- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

PRX Quantum

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

Theory of Quantum-Enhanced Interferometry with General Markovian Light Sources

Erfan Abbasgholinejad1, Daniel Malz2, Ana Asenjo-Garcia3, and Rahul Trivedi1,4,*

  • *Contact author: rahul.trivedi@mpq.mpg.de
PDF

PRX Quantum 7, 033069 – Published 29 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/dmhd-pyct

Abstract

Quantum optical systems comprising quantum emitters interacting with engineered optical modes generate non-classical states of light that can be used as resource states for quantum-enhanced interferometry. However, outside of well-controlled systems producing either single-mode states (e.g. Fock states or squeezed states) or highly symmetric multi-mode states (e.g. superradiant states), their potential for quantum advantage remains uncharacterized. In this work, we develop a framework to analyze quantum enhanced interferometry with general Markovian quantum light sources. First, by connecting the quantum Fisher information (QFI) of the photons emitted by a source to the multi-time correlation functions and the source dynamics, we elucidate the link between the level structure and spectrum of the source to a potential quantum advantage in interferometry. Second, we analyze optimal measurement protocols that can be used to achieve this quantum advantage with experimentally available optical elements. In particular, we show that tunable optical elements with Kerr non-linearity can always be harnessed to implement the optimal measurement for any given source. Simultaneously, we also outline general conditions under which linear optics and photodetection is enough to implement the optimal measurement.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Popular Summary

Quantum light sources can enhance the sensitivity of interferometers beyond classical limits, unlocking new possibilities in precision sensing. While previous work has focused on preparing ideal quantum states like Fock states or NOON states these are often experimentally challenging to realize. In this work, we develop a general theoretical framework to understand when realistic, experimentally accessible light sources can offer quantum advantage in interferometry. We consider a broad and practically relevant class of sources and show how to evaluate their metrological potential by computing only the internal dynamics of the source. We uncover key connections between the source’s level structure and its sensing capabilities: sources with a single ground state are limited to classical scaling, while those with multiple ground states can reach the Heisenberg limit. We also identify measurement protocols including both linear and non-linear setups that can extract the full quantum advantage from these sources. Our results provide a fundamentally important tool for designing and evaluating quantum light sources for interferometry, with immediate relevance to emerging solid-state light sources.

Article Text

References (115)

