00 voturi pozitive00 voturi negative

4 vizualizări10 paginiPolarization-based quantum
entanglement for enhanced resolution

Apr 21, 2019

082411_1

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT sau citiți online pe Scribd

Polarization-based quantum
entanglement for enhanced resolution

© All Rights Reserved

4 vizualizări

00 voturi pozitive00 voturi negative

082411_1

Polarization-based quantum
entanglement for enhanced resolution

© All Rights Reserved

Sunteți pe pagina 1din 10

Opt. Eng. 58(8), 082411 (2019), doi: 10.1117/1.OE.58.8.082411.

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Optical Engineering 58(8), 082411 (August 2019)

resolution

James F. Smith III*

Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C., United States

Abstract. A quantum LIDAR for improving resolution using quantum entanglement in the polarization degree

of freedom is described. A thorough mathematical analysis of this device is provided. A mathematical discussion

of how to generate other more robust entangled states is developed. Internal loss within the entanglement

generator and external loss due to atmosphere, detectors, and targets are modeled. A method using these

approaches for imaging is provided giving N times classical resolution, where N is the number of photons

entangled with explicit results exhibited for N ¼ 3. Closed form expressions for the wave function, normalization,

density matrix, reduced density matrix, visibility, and probabilities of detection of one through three photons using

detectors with general polarization characteristics are provided. An explicit entanglement generator and detector

designs are provided in terms of linear and nonlinear photonics devices. The fundamental role of postselection

measurement for generating entanglement is included. Discussions of entanglement devices that will produce

general M&M states at near-visible frequencies are given. A discussion of a bearing measurement device that

exhibits both super sensitivity and resolution is provided. Computational results are provided that compare prob-

abilities of detection for three single photon detectors with −45- deg, 45-deg, and 45-deg linear polarization.

Results for detecting one to three photons or the vacuum state are compared. Computational results for

detecting three photons with these detectors for various values of internal and atmospheric loss are provided.

Resolution improvements born of quantum entanglement are shown not to degrade with loss. Loss degrades

probability of detection not resolution. © 2019 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) [DOI: 10.1117/1.OE.58.8

.082411]

Keywords: quantum entanglement; polarization degree of freedom; M&M state; N00N state; super resolution; quantum imaging;

quantum sensor; postselection measurement.

Paper 181476SS received Oct. 15, 2018; accepted for publication Feb. 1, 2019; published online Feb. 27, 2019.

A factorization scheme is introduced for an N ¼ 3 N00N general polarization characteristics are provided. All results

state generation in the polarization degree of freedom are derived mathematically using the postulates of quantum

(DOF). A method of using these states for imaging in the mechanics. Computational results comparing probabilities

atmosphere is explored. The factorization scheme potentially for detecting different numbers of photons and for different

permits any N00N or M&M state1–5 to be generated and values of loss are given.

detected. Explicit results for N00N states are presented. The paper is organized as follows: Sec. 2 provides the

Internal loss within the entanglement generator and external design of the entanglement generator including the function

loss due to atmosphere, detectors, and targets are modeled. of various optical elements and a discussion of postselection

A method using these approaches for quantum entangle- detection. Section 2 also provides closed form expressions

ment-based imaging is provided that gives N times classical for the wave function that is produced by the optics, its nor-

malization, the model of loss within the imaging system,

resolution, where N is the number of photons entangled with

atmospheric loss, the related density, and reduced density

explicit results exhibited for N ¼ 3. The wave function, nor-

operators. Section 3 provides general projection operators

malization, density matrix, reduced density matrix, visibility,

for the detection of one to three photons in a wide class of

and probabilities of detection of one through three photons

polarization states and the derivations as well as probabilities

using detectors with general polarization characteristics are

of detection for one through three photons. The relationship

provided. Explicit entanglement generator and detector

between the optimal detection operators and the detection

designs are provided in terms of linear and nonlinear photon-

probabilities are made explicit. In Sec. 4, a general factori-

ics devices. The designs are kindred to those developed zation scheme for M&M states and, subsequently, N00N

for a recent experiment that did not explore atmospheric states is provided. Discussions of entanglement devices that

propagation.2 The fundamental role of postselection meas- will produce general M&M states at near-visible wave-

urement for generating entanglement is included. Closed lengths,2 e.g., 810 nm are also given. In Sec. 5, a discussion

form expressions for general detector configurations are pro- of a bearing measurement device that exhibits both super-

vided. The presented material provides a basis for further sensitivity and resolution is provided. Section 6 provides

quantum imaging research.6,7 Closed form results for the computational results comparing probabilities of detection

relevant wave functions, normalization, detection operators, of one to three photons and the vacuum state for specific

values of loss internal to the imaging system and external

*Address all correspondence to James F. Smith III, E-mail: james.smith@

nrl.navy.mil 0091-3286/2019/$25.00 © 2019 SPIE

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

atmospheric loss. Also, this section compares the probability photons arrive at the detectors at J, then there was no

of detecting three photons at various values of internal and reflected component of vertically polarized light off the PP.

atmospheric loss. Section 7 discusses alternate forms of The local oscillator (LO) photon propagates outside to

entanglement and their utility for sensing and communica- a target and scatters back to the detector path, QPG. . . K.

tions. Finally, Sec. 8 provides conclusions. In the process of scattering off the BK-7 glass at the

Brewster angle, only vertically polarized photons along the

path QPG. . . K are reflected toward the detectors at K. As

2 Entanglement and Detection described in the Mitchell–Lundeen–Steinberg experiment,2

Figure 1 shows a configuration for generating and detecting a postselection using the detector at F is once again used.

