Home | About Journal | Web Links | E-mail Alerts | RSS RSS Icon | Browse

Multiple-measurement Leggett-Garg inequalities

Source: Phys. Rev. A 80, 034102 (2009); doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.80.034102

Published 18 September 2009

KEYWORDS and PACS
Keywords
PACS
  • 03.65.Ta
    Foundations of quantum mechanics; measurement theory
  • YEAR: 2009
RELATED DATABASES

To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
PUBLICATION DATA
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef APS
Marco Barbieri
Groupe d'Optique Quantique, Laboratoire Charles Fabry, Institut d'Optique, Palaiseau 91127, France
In the investigation of the quantum to classical transition, the Leggett-Garg inequality represents what Bell's inequality is for the study of entanglement and nonlocality: a definite quantitative test showing the inadequacy of familiar lines of thought in interpreting quantum phenomena. Here we discuss the generalization of the Leggett-Garg inequality to an arbitrary number of measurements in the perspective of its use as a tool for characterizing nondestructive measurement devices. ©2009 The American Physical Society
History: Received 4 August 2009; published 18 September 2009
Permalink: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRA/v80/e034102

REFERENCES (20)

For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. W. H. Zurek, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 715 (2003).
  2. G. C. Ghirardi, A. Rimini, and T. Weber, Phys. Rev. D 34, 470 (1986).
  3. J. Kofler and Č. Brukner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 180403 (2007).
  4. A. J. Leggett and A. Garg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 857 (1985).
  5. A. N. Jordan, A. N. Korotkov, and M. Büttiker, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 026805 (2006).
  6. N. S. Williams and A. N. Jordan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 026804 (2008).
  7. J. F. Clauser, M. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969).
  8. Based on intuition, we build a hierarchical scale for LGIs based on the difference between the quantum expectation value and the classical bound. In different contexts, alternative definitions might provide a better insight: see A. Cabello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 140406 (2006)
  9. M. Barbieri, P. Mataloni, F. De Martini, G. Vallone, and A. Cabello, ibid. 97, 140407 (2006). On a separate note, we observe that experimentalists might prefer to test the one including less terms, both for the sake of simplicity and because shorter chains might lead to smaller statistical uncertainties (see 12,13).
ADVERTISEMENT