Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWiseman, Howarden_US
dc.contributor.authorMancini, Stefanoen_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Jinen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T11:50:54Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T11:50:54Z
dc.date.issued2002en_US
dc.date.modified2009-10-12T23:14:25Z
dc.identifier.issn10502947en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1103/PhysRevA.66.013807en_AU
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/6990
dc.description.abstractWe compare two different approaches to the control of the dynamics of a continuously monitored open quantum system. The first is Markovian feedback, as introduced in quantum optics by Wiseman and Milburn [Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 548 (1993)]. The second is feedback based on an estimate of the system state, developed recently by Doherty and Jacobs [Phys. Rev. A 60, 2700 (1999)]. Here we choose to call it, for brevity, Bayesian feedback. For systems with nonlinear dynamics, we expect these two methods of feedback control to give markedly different results. The simplest possible nonlinear system is a driven and damped two-level atom, so we choose this as our model system. The monitoring is taken to be homodyne detection of the atomic fluorescence, and the control is by modulating the driving. The aim of the feedback in both cases is to stabilize the internal state of the atom as close as possible to an arbitrarily chosen pure state, in the presence of inefficient detection and other forms of decoherence. Our results (obtained without recourse to stochastic simulations) prove that Bayesian feedback is never inferior, and is usually superior, to Markovian feedback. However, it would be far more difficult to implement than Markovian feedback and it loses its superiority when obvious simplifying approximations are made. It is thus not clear which form of feedback would be better in the face of inevitable experimental imperfections.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_AU
dc.format.extent143386 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_AU
dc.publisherAmerican Physical Societyen_US
dc.publisher.placeUSAen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://prola.aps.org/en_AU
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom013807.1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto013807.9en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalPhysical Review A: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physicsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume66en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode240201en_US
dc.titleBayesian feedback versus Markovian feedback in a two-level atom.en_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.rights.copyrightCopyright 2002 American Physical Society. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.en_AU
gro.date.issued2002
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record