# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Quantum estimation is essentially different from classical estimation regarding the following two points. The first point is that we cannot simultaneously construct the optimal estimators corresponding to respective parameters because of non-commutativity between them. It has been a serious problem since the beginning of the quantum estimation . The second point is that we can reduce the estimation error under the assumption that we can prepare independent and identical samples of the unknown quantum state. It was pointed by Nagaoka  concerning the large deviation theory in one-parameter estimation. The purpose of this paper is to clear the second point concerning the mean square error (MSE).

Our situation is divided into the following two cases. In the first case, we estimate the unknown state by independently measuring every sample. In this case, we may decide the $`n`$-th POVM from $`n1`$ data which have been already given. In the second case, we estimate the unknown state by regarding $`n`$-sample system as a single composite system. In this case, we may use POVMs which are indivisible into every sample system. In order to construct these POVMs, we need to use quantum correlations between every sample. The former is called the non-quantum correlation case and the later the quantum correlation case. When the unknown state is a pure state, the errors of both are asymptotically equivalent in the first order . Concerning the spin 1/2 system, see Hayashi .

In this paper, we formulate a general theory for the asymptotic quantum estimation. It is applied to the simultaneous estimation of the expected photon number and the complex amplitude for the quantum displaced thermal state.

## 2 Asymptotic Estimation Theory

In this paper, we use a quantum state family $`𝒮`$ parameterized by finite parameters $`\theta ^1,\mathrm{},\theta ^d`$:

$`𝒮:=\{\rho _\theta 𝒮()|\theta =(\theta ^1,\mathrm{},\theta ^d)\mathrm{\Theta }𝐑^d\},`$   
where the set $`𝒮()`$ denotes the set of densities on $``$. For simplicity, we assume that $`\rho _\theta `$ is nondegenerate.

### 2.1 Non-quantum correlation case

The non-quantum correlation case is formulated as follows. A pair $`_n=(\{M_k\}_{k=1}^n,\widehat{\theta _n})`$ is called a recursive estimator where $`\widehat{\theta _n}`$ is a function estimating the unknown parameter from $`n`$ data, and $`\{M_k\}_{k=1}^n`$ is a sequence of POVMs $`M_1,M_2(\omega _1),\mathrm{},M_n(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{n1})`$ as follows: the $`n`$-th POVM $`M_k(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{k1})`$ is determined by $`k1`$ data which have been already given. A sequence $`\{_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of recursive estimators is called a recursive MSE consistent estimator if

$`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{n}{\underset{}{{\displaystyle \mathrm{}}}}\widehat{\theta _n}(\omega _1,\omega _2,\mathrm{},\omega _n)\theta ^2P_{\rho _\theta }^_n(d\omega _1,d\omega _2,\mathrm{},d\omega _n)=0,\theta \mathrm{\Theta },`$   
where

$`P_\rho ^_n(d\omega _1,d\omega _2,\mathrm{},d\omega _n)=tr\rho M_1(d\omega _1)tr\rho M_2(\omega _1)(d\omega _2)\mathrm{}tr\rho M_n(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{n1})(d\omega _n).`$   
We define the non-quantum-correlational Cramér-Rao type bound $`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)`$ for a weighted matrix $`G`$($`G`$ is a $`d\times d`$ real positive symmetric matrix.) as:

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G):=inf\left\{\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}TrnGV_\theta (_n)\right|\{_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\text{ is a recursive MSE consistent estimator }\},`$   
where the MSE matrix $`V_\theta (_n)`$ is given by:

$`V_\theta ^{i,j}(_n)=\underset{n}{\underset{}{{\displaystyle \mathrm{}}}}\left(\widehat{\theta _n}^i(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _n)\theta ^i\right)\left(\widehat{\theta _n}^j(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _n)\theta ^j\right)P_{\rho _\theta }^_n(d\omega _1,\mathrm{},d\omega _n).`$   
We have the following equation:

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)=inf\left\{TrG\left(J_\theta ^M\right)^1\right|M\text{ is a POVM on }\},`$   
where $`J_\theta ^M`$ denotes the Fisher information matrix at $`\theta `$ of $`\{tr\rho _\theta M(d\omega )|\theta \mathrm{\Theta }\}`$. It is derived by Jensen’s inequality . Under some regular condition, we show that there exists a recursive MSE consistent estimator $`\{_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that :

$`nTrGV_\theta (_n)C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)\text{ as }n\mathrm{},\theta \mathrm{\Theta }.`$   
According Holevo, we have $`J_\theta ^M\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta `$, where $`\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta `$ is the RLD Fisher information matrix defined as: $`\stackrel{~}{J}_{\theta ;i,j}:=tr(\stackrel{~}{L}_{\theta ;i})^{}\rho _\theta \stackrel{~}{L}_{\theta ;j},\stackrel{~}{L}_{\theta ;i}:=(\rho _\theta )^1\frac{\rho _\theta }{\theta ^i}.`$ Therefore we have the following inequality

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)C_\theta ^R(G),`$   
where

$`C_\theta ^R(G)`$ $`:=`$ $`inf\left\{trGV\right|V\text{ is a }d\times d\text{ real symmetric matrix }V\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1\}`$   
$`=`$ $`TrGRe\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1+Tr\left|\sqrt{G}Im\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1\sqrt{G}\right|.`$   
### 2.2 Quantum correlation case

Next, we formulate the quantum correlation case. For this purpose, we consider a quantum counterpart of independent and identically distributed condition. If $`_1,\mathrm{},_n`$ are $`n`$ Hilbert spaces which correspond to the physical systems, then their composite system is represented by the tensor Hilbert space.