  1. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nat. Photonics 5, 222 (2011).
  2. G. Tóth and I. Apellaniz, Quantum metrology from a quantum information science perspective, J. Phys. A 47, 424006 (2014).
  3. J. P. Dowling and K. P. Seshadreesan, Quantum optical technologies for metrology, sensing, and imaging, J. Lightwave Technol. 33, 2359 (2015).
  4. R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, M. Jarzyna, and J. Kołodyński, Quantum limits in optical interferometry, Prog. Opt. 60, 345 (2015).
  5. D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger, Going beyond Bell’s theorem, in Bell’s Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe (Springer, New York, 1989), pp. 69–72.
  6. A. M. Fox, Quantum Optics: An Introduction (Oxford university press, New York, 2006), Vol. 15.
  7. B. C. Sanders and G. J. Milburn, Optimal quantum measurements for phase estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 2944 (1995).
  8. J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, D. J. Wineland, and D. J. Heinzen, Optimal frequency measurements with maximally correlated states, Phys. Rev. A 54, R4649 (1996).
  9. M. J. Holland and K. Burnett, Interferometric detection of optical phase shifts at the Heisenberg limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1355 (1993).
  10. J. P. Dowling, Quantum optical metrology—the lowdown on high-NOON states, Contemp. Phys. 49, 125 (2008).
  11. H. Lee, P. Kok, and J. P. Dowling, A quantum Rosetta stone for interferometry, J. Mod. Opt. 49, 2325 (2002).
  12. C. C. Gerry and R. A. Campos, Generation of maximally entangled photonic states with a quantum-optical Fredkin gate, Phys. Rev. A 64, 063814 (2001).
  13. K. T. McCusker and P. G. Kwiat, Efficient optical quantum state engineering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 163602 (2009).
  14. K. T. Kapale and J. P. Dowling, Bootstrapping approach for generating maximally path-entangled photon states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 053602 (2007).
  15. H. Cable and J. P. Dowling, Efficient generation of large number-path entanglement using only linear optics and feed-forward, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 163604 (2007).
  16. G. J. Pryde and A. G. White, Creation of maximally entangled photon-number states using optical fiber multiports, Phys. Rev. A 68, 052315 (2003).
  17. J. I. Cirac, R. Blatt, A. S. Parkins, and P. Zoller, Preparation of Fock states by observation of quantum jumps in an ion trap, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 762 (1993).
  18. A. Saxena, E. Abbasgholinejad, A. Majumdar, and R. Trivedi, Boundary measurement tomography of the Bose Hubbard model on general graphs, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033058 (2024).
  19. R. Huang, A. Miranowicz, J.-Q. Liao, F. Nori, and H. Jing, Nonreciprocal photon blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 153601 (2018).
  20. X. Deng, S. Li, Z.-J. Chen, Z. Ni, Y. Cai, J. Mai, L. Zhang, P. Zheng, H. Yu, C.-L. Zou, S. Liu, F. Yan, Y. Xu, and D. Yu, Quantum-enhanced metrology with large Fock states, Nat. Phys. 20, 1874 (2024).
  21. L. S. Bishop, L. Tornberg, D. Price, E. Ginossar, A. Nunnenkamp, A. A. Houck, J. M. Gambetta, J. Koch, G. Johansson, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Proposal for generating and detecting multi-qubit GHZ states in circuit QED, New J. Phys. 11, 073040 (2009).
  22. Y.-A. Chen, X.-H. Bao, Z.-S. Yuan, S. Chen, B. Zhao, and J.-W. Pan, Heralded generation of an atomic NOON state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 043601 (2010).
  23. K. Müller, A. Rundquist, K. A. Fischer, T. Sarmiento, K. G. Lagoudakis, Y. A. Kelaita, C. Sanchez Munoz, E. Del Valle, F. P. Laussy, and J. Vučković, Coherent generation of nonclassical light on chip via detuned photon blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 233601 (2015).
  24. A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, H. Bernien, A. S. Zibrov, H. Pichler, S. Choi et al., Generation and manipulation of Schrödinger cat states in Rydberg atom arrays, Science 365, 570 (2019).
  25. R. Trivedi, K. Fischer, S. Xu, S. Fan, and J. Vuckovic, Few-photon scattering and emission from low-dimensional quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B 98, 144112 (2018).
  26. J. Tang, W. Geng, and X. Xu, Quantum interference induced photon blockade in a coupled single quantum dot-cavity system, Sci. Rep. 5, 9252 (2015).
  27. H. Snijders, J. Frey, J. Norman, H. Flayac, V. Savona, A. Gossard, J. Bowers, M. Van Exter, D. Bouwmeester, and W. Löffler, Observation of the unconventional photon blockade, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 043601 (2018).
