MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Amplifying Single-Photon Nonlinearity Using Weak Measurements

2011· article· en· W1999354252 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Feizpour, Xingxing Xing, Aephraim M. Steinberg

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum optics and atomic interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeak measurementPhysicsPhotonNoise (video)Nonlinear systemSIGNAL (programming language)Nonlinear opticsQuantum mechanicsOpticsStatistical physicsComputational physicsQuantum electrodynamicsQuantumComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that weak measurement can be used to "amplify" optical nonlinearities at the single-photon level, such that the effect of one properly postselected photon on a classical beam may be as large as that of many unpostselected photons. We find that "weak-value amplification" offers a marked improvement in the signal-to-noise ratio in the presence of technical noise with long correlation times. Unlike previous weak-measurement experiments, our proposed scheme has no classical equivalent.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations269
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicQuantum optics and atomic interactionsFrench-language works237,207