum light spectroscopy: Dipole moment estimation, Phys. Rev. A 107, 062601 (2023).
  43. Y. Zhou, J. Yang, J. D. Hassett, S. M. H. Rafsanjani, M. Mirhosseini, A. N. Vamivakas, A. N. Jordan, Z. Shi, and R. W. Boyd, Quantum-limited estimation of the axial separation of two incoherent point sources, Optica 6, 534 (2019).

  44. We only consider emission into modes matched to the transmitter and collection device; fluorescence into other modes is inevitably lost.

  45. E. Brambilla, L. Caspani, O. Jedrkiewicz, L. A. Lugiato, and A. Gatti, High-sensitivity imaging with multi-mode twin beams, Phys. Rev. A 77, 053807 (2008).
  46. G. Brida, M. Genovese, and I. Ruo Berchera, Experimental realization of sub-shot-noise quantum imaging, Nat. Photonics 4, 227 (2010).
  47. N. Samantaray, I. Ruo-Berchera, A. Meda, and M. Genovese, Realization of the first sub-shot-noise wide field microscope, Light 6, e17005 (2017).
  48. P.-A. Moreau, J. Sabines-Chesterking, R. Whittaker, S. K. Joshi, P. M. Birchall, A. McMillan, J. G. Rarity, and J. C. Matthews, Demonstrating an absolute quantum advantage in direct absorption measurement, Sci. Rep. 7, 6256 (2017).
  49. Y. Xia, A. R. Agrawal, C. M. Pluchar, A. J. Brady, Z. Liu, Q. Zhuang, D. J. Wilson, and Z. Zhang, Entanglement-enhanced optomechanical sensing, Nat. Photonics 17, 470 (2023).
  50. A. J. Brady, X. Chen, Y. Xia, J. Manley, M. Dey Chowdhury, K. Xiao, Z. Liu, R. Harnik, D. J. Wilson, Z. Zhang et al., Entanglement-enhanced optomechanical sensor array with application to dark matter searches, Commun. Phys. 6, 237 (2023).
  51. M. Brownnutt, M. Kumph, P. Rabl, and R. Blatt, Ion-trap measurements of electric-field noise near surfaces, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 1419 (2015).
  52. K. A. Gilmore, M. Affolter, R. J. Lewis-Swan, D. Barberena, E. Jordan, A. M. Rey, and J. J. Bollinger, Quantum-enhanced sensing of displacements and electric fields with two-dimensional trapped-ion crystals, Science 373, 673 (2021).
  53. A. J. Brady, C. Gao, R. Harnik, Z. Liu, Z. Zhang, and Q. Zhuang, Entangled sensor-networks for dark-matter searches, PRX Quantum 3, 030333 (2022).
  54. A. J. Brady, Y.-X. Wang, V. V. Albert, A. V. Gorshkov, and Q. Zhuang, Correlated noise estimation with quantum sensor networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 080803 (2026).
  55. Z. Zhang, X. Zhang, J. Liu, and H. Dong, Quantum-enhanced weak absorption estimation with correlated photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 133604 (2025).

  56. As an aside, we can view the twin-beam echo as a variant of an SU(1,1) interferometer [25, 57], where the first and second squeezing operations play the role of active beam splitters in a time-reversed configuration.

  57. A. M. Marino, N. V. Corzo Trejo, and P. D. Lett, Effect of losses on the performance of an SU(1,1) interferometer, Phys. Rev. A 86, 023844 (2012).
  58. R. J. Glauber, Coherent and incoherent states of the radiation field, Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963).
  59. E. C. G. Sudarshan, Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 277 (1963).
  60. S. Ng, S. Z. Ang, T. A. Wheatley, H. Yonezawa, A. Furusawa, E. H. Huntington, and M. Tsang, Spectrum analysis with quantum dynamical systems, Phys. Rev. A 93, 042121 (2016).
  61. A. Agrawal, A. V. Dixit, T. Roy, S. Chakram, K. He, R. K. Naik, D. I. Schuster, and A. Chou, Stimulated emission of signal photons from dark matter waves, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 140801 (2024).
  62. J.-J. Feng, A. J. Brady, and Q. Zhuang, Physical-layer machine learning with multimode interferometric photon counting, Phys. Rev. Appl. 24, 054050 (2025).
  63. H. Shi, A. J. Brady, W. Górecki, L. Maccone, R. Di Candia, and Q. Zhuang, Quantum-enhanced dark matter detection with in-cavity control: Mitigating the Rayleigh curse, npj Quantum Inf. 11, 48 (2025).
