Why the "classical" explanation of weak values by Ferrie and Combes does not work: a comment on Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 120404 (2014)

2014/10/27 by Holger F. Hofmann, Hofmann, Holger F., Masataka Iinuma +4
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Physics and Astronomy · #Complex Systems and Time Series Analysis #FOS: Physical sciences #Quantum Mechanics and Applications #Quantum Physics (quant-ph) #Statistical Mechanics and Entropy #quant-ph

paper · pdf · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1410.7126

Short comment on Ferrie and Combes, arXiv:1403.2362 (Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 120404 (2014)); quantitatively discusses the requirements for the avoidance of statistical artefacts in weak measurements; v2 is unchanged except for the wrong arXiv references that were added automatically in the first submission

openalex publication_date 2014/10/27 · arxiv created 2014/11/21 · arxiv updated 2014/11/24 · openalex created_date 2016/06/24 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28

Abstract

In Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 120404 (2014) [arXiv:1403.2362], Ferrie and Combes claim that weak values could be a statistical artifact caused by correlations between the disturbance and the post-selection condition imposed on the output. In this comment, we show that the disturbance caused by a weak measurement is sufficiently low to definitely rule out the model proposed by Ferrie and Combes.

Citations

• How the Result of a Single Coin Toss Can Turn Out to be 100 Heads

Related

• A comment on "Weak value amplification is suboptimal for estimation and detection"
• A comment on the paper "How can a Result of a Single Coin Toss Turn Out to be 100 Heads" by C. Ferrie and J. Combes
• A close look at Jeckelmann's weak-coupling results: Reply to the Comment by Jeckelmann
• A comment on "How the result of a single coin toss can turn out to be 100 heads"
• Response to Comment on Non-representative Quantum Mechanical Weak Values by Ben-Israel and Vaidman