N ¼ 3 N00N state in the horizontally (H) and vertically (V)

polarized basis. Although this configuration is explicit for

N ¼ 3 N00N states, the approach can be readily generalized 2.1 Entanglement Generator, Its Components, and

to any N00N or M&M state.1–5 Loss Mechanisms

The photon source is located at point A in Fig. 1. It pro- In Fig. 1, LO photons travel through the exit portal at O,

vides photons some of which pass through the beam splitter scatter off target at Q to the detector at K. While traveling

at position B to go to the beta barium borate (BBO) crystal at through the atmosphere, both aþ þ

H and aV experience trans-

position C. Other photons are reflected from the beam split- mittance tatm and reflectance ratm . Atmospheric loss is simu-

ter at position B, subsequently traveling to the mirror at posi- lated by the beam splitter at P. In Fig. 1, the solid gray beam

tion L. Those photons traveling to the BBO crystal stimulate splitters at I and P are used to model loss. They would not

type II parametric down conversion. This generally produces be present in a real system unlike the beam splitters at B

two orthogonally polarized photons. It is rare that type II and M.

parametric down conversion would produce more than two The photon source at A sends photons out that pass

output photons. These two orthogonally polarized photons through a beam splitter at B. Some of the photons travel to

pass through a polarizing beam splitter (PBS) that converts the BBO crystal at C. The others are attenuated along the

them into a horizontally polarized photon with creation oper- path BLMO to produce the LO photon.

ator denoted as aþ H and a vertically polarized photon with Loss along the path C–J is given by the beam splitter at

creation operator denoted as aþ V. I with transmittance, tI and reflectance, rI .

Let the vacuum state be denoted as j0i; after the PBS, the

Recall1,3 that loss at I or Q can be written as

state of the photons is given as aþ þ

H aV j0i. The photon then

travels from position D to position E through the half au0þ ¼ tα · aþ þ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e001;326;450

u þ rα · aα;u ; (1)

wave plate (HWP) that converts the two photons to a photon

with a 45-deg polarization and a second photon with a where

−45-deg polarization. The vertical polarization direction

corresponds to the zero degree polarization state. The three u¼H

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e002;326;408 or V; (2)

lines labeled PP represent a partial polarizer (PP) constructed

using three sheets of BK-7 glass.2 Photons impinge on the α ¼ “atm” or

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e003;326;383 “I”; (3)

BK-7 glass at the Brewster angle; hence, by definition, there

is no reflected component of horizontally polarized light where aþ u creates photons to be detected by detector J and

from the BK-7 glass for the photons impinging from the aþα;u creates “noise” photons to be averaged over using the

HWP plate. The reflected component of the vertically polar- density matrix formalism.1,3 The notation H and V refer to

ized light can in principle be detected by the postselection horizontally and vertically polarized photons. The notations

detector at F. In practice, since type II parametric down “atm” and “I” refer to atmospheric and internal loss within

conversion rarely produces more than two photons, if three the entanglement generator.

-45o

Photon 45o

Source

Fig. 1 Photons traveling along the path ABCD. . . IJK have different loss operators, transmittances, and

reflectances than the photon traveling along the path ABL. . . OQ. . . JK. Arm LOQ can move through an

angle theta for bearing determination. The mirror at R moves in conjunction with arm LOQ to make sure

that the single photon that reflects off it arrives at G at the Brewster angle. The positions of the detectors

at K move in conjunction with the movement of the LOQ arm so that the phase shift along JK is propor-

tional to the change in theta.

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

Recall that for beam splitter models of loss,1,3 it is true that matrix calculations. The operator U ϕ represents the action

of the PS at J and is given explicitly as

jtα j2 þ jrα j2 ¼ 1:

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e004;63;741 (4)

U ϕ ≡ expði · ϕ · aþ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e010;326;730

V aV Þ: (10)

The quantities tα and rα are the complex transmission and

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ for mode α, respectively.

reflectivity pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃThey

ﬃ can be written as It is straightforward to show that the normalization con-

tα ≡ T α · expði · ϕα Þ and rα ≡ Rα · expði · ηα Þ. Without stant for j3 ∷ 0;1; atm; Ii is given as

loss of generality, it will be assumed that ϕα ¼ ηα ¼ 0. pﬃﬃﬃ − 1

After exiting the BK-7 glass and before entering the 3 2 1 2

quarter wave plate (QWP), the two photon traveling path N¼ · 2.5 · jtatm j · jtI j − · jtatm j · jtI j þ 10 :

2 2

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e011;326;676

2 4

2 2

ABC. . . K are in the 60 deg and −60 deg polarization states.

(11)

The creation operator for the 60 deg and −60 deg polariza-

tion states, denoted as aþ þ

60 and a−60 , respectively, satisfy the

following proportionalities: 2.2 Reduced Density Operator

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ The density operator for j3 ∷ 0;1; atm; Ii takes the form

aþ60 j0i ∝ 2∕3 · expð−iπ∕6Þ · ½aþ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e005;63;600

þ

L þ expðiπ∕3Þ · aR ; (5)

ρ ¼ j3 ∷ 0;1; atm; Iih3 ∷ 0;1; atm; Ij: (12)

pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e012;326;584

aþ

−60 j0i ∝ 2∕3 · expðiπ∕6Þ · ½aþ þ

L þ expð−iπ∕3Þ · aR : (6)

The reduced density matrix is derived by tracing over the

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e006;63;567

The photon traveling the LO path, i.e., ABL. . . Q. . . G, is

states and is given explicitly as

in a 0-deg polarization state. The creation operator for the

0-deg polarization state is denoted as aþ 0 , and it satisfies ρred ¼ ρred ðFTÞ þ ρred ðSTÞ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e013;326;520 (13)

the following proportionality:

where

1

aþ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e007;63;494

L − aR Þ: (7) ρred ðFTÞ ¼ 2∕9 · N 2 · Uϕ

2·i EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e014;326;478

V Þ − ðaH Þ j0ih0j½ðaV Þ − ðaH Þ

3 3

The operators aþ þ

L and aR create left and right circularly

polarized photon states, respectively. þ 5 · jtatm · tI rI j2 · ½ðaþ 2 þ 2

V Þ þ ðaH Þ j0ih0j½ðaV Þ þ ðaH Þ

2 2

þ 2 · jtatm · tI rI j2 · aþ þ

V · aH j0ih0jaV · aH

splitters at I and P, the three photons are in a state related

to the final form of Eq. (8): þ 5 · jtatm · r2I j2 · ðaþ þ þ

V − aH Þj0ih0jðaV − aH Þg · U ϕ ;

aþ þ þ þ þ þ (14)

