Response in violation of Bell inequality to imperfect photon addition and subtraction in noisy squeezed states of light
Violation of Bell inequality is a prominent detection method for quantum correlations present in composite quantum systems, both in finite and infinite dimensions. We investigate the consequence on the violation of local realism based on pseduospin operators when photons are added or subtracted in a single mode or in both the modes of the two-mode squeezed states of light in presence of noise. In the noiseless situation, we show that for addition (subtraction) of photons in a single mode, there is an overall enhancement in the maximal violation, although we observe an interplay between monotonicity and non-monotonicity in the violation of Bell inequality depending on the squeezing strength. Moreover, we report that for low squeezing or low number of photons added or subtracted, subtraction in both the modes can lead to higher violation of local realism than that in the case of addition. For any choice of parameters, such ordering is not seen if one compares their entanglement contents. In the event of a faulty twin-beam generator, we obtain a lower-than-expected squeezing in the state. In such a case, or in imperfect photon addition (subtraction), or under local noise, we find that the violation of local realism by the noise-affected two-mode squeezed states always decreases. Interestingly however, we notice that photon addition (subtraction) can in general help to conquer the ill-effects of noise by enhancing the violation of local realism or by transforming non-violating states to violating ones, thereby acting as an activating agent.
NurtureToken New!

Token crowdsale for this paper ends in

Buy Nurture Tokens

Authors

Are you an author of this paper? Check the Twitter handle we have for you is correct.

Saptarshi Roy (add twitter)
Titas Chanda (add twitter)
Tamoghna Das (add twitter)
Aditi Sen De (add twitter)
Ujjwal Sen (add twitter)
Ask The Authors

Ask the authors of this paper a question or leave a comment.

Read it. Rate it.
#1. Which part of the paper did you read?

#2. The paper contains new data or analyses that is openly accessible?
#3. The conclusion is supported by the data and analyses?
#4. The conclusion is of scientific interest?
#5. The result is likely to lead to future research?

Github
User:
None (add)
Repo:
None (add)
Stargazers:
0
Forks:
0
Open Issues:
0
Network:
0
Subscribers:
0
Language:
None
Youtube
Link:
None (add)
Views:
0
Likes:
0
Dislikes:
0
Favorites:
0
Comments:
0
Other
Sample Sizes (N=):
Inserted:
Words Total:
Words Unique:
Source:
Abstract:
None
07/12/18 11:17PM
13,883
2,986
Tweets
Nobody has tweeted about this paper.
Images
Related