Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: continuous measurement of quantum systems @xcite , the study of quantum systems states under the influence of observation prolonged in time , has been a topic of considerable activity in recent years . particularly , for the measurement of an individual microscopic system that is weakly coupled to measurement apparatus , the system s state and its conditioned evolution in time , the so - called diffusive - type quantum state trajectory @xcite , have been intensively explored for applications in quantum information and quantum control . some of the active fields are quantum state estimation ( i.e. , estimating the pre - measurement state of an ensemble of identically prepared systems @xcite ) , conditional reversal of measurement @xcite , and the preparation of entangled states @xcite . the ability to continuously measure quantum systems also opens the possibility of feedback control @xcite , which has also been investigated for topics such as the stabilization of coherent oscillations @xcite and rapid state purification @xcite . this growing interest in the quantum systems under weak continuous measurement has motivated a thorough analysis of quantum trajectory statistics . of notable importance are advances in experiments , such as the measurement of superconducting qubits @xcite , which has allowed the tracking of the trajectories of the quantum state with high fidelity in a single measurement run , allowing the statistics of selected subensembles of trajectories to be explored . the authors recently developed an action principle @xcite over a doubled quantum state space , based on a path integral representation of probability distributions of quantum trajectories . the action principle , implemented by extremizing of the stochastic path integral s action , was used to investigate the optimal behaviour of the trajectories with arbitrary constraints , such as fixing the final boundary condition @xcite . the stochastic path integral and the optimum likelihood approach provide a convenient way to investigate statistical distributions and globally optimal dynamics of quantum state evolution , in addition to the stochastic master equations describing the quantum trajectories and the lindblad master equations describing their average evolution @xcite .    in this paper , we continue the development of the stochastic path integral formalism @xcite , to further explore advantages of having the full joint probability distribution of quantum trajectories . this includes computing statistical averages or expectation values with the ability to condition on definite quantum states at particular times . we present several examples of the formalism including a qubit system under the influence of measurement alone , measurement with concurrent unitary dynamics , and qubit measurement with feedback control . in these examples , the statistics of qubit trajectories are computed using developed techniques for the path integral , such as multi - dimensional gaussian integrals and diagrammatic expansion theory . moreover , in an example of qubit measurement with linear feedback , we utilize a phase portrait analysis to investigate the most likely behaviour of the system dynamics , revealing a simple and practical approach for qubit state stabilization . there have been past works on continuous quantum measurements with path integrals , so we wish to discuss how our approach bears both similarities and differences to them . an early approach suggested by feynman @xcite and later independently developed by mensky @xcite is a restricted path integral : a modified version of the feynman path integral to only sum over paths that contribute to a measurement record . caves , and also barchielli @xcite , constructed similar path integrals by adding coarse - graining ( resolution ) functions describing the effect of the measurement . in these path integral approaches , one considers the distribution of the measurement records ( it can be derived from the probability amplitude , see appendix  [ app - otherpathint ] ) , whereas in our approach , we formulate a path integral in quantum state space to represent a joint probability distribution of the measurement readouts as well as quantum state trajectories . wei and nazarov discussed a different approach to continuous measurements using the keldysh path integral technique @xcite . in breuer and petruccione s path integral @xcite , the notion of the sum over pure state paths in hilbert space is applied , resulting in a different type of doubled state space that does not yield an action functional . the stochastic path integral formalism and the analysis of its action are also applied in classical stochastic processes . for instance , the formalism is used in studying the dynamics and distribution of transmitted electronic charge @xcite , the neural network @xcite , and the large deviations from typical behaviours ( rare events ) @xcite . our approach is similar to the martin - siggia - rose formalism @xcite , which involves adding conjugate fields through the fourier integral form of delta functionals enforcing diffusive dynamics . notably , one can think of the quantum trajectories on a finite dimensional state space as analogous to classical random processes in configuration space of that dimension . this paper is organized as follows . in section  [ sec - mainspi ] , we review the stochastic path integral formalism and its extremized action equations , for a general finite - dimensional system with a markovian setup for weak continuous measurement . in section [ sec - qubit ] , a specific measurement setup for a qubit is presented , which is used throughout this paper . in section  [ sec - qnd ] , we show that , in the case without qubit hamiltonian , we can perform the full path integration directly to get the multi - time correlation functions for the preselected and postselected qubit state . in section  [ sec - purbexpand ] , the diagrammatic expansion theory is presented as an alternative approximation method for computing multi - time correlation functions , with examples for qubit measurement with rabi oscillation . in section [ sec - feedback ] , qubit measurement with feedback control and its optimal dynamics are investigated using the path integral and the action principle approaches . the conclusion can be found in section  [ sec - conclusion ] . a series of supplementary discussions and some detailed calculations that are not included in the main text are presented in the appendixes . we consider the distribution of quantum state trajectories for continuous quantum measurement . a quantum state trajectory , or simply a quantum trajectory , is an evolution of a quantum state in time , conditioned on a detector readout realization . this conditional state trajectory is also known as a solution of stochastic master equations , unravelling master equations in lindblad form . let us discretize the measurement readout into @xmath0 time points and denote @xmath1 as a measurement realization . each @xmath2 is a readout obtained between time @xmath3 and @xmath4 , and is assumed dependent only on a quantum state right before its measurement ( markov assumption ) . we define a series of quantum states @xmath5 , written as a @xmath6-dimensional parametrized vector @xmath7 , where the components are the expansion coefficients of the density operator @xmath8 written in some orthogonal operator basis , such as the @xmath9 generalized gell - mann matrices @xmath10 of a @xmath11-state system @xcite . for a two - state system , the matrices @xmath10 for @xmath12 are the pauli matrices , and @xmath13 is a vector in bloch sphere coordinates . the quantum state trajectory can be computed with an update equation of the form , @xmath14 $ ] , taking into account the measurement back - action from the measurement readout @xmath2 , and also considering the unitary evolution from the measured system s hamiltonian .    since the distribution of the measurement readout only depends on the quantum state right before the measurement in this markovian approach , we can then write the joint probability density function ( pdf ) of all measurement outcomes and state trajectories @xmath15 given an initial state @xmath16 and a set of other constraints @xmath17 as , @xmath18 this is a time step product of @xmath19 , the conditional probability distribution for the measurement outcome @xmath2 given the system state before the measurement @xmath20 , and @xmath21)$ ] , the ( deterministic ) conditional probability distribution for the quantum state after the measurement , given the state at the previous time step and the measurement readout . the prefactor @xmath22 $ ] in eq . is a function of quantum states and readouts at any times , accounting for constraints used in selecting a sub - ensemble of the quantum trajectories , such as initial - state and final - state conditions .    the benefit of having the joint pdf eq . is that it contains all the statistical information about the system s evolution under measurement , and it allows us to selectively work with sub - ensembles of quantum trajectories simply by adding constraints ( or conditions ) to the joint distribution . statistical moments can be computed from this joint pdf by integrating over its variables . for example , an expected value of an arbitrary functional @xmath23 $ ] is given by @xmath24_1^n { \mathrm{d}}[r_k]_0^{n-1 } { \cal p}_{\zeta } { \cal a}$ ] , where we define a notation for the multiple integral , @xmath25_{1}^{n } \equiv \int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}{{\bm q}}_{1 } \cdots { \mathrm{d}}{{\bm q}}_{n}$ ] . direct integration of these quantities using the joint pdf as in eq . , however , can be a challenging task even for a simple qubit measurement problem . as such , we are motivated to write the joint pdf in a path integral form with an action ( or exponent ) , so we can perform the integration using techniques developed in quantum theory such as a diagrammatic perturbation theory . the path integral representation of the joint pdf in eq .   can be attained by writing the delta functions for the state update @xmath26)$ ] for @xmath27 to @xmath28 in the fourier integral form , i.e. , @xmath29 for each @xmath30 and each component of the vector @xmath7 , and then rewrite other terms in exponential forms . the conjugate variables for those delta functions are denoted by @xmath31 for @xmath27 to @xmath28 . we refer to ref . @xcite and its appendixes for a thorough discussion about this transformation and the construction of the path integral . as a result , the joint pdf is then given in a path integral form , @xmath32_{0}^{n-1 } \exp({\cal s}),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the integrals are over all possible paths of @xmath33 and the action @xmath34 is defined as , @xmath35 ) + \ln p(r_k | \bm{q}_k ) \bigg\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] we note that @xmath36 is an additional term determined by the formation of @xmath37 in eq .  , and @xmath38 is a prefactor absorbing normalization constants .    for an example , we consider a sub - ensemble of trajectories that obey conditions on the initial and final states . the theoretical analysis of this kind of constraint is presented in ref . the initial state is fixed at @xmath39 and the final state is at @xmath40 . this leads to the constraint term @xmath41 in eq .   and the preselected and postselected joint pdf , @xmath42 , which is written in a path integral form as , @xmath43_{-1}^{n } \exp({\cal s}_{{{\bm q}}_i , { { \bm q}}_f}),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the path integral s action is , @xmath44 ) + \ln p(r_k | \bm{q}_k ) \bigg\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ] we note that , in eq .   and , two additional conjugate variables , @xmath45 and @xmath46 , are introduced , because we have written the delta functions in @xmath47 , one for the initial state and another for the final state , in the fourier integral form . we can investigate the path integral s largest contribution by solving for its action s extrema . taking the variation of the action eq . over all the variables and setting it to zero , we obtain a set of difference equations ,    [ eq - diffeqs ] @xmath48&=0,\\   \label{eq - backwardp } -\bm{p}_{k-1 } + \frac{\partial}{\partial \bm{q}_k}\big\{\bm{p}_k\cdot \bm{\mathcal{e}}[\bm{q}_k , r_k ] + \ln p(r_k | \bm{q}_k)\big\}&=0 , \\ \frac{\partial}{\partial r_k}\big\ { \bm{p}_k \cdot \bm{\mathcal{e}}[\bm{q}_k , r_k ] + \ln p(r_k | \bm{q}_k)\big\}&=0.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the first , second and third equations are from taking derivatives over the conjugate variables @xmath31 from @xmath49 to @xmath28 , over the state variables @xmath20 from @xmath50 to @xmath28 , and over the measurement readout variables @xmath2 from @xmath27 to @xmath28 , respectively . the derivative over the final state variable @xmath51 gives a trivial equation @xmath52 , whereas the derivatives of the action over @xmath45 and @xmath46 force the boundary conditions @xmath39 and @xmath40 on the solutions of eqs .  . we note that , in the case of no final boundary condition on the quantum state ( i.e. , @xmath53 or @xmath54 ) , the derivative of the action over @xmath51 instead gives @xmath55 , a final value of the conjugate variable .    interestingly , this extremization of the action in eqs . reproduces the lagrange multiplier method , an optimization strategy that accommodates constraints . in our case , the optimized function is the last term of eq .  , @xmath56 , subject to the constraints @xmath57 $ ] for @xmath58 ( enforcing the deterministic state update ) with the lagrange multipliers @xmath59 , and the boundary constraints @xmath39 and @xmath40 with the lagrange multipliers @xmath45 and @xmath46 therefore , a solution of the difference equations eqs .   is a path that optimizes the log - likelihood of a quantum trajectory , @xmath56 , subject to the indicated constraints . the optimal path can be a local maximum , a local minimum , or a saddle point in the constrained probability space . for the optimal path that represents the local maximum , we call it the most likely path or the most probable path .    the optimal path , a solution of the difference equations eq .   and their boundary conditions , can be approximated by taking a time - continuous limit @xmath60 , changing the difference equations to a set of ordinary differential equations , which can then be solved analytically or numerically . this approximation is applicable because its solutions , the optimal readouts and the optimal quantum paths , are smooth functions of time . in the case of the optimal paths that maximize the log - likelihood of preselected and postselected quantum trajectories ( the most likely paths between two quantum states ) , these solutions have been experimentally verified with a superconducting transmon qubit @xcite . so far , we have presented the joint pdf and the path integrals in the time - discrete form . for a more compact representation , we introduce a time - continuous version of the discrete stochastic path integral , assuming that the system is not intrinsically discrete and a well - defined diffusive limit exists . the joint pdf , for example in eq .  , is written as , @xmath61 \ , \exp({\cal s } ) \overset{\delta t \rightarrow 0}{= } { \cal n}\!\ ! \int \!\!\ ! { \cal d}{{\bm p}}\ , \exp({\cal s}),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have defined a notation for functional integrals , e.g. , @xmath62 $ ] . the action in eq . is given by , @xmath63 ) + { \cal f}[{{\bm q}},r]\big\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we have introduced @xmath64{\mathrm{d}}t$ ] as the time - continuous version of the state update equation @xmath65 $ ] , and defined @xmath66 $ ] as the linear - order expansion in time of the log - probability , i.e. , @xmath67+o(\delta t^2)\}$ ] . a proportionality factor of the latter is absorbed into the normalization factor @xmath38 . the time dependence of the variables in eq .   and is suppressed for simplicity ( e.g. , @xmath68 ) .    in the continuous version of the action , the state update equation @xmath69 $ ] can be derived from the first order expansion in @xmath70 of its discrete form @xmath65 $ ] using the exact readout probability distribution @xmath19 . as an alternative , one can consider using a stochastic master equation of the quantum state , where an ideal white noise @xmath71 is introduced with its single gaussian probability distribution . the latter substitution is valid in an idealized noise limit , which we discuss in more detail in section [ subsec - nonqnd ] ( where it stochastic equations are chosen in the diagrammatic perturbation approach ) and in appendix  [ app - whitenoise ] . the choice of the stochastic state equations needs to be consistent with the readout ( or noise ) probability distribution used in obtaining the functional @xmath66 $ ] in eq .  . a careful analysis is needed when considering the extremization of the action as described in eqs .  , which , in the continuum limit , changes to a set of ordinary differential equations . we note that one can derive this same set of differential equations directly from extremizing the continuous - version action in eq .  , if the state update equation @xmath69 $ ] is obtained from the first order expansion in @xmath70 of its discrete form ( this approach to the derivation is presented in ref . @xcite ) . for the action constructed using the it stochastic equations , its extremization does not give a correct set of differential equations describing the optimal paths . however , a stochastic path integral formulated using the it equations is more advantageous when computing functional integrals , which is presented in section  [ sec - purbexpand ] . so far we have presented the formalism in the general context , the quantum measurement with measurement readouts @xmath72 and corresponding quantum states @xmath73 . in order to show examples and demonstrate how to compute interesting quantities using the path integral formalism , we choose a particular theoretical model , a qubit continuously measured by an apparatus assuming a weakly responding ( or coupled ) detector . this theoretical setup has long been a subject of interest in theories and experiments . some of the physical realizations of this system available with current technology are as follows : a single electron in a double quantum dot capacitively coupled to a quantum point contact detector @xcite , a superconducting qubit dispersively coupled to a microwave waveguide cavity @xcite , and quantum optics experiments such as a two - level atom monitored with homodyne optical measurement @xcite .    in most of these experimental setups , one can characterize the qubit evolution as governed by the measurement back - action , the qubit unitary evolution , and extra dephasing due to loss of information or added noise . we write a time - discrete change for a qubit density matrix @xmath8 as @xmath74 $ ] , where we define a measurement operation @xmath75 = { { \hat { m}}}_{r_k } \rho { { \hat { m}}}_{r_k}^{\dagger}/{\text{tr}({{\hat { m}}}_{r_k } \rho { { \hat { m}}}_{r_k}^{\dagger})}$ ] , a unitary operation @xmath76 = e^{-i { { \hat { h } } } \delta t } \rho e^{i { { \hat { h } } } \delta t}$ ] , and an extra dephasing operation @xmath77 $ ] ( we set @xmath78 ) .    the measurement back - action on a qubit state , considering the diffusive measurement as in refs . @xcite , is described by a measurement operator @xmath79 $ ] , where @xmath80 is a characteristic measurement time taken to separate the two gaussian distributions by two standard deviations . the measurement readout distribution is computed from the trace of the measurement operator and the qubit state , @xmath81 with the bloch sphere coordinates of the qubit state given by @xmath82 . we denote a qubit hamiltonian by @xmath83 characterizing the unitary evolution during the measurement , and we define the dephasing operation @xmath77 $ ] accounting for additional dephasing on the system , such as detection inefficiency and dephasing due to the environment . we model the dephasing operation as an extra dephasing rate @xmath84 on the off - diagonal elements of the qubit density matrix @xmath8 . by expanding the state update equation @xmath74 $ ] to first order in @xmath70 , and taking a continuum limit @xmath60 , we obtain a set of differential equations ,    [ eq - contstate ] @xmath85    which turns out to be analogous to the stochastic master equation in stratonovich interpretation as mentioned in ref . @xcite .    using the state update equations in eqs .   and the readout distribution in eq . , we have the qubit action in continuous form ( as in eq .  ) , @xmath86 where we have approximated the logarithm of the readout distribution as @xmath87 , omitting the second term and its higher order expansion because they can be absorbed into the prefactor @xmath38 . we note that the extremization of this action and its most likely paths with fixed initial and final states are presented in more detail in ref . @xcite .    