  64. C. Oh, S. Zhou, Y. Wong, and L. Jiang, Quantum limits of superresolution in a noisy environment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 120502 (2021).
  65. C. Lupo, Subwavelength quantum imaging with noisy detectors, Phys. Rev. A 101, 022323 (2020).
  66. C. A. Casacio, L. S. Madsen, A. Terrasson, M. Waleed, K. Barnscheidt, B. Hage, M. A. Taylor, and W. P. Bowen, Quantum-enhanced nonlinear microscopy, Nature (London) 594, 201 (2021).
  67. M. A. Taylor, J. Janousek, V. Daria, J. Knittel, B. Hage, H.-A. Bachor, and W. P. Bowen, Subdiffraction-Limited quantum imaging within a living cell, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011017 (2014).
  68. M. Dowran, A. Kumar, B. J. Lawrie, R. C. Pooser, and A. M. Marino, Quantum-enhanced plasmonic sensing, Optica 5, 628 (2018).
  69. D. A. Kalashnikov, Z. Pan, A. I. Kuznetsov, and L. A. Krivitsky, Quantum spectroscopy of plasmonic nanostructures, Phys. Rev. X 4, 011049 (2014).
  70. C. Lee, B. Lawrie, R. Pooser, K.-G. Lee, C. Rockstuhl, and M. Tame, Quantum plasmonic sensors, Chem. Rev. 121, 4743 (2021).
  71. E. V. Levine, M. J. Turner, P. Kehayias, C. A. Hart, N. Langellier, R. Trubko, D. R. Glenn, R. R. Fu, and R. L. Walsworth, Principles and techniques of the quantum diamond microscope, Nanophotonics 8, 1945 (2019).
  72. S. Scholten, A. Healey, I. Robertson, G. Abrahams, D. Broadway, and J.-P. Tetienne, Widefield quantum microscopy with nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond: Strengths, limitations, and prospects, J. Appl. Phys. 130, 150902 (2021).
  73. N. Deshler, D. Daly, A. Majumder, K. Saha, and S. Guha, Quantum limited spatial resolution of NV-Diamond magnetometry, arXiv:2508.13438.
  74. K.-H. Cheng, Z. Kazi, J. Rovny, B. Zhang, L. S. Nassar, J. D. Thompson, and N. P. de Leon, Massively multiplexed nanoscale magnetometry with diamond quantum sensors, Phys. Rev. X 15, 031014 (2025).
  75. M. Cambria, S. Chand, C. M. Reiter, and S. Kolkowitz, Scalable parallel measurement of individual nitrogen-vacancy centers, Phys. Rev. X 15, 031015 (2025).
  76. W. Ji, Z. Liu, Y. Guo, Z. Hu, J. Zhou, S. Dai, Y. Chen, P. Yu, M. Wang, K. Xia et al., Correlated sensing with a solid-state quantum multisensor system for atomic-scale structural analysis, Nat. Photonics 18, 230 (2024).
  77. G. Nambiar, A. Grankin, and M. Hafezi, Diagnosing electronic phases of matter using photonic correlation functions, Phys. Rev. X 15, 041020 (2025).
  78. M. E. Choi, C. M. Pluchar, W. He, S. Guha, and D. J. Wilson, Quantum-limited imaging of a nanomechanical resonator with a spatial mode sorter, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, L032031 (2025).
  79. C. M. Pluchar, W. He, J. Manley, N. Deshler, S. Guha, and D. J. Wilson, Imaging-based quantum optomechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 023601 (2025).
  80. B. Schrinski, Y. Yang, U. von Lüpke, M. Bild, Y. Chu, K. Hornberger, S. Nimmrichter, and M. Fadel, Macroscopic quantum test with bulk acoustic wave resonators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 133604 (2023).
  81. Q. R. Rahman, I. Kladarić, M.-E. Kern, L. c. v. Lachman, Y. Chu, R. Filip, and M. Fadel, Genuine quantum non-Gaussianity and metrological sensitivity of Fock states prepared in a mechanical resonator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 180801 (2025).
  82. Y. Xia, W. Li, W. Clark, D. Hart, Q. Zhuang, and Z. Zhang, Demonstration of a reconfigurable entangled radio-frequency photonic sensor network, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 150502 (2020).
  83. Y. Xia, W. Li, Q. Zhuang, and Z. Zhang, Quantum-enhanced data classification with a variational entangled sensor network, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021047 (2021).