$`^{(n)}:=_1\mathrm{}_n.`$   
Thus, a state on the composite system is denoted by a density operator $`\rho ^{(n)}`$ on $`^{(n)}`$. In particular if $`n`$ element systems ($`_1,\mathrm{},_n`$) of the composite system $`^{(n)}`$ are independent of each other, there exists a density $`\rho _k`$ on $`_k`$ such that

$`\rho ^{(n)}=\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _n,\text{ on }^{(n)}.`$   
The condition:

$`_1=\mathrm{}=_n=,\rho _1=\mathrm{}=\rho _n=\rho `$   
corresponds to the independent and identically distributed condition in the classical case. Therefore, we consider the parameter estimation problem for the family $`\{\rho _\theta ^{(n)}\text{ on }|\theta \mathrm{\Theta }\}`$ which is called the $`n`$-i.i.d. extended family.

In this case, we use a sequence $`\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of POVMs where $`M^n`$ is a POVM on $``$ whose measurable set is $`𝐑^d`$ as an estimator. A sequence $`\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is called an MSE consistent estimator if $`\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ satisfies

$`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle _𝐑}\widehat{\theta }\theta ^2tr\rho _\theta ^{(n)}M^n(d\widehat{\theta })=0,\theta \mathrm{\Theta }.`$   
A recursive MSE consistent estimator can be regarded as an MSE consistent estimator because a recursive estimator $`_n=(\{M_k\}_{k=1}^n,\widehat{\theta }_n)`$ is regarded as a POVM $`M(_n)`$ as follows:

$`M(_n)(B):={\displaystyle _{\widehat{\theta }_n^1(B)}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}M_k(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _{k1})(d\omega _k),B𝐑^d\text{ on }^{(n)}.`$   
We define the quantum-correlational Cramér-Rao type bound $`C_\theta ^{QC}(G)`$ for a weighted matrix $`G`$ as:

$`C_\theta ^{QC}(G):=inf\left\{\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}nTrGV_\theta (M^n)\right|\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\text{ is an MSE consistent estimator }\}`$   
where the MSE matrix $`V_\theta (M^n)`$ is given by:

$`V_\theta ^{i,j}(M^n)={\displaystyle _{𝐑^d}}(\widehat{\theta }^i\theta ^i)(\widehat{\theta }^j\theta ^j)tr\rho _\theta ^{(n)}M^n(d\widehat{\theta }).`$   
We have the following equation

$`C_\theta ^{QC}(G)=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}nC_\theta ^n(G),`$   
where $`C_\theta ^n(G)`$ denotes the non-quantum-correlational Cramér-Rao type bound for the $`n`$-i.i.d. extended family . From the definition of the $`n`$-i.i.d. extended family, we have $`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)nC_\theta ^n(G)`$. Therefore, we have the first inequality of (1).

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)C_\theta ^{QC}(G)C_\theta ^R(G).`$ (1)   
It shows the second inequality of (1) that $`J_\theta ^{M^n}n\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta `$ for any POVM $`M^n`$ on $`^{(n)}`$. Therefore the difference between $`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)`$ and $`C_\theta ^{QC}(G)`$ means the difference of the quantum correlation case from the non-quantum correlation case. Under some regular condition, we can show that there exists an MSE consistent estimator $`\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that :

$`nTrGV_\theta (M^n)C_\theta ^{QC}(G)\text{ as }n\mathrm{},\theta \mathrm{\Theta }.`$   
## 3 Quantum displaced thermal states family

Now we consider the estimation for the the complex amplitude $`\zeta `$ and expected photon number $`N`$ for the quantum displaced thermal states family defined as:

$`𝒮:=\left\{\rho _{\zeta ,N}:={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi N}}{\displaystyle _𝐂}\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|\zeta \alpha |^2}{N}}\right)|\alpha \alpha |d^2\alpha |\zeta 𝐂,N>0\right\}.`$   
### 3.1 Estimation of complex amplitude $`\zeta `$

In the case of that photon number $`N`$ is known, we estimate the tow unknown parameters $`\zeta =(\theta ^1+i\theta ^2)/\sqrt{2}`$. This estimation problem is investigated by Yuen, Lax and Holevo . In this case they calculated the inverse $`\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1`$ of the RLD Fisher information matrix as:

$`\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}N+\frac{1}{2}& \frac{i}{2}\\ \frac{i}{2}& N+\frac{1}{2}\end{array}\right).`$   
They calculated the non-quantum-correlational Cramér-Rao type bound $`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)`$ as follows:

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)=C_\theta ^R(G)=2\left(N+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)g_1+\sqrt{g_1^2g_2^2g_3^2},`$ (3)   
where the weighted matrix $`G`$ is parameterized as:

$`G=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_1+g_2& g_3\\ g_3& g_1g_2\end{array}\right).`$   
From (1) and (3), we have the following equations.

