Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 8 minor 52 references

Quantum coherence leveraged agnostic phase estimation

T0 review · 2 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that preparing an ancilla in $|+\rangle$, using it to control whether a probe qubit undergoes an unknown rotation $U$ or its inverse $U^{-1}$, and measuring the ancilla in the $X$ basis, yields Fisher information…

desk verdict Neat controlled-superposition protocol for axis-agnostic phase estimation; the math is right, but the 'agnostic' claim rests on unstated access to U^{-1}. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21736 v1 pith:P3K6IRS2 submitted 2025-07-29 quant-ph

H. S. Karthik This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords agnosticphaseestimationquantummetrologyFisherinformationcoherencecoherentlycontrolledsuperpositionqubitrotationunitaryinversionHamiltonian-independentsensing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper seeks to remove the main obstacle in qubit rotation-angle estimation: the need to know the rotation axis, equivalently the Hamiltonian, in advance to prepare an optimal probe and choose an optimal measurement. It claims that a single coherent ancilla qubit, controlling whether the probe undergoes an unknown rotation $U$ or its inverse $U^{-1}$, yields Fisher information $F=1$ for the rotation angle $\tau$ for every axis, matching the known-H optimal bound without using entanglement. The ancilla outcome probabilities depend only on $\tau$, so an experimenter can estimate the phase while remaining ignorant of the axis both before and after the interaction. A sympathetic reader would care because this is a resource-simple route to Hamiltonian-agnostic sensing in platforms where entanglement is costly, and it gives a concrete operational role to quantum coherence in saturating metrological precision.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coherently controlled superposition (CCS) unitary $L=|0\rangle\langle0|_A\otimes U+|1\rangle\langle1|_A\otimes U^{-1}$, acting on a probe-ancilla product state with the ancilla in $|+\rangle=(|0\rangle+|1\rangle)/\sqrt{2}$ and the probe in $|0\rangle$ or any fixed state. The ancilla coherence turns the controlled operation into an interference between forward evolution $U$ and backward evolution $U^{-1}$ on the probe; the axis dependence of the two paths cancels when the ancilla is measured in the $X$ basis, leaving outcome probabilities that depend only on $\tau$. The $X$-basis measurement is called a coherence-preserving measurement, and it converts the ancilla's coherence into saturating Fisher information about the phase. The paper also tracks the resource quantitatively through the $l^1$-norm coherence $C(\alpha)=\sin 2\alpha$ of the ancilla preparation.

What would settle it

Prepare a qubit probe in $|0\rangle$ and an ancilla in $|+\rangle$, implement $L=|0\rangle\langle0|\otimes U+|1\rangle\langle1|\otimes U^{-1}$ for several axes with the same nominal $\tau$, reveal the axes only after the run, and compare the ancilla counts to $P_+=\cos^2(\tau/2)$ and $P_-=\sin^2(\tau/2)$. If the outcome distribution or the estimated Fisher information depends on the axis, or if the Fisher information falls below 1 at $\tau=\pi/2$, the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a qubit rotation angle $\tau$ can be estimated at the optimal Fisher-information level, $F(\tau)=1$, without knowing the rotation axis $(\theta,\phi)$, by letting a coherent ancilla control whether the probe evolves under $U=e^{-i\hat\sigma\cdot\hat n\tau/2}$ or under its inverse $U^{-1}$. With the ancilla prepared in $|+\rangle$ and the probe in $|0\rangle$, the controlled superposition $L=|0\rangle\langle0|_A\otimes U+|1\rangle\langle1|_A\otimes U^{-1}$ produces ancilla outcome probabilities $P_+=\cos^2(\tau/2)$ and $P_-=\sin^2(\tau/2)$, whose Fisher information with respect to $\tau$ is exactly 1 for every axis. The three-parameter Fisher information matrix is block diagonal with $F_{\tau\tau}=1$ and zero correlations between $\tau$ and the axis parameters, so the phase estimate is agnostic to axis knowledge. The result holds without entanglement in the input state or in the measurement, and the appendix shows that the same axis-agnostic $F_{\tau\tau}=1$ survives even when the probe starts maximally mixed, with the ancilla's coherence serving as the quantitative resource.

