dorsal/arxiv
View SchemaReply to "Comment on 'Measuring a Photonic Qubit without Destroying It'"
| Authors | G. J. Pryde, J. L. O'Brien, A. G. White, S. D. Bartlett, T. C. Ralph |
|---|---|
| Categories | |
| ArXiv ID | quant-ph/0507175 |
| URL | https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0507175 |
| DOI | 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.048902 |
| Journal | Phys.Rev.Lett.95:048902,2005 |
Abstract
In our Letter we proposed a scheme for nondeterministic quantum nondemolition (QND) measurement of the polarization of a single photon--a photonic qubit--using linear optics and photodetection. The scheme works with nonunit probability, but success is heralded by the detection of a single photon in the meter output. We provided an experimental demonstration of this scheme and introduced three universally applicable fidelity measures--the measurement fidelity F_M, the quantum state preparation fidelity F_QSP, and the QND fidelity F_QND--to quantify its performance. The claim of Kok and Munro in their Comment [quant-ph/0406120] is that one of our fidelity measures F_M is not appropriate because it relies on coincidence measurements. We show why this claim is wrong from both a fundamental and an operational perspective.
{
"annotation_id": "b3e1adf1-6d2e-4768-b433-5c35276e81c0",
"date_created": "2026-03-02T18:02:19.359000Z",
"date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:02:19.359000Z",
"file_hash": "ac9f639578250b7e3ff42dd552f56ede251dc44f6c1feb6875fd7ddb36df0349",
"private": false,
"record": {
"abstract": "In our Letter we proposed a scheme for nondeterministic quantum nondemolition\n(QND) measurement of the polarization of a single photon--a photonic\nqubit--using linear optics and photodetection. The scheme works with nonunit\nprobability, but success is heralded by the detection of a single photon in the\nmeter output. We provided an experimental demonstration of this scheme and\nintroduced three universally applicable fidelity measures--the measurement\nfidelity F_M, the quantum state preparation fidelity F_QSP, and the QND\nfidelity F_QND--to quantify its performance. The claim of Kok and Munro in\ntheir Comment [quant-ph/0406120] is that one of our fidelity measures F_M is\nnot appropriate because it relies on coincidence measurements. We show why this\nclaim is wrong from both a fundamental and an operational perspective.",
"arxiv_id": "quant-ph/0507175",
"authors": [
"G. J. Pryde",
"J. L. O\u0027Brien",
"A. G. White",
"S. D. Bartlett",
"T. C. Ralph"
],
"categories": [
"quant-ph"
],
"doi": "10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.048902",
"journal_ref": "Phys.Rev.Lett.95:048902,2005",
"title": "Reply to \"Comment on \u0027Measuring a Photonic Qubit without Destroying It\u0027\"",
"url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0507175"
},
"schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
"source": {
"execution_id": "45f39fc6-5e3d-4c1a-bc0f-904284508fdd",
"id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
"type": "Model",
"variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
"version": "0.1.0"
},
"user_id": 1000002
}