in the remainder of this paper , we will focus on applying the path integral formalism to this particular qubit measurement system , though in different regimes of the hamiltonian parameters . for example , in the next section , we study the `` plain '' qubit measurement where we assume that there is no qubit hamiltonian , i.e. , @xmath88 , and the qubit s evolution comes only from the measurement and the dephasing mechanism . in this section , we present examples as to how we can use the path integral and its optimal path to compute statistical moments of the measured qubit trajectories . as it turns out , analytic solutions are possible for the case of quantum non - demolition measurement ( @xmath89 , where the system hamiltonian commutes with total system - detector hamiltonian ) with a constraint on the initial and final states of the quantum trajectories . in this case , the path integral can be written only in the @xmath90-coordinate , i.e. , @xmath91 , because the evolution of @xmath90 is independent of the other two coordinates , @xmath92 and @xmath93 . the @xmath92 and @xmath93 degrees of freedom can be found directly from @xmath94 and @xmath90 , so they will be dropped from the discussion until section  [ sec - purbexpand ] .    in the following subsections , we consider the plain measurement case when @xmath88 for simplicity . we show how to compute the path integral using the preselected and postselected joint pdf , @xmath95 . we first integrate this joint pdf over all intermediate variables to get the probability density function @xmath96 of arriving at the final state @xmath97 after time @xmath98 , given the initial state @xmath99 . then , we show how to generalize the integration procedures to compute statistical quantities such as averages , variances , and correlation functions of the qubit trajectories in this simplified case . we note here that even though we present the derivation in the plain measurement case , the result should still be valid for the case when @xmath100 . in the latter case , the evolution of the @xmath92 and @xmath93 coordinates of the qubit will be deterministically oscillating with the frequency @xmath101 , without affecting the evolution of the @xmath90 coordinate .      in order to compute the probability distribution of the final qubit state given the initial state separated by time @xmath98 , we start with the joint pdf @xmath102 of the qubit trajectories @xmath103 and measurement outcomes @xmath104 with fixed boundary states , and then integrate over all variables except the final state @xmath97 , @xmath105_0^{n}{\mathrm{d}}[r_k]_0^{n-1 } { \cal p}_{z_i , z_f},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where , as before , we have defined the multi - variable integral , e.g. , @xmath106_{0}^{n } = \int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}z_{0 } \cdots { \mathrm{d}}z_{n}$ ] .    from the discussion in section  [ sec - mainspi ] , the joint pdf is given by a product over the sliced time variables , @xmath107 . the term describing the state update equation is a delta function , @xmath108 with its argument derived from the @xmath90-coordinate of the density matrix equation @xmath109 $ ] , whereas , the probability distribution for the readout eq . is expressed in this form , @xmath110 neglecting higher orders in @xmath70 . substituting these two expressions , eqs .   and , into the joint pdf , we get @xmath111 where we have used @xmath112 to represent the delta function in eq .  . we then integrate out the measurement readouts by transforming the delta function of @xmath90 into a delta function in the readout variable , @xmath113 , using the transformation relation @xmath114 = \sum_i \delta[y - y_i]/|\partial_y f(y)|_{y_i = f^{-1}(x)}$ ] , where the sum extends over all solutions of @xmath115 . after integrating over the measurement readout and also over the boundary state @xmath116 , and @xmath117 , the joint pdf is transformed to a new joint pdf , a function of only the intermediate @xmath90-variables , @xmath118 where the action @xmath34 is , @xmath119 we note that we have simplified the above equation by defining a new variable @xmath120 to write the joint pdf in a compact form . this joint pdf of the @xmath90-variable is one of the main results shown in this paper . it is also important to point out that since we have already integrated over the boundary state variable @xmath116 and @xmath117 , the delta functions for the boundary states have applied to the states @xmath121 and @xmath122 in eqs .   and . the next step is to perform the integration over the intermediate variables @xmath123 for @xmath124 . these integrals can be done easily by expanding @xmath123 around the optimal solution denoted by @xmath125 . we substitute @xmath126 for all @xmath30 s in the action , and perform integration by parts with the vanishing boundaries , @xmath127 . this substitution exactly simplifies to @xmath128 = { \cal s}[{\bar u } ] - \frac{\tau_m}{2 \delta t } \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(\eta_{k+1}-\eta_k)^2 $ ] ( see appendix  [ app - actionpure ] for more detail ) . we then change the integral measures to @xmath129 for @xmath130 and write the probability distribution in eq .   in terms of @xmath131-variables , @xmath132)}{1-z_{f}^2 } \\ & \times   \exp\left\{-   \frac { \tau_m}{2 \delta t}\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(\eta_{k+1}-\eta_k)^2\right\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the optimal path @xmath125 is a solution of the extremization of the action , which gives @xmath133 . the solution is @xmath134 with the two constants of integration @xmath135 and @xmath136 . the optimal solution ( the most likely path ) is given by , @xmath137 where we wrote @xmath138 . we note that in the time - continuum limit , this extremization is equivalent to the vanishing functional derivative of the action , @xmath139/\delta u(t ) = \tau_m \ddot{u } = 0 $ ] , which is similar to the euler - lagrange equation for the classical trajectory of a free particle in the @xmath140 coordinate transformation . the integrals in eq .  , with the probability distribution in @xmath131-variable eq .  , is now in this form , @xmath141_1^{n-1 } p ( \ { \eta_k \}_1^{n-1 } , z_f | z_i).\end{aligned}\ ] ] fortunately , they are gaussian integrals in multiple dimensions which can be calculated from the matrix integral , @xmath142 , where , in our case , @xmath143_1^{n-1}= \int \!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}\eta_1\cdots { \mathrm{d}}\eta_{n-1}$ ] , and the matrix @xmath144 and the vector @xmath145 are given by , @xmath146 noting that @xmath147 . after substituting the optimal solution @xmath125 into @xmath148 $ ] and performing the integrals over @xmath149 in eq . , we obtain the distribution of the final state fixing the initial state and the duration of time @xmath150 , @xmath151 where we have defined @xmath152 as the optimal measurement readout . this solution is exactly the same as what we would get from the change of variables of the probability distribution , @xmath153 , where @xmath154 is a time - average measurement readout . the derivation of the latter distribution is presented in the methods section of ref . @xcite . we have derived the probability distribution for the measured qubit given the fixed initial and final states , as shown in eq .   and . in this subsection , we consider computing the qubit trajectory s statistical quantities that can be written in this expectation form , @xmath155_1^{n-1}{\cal a}\,\ , \frac{p ( \ { z_k \}_1^{n-1},z_f | z_i)}{p(z_f|z_i)},\\ = & \frac{\sqrt{\text{det}{\bm m}}}{(2 \pi)^{\frac{n-1}{2 } } } \int { \rm d}[\eta_k]_1^{n-1}{\cal a}\,\ , e^{-\frac{1}{2}{\bm \eta}^t\cdot { \bm m } \cdot { \bm \eta}},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath156 is an arbitrary functional of @xmath157 at any time @xmath158 for @xmath159 and the matrix @xmath144 is the same as defined in eq .  . note that we have used the notation @xmath160 for a statistical average conditioned on fixed initial and final states , @xmath99 and @xmath97 . since the probability distribution in the @xmath131-variables is gaussian , it is preferable to write @xmath90 in terms of @xmath131 , replacing @xmath90 with @xmath161 , and then perform the integration . for example , a conditional average of @xmath157 at time @xmath158 is given by , @xmath162 expanding to second order in @xmath131 , where the primes indicate derivatives over the @xmath140-variable . in the second line , we still use the bracket @xmath160 for the conditional average of the variable @xmath131 , even if its boundary values are shifted to @xmath163 . the expectation values in terms of @xmath131 can be computed using the definition of moments in the second line of eq .  . because it is a multi - dimensional gaussian integral , we find the result from wick s theorem , @xmath164 where the left hand side is an expectation value of even numbers of @xmath131 at times @xmath165 , and the right hand side is a product of @xmath166 elements of the inverse matrix @xmath167 , summing over all possible pairings between the @xmath131 s on the left side . any other statistical averages with odd numbers of @xmath131 will vanish . as an example , pairing four @xmath131-variables , @xmath168 , yields the sum , @xmath169 . standard deviation ) of the measured qubit trajectories . the preselected state ( initial state ) and the postselected state ( final state ) are @xmath170 and @xmath171 , respectively . the total time is @xmath172 . the numerical data , plotted as gray dots , are analyzed from @xmath173 trajectories computed with time steps of the size @xmath174 , zero qubit hamiltonian , and the final selection tolerance @xmath175 . the numerical data shows excellent agreement with the theoretical solutions . the three fluctuating curves are randomly chosen individual trajectories . the inset shows the average ( dashed green ) and the most likely path ( magenta ) on a bloch sphere plotted in the @xmath92-@xmath90 plane.,width=321 ]    the elements of the inverse matrix @xmath167 are of a simple form , @xmath176 for @xmath177 ( the full matrix is presented in appendix  [ app - invmatrix ] ) . knowing these matrix elements , we can then compute any expectation values of the type shown in eq . , such as a two - time correlation , @xmath178 for @xmath179 , and statistical moments of even orders of @xmath131 , @xmath180 where we have used the discrete time notation @xmath181 and @xmath182 , and the double factorial prefactor @xmath183 for a positive integer @xmath184 . this double factorial comes from the number of ways of pairing @xmath185 identical variables .    