Load-bearing premise

The protocol assumes that the inverse of the unknown rotation, $U^{-1}$, can be applied under coherent control without first knowing the rotation axis; if $U^{-1}$ cannot be physically realized without axis knowledge, the claimed agnostic advantage does not survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An experimenter who can implement $U$ and $U^{-1}$ under coherent control can estimate $\tau$ at the standard quantum limit without calibrating the rotation axis, so the protocol works in fluctuating or uncharacterized fields.
  • Because the input is a product state and the final measurement is local on the ancilla, the scheme avoids both entangled state preparation and entangling measurements, making it cheaper than the hindsight and closed-timelike-curve based protocols it compares with.
  • The Fisher information about $\tau$ is exactly 1 and decoupled from the axis parameters, so the Cramér-Rao bound $\mathrm{Var}(\hat\tau)\ge 1/N$ is saturated for any axis.
  • Even a maximally mixed probe suffices: the coherence lives only in the ancilla, and no dynamical entanglement is generated, so the advantage is attributable to coherent control rather than to entanglement.
  • Under depolarizing noise of strength $f$ on the ancilla, the Fisher information becomes $f^2\sin^2\tau/(1-f^2\cos^2\tau)$, which the paper reports as slightly better than the entanglement-based counterpart at the same noise levels.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves implicit that the practical meaning of 'agnostic' depends on the physical availability of $U^{-1}$; if a platform can implement phase conjugation, reversed control fields, or another unitary-inversion operation without knowing the axis, the scheme is immediately deployable, but the protocol itself does not explain how to realize $U^{-1}$ in a fully axis-agnostic setting.
  • Because the Fisher information matrix is singular in the axis block, the protocol is specifically tailored to estimating $\tau$ alone; a natural extension is to ask whether higher-dimensional coherent control or multiple probes could extract axis information while retaining the same resource economy.
  • The appendix's formulas relating classical and quantum Fisher information to ancilla coherence suggest a direct experimental test: tune the ancilla superposition angle $\alpha$, measure the ancilla $X$ statistics, and check that the Fisher information follows $C(\alpha)^2\sin^2\tau/(1-C(\alpha)^2\cos^2\tau)$, with full axis-agnostic saturation only at $\alpha=\pi/4$.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 8 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a protocol for estimating the rotation angle τ of a single-qubit unitary U = e^{-iτ n·σ/2} without prior knowledge of the rotation axis n=(θ,φ). The protocol prepares an ancilla in the coherent state |+>, uses it to control whether the probe undergoes U or U^{-1} (the coherently controlled superposition L of Eq. (5)), and then measures the ancilla in the X basis. The outcome probabilities are P_± = cos²(τ/2) and sin²(τ/2), yielding Fisher information FI = 1 independent of (θ,φ). The paper computes the three-parameter Fisher information matrix for the joint Y⊗X measurement and shows it to be block-diagonal with F_{ττ}=1 and zero cross-terms with θ and φ, supporting the agnostic claim. Extensions to a maximally mixed probe and to tunable ancilla coherence are provided, together with a noise-robustness comparison against the entanglement-assisted protocol of Song et al. [7].

