Polarization-based quantum

entanglement for enhanced resolution

James F. Smith III

James F. Smith III “Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution,”

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

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use
 Optical Engineering 58(8), 082411 (August 2019)

Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced

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.

1 Introduction visibility, and probabilities of detection for detectors with

A factorization scheme is introduced for an N ¼ 3 N00N
state generation in the polarization degree of freedom
(DOF). A method of using these states for imaging in the
atmosphere is explored. The factorization scheme potentially
permits any N00N or M&M state1–5 to be generated and
detected. Explicit results for N00N states are presented.
Internal loss within the entanglement generator and external
loss due to atmosphere, detectors, and targets are modeled.
A method using these approaches for quantum entangle-
ment-based imaging is provided that gives N times classical
resolution, where N is the number of photons entangled with
explicit results exhibited for N ¼ 3. The wave function, nor-
malization, density matrix, reduced density matrix, visibility,
and probabilities of detection of one through three photons
using detectors with general polarization characteristics are
provided. Explicit entanglement generator and detector
designs are provided in terms of linear and nonlinear photon-
ics devices. The designs are kindred to those developed
for a recent experiment that did not explore atmospheric
propagation.2 The fundamental role of postselection meas-
urement for generating entanglement is included. Closed
form expressions for general detector configurations are pro-
vided. The presented material provides a basis for further
quantum imaging research.6,7 Closed form results for the
relevant wave functions, normalization, detection operators,
*Address all correspondence to James F. Smith III, E-mail: james.smith@
nrl.navy.mil
general polarization characteristics are provided. All results
are derived mathematically using the postulates of quantum
mechanics. Computational results comparing probabilities
for detecting different numbers of photons and for different
values of loss are given.
The paper is organized as follows: Sec. 2 provides the
design of the entanglement generator including the function
of various optical elements and a discussion of postselection
detection. Section 2 also provides closed form expressions
for the wave function that is produced by the optics, its nor-
malization, the model of loss within the imaging system,
atmospheric loss, the related density, and reduced density
operators. Section 3 provides general projection operators
for the detection of one to three photons in a wide class of
polarization states and the derivations as well as probabilities
of detection for one through three photons. The relationship
between the optimal detection operators and the detection
probabilities are made explicit. In Sec. 4, a general factori-
zation scheme for M&M states and, subsequently, N00N
states is provided. Discussions of entanglement devices that
will produce general M&M states at near-visible wave-
lengths,2 e.g., 810 nm are also given. In Sec. 5, a discussion
of a bearing measurement device that exhibits both super-
sensitivity and resolution is provided. Section 6 provides
computational results comparing probabilities of detection
of one to three photons and the vacuum state for specific
values of loss internal to the imaging system and external
0091-3286/2019/$25.00 © 2019 SPIE

Optical Engineering 082411-1 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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
of detecting three photons at various values of internal and
atmospheric loss. Section 7 discusses alternate forms of
entanglement and their utility for sensing and communica-
tions. Finally, Sec. 8 provides conclusions.
2 Entanglement and Detection
Figure 1 shows a configuration for generating and detecting a
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
to any N00N or M&M state.1–5
The photon source is located at point A in Fig. 1. It pro-
vides photons some of which pass through the beam splitter
at position B to go to the beta barium borate (BBO) crystal at
position C. Other photons are reflected from the beam split-
ter at position B, subsequently traveling to the mirror at posi-
tion L. Those photons traveling to the BBO crystal stimulate
type II parametric down conversion. This generally produces
two orthogonally polarized photons. It is rare that type II
parametric down conversion would produce more than two
output photons. These two orthogonally polarized photons
pass through a polarizing beam splitter (PBS) that converts
them into a horizontally polarized photon with creation oper-
ator denoted as aþ H and a vertically polarized photon with
creation operator denoted as aþ V.
Let the vacuum state be denoted as j0i; after the PBS, the
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
photons arrive at the detectors at J, then there was no
reflected component of vertically polarized light off the PP.
The local oscillator (LO) photon propagates outside to
a target and scatters back to the detector path, QPG. . . K.
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
described in the Mitchell–Lundeen–Steinberg experiment,2
postselection using the detector at F is once again used.
2.1 Entanglement Generator, Its Components, and
Loss Mechanisms
In Fig. 1, LO photons travel through the exit portal at O,
scatter off target at Q to the detector at K. While traveling
through the atmosphere, both aþ þ
H and aV experience trans-
mittance tatm and reflectance ratm . Atmospheric loss is simu-
lated by the beam splitter at P. In Fig. 1, the solid gray beam
splitters at I and P are used to model loss. They would not
be present in a real system unlike the beam splitters at B
and M.
The photon source at A sends photons out that pass
through a beam splitter at B. Some of the photons travel to
the BBO crystal at C. The others are attenuated along the
path BLMO to produce the LO photon.
Loss along the path C–J is given by the beam splitter at
I with transmittance, tI and reflectance, rI .
Recall1,3 that loss at I or Q can be written as
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