  28. M. W. Mitchell, J. S. Lundeen, and A. M. Steinberg, Super-resolving phase measurements with a multiphoton entangled state, Nature (London) 429, 161 (2004).
  29. M. Hofheinz, E. M. Weig, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, A. D. O’Connell, H. Wang, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Generation of Fock states in a superconducting quantum circuit, Nature (London) 454, 310 (2008).
  30. T. Nagata, R. Okamoto, J. L. O’Brien, K. Sasaki, and S. Takeuchi, Beating the standard quantum limit with four-entangled photons, Science 316, 726 (2007).
  31. S. Slussarenko, M. M. Weston, H. M. Chrzanowski, L. K. Shalm, V. B. Verma, S. W. Nam, and G. J. Pryde, Unconditional violation of the shot-noise limit in photonic quantum metrology, Nat. Photonics 11, 700 (2017).
  32. R. Schnabel, Squeezed states of light and their applications in laser interferometers, Phys. Rep. 684, 1 (2017).
  33. H. Vahlbruch, M. Mehmet, K. Danzmann, and R. Schnabel, Detection of 15 dB squeezed states of light and their application for the absolute calibration of photoelectric quantum efficiency, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 110801 (2016).
  34. A. H. Safavi-Naeini, S. Gröblacher, J. T. Hill, J. Chan, M. Aspelmeyer, and O. Painter, Squeezed light from a silicon micromechanical resonator, Nature (London) 500, 185 (2013).
  35. C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer, Phys. Rev. D 23, 1693 (1981).
  36. H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, Quantum Measurement and Control (Cambridge university press, Cambridge, England, 2009).
  37. U. L. Andersen, T. Gehring, C. Marquardt, and G. Leuchs, 30 years of squeezed light generation, Phys. Scr. 91, 053001 (2016).
  38. L. A. Orozco, M. G. Raizen, M. Xiao, R. J. Brecha, and H. J. Kimble, Squeezed-state generation in optical bistability, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 4, 1490 (1987).
  39. L.-A. Wu, H. J. Kimble, J. L. Hall, and H. Wu, Generation of squeezed states by parametric down conversion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2520 (1986).
  40. M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge university press, Cambridge, England, 1997).
  41. R. H. Dicke, Coherence in spontaneous radiation processes, Phys. Rev. 93, 99 (1954).
  42. V. Paulisch, M. Perarnau-Llobet, A. González-Tudela, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum metrology with one-dimensional superradiant photonic states, Phys. Rev. A 99, 043807 (2019).
  43. S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439 (1994).
  44. C. W. Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory,.J Stat. Phys. 1, 231 (1969).
  45. A. S. Holevo, Probabilistic and Statistical Aspects of Quantum Theory ({Edizioni della Normale, Pisa, 2011), Vol. 1.
  46. D. Yang, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Efficient information retrieval for sensing via continuous measurement, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031012 (2023).
  47. S. Gammelmark and K. Mølmer, Fisher information and the quantum Cramér-Rao sensitivity limit of continuous measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 170401 (2014).
  48. K. Macieszczak, M. Guţă, I. Lesanovsky, and J. P. Garrahan, Dynamical phase transitions as a resource for quantum enhanced metrology, Phys. Rev. A 93, 022103 (2016).
  49. L. Pezzé and A. Smerzi, Ultrasensitive two-mode interferometry with single-mode number squeezing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 163604 (2013).
  50. R. A. Campos, C. C. Gerry, and A. Benmoussa, Optical interferometry at the Heisenberg limit with twin Fock states and parity measurements, Phys. Rev. A 68, 023810 (2003).
  51. H. F. Hofmann, All path-symmetric pure states achieve their maximal phase sensitivity in conventional two-path interferometry, Phys. Rev. A 79, 033822 (2009).
  52. T. Aoki, B. Dayan, E. Wilcut, W. P. Bowen, A. S. Parkins, T. J. Kippenberg, K. J. Vahala, and H. J. Kimble, Observation of strong coupling between one atom and a monolithic microresonator, Nature (London) 443, 671 (2006).
  53. A. V. Akimov, A. Mukherjee, C. L. Yu, D. E. Chang, A. S. Zibrov, P. R. Hemmer, H. Park, and M. D. Lukin, Generation of single optical plasmons in metallic nanowires coupled to quantum dots, Nature (London) 450, 402 (2007).
  54. T. Lund-Hansen, S. Stobbe, B. Julsgaard, H. Thyrrestrup, T. Sünner, M. Kamp, A. Forchel, and P. Lodahl, Experimental realization of highly efficient broadband coupling of single quantum dots to a photonic crystal waveguide, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 113903 (2008).
  55. A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, R.-S. Huang, J. Majer, S. Kumar, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Strong coupling of a single photon to a superconducting qubit using circuit quantum electrodynamics, Nature (London) 431, 162 (2004).