Significance. If the assumption of coherent access to U^{-1} is granted, the result is a clean and resource-light achievement: it shows that initial coherence, rather than initial entanglement or entangling measurements, suffices to saturate the quantum Fisher information bound for the rotation angle in an axis-agnostic way. The derivation is explicit, self-contained, and contains no fitted parameters; the predicted FI = 1 is falsifiable. The noise analysis in Appendix C gives a modest but concrete robustness advantage over the entangled protocol. The main limitation, discussed below, is the unadvertised resource of U^{-1}, which is load-bearing for the agnostic claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [Coherently controlled superposition (CCS) enabled sensing, Eq. (5) and footnote [25]] The protocol's central operation L requires access to both U and its inverse U^{-1}. The manuscript does not explain how to implement U^{-1} when the rotation axis n is unknown. The cited analogies—optical phase conjugation and reversing a control field—are specific physical mechanisms that are not guaranteed for an arbitrary unknown unitary and themselves presuppose partial knowledge of the dynamics. Without such a resource, the controlled superposition in Eq. (5) cannot be built, and the agnostic advantage disappears. This is a load-bearing issue because the paper's comparisons to protocols that use only forward U (standard phase estimation and the entanglement-assisted protocol of [7]) are not resource-fair. Please state explicitly that access to U^{-1} is an assumption, provide a constructive method able to produce U^{-1} from U with no axis knowledge, or reframe the claim as conditional on time-reversal capability.
  2. [Appendix B, Eq. (22)] The Fisher information matrix in Eq. (22) is presented without a derivation. In particular, the off-diagonal block entries F_{θφ} and F_{φθ} are given in a compact form that is hard to verify. Since the block-diagonal structure (zero F_{τθ}, F_{τφ}) is the central quantitative claim, a derivation or a more transparent presentation showing how the (θ,φ) dependence cancels in the τ-row and τ-column would strengthen the paper. This is an accessibility issue rather than a correctness issue, but it makes the main result difficult for a reader to reproduce independently.
minor comments (8)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase "More the optimality of the measurement, the better will be the improvement" is awkward; consider rephrasing to "A more optimal measurement yields a better estimate."
  2. [Introduction, near Eq. (9)] The sentence "This is a striking and distinctive result since it is the probe qubit which undergoes the phase encoding and the effect of it is witnessed on the ancilla–a clear manifestation of the coherent control mechanism –contrary to conventional phase estimation protocols" is difficult to parse; please restructure and check the dash spacing.
  3. [Throughout] The word "irreverent" appears where "irrelevant" is intended (e.g., "irreverent to the knowledge" and "irreverent to the performance"); please correct these typographical errors.
  4. [Coherently controlled superposition section, after Eq. (9)] The phrase "F I= 1" has spacing issues; it should be "FI = 1", and "i.e," should be "i.e.,".
  5. [Hindsight control section] The sentence "the state of the ancilla acts like a fixed point in the interaction extracting all the information from a transformation (causal) it didn’t undergo" is cryptic and would benefit from a concrete mathematical explanation of the fixed-point concept.
  6. [Figure 4 caption] The caption describes the "success probability of simulating the time-travel of the ancilla"; since the time-travel narrative is interpretive, consider moving this phrase to the discussion and keeping the caption purely descriptive of the plotted quantity.
  7. [Appendix A, Eq. (12)] The formula for the quantum Fisher information matrix for a pure state is correct, but the notation "⟨∂iψ(λ)|ψ(λ)⟩" is used without specifying that the derivatives are with respect to λ_i; a brief statement clarifying the partial-derivative convention would help.
  8. [Appendix B, after Eq. (21)] Please add a sentence explaining how the Fisher information matrix in Eq. (22) is computed from the probabilities in Eq. (21), or provide a short derivation, to make the appendix self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the agnostic FI result is derived by direct algebra from the stated controlled-U/U^{-1} interaction.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. Starting from L = |0><0|_A ⊗ U + |1><1|_A ⊗ U^{-1} (Eq. 5) and the initial product state (Eq. 4), the paper computes the joint state (Eq. 7), projects the ancilla onto the X basis, and obtains P_± = cos²(τ/2), sin²(τ/2) (Eq. 9); these probabilities give FI = 1 as an elementary calculation, and the full Fisher-information matrix in Appendix B (Eqs. 21–22) is evaluated from explicit outcome probabilities, showing the τ–θ and τ–φ cross terms vanish for all λ. No parameter is fitted to data and no occurrence of the target result is used as an input. Citations to prior work (e.g., [7], [22], [23]) are contextual and comparative rather than load-bearing. The one caveat, that realizing the controlled superposition requires access to U^{-1} without knowing the rotation axis (footnote [25] analogizes this to optical phase conjugation), is a physical-resource assumption affecting the scope of the agnostic claim, but it is not circular: the algebra does not presuppose the conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data; the ancilla coherence angle α is an optimizable control, set to π/4 for maximum coherence. The protocol rests on standard quantum mechanics and on two domain assumptions: that the controlled operation can be implemented coherently, and that U^{-1} is available as a black-box operation without Hamiltonian knowledge. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanics and Fisher information theory: unitary evolution, Born rule, Cramér-Rao bound.
    Used throughout; Eq. (1) and Appendix A.
  • domain assumption The controlled operation L = |0><0| ⊗ U + |1><1| ⊗ U^{-1} can be implemented coherently, preserving the ancilla superposition.
    Eq. (5); the protocol's performance depends on this coherent control.
  • domain assumption The inverse unitary U^{-1} is available as a black-box operation without knowledge of the Hamiltonian H.
    Assumed implicitly; not derived or discussed. Section 'Coherently controlled superposition (CCS) enabled sensing'.
  • domain assumption The initial probe and ancilla states are prepared as |0> and |+> respectively, and the ancilla is measured in X.
    These choices are optimized, not fitted; the derivation shows this yields FI=1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum coherence leveraged agnostic phase estimation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P3K6IRS2