substituting these quantities into the expectation value eq . , we then obtain the preselected and postselected average of @xmath157 , @xmath186 keeping terms up to first order of @xmath187 , which is equivalent to second order of @xmath131 because the conditional average of the second order of @xmath131 scales as @xmath187 , i.e. , @xmath188 . this solution eq . is justified in a weak - coupling limit ( @xmath189 ) , however , the full solution to all orders can be computed and is presented in appendix  [ app - fullqnd ] . using the same approximation , we can also compute another interesting quantity , the variance , keeping terms up to first order of @xmath187 , @xmath190 where its full solution to all orders in @xmath187 is also presented in appendix  [ app - fullqnd ] . finally , we compute a two - time correlation in @xmath90-coordinate , keeping up to first order in @xmath187 , @xmath191 for @xmath192 , which decreases linearly in @xmath3 for a fixed @xmath158 . we show in figure  [ fig - qnd ] , the average @xmath193 , its variance , and the optimal path ( the most likely path ) @xmath194 , for the preselected and postselected trajectories , compared with data from a numerical simulation using the monte carlo method ( see appendix  [ app - numer ] for more detail ) . we generate @xmath173 trajectories with a postselection time @xmath172 , showing an excellent agreement with the analytical solutions . we have shown in the previous section that the preselected and postselected moments ( or expected values ) for quantum trajectory variables , in the plain measurement case , can be computed by expanding the path integral around its optimal path . since the action is gaussian , however , the path integral approach can be useful in other cases as well , such as to compute the moments and expectation values of qubit trajectories when there is no final state condition ( state postselection ) , or with non - zero qubit hamiltonian . in this section , we present an alternative method using a diagrammatic perturbation expansion of the action , similar to how feynman diagrams are used in computing path integrals in quantum field theory .    in the following , we start with a brief introduction to the perturbation method ( a standard method used in quantum field theory ) and show how one can compute expectation values of system variables from moment generating functionals . we will then go on to the examples , for the case of qubit trajectories with non - zero hamiltonian and no state postselection . we note that even though most of the derivations are shown in time - continuous form for simplicity , the most straightforward derivations are in time - discretized version , and some of these are shown in appendixes  [ app - sourceterm ] and [ app - heaviside ] . let us suppose that a quantity of interest is an expectation value given in a path integral form , @xmath195 where the quantity @xmath156 is a functional of a system variable @xmath196 , the integral s action @xmath34 is a functional of the system variable @xmath196 and its conjugate variable @xmath197 , and @xmath38 is a constant normalized factor . although we are writing @xmath196 and @xmath197 as one - dimensional variables here , a generalization to arbitrary dimensional vectors is straightforward .    to compute the integral above , we write the action as a sum of two parts , @xmath198 , one being terms in the action that have bilinear forms , ( e.g. , @xmath199 ) , which we call the _ free action _ , @xmath200 and call the rest of terms in the action the _ interaction action _ @xmath201 . we then define a free generating functional @xmath202 $ ] , a path integral of the free action adding extra source terms with functions @xmath203 and @xmath204 , @xmath205 = & \,\,{\cal n}\!\!\int\!\ ! \mathcal{d } { x}\mathcal{d } { \tilde{x}}e^{{\cal s}_f + \int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}t { \tilde{x}}(t ) { \tilde{j}}(t ) + \int \!\!{\mathrm{d}}t { j}(t ) { x}(t )   } \\   = & \,\,\exp\left\{\int \!\!{\mathrm{d}}t { \mathrm{d}}t ' { j}(t ) { g}(t , t'){\tilde{j}}(t ' )    \right\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath206 is an inverse of @xmath207 in eq .   satisfying @xmath208 , and we assume that the gaussian integrals in the first line produce a factor @xmath209 that leaves no prefactor in the second line . note that these integrals converge when @xmath197 is purely imaginary . moreover , if the bilinear terms are instead quadratic terms ( e.g. , @xmath210 ) , the free action will be of the form @xmath211 , and there will be only one source term @xmath212 leading to a different generating functional @xmath213 = \exp\left\{\frac{1}{2}\int\!\!{\mathrm{d}}t{\mathrm{d}}t ' { j}(t ) g(t , t ' ) { j}(t')\right\}$ ] . the generating functional eq . is then used to compute a _ free moment _ defined as @xmath214 . the free moment of the variable @xmath215 ( or @xmath216 ) at time @xmath217 is simply a functional derivative of the generating functional over the variable @xmath218 ( or @xmath219 ) , taking both variables @xmath220 and @xmath204 to be zero at the end . by looking at the second line of eq . ( [ eq - genfunz ] ) , one can see that the simplest non - vanishing free moment is a two - point correlation function @xmath221\big|_{{j}= { \tilde{j}}= 0 } = g(t , t')$ ] . generalizing this to moments of multiple time points , we get @xmath222\bigg|_{{j}={\tilde{j}}=0},\\ { \nonumber}=&\sum_{\substack{\text{all pairings between}\\ \text{variables $ { \tilde x}$ and $ x$ } } } g(t_{j_{k_1 } } , t_{j_{k_2}})\ , \cdots \,g(t_{j_{k_{2m-1 } } } , t_{j_{k_{2m}}}),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the summation is for all possible pairings between the variables @xmath196 s and their conjugate @xmath197 s . the number of propagators in the summation on the right is equal to the number of pairs presented in the expectation bracket on the left . from this , one can see that if there is at least one unpaired variable , the moment will vanish .    using these definitions of the free moments , one can then compute a path integral as in eq .   where @xmath198 and the arbitrary functional @xmath156 is a function of the physical variable @xmath196 , @xmath223 \rangle \equiv & \,\,{\cal n}\!\ ! \int   \!\!{\cal d}{x}{\cal d}{\tilde{x}}e^{{\cal s}_f+{\cal s}_i[{x},{\tilde{x}}]}{\cal a}[{x}],\\ { \nonumber}=&{\cal a}\left[\frac{\hat \delta}{\delta { j}}\right]e^{{\cal s}_i[\frac{\hat\delta}{\delta { j}},\frac{\hat\delta}{\delta { \tilde{j}}}]}{\cal z}_f[{j},{\tilde{j}}]\bigg|_{{j}={\tilde{j}}=0},\\ = & \langle { \cal a}[{x}]e^{{\cal s}_i[{x},{\tilde{x}}]}\rangle_f , \label{eq - expa}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where in the second line we wrote the interaction action @xmath201 and the arbitrary functional @xmath156 as operators acting on the free generating functional @xmath224 $ ] . the perturbation expansion refers to the series expansion of the term @xmath225\}$ ] in eq .  . in some cases , infinite series can be summed over , giving an exact analytic result , although in many others , an approximation is needed in order to truncate the series . an approximation can be made when there is a small parameter appearing in any ( or all ) of the terms in the interaction action @xmath201 , where the expansion is straightforward , keeping terms up to any desired order of the small parameter . another type of approximation , which we present here in more detail , is similar to a semiclassical expansion in quantum mechanics , keeping terms up to any order of a small parameter @xmath226 that appears as an inverse in front of the action , for example , @xmath227 \right\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where we explicitly write the the free action in a bilinear form . to compute an expectation value of a functional @xmath156 using this action , one needs to expand the exponential of the interaction action and then evaluate the free moments in terms of the propagators . the order of expansion is controlled by the parameter @xmath226 . there is a factor of @xmath228 for every single term in the expansion of @xmath201 , and a factor of @xmath226 for every propagator that emerges . this is the basic idea behind the loop expansion in quantum theory , where @xmath226 plays the role of the @xmath229 in the feynman path integral . we will discuss more about the loop expansion in section  [ sec - smallnoiseapprox ] . this loop expansion based on the small parameter @xmath226 , in our quantum measurement case , can be considered as a small noise expansion around a saddle point solution ( a solution that extremizes the action ) . moreover , as in the feynman path integral , under the approximation of the small parameter @xmath226 , a saddle point approximation can also be applied to estimate a path integral , using an expansion of the action around the saddle point solution . for our stochastic path integral , the saddle point approximation gives an estimation of total probability density for the joint probability distribution that the path integral represents . now we can apply the perturbation approach to our quantum measurement problem . we use the joint probability density function introduced in section  [ sec - mainspi ] in its generalized form @xmath230 , a joint pdf of the measurement outcomes and the quantum states given an arbitrary set of constraints @xmath17 . statistical averages or expectation values using the joint pdf are then given in this form , @xmath231{\mathrm{d}}[r_k ] { \cal p}_{\zeta}\ , { \cal a},\\ \overset{\delta t \rightarrow 0}{\approx}&{\cal n}\!\!\!\int\!\!\!{\cal d}{\bm q}{\cal d } r { \cal d}{\bm p } \,\exp({\cal s}){\cal   a},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where , in the second line , we have taken the time - continuous limit and written the joint pdf in the path integral form as @xmath232 , noting that the time - continuous action is given by eq .  . in the following examples , we present the perturbative expansion approach in computing the statistical moments of qubit trajectories . we focus on the case when the qubit hamiltonian does not commute with the measurement operators ( @xmath233 ) and without a final state constraint . the theoretical setup for the qubit with rabi oscillation is analogous to the one used in ref . @xcite , where the qubit hamiltonian is @xmath234 . here we can calculate important quantities such as average trajectories and correlation functions , for the case when there is only an initial state fixed and not the final state . for simplicity of the diagrammatic expansions , we make a white noise approximation and variable transformations to the qubit system .     | cm | > m3.8cm| > m2.5 cm | type & labels of vertices & full forms & diagrams + type 1 ( initial ) & @xmath235 & @xmath236 &    ( b2 ) ; ( bp ) ; ( b2 )  ( bp ) ; ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ;     + type 2 & @xmath237 , @xmath238 , @xmath239 , @xmath240 , @xmath241 , @xmath242 & @xmath243 &    ( b2 ) ; ( bp ) ; ( bpp ) ; ( c0 ) ; ( c1 ) ; ( c2 ) ; ( b2 )  ( bp ) ; ( bp)(bpp ) ; ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; ( bp ) sin ( c1 ) ; ( bp ) sin ( c2 ) ;     + type 3 & @xmath244 , @xmath245 , @xmath246 & @xmath247 &    ( b2 ) ; ( bp ) ; ( bpp ) ; ( b2 )  ( bp ) ; ( bp)(bpp ) ; ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ;     +    we make an idealized white noise limit on the qubit measurement . the variance of the measurement readout distribution @xmath248 is assumed to be very broad , which in this case means @xmath249 , justifying an approximation of the two gaussian distribution in eq .   to a single gaussian distribution , @xmath250 ( see appendix  [ app - whitenoise ] for more detail ) . the measurement readout is then approximated to be its mean plus a noise , @xmath251 , where @xmath71 is the gaussian noise with variance @xmath252 , independent of the qubit state @xmath90 . because the nature of this noise is highly fluctuating , in the derivation of the state update equations , we need to keep an expansion up to a second order in @xmath70 , replacing @xmath253 @xcite . this leads to the it stochastic differential equations @xcite ,    [ eq - itoform ] @xmath254    where @xmath255 are bloch sphere coordinates for the qubit and a dephasing rate @xmath256 is now a total dephasing rate @xmath257 . the white noise @xmath71 has a gaussian probability distribution @xmath258 .    before substituting the state update above into the action of the path integral , we can make changes in the variables of the system in order to simplify the later perturbation process . this is to avoid infinite series related to the linear terms in eqs .  . we define a new set of variables @xmath259 where @xmath260 and @xmath261 is a matrix that diagonalizes the linear terms of eqs . , @xmath262 the eigenvalues are @xmath263 , @xmath264 and @xmath265 , where we define @xmath266 . the diagonalizing matrix @xmath261 and the transformation of the system variables @xmath255 are described in the matrix equation , @xmath267 which gives the following transformation : @xmath268 , @xmath269 , and @xmath270 , and the inverse transformation : @xmath271 , @xmath272 , and @xmath273 . the stochastic differential equations with this new set of variables are ,    [ eq - transformsde ] @xmath274    where we have defined @xmath275 and @xmath276 , @xmath277 , @xmath278 . now we are ready to construct the action of the path integral , substituting the update equations and the log - likelihood function @xmath279 = - \frac{1}{2}\xi^2 $ ] into the action eq .  . we write the action in two separated terms , @xmath198 , where    [ eq - actions ] @xmath280    are the free and interaction actions , respectively . we note that the additional term @xmath281 is not merely a time - continuous form of the first term in eq . ( we only consider the initial condition ) . this is because the actual initial condition term @xmath282 can be removed simply by integrating over the initial variable @xmath16 , forcing the condition @xmath283 to the variables at time @xmath284 . in place of the initial term , when we write the free action eq .   in this form , @xmath285 , there will be leftover terms which contribute to the term @xmath281 , resulting in , @xmath286 this can be easily shown with a discretized version of the path integral , which is presented in more detail in appendix  [ app - sourceterm ] . we note also that , in the rest of the paper , the time integral is always from @xmath287 to @xmath288 , unless stated otherwise .    the propagators ( or green s functions ) are computed from the inverse green s functions , which in this particular case are @xmath289 , where @xmath290 ( or @xmath291 ) for the first three terms in eq .  , and @xmath292 for the noise term . with an identity relation , @xmath293 , the propagators ( green s functions , or two - point correlation functions ) are given by ,    [ eq - propagators ] @xmath294    where @xmath295 for the first three lines . it is important to note that @xmath296 is a left continuous heaviside step function , i.e. , @xmath297 and @xmath298 , causing the two - point correlation functions for @xmath291 to vanish when @xmath299 . this is a result of the it interpretation we chose in writing the state update equation in eq .  . this can also be verified with the discretized version of the path integral and is presented in appendix  [ app - heaviside ] . to compute quantities such as an expectation value @xmath300 where @xmath156 is an arbitrary function written in the form of eq .  , one needs to expand the exponential @xmath301 in a power series of @xmath201 , and looks for terms that contribute to its result . fortunately , from the two - point correlation functions eq . , we know that system variables @xmath291 can only connect with the their conjugate variables at earlier times , e.g. , @xmath302 can only connect with @xmath303 if @xmath304 . knowing this helps predict which terms will contribute to the sum of the expansion . for example , to show that @xmath305 , we look at terms in the interaction action eq .   and see that all of them contain exactly one conjugate variable in each . looking at the propagators in eqs .  , we know that it is impossible for any higher order terms in the expansion of @xmath301 to have all conjugate variables matched with system variables at their later times . this is because every time we want to find terms with system variables at later times , there will be at least one more unmatched conjugate variable appearing . therefore , there are no other contributions apart from 1 , resulting in @xmath306 .    in order to make the calculation of moments @xmath307 more systematic , we develop diagrammatic rules to ease the process of keeping track of the perturbative expansion . each term in the expansion of @xmath301 is a combination of 12 additive terms shown in the interaction action eq .  , with repeated appearance also possible . the 12 interaction terms ( _ interaction vertices _ ) are shown in table  [ tb - vertices ] with their labeling names and examples of their full integral forms , where we use the latter to characterize the vertices into three types shown as the three rows . at the end , all combinations of the interaction vertices ( all additive terms in the expansion of @xmath301 ) are then multiplied with the function of interest @xmath156 before taking the free expectation @xmath308 . the functional @xmath156 is a function of system variables and noise variables ( i.e. , @xmath309 ) at all times . these variables are called _ ending _ vertices . let us use the word _ combination _ for an individual term combining interaction vertices ( from additive terms in the expansion @xmath301 ) and the ending vertices ( from the function @xmath156 ) . one can determine which combinations are non - vanishing and compute their values by following these diagrammatic rules :    * a non - vanishing combination of vertices should contain equal number of each of the system variables ( @xmath291 ) and their conjugates ( @xmath310 ) , and there should be even number of the noise variables ( @xmath71 ) . * the system variable can only be connected to its conjugate at earlier time , while the noise variable @xmath71 connects to another noise variable at the same time . the connections are presented as ` edges ' , or lines joining vertices . the number of edges for each vertex is equal to the number of variables it contains ( graphical representations are shown in table  [ tb - vertices ] , in the column of ` diagrams ' ) . a non - vanishing combination can have any number of vertices , but edges have to all be connected . * a non - vanishing combination is presented by connected diagrams with the ending vertices ( variables with their time arguments being in the range of @xmath311 $ ] ) on the most left and their time arguments clearly stated . the time ordering decreases from left to right , with variables at the same time lining up in the same vertical line , and the vertices with initial conditions ( @xmath287 ) on the most right . * a result of the free expectation value ( @xmath312 ) for each combination is computed by taking into account the constants ( i.e. , @xmath313 ) and integrals attached to each of the interaction vertices , the propagators ( the green s function ) , and the numbers of possible ways to connect diagrams . from the point of view of graphical diagrams , edges represent propagators , and points common to more than one edge correspond to integrals over time . moreover , if there are @xmath166 repeated vertices in a combination , it needs to be multiplied by a factor @xmath314 ( resulting from coefficients in the expansion of @xmath301 ) . however , these factors usually cancel with the number of possible ways to connect the repeated vertices .    ) ( a ) an ending vertex connects with an initial vertex ( @xmath315 ) . ( b ) two ending vertices connect with two interaction vertices ( @xmath316 and @xmath317 ) . ( c ) two ending vertices connect with six interaction vertices ( from left - right , top - bottom order : @xmath318 , @xmath317 , @xmath317 , @xmath319 , @xmath320 and @xmath320 ) . the unequal length of horizontal edges following the ending vertices @xmath321 and @xmath322 indicate that @xmath323.,width=219 ]    in figure  [ fig - exdiagram ] , we show examples of non - vanishing diagrams showing connections of one and two ending vertices . for each of the diagrams , we can determine its contribution by explicitly writing out its full form and computing its integrals . in the following subsections , we present some of the calculations using these diagrams and rules to estimate statistical averages of the qubit trajectories . we note that it is also possible to construct different diagrammatic rules based on different formations of the path integrals . for example , one can perform integrals over the readout noise ( e.g. , the noise @xmath71 ) , transforming the action in eq . and to a new action that contains only the system variables @xmath324 . in this case , the diagrams will be completely different from the one we presented above , but still giving exactly the same results for the statistical quantities related to the system variables . here , we choose to present the diagrammatic rules with explicit noise variables because of the ability to compute correlation functions between the noise and the system states , as shown in section  [ sec - noisesyscorr ] . the diagrammatic rules help in determining non - vanishing terms , but we need a systematic approach to keep track of the order of expansion , especially when there are infinitely many ways to construct diagrams . we consider the small noise approximation around the saddle point solution mentioned in section  [ sec - briefintro ] . to obtain the action of the form in eq . , we introduce a small parameter denoted by @xmath226 to the noise term of eqs .  , controlling the noise variance in the qubit dynamics , leading to a modified action , @xmath325 leaving all terms in the interaction action intact . we then rescale the conjugate variables by replacing @xmath326 , @xmath327 and @xmath328 ( as well as changing variables in the source term , e.g. , @xmath329 ) , noting that the rescaling of the auxiliary variables does not affect the qubit dynamics . since all terms in the action eq . , except for the noise term , have exactly one conjugate variable ( see eqs .  ) , the resulting action is then in the desired form , @xmath330,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath331 are the rescaled conjugate variables . following the discussion in section  [ sec - briefintro ] and the diagrammatic rules presented in the previous section , the order of expansion can be determined by counting the number of edges and vertices of a diagram . each vertex in a diagram contributes a factor of @xmath228 to its result , while each edge ( which represents a propagator ) contributes a factor of @xmath226 . therefore , each term ( diagram ) in the expansion carries a factor of @xmath332 , where @xmath333 , @xmath334 , and @xmath335 are numbers of its external edges ( edges that connect with ending vertices ) , internal edges , and vertices , respectively . this corresponds to the loop expansion where one instead counts the number of loops from @xmath336 , which leads to another way of writing the order of the expansion @xmath337 , noting that the number of external edges @xmath333 is fixed for each set of ending vertices . we show how to count the power of @xmath226 of the diagrams shown in figure  [ fig - exdiagram ] . the numbers of edges , vertices , and loops are as follows : ( a ) @xmath338 , @xmath339 , @xmath340 , @xmath341 , ( b ) @xmath342 , @xmath343 , @xmath344 , @xmath341 , ( c ) @xmath342 , @xmath345 , @xmath346 , @xmath347 , giving the zeroth(zeroth ) , zeroth(first ) , and first(second ) orders of loop(@xmath226 ) , respectively .      as an example of how to use the diagrammatic rules to compute statistical expectation values , we show a derivation of @xmath348 , an average of the @xmath90-coordinate of the quantum trajectories . from the variable transformation in eq . , we know that @xmath349 , therefore we can write the expectation value in terms of the free moments and then compute the diagrams from the vertices in table  [ tb - vertices ] , @xmath350 \coordinate[label = below:$v_t$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$p_{v0}$ ] ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\ , + \,\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate[label = below:$w_t$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$p_{w0}$ ] ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture},\\ { \nonumber}=&\left\langle { v}(t)\,{v}_i \!\!\!\int \!\!\!{\mathrm{d}}t'\ , { p_v}(t')\delta ( t ' ) \right\rangle_f \\ & { \nonumber}+ \left\langle { w}(t)\,{w}_i \!\!\!\int \!\!\!{\mathrm{d}}t'\ , { p_w}(t')\delta ( t ' ) \right\rangle_f,\\ { \nonumber}= & \,{v}_i \!\!\ ! \int \!\!{\mathrm{d}}t ' g_{{v}}(t , t')\delta(t')+{w}_i \!\!\!\int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}t ' g_{{w}}(t , t')\delta(t ' ) , \\ = & \ , { v}_i e^{{\lambda}_2 t } + { w}_i e^{{\lambda}_3 t } , \quad \text{where   $ t \ge 0$},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the green s functions are from eqs .  . from the types of vertices in table  [ tb - vertices ] , there is only one possibility connecting the ending vertices @xmath351 and @xmath352 with @xmath315 and @xmath320 , respectively . this is because choosing other vertices will lead to at least one unmatched noise variable @xmath71 , which , when trying to pair it with another vertex containing @xmath71 , will result in more unmatched conjugate variables .    as a result , the expectation value eq . is explicitly found by transforming back to the system variables @xmath255 , @xmath353 which is exactly the same as the solution we would get from averaging over all possible noise realizations in the it stochastic master equations in eqs .   and solving for an average of @xmath354 . the averages of @xmath92 and @xmath93 can be computed in the similar way . we note that the exact solution for the average trajectory involves only the diagrams with zeroth order of the small parameter @xmath226 ( @xmath355 ) . particularly , one can show that the average trajectory coincides with a saddle point solution of the action eq .   when @xmath356 . the vanishing functional derivatives of the action over the variables @xmath331 gives the exact same equations eqs . ( though , the noise variable @xmath71 is no longer a stochastic function ) , while the vanishing functional derivatives over @xmath357 leads to the differential equations for conjugate variables ,    [ eq - saddlepointp ] @xmath358    where the noise variable is now a solution of extremizing the action over @xmath71 giving , @xmath359 as the noise parameter @xmath226 decreases to zero , as does the noise term @xmath71 , the ordinary differential equations of @xmath357 are uncoupled from eqs .   and their solution ( a saddle point solution ) is then the same as the average trajectory , the solution of eqs .   when @xmath360 . another example is a correlation function between the system variable @xmath90 and the noise variable @xmath71 , given by @xmath361 . since there are now two ending vertices , the situation is more complicated and there are infinitely many ways to connect the diagrams . however , we can compute terms to the lowest order of the loop expansion , which in this case is the zeroth loop ( tree - level diagrams ) . there are in total six contributions to the correlation function , as shown in the following , @xmath362 \coordinate [ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = left:$\xi_{t_2}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of b2,label = above:$v_{t_1}$](a1 ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = above:$p_{v}$](ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( bp ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+ \!\!\!\!\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate [ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = left:$\xi_{t_2}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left = of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( bp ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}+ \!\!\!\!\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate [ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = left:$\xi_{t_2}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$w$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left = of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( bp ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\\ { \nonumber}&+\!\!\!\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate [ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = left:$\xi_{t_2}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of b2,label = above:$w_{t_1}$](a1 ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = above:$p_{w}$](ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( bp ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+\!\!\!\ ! \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate [ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = left:$\xi_{t_2}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$w$,label = above:$w$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left = of ap , label = above:$w_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( bp ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}+ \!\!\!\!\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate [ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = left:$\xi_{t_2}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$w$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left = of ap , label = above:$w_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( bp ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture},\\ { \nonumber}= & \,\kappa_2 \!\!\int \!\!{\mathrm{d}}t ' g_{{v}}(t_1,t ' ) g_{\xi}(t',t_2)\\ { \nonumber}&+\alpha { v}_i^2\!\ ! \int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}t ' g_{{v}}(t_1 , t')g_{\xi}(t',t_2)g_{{v}}(t ' , 0)^2 + \cdots,\\ { \nonumber}=&\ , e^{{\lambda}_2 t_1}\left(\kappa_2 e^{-{\lambda}_2 t_2}+\alpha { v}_i^2 e^{{\lambda}_2 t_2}+\alpha { v}_i { w}_i e^{{\lambda}_3 t_2}\right)\\ & + e^{{\lambda}_3 t_1}\left(\kappa_3 e^{-{\lambda}_3 t_2}+\alpha { w}_i^2 e^{{\lambda}_3 t_2}+\alpha { v}_i { w}_i e^ { { \lambda}_2 t_2}\right),\end{aligned}\ ] ] where the superscript @xmath363 in the first line indicates the number of loops in the expansion , and , in the third line , we show only the integral form of the first two diagrams . this result involves diagrams with first order of the small noise parameter @xmath226 . the definitions of the parameters such as @xmath364 are defined in the discussion of eqs .  - . we note that this result eq . is valid for @xmath304 and it is zero otherwise , because of the special properties of the left continuous heaviside step function @xmath296 . this can be interpreted as the noise being correlated with the qubit state at later times but not with the state at earlier times . this property of the system variable and noise the correlation function is also mentioned in ref . @xcite . let us next consider correlation functions between system variables at two points in time , such as @xmath365 and @xmath366 . both of them can be written in terms of correlation functions between the transformed system variables @xmath367 , for example , the @xmath90-@xmath90-correlation is , @xmath368 . as in the previous example , we keep terms up to the lowest order of loops , which is the zeroth order . each term of the correlation functions , for example @xmath369 , involves 10 different diagrams , thus there are in total @xmath370 diagrams for computing the @xmath90-@xmath90 correlation function . we present in the following three samples of diagrams and their integral forms for the correlation function @xmath371 , @xmath372 \coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$p_{v0}$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of b2,label = above:$v_{t_1}$](a1 ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = above:$p_{v0}$](ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( ap ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$p_v$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = above:$p_v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+ \,\,\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8 cm ] \coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$p_v$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\\ { \nonumber } & + \text{(7 more similar diagrams)},\\ { \nonumber}= & \,\la { v}(t_1 ) \ra \la { v}(t_2 ) \ra \\ { \nonumber}&+\kappa_2 ^ 2\!\ ! \int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}t ' { \mathrm{d}}t '' g_{{v}}(t_1 , t')g_{{v}}(t_2 , t'')g_{\xi}(t ' , t'')\\ { \nonumber}&+\alpha \kappa_2 { v}_i^2 \!\!\int\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}t ' { \mathrm{d}}t''\big\{g_{{v}}(t_1,t')g_{{v}}(t_2,t'')\\ & \qquad \quad g_{\xi}(t ' , t'')g_{{v}}(t',0)g_{{v}}(t',0)\big\ } + \cdots,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where , apart from the first trivial diagram , each initial vertex ( @xmath373 or @xmath374 ) can connect to three possible interaction vertices ( @xmath245 , @xmath239 , or @xmath240 ) . as a result , there are total of @xmath375 possible ways , and they are presented in appendix  [ app - fullform ] ( all diagrams except the first one are of the first order of @xmath226 ) . the similar kind of calculation is applied to the other correlation functions @xmath376 , @xmath377 and @xmath378 . the correlation function between @xmath93 and @xmath90 can be calculated in a similar way , with the same types of diagrams , but with extra prefactors @xmath379 and @xmath380 , @xmath381 where the coefficients @xmath382 and @xmath383 come from the transformation of variables shown in eq .  . we compare the theoretical results , specifically the @xmath90-@xmath90 correlation computed in the previous section , with numerically simulated quantum trajectories . although , the solution of @xmath365 is not explicitly presented here in this paper , as it is too lengthy , it can be computed in a similar way as shown in eq .   and also in appendix  [ app - fullform ] . we show in figure  [ fig - corrlimit](a ) and [ fig - corrlimit](d ) sampled individual trajectories generated from the monte carlo method ( appendix  [ app - numer ] ) , in the regime where @xmath384 . the theoretical variances are computed from the @xmath90-@xmath90 correlation function , and they are shown in panels ( b ) and ( e ) along with the variances from the numerical trajectories . in the top panel , for efficient detection @xmath385 , the numerical variance increases in time and gets saturated ( not shown ) at around a value of @xmath386 for a long enough time , indicating that the qubit states at the later times are distributed throughout the perimeter of the @xmath93-@xmath90 plane of the bloch sphere . the variance from the tree - level diagram approximation fails to exactly capture the long - time behaviour , as we can see that the discrepancy in the panel ( b ) starts to grow as time increases . however , for the inefficient detection case , @xmath387 in figure  [ fig - corrlimit](e ) , we can see that the theoretical approximation can explain the behaviour quite well , predicting the saturated variance at a value of @xmath388 . to compute this quantity theoretically , one takes a limit @xmath389 of the calculated variance @xmath390 .    for the correlation function at two different times , we define a covariance as @xmath391 \equiv \langle z(t_1)z(t_2 ) \rangle - \langle z(t_1 ) \rangle \langle z(t_2 ) \rangle$ ] , and show in figure  [ fig - corrlimit](c ) and [ fig - corrlimit](f ) its numerical and theoretical comparisons . we plot the covariance for @xmath392 and @xmath393 where @xmath394 has its value ranged from @xmath395 to @xmath396 . for the efficient detection case , shown in the panel ( c ) , the agreement between the theory and the simulation is better for the short time case , @xmath397 . for the inefficient detection case , panel ( f ) , the agreement is excellent for both @xmath398 and @xmath399 . since our theoretical results are derived with the small noise expansion around the saddle point solution ( or the average solution , see section  [ sec - averagesol ] ) using @xmath226 as an expansion tracking parameter , the diagrammatic approximation method works well whenever the qubit trajectories are narrowly distributed around its average . this happens in the short - time regime when the diffusion is still small from the initial state , as well as in the regime when the dynamics is strongly suppressed by the dephasing mechanism ( when the detection efficiency is low ) . we note that for the long - time limit , one needs to compute higher order terms which contain more complex diagrams . however , there are other approaches , such as using the qubit master equation to approximate the correlation functions in the stationary limit and calculate spectral densities of the measurement readouts . these can be found in the works on continuous measurement of mesoscopic electronics such as in refs . @xcite . comparing to these approaches , our results give much more accurate correlation functions at short times . we can extend the discussion of the stochastic path integral formalism to its application to the system under continuous measurement with feedback control . the feedback loop consists of getting information about the system state via the measurement , and feeding back a control signal to the system in order to alter the state as desired . one of the most intuitive models of the feedback loop is that the system hamiltonian changes as a function of the system state , which then can be written as a function of the most recent measurement readout . for example , in our qubit measurement case , taking into account additional time delay @xmath400 , the hamiltonian at any time @xmath217 can be written as a function of the measurement readout in the past , @xmath401 , where the parameters @xmath101 and @xmath402 , as defined in section  [ sec - qubit ] , are now functions of the measurement readout @xmath403 at time @xmath404 . we consider an ideal case with instantaneous feedback @xmath405 , i.e. , the measurement readout at time @xmath217 immediately changes the system parameters which are used in computing the state update at the time . this way , the formulation of the stochastic path integral as time - local , its action s extremization equations , and the diagrammatic expansion we presented so far are perfectly applicable . the only modification needed is to treat the readout - dependent hamiltonian parameters as functions of @xmath406 such as @xmath407 and @xmath408 ( or as functions of the quantum state at the time ) . in this section , we present a few examples of the continuous measurement of a qubit with feedback , one with a linear feedback in the form @xmath409 , and another with a state - dependent linear feedback to stabilize a qubit s oscillation . let us consider an instantaneous feedback loop in a qubit measurement introduced in section  [ sec - qubit ] , with @xmath410 and the qubit rabi frequency being a function of the measurement readout . we assume a linear form of the rabi frequency as @xmath411 where @xmath406 is the readout as a function of time and @xmath412 are constant parameters characterizing the bare rabi oscillation and the linear feedback , respectively . we will see later in this subsection that this type of feedback can stabilize pre - determined ( arbitrary ) quantum states . this feedback loop in eq .   has the advantage of fast processing because the qubit hamiltonian depends directly on the value of the measurement readout , requiring no knowledge of the qubit state . for simplicity , we limit our discussion to an ideal case in which the qubit is measured with an efficient detector and no extra environment dephasing . in this regime , we can re - parametrize the qubit bloch vector into a single state parameter @xmath413 where @xmath414 and @xmath415 ( we set @xmath416 in this case ) . we note that , with this linear feedback eq .  , a typical step size for the qubit state defined as @xmath417 has average drift @xmath418 and diffusion @xmath419 of the first order of the time step . thus , the step size is still small . the statistics of quantum trajectories with this instantaneous feedback can be investigated following the same procedure presented in previous sections for the no - feedback qubit measurement . we start with writing the joint probability distribution of the trajectories , and then transform it into a path integral form . the action of the stochastic path integral with the feedback rabi frequency @xmath420 is given by , @xmath421 where @xmath422 , @xmath413 , and @xmath94 are functions of time , omitting the time argument . this is a generalization of the action given in ref . @xcite where the quantum jump in qubit measurement is analyzed . we note here that in eq .  , we have chosen to use the @xmath70-expansion in both the state update and the readout probability distribution , because we are interested in investigating the action - extremized solutions , the optimal paths of the system . the optimal paths of the action in eq .   are obtained by extremizing the action over all variables @xmath422 , @xmath413 , and @xmath94 , leading to two ordinary differential equations and one constraint ,    [ eq - fbodes ] @xmath423    with arbitrary boundary conditions on the variable @xmath413 and @xmath422 . the solutions of these equations are the most likely paths of the system . by writing the action in the form @xmath424)$ ] , where @xmath425 is a _ stochastic hamiltonian _ , we can examine the most likely paths by using phase space analysis  @xcite , motivated by the phase space concept in classical mechanics . substituting the @xmath94 constraint in eqs .   