Repeated cycles of coherent driving, dispersive atom-cavity interaction, and atomic postselection generate two- and multi-component Schrödinger cat states, but the written multi-component formula in Eq. (7) is inconsistent with the recursive derivation.
Measurement-induced generation of Schr\"{o}dinger cat states in cavity QED
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Schr\"{o}dinger cat states, representing coherent superpositions of macroscopically distinguishable states, are indispensable nonclassical resources for continuous-variable quantum information processing. Existing generation protocols typically rely on strong nonlinear interactions, complicated control techniques, or engineered dissipation, posing challenges for experimental implementation. Here, we propose a simple measurement-based protocol for generating Schr\"{o}dinger cat states in a cavity-QED system by combining coherent driving, dispersive atom--cavity interactions, and atomic postselection. The atom--cavity interaction establishes coherent correlations between the atomic and photonic degrees of freedom, while the subsequent atomic postselection projects the cavity field onto a non-Gaussian superposition state with pronounced Wigner negativity. Numerical simulations based on the Lindblad master equation show that the generated Schr\"{o}dinger cat states remain robust against moderate cavity dissipation. Our results demonstrate that conditional atomic measurements provide an effective and experimentally accessible approach for preparing nonclassical cavity states without relying on strong optical nonlinearities or engineered dissipation.
fields
quant-ph 1years
2026 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Measurement-induced generation of Schr\"{o}dinger cat states in cavity QED
Repeated cycles of coherent driving, dispersive atom-cavity interaction, and atomic postselection generate two- and multi-component Schrödinger cat states, but the written multi-component formula in Eq. (7) is inconsistent with the recursive derivation.