@misc{pith2026250721736,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum coherence leveraged agnostic phase estimation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P3K6IRS2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21736}
}
abstract

Quantum metrology concerns improving the estimation of an unknown parameter using an optimal measurement scheme on the quantum system. More the optimality of the measurement, the better will be the improvement in sensing the value of the unknown parameter. Pertaining to the case of a two level system (qubit) undergoing rotation, a typical metrological task concerns the estimation of the angle of rotation ($\tau$) given the information about the axis of rotation ($\theta,\phi$). The method for garnering information about ($\tau)$ is through maximizing the Fisher information. In the absence of the axis-knowledge, the optimality of the metrological task reduces drastically. Drawing inspiration from recent works leveraging entanglement to connect closed time-like curves and metrology, we overcome this limitation (lack of the knowledge of the rotation axis) using an ancilla assisted protocol. Here, the probe and the ancilla interact through a coherently controlled superposition of unitary evolutions. The quantum coherence in the initial state of the ancilla forms as the resource aiding the protocol. By measuring the ancilla in the same coherent basis in which it was prepared, we achieve optimal Fisher information about the rotation angle, independent of the axis parameters. Notably, this resource-efficient and operationally simple agnostic sensing alternative is independent of both the entanglement in the initial joint state of the probe and the ancilla and entangling measurements, yet accounts for maximum Fisher information about the angle of rotation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21736 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Single qubit sensing protocol–time runs from left to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Entanglement leveraged hindsight sensing protocol– [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: The probe and the ancilla qubit start in the state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The success probability of the outcome [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: (a) Plot showing FI (about [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    Altorio, M

    M. Altorio, M. G. Genoni, F. Somma, and M. Barbieri, Metrol- ogy with unknown detectors, Physical Review Letters 116, 100802 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [23]

    Chapeau-Blondeau, Quantum parameter estimation on co- herently superposed noisy channels, Physical Review A 104, 032214 (2021)

    F. Chapeau-Blondeau, Quantum parameter estimation on co- herently superposed noisy channels, Physical Review A 104, 032214 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [7]

    D. R. Arvidsson-Shukur, A. G. McConnell, and N. Yunger Halpern, Nonclassical advantage in metrology established via quantum simulations of hypothetical closed timelike curves, Physical Review Letters 131, 150202 (2023)

    work page 2023

  4. [1]

    S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Physical Review Letters 72, 3439 (1994)

    1994

  5. [2]

    preparation

    correspond to the coherent superpo- sition of the eigenstates of the Hamiltonian ( ∝ σz). Conse- quently, a measurement M along ˆy helps in maximizing the FI (= 1 ) for the parameter τ (around τ = 0 ). This process mirrors the single qubit sensing protocol considering the time- travel narrative for the probe qubit. From the optimal state ‘preparation’ in ...

    work page 2025

  6. [3]

    Giovannetti, S

    V . Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum metrology, Physical review letters 96, 010401 (2006)

    2006

  7. [4]

    M. G. Paris, Quantum estimation for quantum technology, In- ternational Journal of Quantum Information 7, 125 (2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [5]

    Tóth and I

    G. Tóth and I. Apellaniz, Quantum metrology from a quantum information science perspective, Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical 47, 424006 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 52 references
  1. [6]

    Giovannetti, S

    V . Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quan- tum metrology, Nature photonics 5, 222 (2011)

    2011

  2. [8]

    X. Song, F. Salvati, C. Gaikwad, N. Yunger Halpern, D. R. Arvidsson-Shukur, and K. Murch, Agnostic phase estimation, Physical Review Letters 132, 260801 (2024)

    2024

  3. [9]

    Gödel, An example of a new type of cosmological solutions of einstein’s field equations of gravitation, Reviews of modern physics 21, 447 (1949)

    K. Gödel, An example of a new type of cosmological solutions of einstein’s field equations of gravitation, Reviews of modern physics 21, 447 (1949)

    1949

  4. [10]