0 a60 a−60 → QWPða0 Þ · QWPða60 Þ · QWPða−60 Þ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e008;63;396

QWP

2 and

→ pﬃﬃﬃ · ½tatm · ðaþ þ þ þ

V − aH Þ þ ratm · ðaatm;V − aatm;H Þ ρred ðSTÞ ¼ 4∕9 · N 2 · jratm j2 · Uϕ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e015;326;354

propagation of 3 2i

atmospheric

· fjtI j4 · ½ðaþ þ þ þ 2

0 deg photon

H Þ þ aH · aV þ ðaV Þ j0ih0j½ðaH Þ þ aH · aV

2 2

· ½tI · ðaþ

V þe

iπ∕3

· aþ þ

H Þ þ rI · ðaI;V þ e

iπ∕3

· aþ

I;H Þ

þ ðaV Þ2 þ 5 · jtI · rI j2 · ðaþ þ

V þ aH Þj0ih0jðaV þ aH Þ

· ½tI · ðaþ

V þe

−iπ∕3

· aþ þ

H Þ þ rI · ðaI;V þ e

−iπ∕3

· aþ

I;H Þ:

þ 5 · jrI j4 · j0ih0jg · Uþ

ϕ: (15)

(8)

Physical insight about Eqs. (14) and (15) can be gained

Multiplying out the final form in Eq. (8) and multiplying through the following observations. Recall that of the three

by a normalization constant denoted as N, it follows that photons, only one, the signal photon, propagates in the

after passing through the phase shifter (PS) at J in Fig. 1 atmosphere; the other two remain internal to the system.

that the state of system of three photons is proportional to a The terms on the right-hand-side of Eq. (14), i.e., the FT

N00N state Uϕ · ½ðaþ þ 3

V Þ − ðaH Þ j0i characterized by both

3

terms are all multiplied by jtatm j2, whereas the terms on

internal and atmospheric loss. The N00N state takes the form the right-hand-side of Eq. (15), i.e., the ST terms are all

multiplied by jratm j2. Recall from Eqs. (3) and (4) that jtα j2 þ

j3 ∷ 0;1; atm; Ii ∝ U ϕ · fjtatm · t2I j2 · ½ðaþ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e009;63;203

3 þ 3

V Þ − ðaH Þ j0i þ : : : g: jrα j2 ¼ 1 for α ¼ “atm” or “I”. So, it follows that jratm j2 ¼

(9) 1 − jtatm j2 . So, the FT terms relate to probabilities of events

where the signal photon is detected after propagating in the

The notation j3 ∷ 0;1; atm; Ii indicates the formation of atmosphere. The ST terms relate to the probabilities of events

a N00N state, i.e., 3 ∷ 0, with one photon traveling in the where the signal photon that propagates in the atmosphere is

atmosphere as denoted by the “1.” The “atm” and “I” labels not detected.

within the ket indicate loss mechanisms internal to the

imager and in the atmosphere. The “. . . ” in Eq. (9) indicate 3 Probabilities of Detection

terms outside of the N00N set fj3;0i; j0;3ig generated by This section provides the derivation of the probability of

½ðaþ þ 3

V Þ − ðaH Þ j0i; these terms carry significant information

3

detecting three photons with three single photon detectors.

about the loss processes and are included in the density Each single photon detector can detect a specific general

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

linearly polarized state. Closed form results for wave func- EN ≡ jN; 0ihN; 0j þ j0; Nih0; Nj:

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e025;326;752 (25)

tions, normalizations, projection operators, and probabilities

of detection for one to three photons and detection of the From the form of the reduced density matrix, it follows

vacuum state are provided. that the terms in Eq. (15) contribute zero to hP123 ired ≡

trðP123 ρred Þ, which is the probability of three photon detec-

tion. The probability of three photon detection will also be

3.1 Probability of Three Photon Detection denoted as Prob123 , so it follows that:

Consider three one photon detectors where each detects pho-

Prob123 ≡ hP123 ired ≡ trðP123 ρred Þ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e026;326;675

angles measured counterclockwise from the horizontally ¼ 3! · N 2123 · ½trðE30 · ρred Þ þ Q1 · Q2 · trðA3 · ρred Þ

polarized direction. The wave function for three photons

¼ 3! · N 2123 · ½hE30 ired þ Q1 · Q2 · hA3 ired ; (26)

with polarization directions θ1 , θ2 , and θ3 , up to normaliza-

tion is given as

where

Y

3

E30 ≡ Q21 · j3;0ih3;0j þ Q22 j0;3ih0;3j; (27)

jψ 123 i ≡ ðα1l aþ þ

H þ α2l aV Þj0i;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e027;326;597

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e016;63;615 (16)

l¼1

hE30 ired ≡ trðE30 · ρred Þ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e028;326;574

where 2 · 3!

¼ · N 2 · jtatm · t2I j2 · ðQ21 þ Q22 Þ; (28)

α1l ≡ cos θl ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e017;63;554 l ¼ 1;2; 3; (17) 9

and and

hA3 ired ≡ trðA3 · ρred Þ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e029;326;510

α2l ≡ sin θl ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e018;63;517 l ¼ 1;2; 3: (18)

2 · 3!

Equation (16) can be written as ¼ −2 · · N 2 · jtatm · t2I j2 · cosð3ϕÞ: (29)

9

Y Y

pﬃﬃﬃﬃ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e019;63;480

3 3

It should be noted in Eq. (26) that the probability of

jψ 123 i ≡ 3! · α1l j3;0i þ α2l j0;3i detecting three photons depends on hA3 ired , which for ϕ ¼ 0

l¼1 l¼1

pﬃﬃﬃﬃ is referred to as the visibility,1,3

þ 2! · ðα11 α12 α23 þ α11 α22 α13 þ α21 α12 α13 Þj2;1i Substitution of Eqs. (28) and (29) into Eq. (26) yields:

pﬃﬃﬃﬃ

þ 2! · ðα21 α22 α13 þ α21 α12 α23 þ α11 α22 α23 Þj1;2i: Prob123 ¼ hP123 ired

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e030;326;412

(19) 2 · 3!

