EPSRC Reference: 
EP/H041222/1 
Title: 
Quantum Imaging 
Principal Investigator: 
Kok, Professor P 
Other Investigators: 

Researcher CoInvestigators: 

Project Partners: 

Department: 
Physics and Astronomy 
Organisation: 
University of Sheffield 
Scheme: 
First Grant  Revised 2009 
Starts: 
01 July 2010 
Ends: 
30 June 2011 
Value (£): 
95,445

EPSRC Research Topic Classifications: 
New & Emerging Comp. Paradigms 
Quantum Optics & Information 

EPSRC Industrial Sector Classifications: 
No relevance to Underpinning Sectors 


Related Grants: 

Panel History: 
Panel Date  Panel Name  Outcome 
25 Feb 2010

Physical Sciences Panel  Physics

Announced


Summary on Grant Application Form 
Imaging is an important technological tool in many disciplines, such as biomedical research, nanotechnology, and basic physics research. However, due to the wave nature of light there are limits in resolution and contrast that can be achieved in classical imaging techniques. On the other hand, quantum entanglement may offer an improvement over these classical limits, leading to the subject of quantum imaging. The best known quantum imaging protocols are twophoton microscopy and spectroscopy, quantum holography, quantum lithography, and quantum illumination. There are two reasons why it is important to understand the precise distinction between classical and quantum imaging. First, it will help identify new methods for improved imaging, potentially leading to new technology. Second, it will reveal a fundamental aspect of physics that has hitherto remained elusive, namely what makes quantum optics more powerful in imaging than classical optics. The obvious answer to this question, i.e., quantum entanglement, has already been proved false to some extent. While entanglement is probably necessary, it is certainly not sufficient. This is reminiscent of quantum computing, where it was shown that entanglement is necessary but not sufficient for obtaining the promised exponential speedup over classical computing.The first problem we encounter when we try to understand the difference between classical and quantum imaging is the lack of an operational quantitative measure of the imaging quality. We therefore need a quantitative measure for practical imaging protocols that provides a welldefined threshold between the classical and the quantum regime. Secondly, what exactly is the role of entanglement in quantum imaging? Furthermore, is it possible to derive fundamental bounds on quantum imaging with respect to the imaging quality measure? Thirdly, once a fundamental limit on the objective imaging measure has been found, an obvious question is what procedures saturate this bound.

Key Findings 
This information can now be found on Gateway to Research (GtR) http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk

Potential use in nonacademic contexts 
This information can now be found on Gateway to Research (GtR) http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk

Impacts 
Description 
This information can now be found on Gateway to Research (GtR) http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk 
Summary 

Date Materialised 


Sectors submitted by the Researcher 
This information can now be found on Gateway to Research (GtR) http://gtr.rcuk.ac.uk

Project URL: 

Further Information: 

Organisation Website: 
http://www.shef.ac.uk 