    Svetlichny, Time travel: Deutsch vs

    G. Svetlichny, Time travel: Deutsch vs. teleportation, Interna- tional Journal of Theoretical Physics 50, 3903 (2011)

    2011

  5. [11]

    M. S. Morris, K. S. Thorne, and U. Yurtsever, Wormholes, time machines, and the weak energy condition, Physical Review Let- ters 61, 1446 (1988)

    1988

  6. [12]

    M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, Wormholes in spacetime and their use for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching general rela- tivity, American Journal of Physics 56, 395 (1988)

    1988

  7. [13]

    Deutsch, Quantum mechanics near closed timelike lines, Physical Review D 44, 3197 (1991)

    D. Deutsch, Quantum mechanics near closed timelike lines, Physical Review D 44, 3197 (1991)

    1991

  8. [14]

    Lloyd, L

    S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, R. Garcia-Patron, V . Giovannetti, Y . Shikano, S. Pirandola, L. A. Rozema, A. Darabi, Y . Souda- gar, L. K. Shalm, and A. M. Steinberg, Closed timelike curves via postselection: Theory and experimental test of consistency, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 040403 (2011)

    2011

  9. [15]

    Lloyd, L

    S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, R. Garcia-Patron, V . Giovannetti, and Y . Shikano, Quantum mechanics of time travel through post- selected teleportation, Physical Review D—Particles, Fields, Gravitation, and Cosmology 84, 025007 (2011)

    2011

  10. [16]

    Ringbauer, M

    M. Ringbauer, M. A. Broome, C. R. Myers, A. G. White, and T. C. Ralph, Experimental simulation of closed timelike curves, Nature Communications 5, 1 (2014)

    2014

  11. [17]

    X. Song, S. S. Borjigin, F. Salvati, Y .-X. Wang, N. Y . Halpern, D. R. Arvidsson-Shukur, and K. Murch, Superconducting an- tiqubits achieve optimal phase estimation via unitary inversion, arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.04315 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Kaiser, T

    F. Kaiser, T. Coudreau, P. Milman, D. B. Ostrowsky, and S. Tanzilli, Entanglement-enabled delayed-choice experiment, Science 338, 637 (2012)

    2012

  13. [19]

    Lee, H.-T

    J.-C. Lee, H.-T. Lim, K.-H. Hong, Y .-C. Jeong, M. Kim, and Y .- H. Kim, Experimental demonstration of delayed-choice deco- herence suppression, Nature Communications 5, 4522 (2014)

    2014

  14. [20]

    X.-s. Ma, J. Kofler, and A. Zeilinger, Delayed-choice gedanken experiments and their realizations, Reviews of Modern Physics 88, 015005 (2016)

    2016

  15. [21]

    Chapeau-Blondeau, Optimizing qubit phase estimation, Physical Review A 94, 022334 (2016)

    F. Chapeau-Blondeau, Optimizing qubit phase estimation, Physical Review A 94, 022334 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    B. Xia, J. Huang, H. Li, Z. Luo, and G. Zeng, Nanoradian-scale precision in light rotation measurement via indefinite quantum dynamics, Science Advances 10, eadm8524 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    X. Song, M. Naghiloo, and K. Murch, Quantum process infer- ence for a single-qubit maxwell demon, Physical Review A104, 022211 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    The action of U † is analogous in spirit to optical phase conju- gation, where a phase-conjugate mirror undoes the wavefront distortions by generating a complex-conjugated time-reversed field [31–36] or similar to switching the ‘sign’ of a control field [37]

  19. [27]

    In the well-known grandfather paradox, the actions of the time- traveling grand-daugther who interacts with her grandfather could have an effect on her own existence. Such logical co- nundrums are avoided either by framing self-consitency condi- tions [38] (for quantum theory)...

  20. [28]

    Our CCS sensing protocol uses a coherent ancilla-assisted strat- egy similar to the conceptual scheme of using indefinite causal order exhibited via the quantum switch (for metrology some of the recent works include [40–42]). However, our proto- col achieves Hamiltonian-agnost...