¼ · N 2123 · N 2 jtatm t2I j2

0 9

Let the normalized wave function be denoted as jψ 123 i:

· ½Q21 þ Q22 − 2Q1 Q2 cosð3ϕÞ: (30)

0

jψ 123 i ≡ N 123 jψ 123 i; (20)

So “measuring,” i.e., obtaining reduced trace of P123 is

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e020;63;366

Since ðQ1 − Q2 Þ2 ≥ 0 and j cosð3ϕÞj ≤ 1 imply that

P123 ≡ N 2123 jψ 123 ihψ 123 j:

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e021;63;324 (21) Q21 þ Q22 ≥ 2Q1 Q2 ≥ 2Q1 Q2 cosð3ϕÞ, hence

Y

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e031;326;293

3 2 Y

3 2 Y

2 Y

3

Substitution of Eqs. (19) into (21) yields

α1l þ α2l −2 αjl cosð3ϕÞ

P123 ¼ 3! · N 2123 fQ21 j3;0ih3;0j þ Q22 j0;3ih0;3j þ Q1 · Q2 A3

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e022;63;281

þ terms of the form j3;0ih2;1j; j0;3ih2;1j; j3;0ih1;2j; ¼ Q21 þ Q22 − 2Q1 Q2 cosð3ϕÞ ≥ 0: (31)

j0;3ih1;2j; and Hermitian adjoints of these termsg; So, it follows that the expression for Prob123 ¼ hP123 ired

(22) in Eq. (30) is always greater than or equal to zero.

To determine the normalization constant N 123 , make the

following definitions:

Y

3

Qk ≡

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e023;63;198 αkl ; k ¼ 1;2; (23) R1 ≡ α11 α12 α23 þ α11 α22 α13 þ α21 α12 α13 ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e032;326;181 (32)

l¼1

Recall that the standard detection operator for N00N R2 ≡ α21 α22 α13 þ α11 α22 α23 þ α21 α12 α23 :

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e033;326;151 (33)

states1,3–5 is given as

It follows from Eq. (19) and Eqs. (32) and (33) that

AN ≡ jN; 0ih0; Nj þ j0; NihN; 0j:

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e024;63;130 (24) EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e034;326;114

pﬃﬃﬃﬃ

jψ 123 i ¼ 3! · ðQ1 j3;0i þ Q2 j0;3iÞ

The following operator and related operators defined later pﬃﬃﬃﬃ

and denoted with a prime are useful: þ 2! · ðR1 j2;1i þ R2 j1;2iÞ: (34)

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

From Eqs. (20) and (34) and the normalization condition γ 21 ≡ sin χ 1 :

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e045;326;752 (45)

0 0

for jψ 123 i, i.e., 1 ¼ hψ 123 jψ 123 i ¼ N 2123 hψ 123 jψ 123 i, it fol-

lows that: The quantity χ 1 can take any one of the values θl ;

l ¼ 1;2; 3. The normalization denoted as N 1 is unity, i.e.,

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e035;63;719 N 123 ¼ ½hψ 123 jψ 123 i−1∕2

N 1 ¼ 1: (46)

¼ ½6 · ðQ21 þ Q22 Þ þ 2 · ðR21 þ R22 Þ−1∕2 :

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e046;326;708

(35)

It is also useful to define a quantity E10 as

3.2 Probability of Only Two Photons Being Detected

E10 ≡ γ 211 aþ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e047;326;666

2 þ

1 j0ih0ja1 þ γ 21 a2 j0ih0ja2 : (47)

The wave function for two photon detection is given as

It is straightforward to show that the probability of one

Y

2

photon being detected is

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e036;63;637 jψ 12 i ≡ ðβ1l aþ þ

H þ β2l aV Þj0i; (36)

l¼1

Prob1 ¼ trðE10 ρred Þ þ γ 11 γ 21 trðA1 ρred Þ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e048;326;612

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e037;63;576 β1l ¼ cos νl ; l ¼ 1;2; (37)

where

and hE10 i ≡ trðE10 ρred Þ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e049;326;551 (49)

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e038;63;539 β2l ¼ sin νl ; l ¼ 1;2: (38)

hA1 i ≡ trðA1 ρred Þ; (50)

The quantities νl ; l ¼ 1;2 can take on any two of the three

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e050;326;526

In a fashion analogous to the quantities for detection of

10 2 20

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e051;326;489

three photons, the probability of detecting two photons is Prob1 ¼ · N jtatm r2I j2 þ · N 2 jratm tI rI j2

given as 9 9

20 2

Prob12 ¼ T 1 þ T 2 ; (39) þ · N γ 11 γ 21 ð2 · jratm tI rI j2 − jtatm r2I j2 Þ cos ϕ: (51)

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e039;63;458

9

where

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e040;63;416

20

T1 ≡ · N N 12 jtatm rI tI j 2 · ½ðβ11 β12 Þ2 þ ðβ21 β22 Þ2

2 2 2

It is straightforward to show that the probability of detecting

9

the vacuum state is given as

1

þ 4 · β11 β12 β21 β22 cosð2ϕÞ þ ðβ11 β22 þ β12 β21 Þ2 ; 20

5 Probo ≡

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e052;326;383 · N 2 jratm j2 jrI j4 : (52)

9

(40)

4 Factorization of a M&M State

4

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e041;63;334

T 2 ≡ · N 2 N 212 jratm j2 jtI j4 ½4 · ½ðβ11 β12 Þ2 þ ðβ21 β22 Þ2 This section offers a general method of factoring M&M

9 state operators and by default those operators associated

þ 8 · β11 β12 β21 β22 · cosð2ϕÞ þ ðβ11 β22 þ β12 β21 Þ2 with N00N states. This facilitates a discussion of designs

for devices for generating entangled states at near visible

X

2

þ4· βk1 βk2 ðβ11 β22 þ β12 β21 Þ cos ϕ; (41) frequencies.

