Beyond sensitivity: mechanism-resolved error budgets for designing quantum sensors
📄 arXiv:2608.28519 · 📥 PDF · 2026-08-28 · quant-ph
Authors: Nima Leclerc [arXiv · scholar] , Marco Capelli [arXiv · scholar] , Kevin James Rietwyk [arXiv · scholar] , Mark Dong [arXiv · scholar] , Dmitry Lyakh [arXiv · scholar] , Geoffrey Iwata [arXiv · scholar] , Brandon Rodenburg [arXiv · scholar] , Sean Oliver [arXiv · scholar] , Benedikt Kloss [arXiv · scholar] , Jin-Sung Kim [arXiv · scholar] , Stefan Bogdanovic [arXiv · scholar] , Yunheng Chen [arXiv · scholar] , Meysam Sharifzadeh Mirshekarloo [arXiv · scholar] , Cedric Weber [arXiv · scholar] , Marcus Doherty [arXiv · scholar] , Ethan Pratt [arXiv · scholar] , Joseph Hagmann [arXiv · scholar]
📄 Abstract
Quantum sensors are specified by a headline sensitivity, yet applications also demand accuracy and reliability. The dominant limiter of one metric is often known, but no method resolves how interacting mechanisms combine into a signed, per-mechanism budget for each metric. We introduce a framework that computes a sensor's sensitivity, accuracy, and robustness from one open-system simulation and attributes each to its limiting mechanism. For a nitrogen-vacancy diamond ensemble the attribution inverts across metrics: dephasing limits sensitivity, the thermal ground-state shift limits accuracy, and optical leakage limits robustness. At identical sensitivity the recovered-field bias spans $8$ to $1500$\,nT, so tuning to sensitivity alone can miss the accuracy target by two orders of magnitude. The same modeling transfers to a cesium optically pumped magnetometer recording a human magnetocardiogram. As a digital twin, it predicts the gain from addressing each limiter, so sensors can be designed to the required metrics.