BBO PBS HWP QWP PS 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.

Optical Engineering 082411-2 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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
jtα j2 þ jrα j2 ¼ 1:
EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e004;63;741
matrix calculations. The operator U ϕ represents the action
of the PS at J and is given explicitly as
(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

states corresponding to noise, i.e., the “atm” and the “I”

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

0 j0i ∝ pffiffiffi · ðaþ þ

L − aR Þ: (7) ρred ðFTÞ ¼ 2∕9 · N 2 · Uϕ
2·i EQ-TARGET;temp:intralink-;e014;326;478

· fjtatm · t2I j2 · ½ðaþ 3 þ 3

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

After passage through the QWP at H and the loss beam

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

Optical Engineering 082411-3 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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

tons linearly polarized at angles θ1 , θ2 , and θ3 , with positive

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

where N 123 is a normalization constant: equivalent to determining hAired .

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

l¼1 l¼1 j¼1 l¼1

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)

Optical Engineering 082411-4 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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

where ¼ hE10 i þ γ 11 γ 21 hA1 i; (48)

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

values θl ; l ¼ 1;2; 3. and

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

 3.4 Probability Detecting the Vacuum State

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)

Optical Engineering 082411-5 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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

pffiffiffiffiffiffi correspond to different distances between the photon source

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

number of photons entangled, e.g., N ¼ 3 as in Fig. 1. Thus,

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

jm ∷ m 0 iHV ≡ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi0 ffi ðaþ m0 þ m0

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.

Optical Engineering 082411-6 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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

0.25 versus phase for six values of the atmospheric transmittance.

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

0.15 can be <67% of the observed values for T I ¼ 0.95 in Fig. 3.

Thus, internal loss can play a significant role in changing
the probability of detection.
0.1

7 Multiphoton Entanglement and

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

Optical Engineering 082411-7 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)

Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019

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-
entangled states.28 Multiphoton states refer to states where
three or more photons are entangled in one DOF. A DOF can
be polarization, energy-time (ET), orbital angular momen-
tum,29,30 radial quantum number,31 frequency,32 etc. HE
states refer to entanglement of photons, generally in two
or more DOFs.
MPE states, as discussed in previous sections, can offer
improvement in resolution. If N photons are entangled, each
with electromagnetic wavelength λ, then sensing and imag-
ing can be done using a wavelength that is effectively3–5 λ∕N.
If the resolution that the wavelength λ offers is satisfactory,
then the size of lenses can be reduced by a factor of N.
This can be a useful feature for missions where mass or size
limitation are important, e.g., space applications.33
States like N00N states can be fragile when subjected
to environmental loss.3–5,9–11,34,35 This does not mean that
sensing and imaging cannot be done. It generally means that
many signal photons must be transmitted to produce the
desired results. The number of required photons needed
for transmission is estimated using the quantum Chernoff
bound.9,15,18,21–23,26,36 Transmission over time of additional
signal photons increases measurement time, referred to as
time-on-target20,22 (TOT). This can prove to be a liability
for a variety of reasons.20,22
Some MPE states are more robust than others. M&M
states are significantly more robust than the corresponding
N00N state.3,9–11,34,35 This robustness helps M&M states
to survive more effectively in the presence of loss mecha-
nisms than N00N states, subsequently reducing TOT. Linear
combinations of M&M states are significantly more robust
than the corresponding M&M state or N00N state,9 further
facilitating sensing and imaging with low TOT.
HE states typically involve a signal and ancilla photon
entangled in at least two DOFs. These states can be used
for sensing20–22 or communications.13,14,21,27 When used
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
system have signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) denoted as SNRc .
Let the sensing system using HE have an SNR denoted by
SNRHE . It can be shown mathematically that for entangled26
or hyperentangled systems20–22 that the improvement in SNR
over classical is proportional to d. In other words, SNRHE ∼
d · SNRc .20–22 The tilde “∼” is read as “goes as,” i.e., there
can be an additional proportionality factor. Likewise, let
TOTHE and TOTc denote the TOT for the hyperentangled
system and the classical system, respectively, then TOTHE ∼
TOTc ∕d.20–22 Many other measures of effectiveness are im-
proved by using HE. These include the signal-to-interference
ratio (SIR), where using analogous notation, SIRHE ∼ d ·
SIRc ; maximum sensing range that experiences an improve-
ment by a factor proportional to d1∕4 ; maximum communi-
cation range whose improvement factor is proportional to
d1∕2 ; the quantum Cramer Rao lower bound (QCRLB),
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-
able feature; and the Holevo bound that can be interpreted as
a bound on the number of classical bits that can be carried by
each signal photon.23,39 The improvement in the Holevo
bound relative to the classical case is proportional to log2 ðdÞ.
Since modern values25 of d can exceed 10,000, in theory,
Optical Engineering
Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019
Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use
improvements in SNR, SIR, TOT, and QCRLB can exceed
10,000. Improvements in sensing and communications range
can exceed 10 and 100, respectively. The improvement in
the Holevo bound can be >12 additional bits carried by each
signal photon.23,28
It is possible to combine MPE with hyperentanglement.
By using an jN ∷ 1i state, i.e., initially N signal photons and
one ancilla photon, that are initially entangled in polarization
followed by entanglement in other DOFs, such as ET, it is
possible to offer significant additional improvements in the
measures of effectiveness (MOEs) described above. The
improvement factor for SNR and SIR in this case is N · d;
maximum sensing range experiences an improvement factor
proportional to ðN · dÞ1∕4 ; maximum communications range
is improved by a factor proportional to ðN · dÞ1∕2 ; the