  56. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002).
  57. J. Liu, H. Yuan, X.-M. Lu, and X. Wang, Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estimation, J. Phys. A 53, 023001 (2020).
  58. O. E. Barndorff-Nielsen and R. D. Gill, Fisher information in quantum statistics, J. Phys. A 33, 4481 (2000).
  59. M. Hayashi, Comparison between the Cramer-Rao and the mini-max approaches in quantum channel estimation, Commun. Math. Phys. 304, 689 (2011).
  60. Y. Yang, G. Chiribella, and M. Hayashi, Attaining the ultimate precision limit in quantum state estimation, Commun. Math. Phys. 368, 223 (2019).
  61. S. Xu and S. Fan, Input-output formalism for few-photon transport: A systematic treatment beyond two photons, Phys. Rev. A 91, 043845 (2015).
  62. R. Trivedi, K. Fischer, S. D. Mishra, and J. Vučković, Point-coupling Hamiltonian for frequency-independent linear optical devices, Phys. Rev. A 100, 043827 (2019).
  63. R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis (Cambridge university press, New York, 2012).
  64. P. Guilmin, P. Rouchon, and A. Tilloy, Correlation functions for realistic continuous quantum measurement, IFAC-PapersOnLine 56, 5164 (2023).
  65. C. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise: A Handbook of Markovian and Non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics, 3rd ed. (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004).
  66. H. Carmichael, An Open Systems Approach to Quantum Optics: Lectures Presented at the Université Libre de Bruxelles, October 28 to November 4, 1991 (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009), Vol. 18.
  67. H. J. Carmichael, Statistical Methods in Quantum Optics 1: Master Equations and Fokker–Planck Equations (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013).
  68. F. Belliardo, A. Chu, M. Koppenhöfer, and A. A. Clerk, Extracting information from a superradiant burst using simple measurements, arXiv:2603.13130.
  69. A. Majumdar, P. Kaer, M. Bajcsy, E. D. Kim, K. G. Lagoudakis, A. Rundquist, and J. Vučković, Proposed coupling of an electron spin in a semiconductor quantum dot to a nanosize optical cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 027402 (2013).
  70. E. I. Rosenthal, C. P. Anderson, H. C. Kleidermacher, A. J. Stein, H. Lee, J. Grzesik, G. Scuri, A. E. Rugar, D. Riedel, S. Aghaeimeibodi, G. H. Ahn, K. Van Gasse, and J. Vučković, Microwave spin control of a tin-vacancy qubit in diamond, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031022 (2023).
  71. A. E. Rugar, C. Dory, S. Sun, and J. Vučković, Characterization of optical and spin properties of single tin-vacancy centers in diamond nanopillars, Phys. Rev. B 99, 205417 (2019).
  72. R. Trivedi, M. Radulaski, K. A. Fischer, S. Fan, and J. Vučković, Photon blockade in weakly driven cavity quantum electrodynamics systems with many emitters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 243602 (2019).
  73. D. M. Lukin, B. Windt, M. Bello, D. Catanzaro, M. A. Guidry, E. Lustig, S. Biswas, G. Scuri, T. K. Le, J. Yang et al., Mesoscopic cavity quantum electrodynamics with phase-disordered emitters in a Kerr nonlinear resonator, arXiv:2504.09324.
  74. D. M. Lukin, M. A. Guidry, J. Yang, M. Ghezellou, S. Deb Mishra, H. Abe, T. Ohshima, J. Ul-Hassan, and J. Vučković, Two-emitter multimode cavity quantum electrodynamics in thin-film silicon carbide photonics, Phys. Rev. X 13, 011005 (2023).
  75. R. E. Evans, M. K. Bhaskar, D. D. Sukachev, C. T. Nguyen, A. Sipahigil, M. J. Burek, B. Machielse, G. H. Zhang, A. S. Zibrov, E. Bielejec, H. Park, M. Lončar, and M. D. Lukin, Photon-mediated interactions between quantum emitters in a diamond nanocavity, Science 362, 662 (2018).
  76. M. Tavis and F. W. Cummings, Exact solution for an n-molecule—radiation-field Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. 170, 379 (1968).
  77. B. Lemberger and K. Mølmer, Radiation eigenmodes of Dicke superradiance, Phys. Rev. A 103, 033713 (2021).
  78. K. Wan and R. Lasenby, Bounds on adaptive quantum metrology under Markovian noise, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033092 (2022).
  79. A. Das, W. Górecki, and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Universal time scalings of sensitivity in Markovian quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A 111, L020403 (2025).
  80. S. Zhou, M. Zhang, J. Preskill, and L. Jiang, Achieving the Heisenberg limit in quantum metrology using quantum error correction, Nat. Commun. 9, 78 (2018).
  81. R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, J. Czajkowski, and P. Sekatski, Adaptive quantum metrology under general Markovian noise, Phys. Rev. X 7, 041009 (2017).

