Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Well-posedness and instability of free electron quantum tomography

Florian Oberender

Abstract

Recent advancements in photon induced near-field electron microscopy (PINEM) enable the preparation, coherent manipulation and characterization of free-electron quantum states. The available measurement consists of electron energy spectrograms and the goal is the reconstruction of a density matrix representing the quantum state. This requires the solution of a constrained linear inverse problem, where a positive semi-definite trace-class operator is reconstructed given its diagonal in different bases. We show the well-posedness of this problem by exploiting the regularizing effect of the positive semi-definiteness constraint. Unusually, well-posedness in this case does not imply any stability estimates. We show that no global stability estimates exist and any estimator converges arbitrarily slowly. We also provide further bounds on the instability generally complementing the analysis done in [arXiv:1907.03438]. Furthermore, we derive a decomposition of the discretized operator which allows us to study its injectivity and stability properties. It also leads to a faster implementation which we exploit in numerical experiments validating the instability estimates and the stability of the constrained problem.

Well-posedness and instability of free electron quantum tomography

Abstract

Recent advancements in photon induced near-field electron microscopy (PINEM) enable the preparation, coherent manipulation and characterization of free-electron quantum states. The available measurement consists of electron energy spectrograms and the goal is the reconstruction of a density matrix representing the quantum state. This requires the solution of a constrained linear inverse problem, where a positive semi-definite trace-class operator is reconstructed given its diagonal in different bases. We show the well-posedness of this problem by exploiting the regularizing effect of the positive semi-definiteness constraint. Unusually, well-posedness in this case does not imply any stability estimates. We show that no global stability estimates exist and any estimator converges arbitrarily slowly. We also provide further bounds on the instability generally complementing the analysis done in [arXiv:1907.03438]. Furthermore, we derive a decomposition of the discretized operator which allows us to study its injectivity and stability properties. It also leads to a faster implementation which we exploit in numerical experiments validating the instability estimates and the stability of the constrained problem.
Paper Structure (9 sections, 16 theorems, 88 equations, 3 figures, 1 table)

This paper contains 9 sections, 16 theorems, 88 equations, 3 figures, 1 table.

Key Result

Lemma 2.1

For $a$ as defined before holds for all $l\in\mathbb{Z}$.

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: (a) Difference of norms of results for different values of $|g|$ plotted against the index of the largest non-zero off-diagonal (b) Convergence of norms for band-limited matrices for different limiting values k. The black dashed lines mark the rates from \ref{['the:bandlimited']}.
  • Figure 2: (a) Convergence of norms of matrices with exponential decay. This case is severely corrupted by truncation errors due to the nature of the required sequence. The black dashed lines mark the rate from \ref{['the:exponential']} and they roughly mark the point where large truncation errors begin to appear. (b) Convergence of norms for matrices with polynomial decay with different decay rates $\mu$. The black dashed lines mark the rates from \ref{['the:polynomial']}.
  • Figure 3: (a) Comparison of reconstruction errors with restriction (regular) and without restriction (dashed) for different noise levels. (b) Comparison of relative reconstruction errors for matrices $\rho(w)$ with different width $w$ from exact data. The reconstructions without restriction are again marked by dashed lines.

Theorems & Definitions (31)

  • Lemma 2.1
  • proof
  • Theorem 2.2
  • proof
  • Remark 2.3
  • Lemma 2.4
  • proof
  • Theorem 2.5
  • Lemma 2.6
  • proof
  • ...and 21 more