QCRLB improves, i.e., gets smaller by a factor proportional
to N 2 · d; TOT is reduced by a likewise desirable factor pro-
portional to N 2 · d and the Holevo bound’s improvement
goes as N · log2 ðdÞ.28 So, it is observed that by combining
MPE with hyperentanglement, significant amounts of addi-
tional utility are obtained. Combining MPE with hyperentan-
glement can offer significant opportunities for tradeoff
between the two concepts while retaining high MOE values.
For example, for N ¼ 5 and a modest Hilbert space of
dimensionality d ¼ 1000, it follows that the Holevo bound’s
improvement can be 50 bits.23,28
Additional improvements can be introduced by combin-
ing MPE states, HE states, and networks.40–42 The networks
can be of a classical or quantum nature. If each output node
on the network has M transmitter detector pairs, then the
improvement factors for SNR and SIR are proportional to
M · N · d; TOT and QCRLB are reduced by the desirable
factor proportional to M · N 2 · d; the sensing range and com-
munication range improvement factors are proportional to
ðM · N · dÞ1∕4 and ðM · N · dÞ1∕2 , respectively. The relative
Holevo bound improvement compared to classical goes as
M · N · log2 ðdÞ per transmitted signal photon.23,28
8 Conclusions
Quantum entanglement results in super resolution, i.e., res-
olution beating the Rayleigh diffraction limit. For three
entangled photons forming a N00N state, resolution is
improved by a factor of three. Resolution is never degraded
as loss increases. Even with 25% internal loss and 90%
atmospheric loss, super resolution is maintained and maxi-
mum probabilities of detection of ∼5% are observed. Low
probability of detection will increase measurement time
but still holds promise for super resolution applications in
imaging.
A generalized procedure for producing M&M states
is discussed. M&M states are more robust than the corre-
sponding N00N state. Linear combinations of M&M states
are more robust than the corresponding M&M state. By com-
bining MPE with hyperentanglement, significant additional
utility can be gained for both sensing and imaging systems.
References
1. S. D. Huver, C. F. Wildfeuer, and J. P. Dowling, “Entangled fock states
for robust quantum optical metrology, imaging, and sensing,” Phys. Rev.
A 78, 1–5 (2008).
2. M. W. Mitchell, J. S. Lundeen, and A. M. Steinberg, “Super-resolving
phase measurements with a multiphoton entangled state,” Nature 429,
161–164 (2004).
082411-8 August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)
 Smith: Polarization-based quantum entanglement for enhanced resolution
3. J. F. Smith, III, “Quantum interferometer and radar theory based on
N00N, M and M, or linear combinations of entangled states,” Proc.
SPIE 7702, 77020I (2010).
4. J. F. Smith, III, “Quantum entangled radar theory and a correction
method for the effects of the atmosphere on entanglement,” Proc.
SPIE 7342, 73420A (2009).
5. G. Gilbert, M. Hamrick, and Y. S. Weinstein, “Practical quantum inter-
ferometry using photonic N00N states,” Proc. SPIE 6573, 65730K
(2007).
6. R. Meyers, K. S. Deacon, and Y. Shih, “Ghost-imaging experiment by
measuring reflected photons,” Phys. Rev. A 77, 041801R (2008).
7. R. W. Boyd et al., “Quantum imaging: enhanced image formation using
quantum states of light,” Proc. SPIE 7342, 73420B (2009).
8. M. Hofheinz et al., “Synthesizing arbitrary quantum states in a super-
conducting resonator,” Nature 459, 546–549 (2009).
9. J. F. Smith, III, “Enhancing interferometer phase estimation, sensing
sensitivity, and resolution using robust entangled states,” Opt. Eng.
56(11), 111710 (2017).
10. J. P. Dowling, “Quantum optical metrology—the lowdown on high-
N00N states,” J. Contemp. Phys. 49(2), 125–143 (2008).
11. J. F. Smith, III, “Generation and detection of quantum entangled states
for quantum imaging,” Proc. SPIE 8057, 805708 (2011).
12. J. F. Smith, III, “Superdense coding facilitated by hyper-entanglement
and quantum networks,” Proc. SPIE 10193, 1019316 (2017).
13. X.-F. Ren, G.-P. Guo, and G.-C. Guo, “Complete Bell-states analysis
using hyper-entanglement,” Phys. Lett. A 343, 8–11 (2005).
14. X.-F. Ren et al., “Engineering of multi-dimensional entangled states of
photon pairs using hyper-entanglement,” Chin. Phys. Lett. 23(3) (2006).
15. J. F. Smith, III, “Quantum hyper-entanglement and angular spectrum
