Can Randomly Structured Metasurfaces Be Used for Quantum Tomography of High-Dimensional Spatial Qudits?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reconstructing the density matrix of the quantum state of photons through a tomographically complete set of measurements, known as quantum state tomography, is an essential task in nearly all applications of quantum science and technology, from quantum sensing to quantum communications. Recent advances in optical metasurfaces enable the design of ultrathin nanostructured optical elements performing such state tomography tasks, promising greater simplicity, miniaturization, and scalability. However, reported metasurfaces on this goal were limited to a small Hilbert dimension, e.g., polarization qubits or spatial qudits with only a few states. When scaling up to higher-dimensional qudit tomography problems, especially those involving spatial qudits, a natural question arises: whether a metasurface with randomized nanostructures is sufficient to perform such qudit tomography, achieving optimal conditions. In this work, we attempt to answer this question through a set of numerical experiments with random metasurfaces, utilizing large-scale simulations of over 16,000 distinct metasurfaces, each exceeding 200 wavelengths in size. We show that, with sufficient redundancy in the number of detectors, random metasurfaces perform reasonably well in quantum photonic spatial qudit tomography encoded in Hermite-Gaussian states for up to approximately 10 states. Furthermore, we discuss additional considerations for optimizing metasurfaces in multiphoton cases. Our work opens a pathway toward computationally efficient, miniaturized, and error-tolerant quantum measurement platforms.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".