k¼1

4.1 Factorization Scheme

and

Consider the M&M state

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e042;63;235 N 12 ¼ ½2 · ðβ11 β12 Þ2 þ 2 · ðβ21 β22 Þ2 þ ðβ11 β22 þ β12 β21 Þ2 −1∕2 :

1

(42) jm ∷ m 0 iab ≡ pﬃﬃﬃ ½jm; m 0 iab − jm 0 ; miab ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e053;326;235 (53)

2

3.3 One Photon Detection Probability where m > m 0 . This state can be written as

For the case that only one photon is detected by one of the

1

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e054;326;180

m þ m0 þ m þ m0

three single-photon detectors, the detected state would take jm∶∶m 0 iab ≡ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ0 ﬃ ½ðaþ

a Þ ðab Þ − ðab Þ ðaa Þ j0iab

the form: 2 · m! · m !

1 m0 þ m0 þ m−m 0 − ðaþ Þm−m 0 j0i

jψ 1 i ¼ N 1 ðγ 11 aþ þ

1 þ γ 21 a2 Þj0i; (43) ¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ0 ﬃ ðaþ

a Þ ðab Þ ½ðaa Þ b ab

2 · m! · m !

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e043;63;140

where 1 0

Y0 −1

m−m

þ þ m0 þ

¼ pﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃﬃ ðaa Þ ðab Þ ·

m ðaþ

a − uk · ab Þj0iab ;

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e044;63;97 γ 11 ≡ cos χ 1 ; (44) 2 · m! · m 0 ! k¼0

and (54)

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

where j0iab is the vacuum for arms “a” and “b” of the inter- a wheel with a string attached, bearing can be determined.

ferometer, and uk is the k’th root of unity, i.e., As the wheel is rotated, the line segment LQ points along

different bearing lines. By attaching a string to the wheel

2π · k so it winds around the wheel when it rotates and attaching

uk ≡ exp i ; k ¼ 0;1; : : : ; m − m 0 − 1; (55)

m − m0 the other end of the string to the detector, different bearings

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e055;63;730

where i ¼ −1. at A and the detector at K. It is easy to set this wheel-string

Observe that assembly up so that the separation distance between A and K

is proportional to the change in bearing indicated by theta in

þ

ðaþ

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e056;63;664

a − uk · ab Þj0iab ¼ j1;0iab − uk · j0;1iab : (56) Fig. 1. Increasing the separation between A and K changes

the phase in the argument of the cosine term. This permits as

The right side of Eq. (56) up to normalization is a the bearing is changed, the position of different probability

Shrodinger kitten state. of three photon detection maxima to be found. The positions

Let the phase νk be defined as of the probability of three photon detection maxima yield a

measure of the bearing with an error no larger than λ∕ðN · rÞ,

νk ≡

2π · k

; k ¼ 0;1; : : : ; m − m 0 − 1: (57) where λ is the wavelength of each individual photon, r is the

m − m0 radius of the wheel arm LQ is mounted on, and N is the

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e057;63;599

It follows from Eqs. (10), (54), (55), and (57) with the the measurement scheme can show both super resolution and

state labels “a” and “b” replaced by the horizontally polar- super sensitivity.1

ized and vertically polarized state labels “H” and “V,” The mirror at R moves in conjunction with arm LOQ to

respectively, that the M&M state can be written as make sure that the single photon that reflects off it arrives at

G at the Brewster angle. Alternatively, the mirror at R could

1

EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e058;63;513

H Þ ðaV Þ

be eliminated if a fiber optic cable conducts the photon from

2 · m! · m ! P to the right-most sheet of the BK-7 glass so that the photon

Y0 −1

m−m arrives at the Brewster angle. The wheel and string design

· U νk ðaþ þ

H − aV Þj0iHV : (58) are supplied to provide intuition about how entanglement

k¼0 schemes can be used to measure theta.

6 Computational Results

4.2 M&M State Generation

This section provides computational results for the detection

To construct the state represented by Eq. (58) at near-visible of one to three photons and the detection of the vacuum state.

frequencies: For all the figures, it is assumed that a three photon

ð−45; 45; 45Þ degree detection scheme is used. The notation

i. It follows from Eq. (58) that if m 0 horizontally polarized

m0 ð−45; 45; 45Þ implies that three single-photon detectors are

photons corresponding to ðaþ 0

H Þ , m vertically polar-

m 0 are sent to used where θ1 ¼ −45 deg, θ2 ¼ 45 deg, and θ3 ¼ 45 deg

ized photons corresponding to ðaþ V Þ

as in Eqs. (16)–(18). Probabilities of detection as a function

a detector that the part of the state in Eq. (58) corre-

0 0 of phase, internal transmittance and atmospheric transmit-

sponding to ðaþ þ m

H Þ ðaV Þ

m can be created.

tance are given. It is shown that even when there is signifi-

0

ii. If m − m vertically polarized photons are passed cant loss super resolution is maintained. Super resolution is

through an HWP, they will produce 45-deg polarized defined as measurements that are better than the Rayleigh

photons corresponding to aþ þ

H − aV . If each of these diffraction limit.1 Loss degrades the probability of detection,

45-deg polarized photons are sent through a PS Uνk , not the super resolution provided by quantum entanglement.

then the m − m 0 photons corresponding to the product

Q In Fig. 2, probability of detection versus phase is plotted

m−m 0 −1

k¼0 Uνk ðaþ þ

H − aV Þ can be formed. for the cases of three photon detection, two photon detection,

one photon detection, and vacuum state detection. The values

By combining the operations in items i and ii above, it T I ¼ 0.8 and T atm ¼ 0.1 are assumed. This represents a sig-

follows that the state corresponding to Eq. (58) can be con- nificant amount of loss, 20% internal to the system, and 90%

structed at near-visible frequencies. A general method of pro- external to the system. Since there is a significant amount of

ducing any single particle state at microwave frequencies has atmospheric loss, the probability of detection of three pho-

been demonstrated experimentally.8 By combining this pro- tons is relatively small compared to some of the other cases.

cedure and the methods of items i and ii, it may be possible It should be observed even though the probability of

to generate microwave frequency M&M and hence N00N detecting the three photons is small, the super resolution

states. property is undiminished as is observed in Figs. 2–4.

For the two photon ð−45;45Þ degree case, the coefficient

5 Bearing Measurement, Super Resolution, and of the cosðϕÞ term vanishes, whereas for the (45, 45) degree

Super Sensitivity case, it does not. The notation ð−45;45Þ refers to θ1 ¼

The phase in the argument of the cosine term of the proba- −45 deg and θ2 ¼ 45 deg as in Eqs. (36)–(38). So, for

bility of three photons being detected [Eq. (30)] can be used the two photon ð−45;45Þ detection, the only ϕ dependence

to determine bearing. The bearing is the angle between two that the probability has is cosð2ϕÞ. For the two photon

objects. If the LQ arm in Fig. 1 that has the single photon (45, 45) detection case, the ϕ dependences are cosð2ϕÞ and

propagating into the external environment is mounted on cosðϕÞ. The cosð2ϕÞ and cosðϕÞ terms interfere destructively.

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

0.5

3 Photons So, the two photon ð−45; 45Þ case and two photon (45, 45)

2 Photons ( -45,45) case have different maxima and minima.

2 Photons (45,45) In Fig. 2, the probability of detecting one photon is some-

0.4 1 Photon ( -45)

times lower than the probability of detecting two photons.

1 Photon (45)

This can be understood in the following way. The probability

Probability

Vacuum

of detecting two photons refers to the probability of detecting

0.3 exactly two photons. The probability of detecting one photon

refers to the probability of detecting exactly one photon.

Similar statements hold for the detection of zero or three

0.2 photons.

Since the type II parametric down converted photons

0.1

are only subject to internal loss, i.e., relatively low loss, the

probability of detecting two photons is higher than that of

detecting only one photon. The probability of losing one

0 or two of the down converted photons is low.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Additional intuition can be developed by considering an

Phase extreme case. Recall that there are two internal photons propa-

gating and only one signal photon. When the probability of

Fig. 2 Probability of photon detection versus phase. θ1 ¼ −45 deg,

θ2 ¼ 45 deg, and θ3 ¼ 45 deg, T I ¼ 0.8, and T atm ¼ 0.1. losing an internal photon is near zero and the probability

of the single signal photon that propagates in the atmosphere

being detected is near zero, then the probability of detecting

exactly two photons is very high. The probability of detecting

T atm=0.1

0.4 T atm=0.2

only one photon is near zero because of the low probability of

T atm=0.3 losing an internal photon. So, the probability of detecting

0.35 T atm=0.4 exactly two photons is significantly higher in this case than

T atm=0.5

the probability of detecting one photon or three photons.

0.3 T atm=0.6

Figure 3 is a plot of probability of three photon detection

Probability

The atmospheric transmittance, T atm , takes values ranging

0.2 from 0.1 to 0.6 in increments of 0.1. For the internal trans-

mittance, the value T I ¼ 0.95 is taken. The positions of

0.15 maxima and minima are indicative of resolution associated

0.1 with this scheme, i.e., three times classical resolution. It is

observed that all six curves have their maxima and minima

0.05 for the same values of phase. This implies as the amount of

loss increases that the resolution improvement offered by

0 entanglement does not diminish. Loss does not diminish res-

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Phase (Radians) olution, but it does significantly decrease the probability of

detection. For T atm ¼ 0.6, the maximum probability of detec-

Fig. 3 Probability of photon detection versus phase. θ1 ¼ −45 deg, tion is ∼0.45. For T atm ¼ 0.1, the maximum probability of

θ2 ¼ 45 deg, and θ3 ¼ 45 deg, T I ¼ 0.95. detection is <0.1. During an actual imaging application of

this target, lower probability of detection would mean greater

measurement time.

T atm=0.1 In Fig. 4, the same values of T atm are used, giving rise to

T atm=0.2 six curves. From Figs. 3 to 4, the value of the internal trans-

0.25 T atm=0.3 mittance diminishes. Maxima and minima remain at the

T atm=0.4

same position as in Fig. 3. This has been observed for many

T atm=0.5

T atm=0.6

values of T I . The effect of the increased internal loss is to

0.2

diminish probabilities of detection. In Fig. 4 for T I ¼

0.75, the maximum probabilities of detection for each curve

Probability

Thus, internal loss can play a significant role in changing

the probability of detection.

0.1

0.05

Hyperentanglement

This section describes other forms of entanglement. These

0 include forms of entanglement already discussed, e.g., N00N

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Phase (Radians) states and M&M states. Additional entangled states that will

be discussed are linear combinations of N00N states (LCNS),

Fig. 4 Probability of photon detection versus phase. θ1 ¼ −45 deg, linear combinations of M&M states (LCMMS),3,9–11 hyper-

θ2 ¼ 45 deg, and θ3 ¼ 45 deg, T I ¼ 0.75. entangled (HE) states,12–27 and hybrid states formed by

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

combining multiphoton entangled (MPE) states with hyper- improvements in SNR, SIR, TOT, and QCRLB can exceed

entangled states.28 Multiphoton states refer to states where 10,000. Improvements in sensing and communications range

three or more photons are entangled in one DOF. A DOF can can exceed 10 and 100, respectively. The improvement in

be polarization, energy-time (ET), orbital angular momen- the Holevo bound can be >12 additional bits carried by each

tum,29,30 radial quantum number,31 frequency,32 etc. HE signal photon.23,28

states refer to entanglement of photons, generally in two It is possible to combine MPE with hyperentanglement.

or more DOFs. By using an jN ∷ 1i state, i.e., initially N signal photons and

MPE states, as discussed in previous sections, can offer one ancilla photon, that are initially entangled in polarization

improvement in resolution. If N photons are entangled, each followed by entanglement in other DOFs, such as ET, it is

with electromagnetic wavelength λ, then sensing and imag- possible to offer significant additional improvements in the

ing can be done using a wavelength that is effectively3–5 λ∕N. measures of effectiveness (MOEs) described above. The

If the resolution that the wavelength λ offers is satisfactory, improvement factor for SNR and SIR in this case is N · d;

then the size of lenses can be reduced by a factor of N. maximum sensing range experiences an improvement factor

This can be a useful feature for missions where mass or size proportional to ðN · dÞ1∕4 ; maximum communications range

limitation are important, e.g., space applications.33 is improved by a factor proportional to ðN · dÞ1∕2 ; the

States like N00N states can be fragile when subjected QCRLB improves, i.e., gets smaller by a factor proportional

to environmental loss.3–5,9–11,34,35 This does not mean that to N 2 · d; TOT is reduced by a likewise desirable factor pro-

sensing and imaging cannot be done. It generally means that portional to N 2 · d and the Holevo bound’s improvement

many signal photons must be transmitted to produce the goes as N · log2 ðdÞ.28 So, it is observed that by combining

desired results. The number of required photons needed MPE with hyperentanglement, significant amounts of addi-

for transmission is estimated using the quantum Chernoff tional utility are obtained. Combining MPE with hyperentan-

bound.9,15,18,21–23,26,36 Transmission over time of additional glement can offer significant opportunities for tradeoff

signal photons increases measurement time, referred to as between the two concepts while retaining high MOE values.

time-on-target20,22 (TOT). This can prove to be a liability For example, for N ¼ 5 and a modest Hilbert space of

for a variety of reasons.20,22 dimensionality d ¼ 1000, it follows that the Holevo bound’s

Some MPE states are more robust than others. M&M improvement can be 50 bits.23,28

states are significantly more robust than the corresponding Additional improvements can be introduced by combin-

N00N state.3,9–11,34,35 This robustness helps M&M states ing MPE states, HE states, and networks.40–42 The networks

to survive more effectively in the presence of loss mecha- can be of a classical or quantum nature. If each output node

on the network has M transmitter detector pairs, then the

nisms than N00N states, subsequently reducing TOT. Linear

improvement factors for SNR and SIR are proportional to

combinations of M&M states are significantly more robust

M · N · d; TOT and QCRLB are reduced by the desirable

than the corresponding M&M state or N00N state,9 further

factor proportional to M · N 2 · d; the sensing range and com-

facilitating sensing and imaging with low TOT.

munication range improvement factors are proportional to

HE states typically involve a signal and ancilla photon

ðM · N · dÞ1∕4 and ðM · N · dÞ1∕2 , respectively. The relative

entangled in at least two DOFs. These states can be used

Holevo bound improvement compared to classical goes as

for sensing20–22 or communications.13,14,21,27 When used

M · N · log2 ðdÞ per transmitted signal photon.23,28

for sensing, HE offers the advantage that it results in under-

lying Hilbert spaces of large dimensionality denoted20–22,26

as d. Let the classical system, i.e., a single-photon imaging 8 Conclusions

system have signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) denoted as SNRc . Quantum entanglement results in super resolution, i.e., res-

Let the sensing system using HE have an SNR denoted by olution beating the Rayleigh diffraction limit. For three

SNRHE . It can be shown mathematically that for entangled26 entangled photons forming a N00N state, resolution is

or hyperentangled systems20–22 that the improvement in SNR improved by a factor of three. Resolution is never degraded

over classical is proportional to d. In other words, SNRHE ∼ as loss increases. Even with 25% internal loss and 90%

d · SNRc .20–22 The tilde “∼” is read as “goes as,” i.e., there atmospheric loss, super resolution is maintained and maxi-

can be an additional proportionality factor. Likewise, let mum probabilities of detection of ∼5% are observed. Low

TOTHE and TOTc denote the TOT for the hyperentangled probability of detection will increase measurement time

system and the classical system, respectively, then TOTHE ∼ but still holds promise for super resolution applications in

TOTc ∕d.20–22 Many other measures of effectiveness are im- imaging.

proved by using HE. These include the signal-to-interference A generalized procedure for producing M&M states

ratio (SIR), where using analogous notation, SIRHE ∼ d · is discussed. M&M states are more robust than the corre-

SIRc ; maximum sensing range that experiences an improve- sponding N00N state. Linear combinations of M&M states

ment by a factor proportional to d1∕4 ; maximum communi- are more robust than the corresponding M&M state. By com-

cation range whose improvement factor is proportional to bining MPE with hyperentanglement, significant additional

d1∕2 ; the quantum Cramer Rao lower bound (QCRLB), utility can be gained for both sensing and imaging systems.

a lower bound on the variance of quantities estimate,37,38

which is made smaller by a factor of d by HE, a highly desir- References

able feature; and the Holevo bound that can be interpreted as 1. S. D. Huver, C. F. Wildfeuer, and J. P. Dowling, “Entangled fock states

a bound on the number of classical bits that can be carried by for robust quantum optical metrology, imaging, and sensing,” Phys. Rev.

each signal photon.23,39 The improvement in the Holevo A 78, 1–5 (2008).

2. M. W. Mitchell, J. S. Lundeen, and A. M. Steinberg, “Super-resolving

bound relative to the classical case is proportional to log2 ðdÞ. phase measurements with a multiphoton entangled state,” Nature 429,

Since modern values25 of d can exceed 10,000, in theory, 161–164 (2004).

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution

3. J. F. Smith, III, “Quantum interferometer and radar theory based on 25. M. Krenn et al., “Generation and confirmation of a (100x100)-dimen-

N00N, M and M, or linear combinations of entangled states,” Proc. sional quantum system,” PNAS 111(17), 6243–6247 (2014).

SPIE 7702, 77020I (2010). 26. S. Lloyd, “Enhanced sensitivity of photodetection via quantum illumi-

4. J. F. Smith, III, “Quantum entangled radar theory and a correction nation,” Science 321, 1463–1465 (2008).

method for the effects of the atmosphere on entanglement,” Proc. 27. J. T. Barreiro, T.-C. Wei, and P. G. Kwiat, “Beating the channel capacity

SPIE 7342, 73420A (2009). limit for linear photonic superdense coding,” Nat. Phys. 4, 282–286

5. G. Gilbert, M. Hamrick, and Y. S. Weinstein, “Practical quantum inter- (2008).

ferometry using photonic N00N states,” Proc. SPIE 6573, 65730K 28. J. F. Smith, III, “Combining multi-photon entanglement, hyper-entan-

(2007). glement, and quantum networks for enhanced sensing,” Proc. SPIE

6. R. Meyers, K. S. Deacon, and Y. Shih, “Ghost-imaging experiment by 10633, 1063316 (2018).

measuring reflected photons,” Phys. Rev. A 77, 041801R (2008). 29. L. Allen et al., “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transforma-

7. R. W. Boyd et al., “Quantum imaging: enhanced image formation using tion of Laguerre–Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185–8189

quantum states of light,” Proc. SPIE 7342, 73420B (2009). (1992).

8. M. Hofheinz et al., “Synthesizing arbitrary quantum states in a super- 30. A. E. Willner, Twisted Light Could Dramatically Boost Data Rates,

conducting resonator,” Nature 459, 546–549 (2009). IEEE Spectrum, Piscataway (2016).

9. J. F. Smith, III, “Enhancing interferometer phase estimation, sensing 31. W. N. Plick et al., “The forgotten quantum number: a short note on

sensitivity, and resolution using robust entangled states,” Opt. Eng. the radial modes of Laguerre–Gaussbeams,” arXiv:1306.6517 (2013).

56(11), 111710 (2017). 32. D. H. Hughes et al., “Quantum operations on entangled photons using

10. J. P. Dowling, “Quantum optical metrology—the lowdown on high- Lyot filters,” Proc. SPIE 9996, 99960H (2016).

N00N states,” J. Contemp. Phys. 49(2), 125–143 (2008). 33. G. Gilbert et al., “Quantum sensor miniaturization prospectus,” Proc.

11. J. F. Smith, III, “Generation and detection of quantum entangled states SPIE 7342, 73420I (2008).

for quantum imaging,” Proc. SPIE 8057, 805708 (2011). 34. C. C. Gerry and R. A. Campos, “Generation of maximally entangled

12. J. F. Smith, III, “Superdense coding facilitated by hyper-entanglement photonic states with a quantum-optical Fredkin gate,” Phys. Rev. A

and quantum networks,” Proc. SPIE 10193, 1019316 (2017). 64, 063814 (2001).

13. X.-F. Ren, G.-P. Guo, and G.-C. Guo, “Complete Bell-states analysis 35. H. Cable and J. P. Dowling, “Efficient generation of large number-path

using hyper-entanglement,” Phys. Lett. A 343, 8–11 (2005). entanglement using only linear optics and feed-forward,” Phys. Rev.

14. X.-F. Ren et al., “Engineering of multi-dimensional entangled states of Lett. 99, 163604 (2007).

photon pairs using hyper-entanglement,” Chin. Phys. Lett. 23(3) (2006). 36. N. Calsamiglia and N. Lütkenhaus, “Maximum efficiency of a linear-

15. J. F. Smith, III, “Quantum hyper-entanglement and angular spectrum optical Bell-state analyzer,” Appl. Phys. B: Laser Opt. 72, 67–71 (2001).

decomposition applied to sensors,” Proc. SPIE 9873, 98730M (2016). 37. C. W. Helstrom, Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory, Vol. 123,

16. J. F. Smith, III, “Sensors based on quantum hyper-entanglement: Academic Press, New York (1976).

efficiency and performance in the presence of other photon sources,” 38. U. Dorner et al., “Optimal quantum phase estimation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.

Proc. SPIE 9500, 95000E (2015). 102, 040403 (2009).

17. J. F. Smith, III, “Generation, detection, and applications of quantum 39. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum

hyper-entangled and entangled states,” Proc. SPIE 8400, 840011 Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).

(2012). 40. N. Sangouard et al., “Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles

18. J. F. Smith, III, “Hyper-entanglement based system with enhanced and linear optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 33 (2011).

resolution, signal to noise ratio, and measurement time,” Proc. SPIE 41. R. van Meter, Quantum Networking (Networks and Telecommuni-

8749, 87490Y (2013). cations), Wiley-ISTE, Hoboken (2014).

19. J. F. Smith, III, “Hyper-entanglement based sensor with reduced meas- 42. M. Bashkansky, F. K. Fatemi, and I. Vurgaftman, “Quantum memory in

urement time and enhanced signal to interference ratio,” Proc. SPIE warm rubidium vapor with buffer gas,” Opt. Lett. 37(2), 142 (2012).

9123, 91230L (2014).

20. J. F. Smith, III, “Improving detection range, signal-to-noise ratio, and

measurement time through hyperentanglement,” Opt. Eng. 56(7), James F. Smith III is a theoretical physicist and has conducted

071511 (2017). research for over 27 years at the Naval Research Laboratory. He

21. J. F. Smith, III, “Enhanced sensing and communication via quantum has about 150 peer-reviewed publications in areas of theoretical

networks,” Proc. SPIE 10188, 101880I (2017). physics, applied mathematics, and related engineering topics. His

22. J. F. Smith, III, “Using hyperentanglement to enhance resolution, signal-

to-noise ratio, and measurement time,” Opt. Eng. 56(3), 031210 (2016). research interests include, but are not limited to, quantum information

23. J. F. Smith, III, “Enhanced communication through quantum hyper- theory, mathematical techniques, quantum sensing/imaging, and

entanglement,” Proc. SPIE 10660, 106600I (2018). quantum networks. He has conceived of a class of imaging/detec-

24. M. Agnew et al., “Tomography of the quantum state of photons tion/sensing devices and quantum networks based on quantum

entangled in high dimensions,” Phys. Rev. A 84, 062101 (2011). hyperentanglement.

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use

## Mult mai mult decât documente.

Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.

Anulați oricând.