{
  "abstract": "Quantum techniques matter to optical astronomy when they preserve information in the parameter-bearing measurement channel after realistic loss, calibration, covariance, and inference are propagated to the final astrophysical observable. We compare 7 approaches by the quantity they change: internal optical-path delay, sub-Rayleigh source separation, coronagraphic planet throughput & stellar leakage, coherent field quadratures, nonlocal complex visibility, null depth, active phase sensing. In an Earth-analog astrometry case, 6-dB squeezed internal metrology improves the measured phase quadrature by 1.58 and the complete readout by ~1.20, but fixed-time planet-mass precision by only 1.010 (95 % interval 1.005-1.045); mission duration, useful baseline, cadence, calibration have greater modeled leverage. For a close young binary, signed spatial-mode demultiplexing preserves sub-Rayleigh orbital information that is substantially degraded in the tested direct-imaging comparator. A representative matched-model calculation gives a dynamical-mass RMSE gain 1.77 1.47-2.15). For illustrative equal-prior pre-main-sequence predictions at 0.10 and \\(0.12M_\\odot\\), mass precisions of 15%, 10%, 7% correspond to correct-selection probabilities of ~73%, 82%, 90%. The numerical gain remains provisional because the event-level continuous-image comparator, strict tail convergence, externally measured broadband transfer matrix, and finite-photon calibration are not yet closed. Modal coronagraphy and quantum-enhanced heterodyne reception define conditional receiver opportunities, while the nonlocal, nuller, and prepared-NOON cases identify physical bottlenecks that prevent an astrophysical advantage in the stated configurations. The common result is that quantum technology is most valuable when it changes an information-bearing observable and that channel remains consequential in the final science measurement.",
  "abstract_shown": true,
  "affiliations": [],
  "article_type": null,
  "arxiv": "2609.11974",
  "author_total": 1,
  "authors": [
    {
      "name": "Slava G. Turyshev"
    }
  ],
  "bibtex": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/889drsy66h4y6.bib",
  "cited_by": 0,
  "doi": "10.48550/arxiv.2609.11974",
  "fulltext_url": null,
  "id": "889drsy66h4y6",
  "issns": [],
  "landing_url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.11974",
  "language": null,
  "licence": "LicenseRef-arXiv-nonexclusive-1.0",
  "licence_label": "arXiv licence",
  "licence_source": "article",
  "licence_url": "http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/",
  "metadata_licence": "CC0-1.0",
  "native_subjects": [
    [
      "arxiv",
      "physics.gen-ph"
    ],
    [
      "openalex",
      "3107|Adaptive optics and wavefront sensing"
    ]
  ],
  "openalex": "W7212578351",
  "pdf_url": "https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.11974",
  "pmcid": null,
  "pmid": null,
  "published": "2026-09-01",
  "publisher": null,
  "ris": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/889drsy66h4y6.ris",
  "sources": [
    {
      "first_seen": "2026-10-30T12:21:07Z",
      "native_id": "2609.11974",
      "source": "arxiv",
      "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.11974"
    }
  ],
  "subjects": [
    {
      "field": "physics",
      "origin": "openalex:3107|Adaptive optics and wavefront sensing",
      "subfield": "optics-photonics"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Do Quantum Measurement Advantages Survive to Astrophysical Inference? Seven Benchmarks in Optical Interferometry and Imaging",
  "title_text": "Do Quantum Measurement Advantages Survive to Astrophysical Inference? Seven Benchmarks in Optical Interferometry and Imaging",
  "type": "preprint",
  "updated_at": "2026-10-30T12:21:07Z",
  "url": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/889drsy66h4y6",
  "venue": "arXiv",
  "versions": []
}