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)=C_\theta ^{QC}(G)=C_\theta ^R(G).`$ (5)   
In this case, the optimal estimator is the squeezed heterodyne.

### 3.2 Simultaneous estimation of complex amplitude $`\zeta `$ and expected photon number $`N`$

Next we consider the case of that both of the expected photon number $`N`$ and the complex amplitude $`\zeta `$ are unknown. In this case, we estimate three unknown parameters $`\theta ^1,\theta ^2`$ and $`\theta ^3=N`$. The first equation of (5) isn’t held. Therefore, the squeezed heterodyne isn’t optimal. The inverse $`\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1`$ of the RLD Fisher information matrix is calculates as:

$`\stackrel{~}{J}_\theta ^1=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}N+\frac{1}{2}& \frac{i}{2}& 0\\ \frac{i}{2}& N+\frac{1}{2}& 0\\ 0& 0& N(N+1)\end{array}\right).`$   
Therefore we can calculated $`C_\theta ^R(G)`$ as:

$`C_\theta ^R(G)=g_0N(N+1)+2\left(N+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)g_1+\sqrt{g_1^2g_2^2g_3^2},`$   
if the weighted matrix $`G`$ can be parameterized as:

$`G=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}g_1+g_2& g_3& 0\\ g_3& g_1g_2& 0\\ 0& 0& g_0\end{array}\right).`$ (10)   
If the weighted matrix $`G`$ can be parameterized as (10), we obtain the following equations:

$`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)>C_\theta ^{QC}(G)=C_\theta ^R(G).`$ (11)   
A proof for $`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)>C_\theta ^{QC}(G)`$ is omitted. The inequality $`C_\theta ^{NQC}(G)>C_\theta ^{QC}(G)`$ means that we cannot the simultaneous measurement of the photon number counting and heterodyne for a single sample.

### 3.3 Construction of an MSE consistent estimator $`\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ attaining $`C_\theta ^R(I)`$

Now, for a weighted matrix $`I`$, we construct an MSE consistent estimator $`\{M^n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that

$`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}ntrV_\theta (M^n)=C_\theta ^R(I),\theta \mathrm{\Theta }.`$   
It is sufficient for $`C_\theta ^{QC}(I)=C_\theta ^R(I)`$ to construct such an MSE consistent estimator.

Every POVM $`M^n`$ is constructed in the following step:

(1) Evolve the unknown state $`\underset{n}{\underset{}{\rho _{\zeta ,N}\mathrm{}\rho _{\zeta ,N}}}`$ as:

$`\underset{n}{\underset{}{\rho _{\zeta ,N}\mathrm{}\rho _{\zeta ,N}}}U_n\underset{n}{\underset{}{\rho _{\zeta ,N}\mathrm{}\rho _{\zeta ,N}}}U_n^{}=\rho _{\sqrt{n}\zeta ,N}\underset{n1}{\underset{}{\rho _{0,N}\mathrm{}\rho _{0,N}}}\text{ on }^{(n)},`$   
where

$`U_n`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\varphi _{n1}(a_n^{}a_1a_1^{}a_n)\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\varphi _2(a_3^{}a_1a_1^{}a_3)\mathrm{exp}\varphi _1(a_2^{}a_1a_1^{}a_2)\text{ on }^{(n)}`$   
$`\varphi _i`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{arctan}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{i}}},i=1,2,\mathrm{},n1.`$   
$`a_i`$ denotes the annihilation operator on $`_i`$.

(2) Measure the first sample $`\rho _{\sqrt{n}\zeta ,N}`$ by the heterodyne, then we get the estimate $`\widehat{\zeta }`$ of the complex amplitude.

(3) Measure the others by the photon counting, then we obtain $`n1`$ data which obey the probability distribution $`P^N(k)`$:

$`P^N(k)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N+1}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N}{N+1}}\right)^k,k=0,1\mathrm{}.`$   
(4) We obtain the estimate $`\widehat{N}`$ of the expected photon number $`N`$ by the maximum likelihood estimator of the probability distribution $`P^N(k_1),\mathrm{},P^N(k_{n1})`$.

## 4 Conclusion

We formulate an asymptotic quantum estimation theory. This theory is applied to the simultaneous measurement of the photon number counting and the heterodyne for displaced thermal states. It is a future study to realize the MSE consistent estimator proposed in this paper in an actual physical system.

## 5 Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Research Fellowships of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists No. 9404. The author would like to thank Dr. K. Matsumoto for useful discussions of these topics.