  82. The diamond norm is defined as ∥Δ∥⋄≔supA sup∥X∥1=1∥(Δ⊗IA)(X)∥1,(32)where ∥X∥1≔TrX†X is the trace norm and IA is the identity on an auxiliary system A (it suffices to take dimA equal to the input dimension) [106].

  83. H. Pichler, S. Choi, P. Zoller, and M. D. Lukin, Universal photonic quantum computation via time-delayed feedback, Proceed. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114, 11362 (2017).
  84. Z.-Y. Wei, D. Malz, A. González-Tudela, and J. I. Cirac, Generation of photonic matrix product states with Rydberg atomic arrays, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 023021 (2021).
  85. Z.-Y. Wei, J. I. Cirac, and D. Malz, Generation of photonic tensor network states with circuit QED, Phys. Rev. A 105, 022611 (2022).
  86. O. Rubies-Bigorda, S. J. Masson, S. F. Yelin, and A. Asenjo-Garcia, Deterministic generation of photonic entangled states using decoherence-free subspaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 213603 (2025).
  87. M. B. Giles and N. A. Pierce, An introduction to the adjoint approach to design, Flow Turbul. Combust. 65, 393 (2000).
  88. D. Givoli, A tutorial on the adjoint method for inverse problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 380, 113810 (2021).
  89. A. D. White, R. Trivedi, K. Narayanan, and J. Vučković, Enhancing superradiance in spectrally inhomogeneous cavity QED systems with dynamic modulation, ACS Photonics 9, 2467 (2022).
  90. S. Zhou, C.-L. Zou, and L. Jiang, Saturating the quantum Cramér–Rao bound using LOCC, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 025005 (2020).
  91. M. Tsang, Quantum reversal: A general theory of coherent quantum absorbers, Quantum 9, 1650 (2025).
  92. F. Girotti, A. Godley, and M. Guta, Estimating quantum Markov chains using coherent absorber post-processing and pattern counting estimator, Quantum 9, 1835 (2025).
  93. M. Yuan, A. Seif, A. Lingenfelter, D. I. Schuster, A. A. Clerk, and L. Jiang, Universal control in bosonic systems with weak Kerr nonlinearities, Phys. Rev. A 111, 032606 (2025).
  94. K. A. Fischer, R. Trivedi, and D. Lukin, Particle emission from open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A 98, 023853 (2018).
  95. C. Schön, E. Solano, F. Verstraete, J. I. Cirac, and M. M. Wolf, Sequential generation of entangled multiqubit states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 110503 (2005).
  96. C. Schön, K. Hammerer, M. M. Wolf, J. I. Cirac, and E. Solano, Sequential generation of matrix-product states in cavity QED, Phys. Rev. A 75, 032311 (2007).
  97. J. I. Cirac, D. Perez-Garcia, N. Schuch, and F. Verstraete, Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states: Concepts, symmetries, theorems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 045003 (2021).
  98. J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, H. J. Kimble, and H. Mabuchi, Quantum state transfer and entanglement distribution among distant nodes in a quantum network, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3221 (1997).
  99. N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, T. Schulte-Herbrüggen, and S. J. Glaser, Optimal control of coupled spin dynamics: Design of NMR pulse sequences by gradient ascent algorithms, J. Magn. Reson. 172, 296 (2005).
  100. A. Khan, F. Albarelli, and A. Datta, Tensor network approach to sensing quantum light-matter interactions, PRX Quantum 6, 040343 (2025).
  101. D. Yang, M. Ketkar, K. Audenaert, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Quantum Cramér–Rao precision limit of noisy continuous sensing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 070802 (2026).
  102. A. L. Grimsmo, Time-delayed quantum feedback control, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 060402 (2015).
  103. G. Calajó, Y.-L. L. Fang, H. U. Baranger, and F. Ciccarello, Exciting a bound state in the continuum through multiphoton scattering plus delayed quantum feedback, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 073601 (2019).
  104. R. Trivedi, D. Malz, S. Sun, S. Fan, and J. Vučković, Optimal two-photon excitation of bound states in non-Markovian waveguide QED, Phys. Rev. A 104, 013705 (2021).
  105. D. Tamascelli, A. Smirne, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Nonperturbative treatment of non-Markovian dynamics of open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 030402 (2018).
  106. J. Watrous, The Theory of Quantum Information (Cambridge university press, Cambridge, England, 2018).
  107. M. J. Collett and C. W. Gardiner, Squeezing of intracavity and traveling-wave light fields produced in parametric amplification, Phys. Rev. A 30, 1386 (1984).
  108. M. M. Wolf, Quantum channels and operations-guided tour (2012).
  109. M. B. Ruskai, Beyond strong subadditivity? Improved bounds on the contraction of generalized relative entropy, Rev. Math. Phys. 6, 1147 (1994).
  110. 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).
  111. F. Girotti, A. Godley, and M. Guţă, Optimal estimation of pure states with displaced-null measurements, J. Phys. A 57, 245304 (2024).
  112. D. Perez-Garcia, F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac, Matrix product state representations, Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 401 (2007).
  113. D. Dong and I. R. Petersen, Quantum control theory and applications: A survey, IET Control Theory Appl. 4, 2651 (2010).
  114. D. d’Alessandro, Introduction to Quantum Control and Dynamics (Chapman and Hall/CRC, London, 2021).
  115. S. G. Schirmer, H. Fu, and A. I. Solomon, Complete controllability of quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A 63, 063410 (2001).

Outline

Information

PRX Quantum 7, 033069– Published 29 September, 2026
  • Received 22 June 2025
  • Revised 17 May 2026
  • Accepted 31 August 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. Open access publication funded by Max Planck Society.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation