| Literature DB >> 28740228 |
Paul-Antoine Moreau1,2, Javier Sabines-Chesterking3, Rebecca Whittaker3, Siddarth K Joshi3,4, Patrick M Birchall3, Alex McMillan3, John G Rarity3, Jonathan C F Matthews5.
Abstract
Engineering apparatus that harness quantum theory promises to offer practical advantages over current technology. A fundamentally more powerful prospect is that such quantum technologies could out-perform any future iteration of their classical counterparts, no matter how well the attributes of those classical strategies can be improved. Here, for optical direct absorption measurement, we experimentally demonstrate such an instance of an absolute advantage per photon probe that is exposed to the absorbative sample. We use correlated intensity measurements of spontaneous parametric downconversion using a commercially available air-cooled CCD, a new estimator for data analysis and a high heralding efficiency photon-pair source. We show this enables improvement in the precision of measurement, per photon probe, beyond what is achievable with an ideal coherent state (a perfect laser) detected with 100% efficient and noiseless detection. We see this absolute improvement for up to 50% absorption, with a maximum observed factor of improvement of 1.46. This equates to around 32% reduction in the total number of photons traversing an optical sample, compared to any future direct optical absorption measurement using classical light.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28740228 PMCID: PMC5524907 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-06545-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Absorption measurement strategies. (a) Direct absorption measurement with a single beam. (b) Differential measurement to suppress experimental classical noise. (c) Use of correlated twin beams generated from a nonlinear process (χ). In each cartoon, D denotes detectors, S denotes a sample being measured and A denotes analysis that combines the intensity measurement of one detector with another or with a known mean intensity of a laser (denoted L).
Figure 2Experimental setup. A 404-nm laser beam pumps a PPKTP crystal to generate SPDC. After removing the pump beam, the two photons (each labeled the signal and idler photons) are separated and launched inside two optical fibres. The output of one fibre is passed through a sample before being focussed onto a few pixels of a CCD camera, while the second fibre output is directly focussed on the camera.
Figure 3Illustrating the improvement achieved using two-photons compared to single photons in practice. (a) Data points each obtained with a single acquisition of correlated two-photon states captured by the CCD and analysed with our estimator eq. (2). (b) Data points each obtained with a single acquisition of single-photon states and with the direct and sub-optimal estimator eq. (1). Both data in (a) and (b) are each from 1,000 individual absorption estimates (α = 5.99 · 10−3 which is obtained with only the HWP as a sample). (c) The distributions of these data are compared by fitting Gaussian functions—the narrower blue curve corresponds to (a), the wider green curve corresponds to (b). The intermediate red curve corresponds to the expected distribution of estimates that would occur with a perfect coherent state measured with 100% efficient and noiseless detection. The three distributions are presented with different normalisations so that their maximum are superposed along the horizontal axis to highlight the difference in width.
Figure 4Absolute quantum advantage in absorption measurement. (a) Γ is the ratio of the variance of an absorption estimate for the ideal classical scheme, to our experimental measurement. (b) Normalised optical exposure for equal precision, computed from the ratio between the number of photons probing the sample in a particular scheme and in the best direct classical scheme attaining the same estimation precision by increasing the illumination. In both plots: the red solid lines correspond to the ideal classical limit, the red dotted lines correspond to a classical state detected with the same 90% efficiency as in our setup, and the red dashed lines correspond to the example of a differential classical measurement where a laser is split on a 50:50 beamsplitter (Fig. 1(b)) and therefore quantum fluctuations are un-correlated. The yellow line corresponds to the theoretical limit achievable by our system, taking into account the measured rate of classical fluctuations and the arms efficiencies (See Supplementary material). The blue dots with error bars correspond to the experimental data using the quantum corrected measurement. The green asterisks correspond a classical measurement with our setup, using only the single photons generated from downconversion passing through the sample in Arm 1 and ignoring any correlated data in Arm 2. And finally the blue shadowed area highlight the absolute quantum advantage that is detected. Error bars correspond to the standard error on the related quantities taking into account both the uncertainty on the precision of the measurement and the uncertainty on the efficiency of the camera following error propagation on equations (3) and (4). The blue lines correspond to best-fit to the theory, with extra parameters corresponding to eventual super-poissonian non-deterministic and deterministic noise in each fluorescence beam, and to camera noise. All data and curves in both plots normalise to PPE to the sample. N.b. the first point of each plot is obtained with only the HWP as a sample i.e. removing the PBS.