decomposition applied to sensors,” Proc. SPIE 9873, 98730M (2016).
16. J. F. Smith, III, “Sensors based on quantum hyper-entanglement:
efficiency and performance in the presence of other photon sources,”
Proc. SPIE 9500, 95000E (2015).
17. J. F. Smith, III, “Generation, detection, and applications of quantum
hyper-entangled and entangled states,” Proc. SPIE 8400, 840011
(2012).
18. J. F. Smith, III, “Hyper-entanglement based system with enhanced
resolution, signal to noise ratio, and measurement time,” Proc. SPIE
8749, 87490Y (2013).
19. J. F. Smith, III, “Hyper-entanglement based sensor with reduced meas-
urement time and enhanced signal to interference ratio,” Proc. SPIE
9123, 91230L (2014).
20. J. F. Smith, III, “Improving detection range, signal-to-noise ratio, and
measurement time through hyperentanglement,” Opt. Eng. 56(7),
071511 (2017).
21. J. F. Smith, III, “Enhanced sensing and communication via quantum
networks,” Proc. SPIE 10188, 101880I (2017).
22. J. F. Smith, III, “Using hyperentanglement to enhance resolution, signal-
to-noise ratio, and measurement time,” Opt. Eng. 56(3), 031210 (2016).
23. J. F. Smith, III, “Enhanced communication through quantum hyper-
entanglement,” Proc. SPIE 10660, 106600I (2018).
24. M. Agnew et al., “Tomography of the quantum state of photons
entangled in high dimensions,” Phys. Rev. A 84, 062101 (2011).
Optical Engineering 082411-9
Downloaded From: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/journals/Optical-Engineering on 21 Apr 2019
Terms of Use: https://www.spiedigitallibrary.org/terms-of-use
25. M. Krenn et al., “Generation and confirmation of a (100x100)-dimen-
sional quantum system,” PNAS 111(17), 6243–6247 (2014).
26. S. Lloyd, “Enhanced sensitivity of photodetection via quantum illumi-
nation,” Science 321, 1463–1465 (2008).
27. J. T. Barreiro, T.-C. Wei, and P. G. Kwiat, “Beating the channel capacity
limit for linear photonic superdense coding,” Nat. Phys. 4, 282–286
(2008).
28. J. F. Smith, III, “Combining multi-photon entanglement, hyper-entan-
glement, and quantum networks for enhanced sensing,” Proc. SPIE
10633, 1063316 (2018).
29. L. Allen et al., “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transforma-
tion of Laguerre–Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185–8189
(1992).
30. A. E. Willner, Twisted Light Could Dramatically Boost Data Rates,
IEEE Spectrum, Piscataway (2016).
31. W. N. Plick et al., “The forgotten quantum number: a short note on
the radial modes of Laguerre–Gaussbeams,” arXiv:1306.6517 (2013).
32. D. H. Hughes et al., “Quantum operations on entangled photons using
Lyot filters,” Proc. SPIE 9996, 99960H (2016).
33. G. Gilbert et al., “Quantum sensor miniaturization prospectus,” Proc.
SPIE 7342, 73420I (2008).
34. 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).
35. 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).
36. N. Calsamiglia and N. Lütkenhaus, “Maximum efficiency of a linear-
optical Bell-state analyzer,” Appl. Phys. B: Laser Opt. 72, 67–71 (2001).
37. C. W. Helstrom, Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory, Vol. 123,
Academic Press, New York (1976).
38. U. Dorner et al., “Optimal quantum phase estimation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.
102, 040403 (2009).
39. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum
Information, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000).
40. N. Sangouard et al., “Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles
and linear optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 33 (2011).
41. R. van Meter, Quantum Networking (Networks and Telecommuni-
cations), Wiley-ISTE, Hoboken (2014).
42. M. Bashkansky, F. K. Fatemi, and I. Vurgaftman, “Quantum memory in
warm rubidium vapor with buffer gas,” Opt. Lett. 37(2), 142 (2012).
James F. Smith III is a theoretical physicist and has conducted
research for over 27 years at the Naval Research Laboratory. He
has about 150 peer-reviewed publications in areas of theoretical
physics, applied mathematics, and related engineering topics. His
research interests include, but are not limited to, quantum information
theory, mathematical techniques, quantum sensing/imaging, and
quantum networks. He has conceived of a class of imaging/detec-
tion/sensing devices and quantum networks based on quantum
hyperentanglement.
August 2019 • Vol. 58(8)