pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.14298 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-15 · 🪐 quant-ph

Precision Limits of Multiparameter Markovian-Noise Metrology

Anthony J. Brady , Yu-Xin Wang , Luis Pedro Garc\'ia-Pintos , Alexey V. Gorshkov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 13:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum metrologyMarkovian noisemultiparameter estimationLindblad dynamicsprecision boundsHeisenberg scalingPoisson countingcollective dissipation
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

Markovian dynamics enforces standard scaling with time but allows Heisenberg scaling with the number of dissipative channels under entanglement and high-rank correlations.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper derives fundamental precision limits for estimating multiple stochastic signals that drive Markovian Lindblad evolution, with arbitrary quantum control and noiseless ancillae permitted. It proves that the average variance per parameter cannot beat the scaling Ω(1/(T R²)), where T is total sensing time and R is the number of dissipative channels, when the signal has high-rank correlations across channels and the probe is entangled. This yields super-Heisenberg scaling with system size N whenever collective k-body dissipation makes R grow as N^k. The bounds are achieved by a rapid prepare-and-measure protocol that reduces the task to parallel multi-Poisson jump counting when parameters enter the dissipative eigenrates. The framework supplies both ultimate limits and concrete optimal protocols for noise metrology in open quantum systems.

Core claim

Although Markovianity enforces standard-quantum-limit scaling with sensing time T, our bounds reveal Heisenberg-type scaling in the number of dissipative channels R: when the stochastic signal exhibits high-rank correlations across the R channels and the probe is entangled, the average variance (per parameter) scales no better than Ω(1/(T R²)). For collective k-body dissipation, R=Θ(N^k), signifying super-Heisenberg scaling with the system size N. When parameters enter through dissipative eigenrates, a rapid prepare-and-measure protocol that tracks many distinct quantum jumps attains these limits and reduces the problem to a multi-Poisson counting model.

What carries the argument

The multiparameter quantum Fisher information bound for Markovian Lindblad dynamics together with the rapid prepare-and-measure protocol that converts the estimation task into parallel multi-Poisson counting of quantum jumps.

Load-bearing premise

The unknown stochastic signal must possess high-rank correlations across the dissipative channels, the probe must be entangled, arbitrary quantum control and noiseless ancillae must be available, and the parameters must enter the dynamics through the dissipative eigenrates.

What would settle it

An experiment that prepares an entangled probe, applies a high-rank correlated Markovian noise process with R channels, performs the rapid prepare-and-measure protocol, and measures an average variance per parameter that scales worse than 1/(T R²) would falsify the claimed tightness of the bound.

read the original abstract

Measuring stochastic signals ("noise metrology") constitutes a central task in quantum sensing and the characterization of open quantum systems. Here we establish ultimate precision bounds for multiparameter estimation of stochastic signals encoded through Markovian Lindblad dynamics, allowing for arbitrary quantum control and noiseless ancillae. Although Markovianity enforces standard-quantum-limit scaling with sensing time $T$, our bounds reveal Heisenberg-type scaling in the number of dissipative channels, $R$: when the stochastic signal exhibits high-rank correlations across the $R$ channels and the probe is entangled, the average variance (per parameter) scales no better than $\Omega(1/(TR^2))$. For collective $k$-body dissipation, $R=\Theta(N^k)$, signifying super-Heisenberg scaling with the system size $N$. We further show that, when the unknown parameters enter through the dissipative eigenrates, a Rapid Prepare-and-Measure (RPM) protocol that tracks many distinct quantum jumps in parallel attains these limits. In this regime, the estimation problem reduces to a multi-Poisson counting model, providing a conceptually clean route to optimal quantum noise metrology. We illustrate the breadth of the framework with applications to networked noise metrology, collective many-body dissipation, learning Pauli noise, and subdiffraction quantum imaging.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents precision limits for multiparameter Markovian-noise metrology in open quantum systems. It derives that Markovian dynamics enforce standard quantum limit scaling with sensing time T, but allow for Heisenberg scaling with the number of dissipative channels R under high-rank signal correlations and entangled probes, with average variance scaling as Ω(1/(T R²)). For collective dissipation, R scales as N^k leading to super-Heisenberg scaling with system size. A Rapid Prepare-and-Measure protocol is proposed to attain these bounds when parameters enter via dissipative eigenrates, reducing to multi-Poisson statistics, with applications in several areas.

Significance. This contribution is significant for the field of quantum sensing and open quantum systems characterization. By revealing scaling advantages with the number of channels rather than time, it offers new insights into overcoming Markovian limitations. The RPM protocol and multi-Poisson reduction provide a practical and conceptually clear approach to optimal estimation. If the mathematical derivations are sound, this could influence experimental protocols in networked systems and many-body physics. The paper credits the use of arbitrary control and ancillae appropriately.

major comments (2)
  1. [Main results on scaling bounds] The claim that the average variance scales no better than Ω(1/(T R²)) is conditional on high-rank correlations across the R channels and an entangled probe. The manuscript should provide the explicit theorem or proposition deriving this bound, including the precise dependence on the correlation structure, as this is load-bearing for the central scaling claim.
  2. [RPM protocol section] The attainment of the derived bounds by the RPM protocol is restricted to the case where unknown parameters enter through the dissipative eigenrates, reducing the estimation to a multi-Poisson counting model. For general Lindblad parametrizations where parameters modulate the Lindblad operators L_j, the jump statistics cease to be independent Poisson processes. This limitation undermines the generality of the constructive result and requires further clarification or a counterexample in the general case.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract is clear but the introduction should better motivate the choice of high-rank correlations as a key assumption.
  2. [Applications] In the applications to subdiffraction quantum imaging, ensure that the mapping to the R channels is explicitly shown.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading, positive assessment of significance, and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions that will be incorporated in the next version of the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Main results on scaling bounds] The claim that the average variance scales no better than Ω(1/(T R²)) is conditional on high-rank correlations across the R channels and an entangled probe. The manuscript should provide the explicit theorem or proposition deriving this bound, including the precise dependence on the correlation structure, as this is load-bearing for the central scaling claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit, self-contained statement of the bound improves readability. The scaling Ω(1/(T R²)) follows from the multiparameter quantum Fisher information matrix for Markovian Lindblad dynamics (derived via the channel extension and the high-rank assumption on the signal correlation matrix C). When rank(C) = R and the probe is entangled across channels, the trace of the inverse QFI yields the stated average-variance lower bound. To make this load-bearing claim fully transparent, we will insert a new Proposition 1 in the main text that states the bound together with the precise conditions on the eigenvalues of C (bounded away from zero) and the entanglement requirement. The proof sketch will be retained in the main text with a reference to the supplementary material for the full derivation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [RPM protocol section] The attainment of the derived bounds by the RPM protocol is restricted to the case where unknown parameters enter through the dissipative eigenrates, reducing the estimation to a multi-Poisson counting model. For general Lindblad parametrizations where parameters modulate the Lindblad operators L_j, the jump statistics cease to be independent Poisson processes. This limitation undermines the generality of the constructive result and requires further clarification or a counterexample in the general case.

    Authors: The manuscript already restricts the RPM protocol to the regime in which parameters enter exclusively through the dissipative eigenrates (explicitly stated in the abstract and in the RPM section). In that regime the jump processes are independent Poisson processes and the protocol saturates the derived bounds. For general parametrizations that modulate the Lindblad operators themselves, the statistics are no longer independent Poissons and the simple RPM protocol does not attain the ultimate bounds; more sophisticated control or adaptive strategies would be required. We will add a dedicated clarifying paragraph immediately after the RPM theorem that (i) reiterates the scope, (ii) explains why the Poisson reduction fails when L_j depend on the parameters, and (iii) notes that the ultimate bounds themselves remain valid for general parametrizations even if the constructive RPM protocol does not saturate them. A full counter-example for the general case lies outside the present scope but can be added as a short remark if the referee deems it essential. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; bounds derived independently from Lindblad structure

full rationale

The paper derives ultimate precision bounds for multiparameter stochastic signal estimation under Markovian Lindblad dynamics, allowing arbitrary control and ancillae. The claimed Ω(1/(T R²)) scaling follows from the mathematical properties of high-rank channel correlations combined with probe entanglement, as a direct consequence of the quantum Fisher information analysis in the multiparameter setting. The RPM protocol is shown to attain the bounds only under the additional restriction that parameters enter exclusively via dissipative eigenrates (reducing to a multi-Poisson counting model); this is presented as a constructive sufficiency result, not a definitional equivalence or fitted prediction. No load-bearing self-citations, ansatz smuggling, or uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work are invoked to force the central scaling. The derivation remains self-contained against external quantum metrology benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard open quantum system assumptions without introducing new free parameters or entities in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Evolution follows Markovian Lindblad dynamics
    Explicitly stated as the encoding mechanism for the stochastic signals.
  • domain assumption Arbitrary quantum control and noiseless ancillae are permitted
    Invoked to achieve the ultimate bounds.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5542 in / 1322 out tokens · 28109 ms · 2026-05-10T13:05:44.161932+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

150 extracted references · 150 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Rayleigh’s curse

    This enlarges the available Hilbert space toH=H S ⊗Hmem withD mem = 4N, and indeed removes the exponential sampling overhead [20– 23], as we now show. Using⟨Φ N |A⊗B|Φ N ⟩= Tr AB⊤ /2N, the Pauli ba- sisbecomesperfectlydistinguishable(uptothetranspose convention), ⟨ΦN |(Pa ⊗P ⊤ b )|ΦN ⟩=δ ab.(89) In other words, the family{(P a ⊗I)|Φ N ⟩}R a=1 is or- thono...

    work page

  2. [2]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 035002 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Pezzè, A

    L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Pirandola, B

    S. Pirandola, B. R. Bardhan, T. Gehring, C. Weed- brook, and S. Lloyd, Advances in photonic quantum sensing, Nat. Photonics12, 724–733 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Huang , author M

    J. Huang, M. Zhuang, and C. Lee, Entanglement- enhanced quantum metrology: From standard quan- tum limit to Heisenberg limit, Appl. Phys. Rev.11, 10.1063/5.0204102 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0204102 2024

  6. [6]

    Zaiser, T

    S. Zaiser, T. Rendler, I. Jakobi, T. Wolf, S.-Y. Lee, S. Wagner, V. Bergholm, T. Schulte-Herbrüggen, P. Neumann,et al., Enhancing quantum sensing sensi- tivity by a quantum memory, Nat. Commun.7, 12279 (2016)

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    S. Chen, J. Cotler, H.-Y. Huang, and J. Li, Exponen- tial Separations Between Learning With and Without Quantum Memory, in2021 IEEE 62nd Annual Sym- posium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) (2022) pp. 574–585

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Huang, M

    H.-Y. Huang, M. Broughton, J. Cotler, S. Chen, J. Li, M. Mohseni, H. Neven, R. Babbush, R. Kueng,et al., Quantum advantage in learning from experiments, Sci- ence376, 1182–1186 (2022)

    work page 2022

  9. [9]

    Massar and S

    S. Massar and S. Popescu, Optimal Extraction of In- formation from Finite Quantum Ensembles, Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 1259 (1995)

    work page 1995

  10. [10]

    L. O. Conlon, T. Vogl, C. D. Marciniak, I. Pogorelov, S. K. Yung, F. Eilenberger, D. W. Berry, F. S. Santana, R. Blatt,et al., Approaching optimal entangling collec- tive measurements on quantum computing platforms, Nat. Phys.19, 351–357 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    C. W. Helstrom,Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory(Academic Press, New York, 1976)

    work page 1976

  12. [12]

    A. S. Holevo,Probabilistic and Statistical Aspects of Quantum Theory(North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1982)

    work page 1982

  13. [13]

    M. G. A. Paris, Quantum estimation for quantum tech- nology, Int. J. Quantum Inf.7, 125 (2009)

    work page 2009

  14. [14]

    S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439 (1994)

    work page 1994

  15. [15]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum- Enhanced Measurements: Beating the Standard Quan- tum Limit, Science306, 1330 (2004)

    work page 2004

  16. [16]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 010401 (2006)

    work page 2006

  17. [17]

    A. J. Brady, Y.-X. Wang, V. V. Albert, A. V. Gor- shkov, and Q. Zhuang, Correlated Noise Estimation with Quantum Sensor Networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 080803 (2026)

    work page 2026

  18. [18]

    Y.-X. Wang, J. Bringewatt, A. Seif, A. J. Brady, C. Oh, and A. V. Gorshkov, Exponential entangle- ment advantage in sensing correlated noise (2024), arXiv:2410.05878 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    Prabhu, V

    S. Prabhu, V. Kremenetski, S. A. Khan, R. Yanagimoto, and P. L. McMahon, Exponential advantage in quantum sensing of correlated parameters, Quantum10, 1963 (2026)

    work page 1963

  20. [20]

    Y.-X. Wang, A. J. Brady, F. Belliardo, and A. V. Gorshkov, Entanglement advantage in sens- ing power-law spatiotemporal noise correlations (2026), arXiv:2603.15742 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    S.Chen, S.Zhou, A.Seif,andL.Jiang,Quantumadvan- tages for Pauli channel estimation, Phys. Rev. A105, 032435 (2022)

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    S. Chen, C. Oh, S. Zhou, H.-Y. Huang, and L. Jiang, Tight Bounds on Pauli Channel Learning without En- tanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 180805 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    M. C. Caro, Learning Quantum Processes and Hamilto- nians via the Pauli Transfer Matrix, ACM Trans. Quan- tum Comput.5, 1–53 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Kim and C

    M. Kim and C. Oh, On the fundamental resource for ex- ponential advantage in quantum channel learning, Nat. Commun.17, 1822 (2026)

    work page 2026

  25. [25]

    Tsang, Resolving starlight: a quantum perspective, Contemp

    M. Tsang, Resolving starlight: a quantum perspective, Contemp. Phys.60, 279 (2019)

    work page 2019

  26. [26]

    Albarelli, M

    F. Albarelli, M. Barbieri, M. Genoni, and I. Gianani, A perspective on multiparameter quantum metrology: From theoretical tools to applications in quantum imag- ing, Phys. Lett. A384, 126311 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Defienne, W

    H. Defienne, W. P. Bowen, M. Chekhova, G. B. Lemos, D. Oron, S. Ramelow, N. Treps, and D. Faccio, Ad- vances in quantum imaging, Nat. Photon.18, 1024 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Hashim, R

    A. Hashim, R. K. Naik, A. Morvan, J.-L. Ville, B. Mitchell, J. M. Kreikebaum, M. Davis, E. Smith, C. Iancu,et al., Randomized Compiling for Scal- able Quantum Computing on a Noisy Superconducting Quantum Processor, Phys. Rev. X11, 041039 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    J. J. Burnett, A. Bengtsson, M. Scigliuzzo, D. Niepce, M. Kudra, P. Delsing, and J. Bylander, Decoherence 15 benchmarking of superconducting qubits, npj Quantum Inf.5, 54 (2019)

    work page 2019

  30. [30]

    Harper, S

    R. Harper, S. T. Flammia, and J. J. Wallman, Efficient learning of quantum noise, Nat. Phys.16, 1184 (2020)

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    von Lüpke, F

    U. von Lüpke, F. Beaudoin, L. M. Norris, Y. Sung, R. Winik, J. Y. Qiu, M. Kjaergaard, D. Kim, J. Yo- der,et al., Two-Qubit Spectroscopy of Spatiotemporally Correlated Quantum Noise in Superconducting Qubits, PRX Quantum1, 010305 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Van Den Berg, Z

    E. Van Den Berg, Z. K. Minev, A. Kandala, and K. Temme, Probabilistic error cancellation with sparse Pauli–Lindblad models on noisy quantum processors, Nat. Phys.19, 1116 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Hashim, L

    A. Hashim, L. B. Nguyen, N. Goss, B. Marinelli, R. K. Naik, T. Chistolini, J. Hines, J. Marceaux, Y. Kim, et al., Practical Introduction to Benchmarking and Characterization of Quantum Computers, PRX Quan- tum6, 030202 (2025)

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    Proctor, K

    T. Proctor, K. Young, A. D. Baczewski, and R. Blume- Kohout, Benchmarking quantum computers, Nat. Rev. Phys.7, 105 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Casola, T

    F. Casola, T. van der Sar, and A. Yacoby, Probing condensed matter physics with magnetometry based on nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamond, Nat. Rev. Mat.3, 17088 (2018)

    work page 2018

  36. [36]

    Rovny, S

    J. Rovny, S. Gopalakrishnan, A. C. B. Jayich, P. Maletinsky, E. Demler, and N. P. de Leon, Nanoscale diamond quantum sensors for many-body physics, Nat. Rev. Phys.6, 753 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Rovny, Z

    J. Rovny, Z. Yuan, M. Fitzpatrick, A. I. Abdalla, L. Fu- tamura, C. Fox, M. C. Cambria, S. Kolkowitz, and N. P. de Leon, Nanoscale covariance magnetometry with dia- mond quantum sensors, Science378, 1301 (2022)

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    M. E. Ziffer, F. Machado, B. Ursprung, A. Lozovoi, A. B. Tazi, Z. Yuan, M. E. Ziebel, T. Delord, N. Zeng, et al., Quantum Noise Spectroscopy of Criticality in an Atomically Thin Magnet (2024), arXiv:2407.05614 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Cheng, Z

    K.-H. Cheng, Z. Kazi, J. Rovny, B. Zhang, L. S. Nassar, J. D. Thompson, and N. P. de Leon, Massively Multi- plexed Nanoscale Magnetometry with Diamond Quan- tum Sensors, Phys. Rev. X15, 031014 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    Rovny, S

    J. Rovny, S. Kolkowitz, and N. P. de Leon, Multi-qubit nanoscale sensing with entanglement as a resource, Na- ture647, 876–882 (2025)

    work page 2025

  41. [41]

    X. Zhou, M. Wang, X. Ye, H. Sun, Y. Guo, S. Han, Z. Chai, W. Ji, K. Xia,et al., Entanglement-enhanced nanoscale single-spin sensing, Nature647, 883 (2025)

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    Ye and P

    J. Ye and P. Zoller, Essay: Quantum Sensing with Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Platforms for Funda- mental Physics, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 190001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    S. D. Bass and M. Doser, Quantum sensing for particle physics, Nat. Rev. Phys.6, 329 (2024)

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    S. M. Roy and S. L. Braunstein, Exponentially En- hanced Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 220501 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    Boixo, S

    S. Boixo, S. T. Flammia, C. M. Caves, and J. Geremia, Generalized Limits for Single-Parameter Quantum Es- timation, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 090401 (2007)

    work page 2007

  46. [46]

    L. A. Correa, M. Mehboudi, G. Adesso, and A. Sanpera, Individual Quantum Probes for Optimal Thermometry, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 220405 (2015)

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    Sekatski and M

    P. Sekatski and M. Perarnau-Llobet, Optimal nonequi- librium thermometry in Markovian environments, Quantum6, 869 (2022)

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    J. W. Gardner, S. A. Haine, J. J. Hope, Y. Chen, and T. Gefen, Lindblad estimation with fast and precise quantum control, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 044055 (2025)

    work page 2025

  49. [49]

    J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok, Geometric perspective on quantum parameter estimation, AVS Quantum Sci.2, 014701 (2020)

    work page 2020

  50. [50]

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X. Lu, and X. Wang, Quantum Fisher InformationMatrixandMulti-ParameterEstimation,J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.53, 023001 (2020)

    work page 2020

  51. [51]

    J. J. Meyer, Fisher Information in Noisy Intermediate- Scale Quantum Applications, Quantum5, 539 (2021)

    work page 2021

  52. [52]

    Ad- vances in multiparameter quantum sensing and metrology, 2025

    L. Pezzè and A. Smerzi, Advances in multipa- rameter quantum sensing and metrology (2025), arXiv:2502.17396 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Fujiwara and H

    A. Fujiwara and H. Nagaoka, Quantum Fisher metric andestimationforpurestatemodels,Phys.Lett.A201, 119 (1995)

    work page 1995

  54. [54]

    S. Ragy, M. Jarzyna, and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Compatibility in multiparameter quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A94, 052108 (2016)

    work page 2016

  55. [55]

    Pezzè, M

    L. Pezzè, M. A. Ciampini, N. Spagnolo, P. C. Humphreys, A. Datta, I. A. Walmsley, M. Barbieri, F. Sciarrino, and A. Smerzi, Optimal Measurements for Simultaneous Quantum Estimation of Multiple Phases, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 130504 (2017)

    work page 2017

  56. [56]

    Albarelli and R

    F. Albarelli and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Probe Incompatibility in Multiparameter Noisy Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. X12, 011039 (2022)

    work page 2022

  57. [57]

    J. S. Sidhu, Y. Ouyang, E. T. Campbell, and P. Kok, Tight Bounds on the Simultaneous Estimation of In- compatible Parameters, Phys. Rev. X11, 011028 (2021)

    work page 2021

  58. [58]

    W. F. Stinespring, Positive Functions on C∗-Algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.6, 211 (1955)

    work page 1955

  59. [59]

    Schumacher and M

    B. Schumacher and M. A. Nielsen, Quantum data pro- cessing and error correction, Phys. Rev. A54, 2629 (1996)

    work page 1996

  60. [60]

    transition probability

    A. Uhlmann, The “transition probability” in the state space of a *-algebra, Rep. Math. Phys.9, 273 (1976)

    work page 1976

  61. [61]

    Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun

    G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys.48, 119 (1976)

    work page 1976

  62. [62]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups ofN-level systems, J. Math. Phys.17, 821 (1976)

    work page 1976

  63. [63]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Systems(Oxford University Press, 2007)

    work page 2007

  64. [64]

    V. V. Albert, B. Bradlyn, M. Fraas, and L. Jiang, Ge- ometry and Response of Lindbladians, Phys. Rev. X6, 041031 (2016)

    work page 2016

  65. [65]

    Fujiwara and H

    A. Fujiwara and H. Imai, A fibre bundle over manifolds of quantum channels and its application to quantum statistics, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.41, 255304 (2008)

    work page 2008

  66. [66]

    B. M. Escher, R. L. de Matos Filho, and L. Davidovich, General framework for estimating the ultimate precision limit in noisy quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Phys. 7, 406 (2011)

    work page 2011

  67. [67]

    Demkowicz-Dobrzański, J

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, J. Kołodyński, and M. Guţă, The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum- enhanced metrology, Nat. Commun.3, 1063 (2012)

    work page 2012

  68. [68]

    Kołodyński and R

    J. Kołodyński and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Efficient tools for quantum metrology with uncorrelated noise, New J. Phys.15, 073043 (2013). 16

    work page 2013

  69. [69]

    Catana, L

    C. Catana, L. Bouten, and M. Guţă, Fisher informa- tions and local asymptotic normality for continuous- time quantum Markov processes, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.48, 365301 (2015)

    work page 2015

  70. [70]

    Guta and J

    M. Guta and J. Kiukas, Information geometry and lo- cal asymptotic normality for multi-parameter estima- tion of quantum Markov dynamics, J. Math. Phys.58, 10.1063/1.4982958 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4982958 2017

  71. [71]

    Kurdziałek, W

    S. Kurdziałek, W. Górecki, F. Albarelli, and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Using Adaptiveness and Causal Superpositions Against Noise in Quantum Metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 090801 (2023)

    work page 2023

  72. [72]

    Wan and R

    K. Wan and R. Lasenby, Bounds on adaptive quantum metrology under Markovian noise, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033092 (2022)

    work page 2022

  73. [73]

    A. Das, W. Górecki, and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Universal time scalings of sensitivity in Markovian quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A111, L020403 (2025)

    work page 2025

  74. [74]

    X.-M. Lu, X. Wang, and C. P. Sun, Quantum Fisher information flow and non-Markovian processes of open systems, Phys. Rev. A82, 042103 (2010)

    work page 2010

  75. [75]

    D. P. Pires, M. Cianciaruso, L. C.Céleri, G. Adesso, and D. O. Soares-Pinto, Generalized Geometric Quantum Speed Limits, Phys. Rev. X6, 021031 (2016)

    work page 2016

  76. [76]

    Ito and A

    S. Ito and A. Dechant, Stochastic Time Evolution, In- formationGeometry, andtheCramér-RaoBound,Phys. Rev. X10, 021056 (2020)

    work page 2020

  77. [77]

    L. P. García-Pintos, S. B. Nicholson, J. R. Green, A. del Campo, and A. V. Gorshkov, Unifying Quantum and Classical Speed Limits on Observables, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011038 (2022)

    work page 2022

  78. [78]

    Matsumoto, A new approach to the Cramér-Rao- type bound of the pure-state model, J

    K. Matsumoto, A new approach to the Cramér-Rao- type bound of the pure-state model, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.35, 3111 (2002)

    work page 2002

  79. [79]

    Radaelli, J

    M. Radaelli, J. A. Smiga, G. T. Landi, and F. C. Binder, Parameter estimation for quantum jump unraveling, Quantum10, 1993 (2026)

    work page 1993

  80. [80]

    S. M. Kay,Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Process- ing: Estimation Theory, Vol. 1 (Prentice-Hall PTR, 1993)

    work page 1993

Showing first 80 references.