{
  "id": "1302.0932",
  "version": "v2",
  "published": "2013-02-05T04:23:02.000Z",
  "updated": "2013-02-12T01:25:17.000Z",
  "title": "When quantum tomography goes wrong: drift of quantum sources and other errors",
  "authors": [
    "S. J. van Enk",
    "Robin Blume-Kohout"
  ],
  "comment": "To appear in New Journal of Physics, Focus on Quantum Tomography. Two more references added",
  "journal": "New J. Phys. 15 025024 (2013)",
  "doi": "10.1088/1367-2630/15/2/025024",
  "categories": [
    "quant-ph"
  ],
  "abstract": "The principle behind quantum tomography is that a large set of observations -- many samples from a \"quorum\" of distinct observables -- can all be explained satisfactorily as measurements on a single underlying quantum state or process. Unfortunately, this principle may not hold. When it fails, any standard tomographic estimate should be viewed skeptically. Here we propose a simple way to test for this kind of failure using Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC). We point out that the application of this criterion in a quantum context, while still powerful, is not as straightforward as it is in classical physics. This is especially the case when future observables differ from those constituting the quorum.",
  "revisions": [
    {
      "version": "v2",
      "updated": "2013-02-12T01:25:17.000Z"
    }
  ],
  "analyses": {
    "keywords": [
      "quantum tomography",
      "quantum sources",
      "standard tomographic estimate",
      "single underlying quantum state",
      "akaikes information criterion"
    ],
    "tags": [
      "journal article"
    ],
    "publication": {
      "journal": "New Journal of Physics",
      "year": 2013,
      "month": "Feb",
      "volume": 15,
      "number": 2,
      "pages": "025024"
    },
    "note": {
      "typesetting": "TeX",
      "pages": 0,
      "language": "en",
      "license": "arXiv",
      "status": "editable",
      "adsabs": "2013NJPh...15b5024V"
    }
  }
}