  84. A. S. Sheremet, M. I. Petrov, I. V. Iorsh, A. V. Poshakinskiy, and A. N. Poddubny, Waveguide quantum electrodynamics: Collective radiance and photon-photon correlations, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 015002 (2023).
  85. M. Reitz, C. Sommer, and C. Genes, Cooperative quantum phenomena in light-matter platforms, PRX Quantum 3, 010201 (2022).
  86. A. González-Tudela, A. Reiserer, J. J. García-Ripoll, and F. J. García-Vidal, Light–matter interactions in quantum nanophotonic devices, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 166 (2024).
  87. M. Lednev, D. Fernández de la Pradilla, F. Lindel, E. Moreno, F. J. García-Vidal, and J. Feist, Spatially resolved photon statistics of general nanophotonic systems, PRX Quantum 6, 020361 (2025).
  88. S.-H. Tan, B. I. Erkmen, V. Giovannetti, S. Guha, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, S. Pirandola, and J. H. Shapiro, Quantum illumination with Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 253601 (2008).
  89. S. Guha and B. I. Erkmen, Gaussian-state quantum-illumination receivers for target detection, Phys. Rev. A 80, 052310 (2009).
  90. Q. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, and J. H. Shapiro, Optimum mixed-state discrimination for noisy entanglement-enhanced sensing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 040801 (2017).
  91. A. Cox, Q. Zhuang, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Guha, Quantum illumination advantage for classification among an arbitrary library of targets, in 2024 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) (IEEE, 2024), pp. 551–556, 10.1109/ISIT57864.2024.10619544.
  92. P. Sekatski, M. Skotiniotis, J. Kołodyński, and W. Dür, Quantum metrology with full and fast quantum control, Quantum 1, 27 (2017).
  93. J. W. Gardner, S. A. Haine, J. J. Hope, Y. Chen, and T. Gefen, Lindblad estimation with fast and precise quantum control, Phys. Rev. Appl. 24, 044055 (2025).
  94. Z. Huang, C. Schwab, and C. Lupo, Ultimate limits of exoplanet spectroscopy: A quantum approach, Phys. Rev. A 107, 022409 (2023).
  95. Q. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, and J. H. Shapiro, Distributed quantum sensing using continuous-variable multipartite entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032329 (2018).
  96. W. Ge, K. Jacobs, Z. Eldredge, A. V. Gorshkov, and M. Foss-Feig, Distributed quantum metrology with linear networks and separable inputs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 043604 (2018).
  97. X. Guo, C. R. Breum, J. Borregaard, S. Izumi, M. V. Larsen, T. Gehring, M. Christandl, J. S. Neergaard-Nielsen, and U. L. Andersen, Distributed quantum sensing in a continuous-variable entangled network, Nat. Phys. 16, 281 (2020).
  98. Z. Zhang and Q. Zhuang, Distributed quantum sensing, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 043001 (2021).
  99. J. Bringewatt, A. Ehrenberg, T. Goel, and A. V. Gorshkov, Optimal function estimation with photonic quantum sensor networks, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013246 (2024).
  100. C. Fabre and N. Treps, Modes and states in quantum optics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 035005 (2020).
  101. W. Larson and B. E. A. Saleh, Resurgence of Rayleigh’s curse in the presence of partial coherence, Optica 5, 1382 (2018).
  102. M. Tsang, Introduction to quantum optics (2024) (Accessed: Dec. 4, 2024).
  103. J. Rehacek, M. Paúr, B. Stoklasa, Z. Hradil, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto, Optimal measurements for resolution beyond the Rayleigh limit, Opt. Lett. 42, 231 (2017).
  104. R. Kerviche, S. Guha, and A. Ashok, Fundamental limit of resolving two point sources limited by an arbitrary point spread function, in 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) (2017), pp. 441–445, 10.1109/ISIT.2017.8006566.
  105. J. Řehaček, Z. Hradil, B. Stoklasa, M. Paúr, J. Grover, A. Krzic, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto, Multiparameter quantum metrology of incoherent point sources: Towards realistic superresolution, Phys. Rev. A 96, 062107 (2017).
  106. L. J. Fiderer, T. Tufarelli, S. Piano, and G. Adesso, General expressions for the quantum Fisher information matrix with applications to discrete quantum imaging, PRX Quantum 2, 020308 (2021).
  107. J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok, Quantum metrology of spatial deformation using arrays of classical and quantum light emitters, Phys. Rev. A 95, 063829 (2017).