  21. [29]

    Y . Guo, Z. Liu, H. Tang, X.-M. Hu, B.-H. Liu, Y .-F. Huang, C.- F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and G. Chiribella, Experimental demonstra- tion of input-output indefiniteness in a single quantum device, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 160201 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    Strömberg, P

    T. Strömberg, P. Schiansky, M. T. Quintino, M. Antesberger, L. A. Rozema, I. Agresti, ˇC. Brukner, and P. Walther, Experi- mental superposition of a quantum evolution with its time re- verse, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023071 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Friis, A

    N. Friis, A. A. Melnikov, G. Kirchmair, and H. J. Briegel, Co- herent controlization using superconducting qubits, Scientific reports 5, 18036 (2015)

    2015

  24. [32]

    D. M. Pepper, Applications of optical phase conjugation, Sci- entific American 254, 74 (1986)

    1986

  25. [33]

    G. S. He, Optical phase conjugation: principles, techniques, and applications, Progress in Quantum Electronics 26, 131 (2002)

    2002

  26. [34]

    Yaqoob, D

    Z. Yaqoob, D. Psaltis, M. S. Feld, and C. Yang, Optical phase conjugation for turbidity suppression in biological samples, Na- ture photonics 2, 110 (2008)

    2008

  27. [35]

    R. A. Fisher, Optical phase conjugation (Academic press, 2012)

    2012

  28. [36]

    B. Y . Zel’Dovich, N. F. Pilipetsky, and V . V . Shkunov,Princi- ples of phase conjugation, V ol. 42 (Springer, 2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    C.-Y . Shen, J. Li, T. Gan, Y . Li, M. Jarrahi, and A. Ozcan, All- optical phase conjugation using diffractive wavefront process- 7 ing, Nature Communications 15, 4989 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    Zhang, T

    Z. Zhang, T. Wang, L. Xiang, J. Yao, J. Wu, and Y . Yin, Mea- suring the berry phase in a superconducting phase qubit by a shortcut to adiabaticity, Physical Review A 95, 042345 (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    I. D. Novikov, Evolution of the universe, Cambridge: Univer- sity Press (1983)

    1983

  32. [40]

    S. W. Hawking, Chronology protection conjecture, Physical Re- view D 46, 603 (1992)

    1992

  33. [41]

    Mukhopadhyay, M

    C. Mukhopadhyay, M. K. Gupta, and A. K. Pati, Superposition of causal order as a metrological resource for quantum ther- mometry, arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.07508 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Frey, Indefinite causal order aids quantum depolarizing channel identification, Quantum Information Processing 18, 96 (2019)

    M. Frey, Indefinite causal order aids quantum depolarizing channel identification, Quantum Information Processing 18, 96 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    X. Zhao, Y . Yang, and G. Chiribella, Quantum metrology with indefinite causal order, Physical review letters 124, 190503 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    C. R. Rao, Information and the accuracy attainable in the esti- mation of statistical parameters, in Breakthroughs in Statistics: Foundations and basic theory (Springer, 1992) pp. 235–247

    1992

  37. [45]

    Cramér, Mathematical methods of statistics, V ol

    H. Cramér, Mathematical methods of statistics, V ol. 9 (Prince- ton university press, 1999)

    1999

  38. [46]

    C. W. Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory, Journal of Statistical Physics 1, 231 (1969)

    1969

  39. [47]

    Fujiwara and H

    A. Fujiwara and H. Nagaoka, Quantum fisher metric and es- timation for pure state models, Physics Letters A 201, 119 (1995)

    1995

  40. [48]

    A. Z. Goldberg, L. L. Sánchez-Soto, and H. Ferretti, Intrinsic sensitivity limits for multiparameter quantum metrology, Phys- ical Review Letters 127, 110501 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    A. A. Abbott, J. Wechs, D. Horsman, M. Mhalla, and C. Bran- ciard, Communication through coherent control of quantum channels, Quantum 4, 333 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Baumgratz, M

    T. Baumgratz, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Quantifying co- herence, Physical review letters 113, 140401 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    Feng and L

    X. Feng and L. Wei, Quantifying quantum coherence with quantum fisher information, Scientific Reports7, 15492 (2017). APPENDIX A: A short note on (quantum) parameter estimation A typical estimation problem (see Fig. 1 in the main text) can be stated as follows: a probe initial...

    2017

  44. [52]

    Here, the noise strength f = 0 .95

    (noisy preparation of the singlet). Here, the noise strength f = 0 .95. (b) The noise strength f = 0 .97. (c) The noise strength f = 0.99 Notice that in all the three cases, the CCS sensing strategy performs slightly better than that involving entangled state and measurement. ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.