  108. M. P. Backlund, Y. Shechtman, and R. L. Walsworth, Fundamental precision bounds for three-dimensional optical localization microscopy with Poisson statistics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 023904 (2018).
  109. Z. Yu and S. Prasad, Quantum limited superresolution of an incoherent source pair in three dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 180504 (2018).
  110. C. Napoli, S. Piano, R. Leach, G. Adesso, and T. Tufarelli, Towards superresolution surface metrology: Quantum estimation of angular and axial separations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 140505 (2019).
  111. E. Bisketzi, D. Branford, and A. Datta, Quantum limits of localisation microscopy, New J. Phys. 21, 123032 (2019).
  112. M. Gross and S. Haroche, Superradiance: An essay on the theory of collective spontaneous emission, Phys. Rep. 93, 301 (1982).
  113. W.-K. Mok, A. Poddar, E. Sierra, C. C. Rusconi, J. Preskill, and A. Asenjo-Garcia, Universal scaling laws for correlated decay of many-body quantum systems, arXiv:2406.00722.
  114. J. Q. Quach, K. E. McGhee, L. Ganzer, D. M. Rouse, B. W. Lovett, E. M. Gauger, J. Keeling, G. Cerullo, D. G. Lidzey, and T. Virgili, Superabsorption in an organic microcavity: Toward a quantum battery, Sci. Adv. 8, eabk3160 (2022).
  115. M. Tsang, Subdiffraction incoherent optical imaging via spatial-mode demultiplexing, New J. Phys. 19, 023054 (2017).
  116. Z. Dutton, R. Kerviche, A. Ashok, and S. Guha, Attaining the quantum limit of superresolution in imaging an object’s length via predetection spatial-mode sorting, Phys. Rev. A 99, 033847 (2019).
  117. M. Tsang, Quantum limit to subdiffraction incoherent optical imaging, Phys. Rev. A 99, 012305 (2019).
  118. S. Zhou and L. Jiang, Modern description of Rayleigh’s criterion, Phys. Rev. A 99, 013808 (2019).
  119. M. R. Grace, Z. Dutton, A. Ashok, and S. Guha, Approaching quantum-limited imaging resolution without prior knowledge of the object location, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 37, 1288 (2020).
  120. K. K. Lee, C. N. Gagatsos, S. Guha, and A. Ashok, Quantum-inspired multi-parameter adaptive Bayesian estimation for sensing and imaging, IEEE JSTP 17, 491 (2023).
  121. X.-M. Lu, H. Krovi, R. Nair, S. Guha, and J. H. Shapiro, Quantum-optimal detection of one-versus-two incoherent optical sources with arbitrary separation, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 1 (2018).
  122. Z. Huang and C. Lupo, Quantum hypothesis testing for exoplanet detection, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 130502 (2021).
  123. M. R. Grace and S. Guha, Identifying objects at the quantum limit for superresolution imaging, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 180502 (2022).
  124. C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. García-Patrón, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, Gaussian quantum information, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621 (2012).
  125. A. Serafini, Quantum Continuous Variables: A Primer of Theoretical Methods (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2017).
  126. M. G. A. Paris, Quantum estimation for quantum technology, Int. J. Quantum. Inform. 07, 125 (2009).
  127. J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok, Geometric perspective on quantum parameter estimation, AVS Quantum Sci. 2, 014701 (2020).
  128. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 010401 (2006).
  129. A. Fujiwara and H. Imai, A fibre bundle over manifolds of quantum channels and its application to quantum statistics, J. Phys. A 41, 255304 (2008).
  130. B. M. Escher, R. L. de Matos Filho, and L. Davidovich, General framework for estimating the ultimate precision limit in noisy quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Phys. 7, 406 (2011).
  131. J. S. Ivan, K. K. Sabapathy, and R. Simon, Operator-sum representation for bosonic Gaussian channels, Phys. Rev. A 84, 042311 (2011).
  132. C. N. Gagatsos, B. A. Bash, S. Guha, and A. Datta, Bounding the quantum limits of precision for phase estimation with loss and thermal noise, Phys. Rev. A 96, 062306 (2017).
  133. O. Pinel, P. Jian, N. Treps, C. Fabre, and D. Braun, Quantum parameter estimation using general single-mode Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 88, 040102(R) (2013).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. X 16, 041030– Published 2 November, 2026
  • Received 2 April 2026
  • Revised 11 September 2026
  • Accepted 6 October 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