into the action ( equivalent to integrating the path integral over the variable @xmath426 ) , we obtain the action and the stochastic hamiltonian in terms of only the system variable @xmath413 and its conjugate @xmath422 , @xmath427 this quantity is explicitly time - independent and so it is a constant of motion for the most likely path , a solution of the ordinary differential equations in eqs . let us define the stochastic energy @xmath428 , and then solve for the conjugate variable @xmath429 as a function of @xmath413 and @xmath333 from eq .  . each value of @xmath333 will then correspond to a curve in the phase space portrait , describing dynamics of the most likely paths , the same way the individual classical trajectories are depicted as constant - energy curves on a phase space plot .    as an example , we show in figure  [ fig - phasespace](a ) the phase space portrait for the pure linear feedback case ( i.e. , @xmath430 ) , where we plot the conjugate variable @xmath422 as a function of @xmath413 , @xmath431 for different values of @xmath333 . this is an interesting case . we can see from the phase space plot in figure  [ fig - phasespace](a ) that there exists some attractors to which all states eventually limit to . these attractors coincide with the divergence of the conjugate variable @xmath429 in eq .  , and also appear as stationary points where @xmath432 in eqs .  . solving these equations , we obtain the attractors are located at @xmath433 and @xmath434 where @xmath435 is an even integer . these attractors may be interpreted as stabilized states achieved by turning on a linear feedback @xmath436 and turning off the bare qubit frequency @xmath437 . they are effectively the new collapse points , rather than at the poles of the bloch sphere , i.e. , @xmath438 ( @xmath439 ) . considering only angles between @xmath395 and @xmath440 , for the positive feedback @xmath441 , as @xmath442 increases from zero , the stabilized states @xmath443 move from @xmath395 and @xmath444 toward each other and coalesce at @xmath445 when @xmath446 ; whereas in the negative feedback @xmath447 , as @xmath442 grows , the stabilized states move toward each other in the region of @xmath444 and @xmath448 and coalesce at @xmath449 when @xmath450 . we simulate numerical qubit trajectories using the monte carlo method ( appendix  [ app - numer ] ) , showing that individual trajectories initialized at different states are eventually pinned to the stabilized states as predicted from the most likely path phase space . this is shown in figure  [ fig - phasespace](b ) for three different initial conditions , along with their most likely paths .      in this subsection , we show an example using the path integral to compute a correlation function for a system with linear feedback loop . the feedback loop of this example resembles the one used in the solid - state qubit measurement in ref . @xcite which has been adapted and realized in the transmon qubit experiment  @xcite . the theoretical setup is an oscillating qubit ( a double quantum dot ) continuously monitored by a near quantum - limited detector ( a quantum point contact ) , of which the hamiltonian and the measurement operator are in the same form as presented in section  [ sec - qubit ] . we as before consider the ideal symmetric qubit case where @xmath410 , and the qubit is measured with an efficient detector with no extra environment dephasing . the qubit state is represented by a single parameter @xmath413 where @xmath451 and @xmath452 . the stochastic master equation for the qubit state , in the @xmath70-expansion similar to eqs . ( stratonovich form , as discussed in ref . @xcite ) , is given by , @xmath453 where @xmath413 and @xmath71 are functions of time and @xmath454 is the feedback rabi frequency , which is assumed to be a function of the qubit state @xmath413 . we later neglect the second term on the right side of eq .   because we consider a diffusive rabi limit @xmath455 . the feedback protocol considered in this subsection ( and also in ref  @xcite ) is a linear feedback designed to stabilize the quantum oscillation of the qubit state , against the random phase kicks due to the measurement . the desired qubit evolution is described by @xmath456 and @xmath457 where we define @xmath458 as the target oscillation frequency . the difference between the actual phase @xmath413 and the target phase @xmath459 , denoted as @xmath460 , is used to control the oscillating part of the qubit hamiltonian . therefore , we write the feedback rabi frequency as , @xmath461 , where @xmath462 is the dimensionless feedback factor . this feedback loop continuously corrects the random changes of the state made by the measurement so that the outcome trajectory closely follows the desired qubit oscillation . let us assume that the phase difference @xmath463 is a slowly changing variable as compared to the oscillation with the desired frequency @xmath458 . therefore , we can average the fluctuating process described in eq .   over the oscillation period @xmath464 , taking @xmath463 to be constant during this period . the period @xmath465 will eventually be our new time scale . we define a new noise @xmath466 as a time - average of the last term of eq .   over the oscillation period , @xmath467 with its zero ensemble average @xmath468 and its variance being @xmath469 . we then can simplify the differential equation eq .   to one in terms of the phase difference @xmath463 , @xmath470 with the new time scale @xmath465 .    here we will use the above differential equation eq .   to compute a correlation function @xmath471 using the path integral approach . following the derivation of the action in eq .   and where @xmath472 and @xmath473 are now our new system variable and a noise probability density function , we obtain the action in this form , @xmath474 omitting the boundary terms . note that we have written the pure imaginary conjugate variable ( @xmath475 ) explicitly with @xmath476 . as before , we can compute an average quantity by integrating the paths @xmath477 . so , we first write the correlation function @xmath478 in terms of the phase difference @xmath463 , then average over the oscillation period @xmath465 , getting rid of the fast fluctuating parts , and we are left with @xmath479\ra \cos ( \delta_d \tau)/2 + \sin[\delta \theta(t)-\delta \theta(t+\tau)]\ra \sin ( \delta_d \tau)/2 $ ] . the correlation function apparently can be written in terms of the real part and imaginary part of the following quantity , @xmath480 where we have used the same notations , such as @xmath481 for the integral over all possible paths @xmath482 , and @xmath38 for a normalized factor .    the gaussian integral over @xmath466 in eq is quite straightforward resulting in a bilinear term in @xmath483 , which then leads to another gaussian integral of @xmath483 . as one would expect , these integrals generate another prefactor that cancels the normalized factor @xmath38 . consequently , the last integral over @xmath463 is left as @xmath484 where the exponent @xmath485 is given by , @xmath486 this effective action can be transformed further using the integration by parts , for example , @xmath487 , assuming that the boundary conditions for @xmath463 at both end points vanish . we then write the action in terms of the inverse green s function and the source term as discussed in section  [ sec - briefintro ] , @xmath488 where the inverse green s function , the green s function , and a particular form of the source term are given by , @xmath489    performing the last gaussian functional integral over @xmath463 gives , @xmath490 for the positive value of the time difference @xmath394 . this quantity is a real number , therefore we obtain the correlation function , @xmath491 assuming that @xmath492 . this result agrees with the solution found in ref . @xcite which is presented in different notation . we have developed and extended the stochastic path integral technique to study statistical behaviour of a quantum system under weak continuous measurement , as well as measurement with feedback , presented with several qubit examples . the path integral approach is constructed based on the joint probability distribution of the measurement records , which is then extended to the distribution of quantum states , describing all possible quantum trajectories . we have shown that with this path integral and its action formalism , the optimal dynamics , such as the most likely paths , can be obtained naturally from the extremization of the action , whereas other statistical quantities can be achieved from direct integration or perturbation theory . in the case of plain measurement of a qubit , we have derived analytic solutions for the average trajectory , the variance , and the correlation functions conditioning on the fixed initial and final states , which show an excellent agreement with the numerically simulated data . we have also presented a diagrammatic perturbation method used in computing expectation values and correlation functions of quantum trajectories , and elaborated it with examples of the qubit with rabi oscillation case . the variances and multi - time correlation functions of qubit trajectories in the short - time regime have been revealed using this method given initial conditions , and the results are in good agreement with the numerical simulation . moreover , we have considered quantum measurement with feedback control , using the action principle to investigate the dynamics of the most likely paths of a qubit with linear feedback on its oscillating frequency . we have discovered that the direct linear feedback , manipulating the qubit hamiltonian instantly using the measurement readout , can stabilize the qubit state to arbitrarily chosen pure states . we have also considered the example of the feedback loop stabilizing the qubit rabi frequency introduced in ref . @xcite , and we have computed the correlation function for the qubit trajectory using the path integration method . so far , the stochastic path integral formalism in the context of continuous quantum measurement has been proven to be useful in studying the statistics of quantum trajectories ; however , there are some unsolved issues that need to be further explored . one is the limitation of the statistical average solutions derived from the perturbation expansion theory . only the first few orders of the expansion have been computed , resulting in the solutions that are valid only in the certain parameter regimes . we hope to find solutions in an arbitrary regime , possibly with some modifications of our approach . another issue is the assumption of the instantaneous feedback , which can be difficult to realize in experiments . feedback loops modelled with time delays will be taken into account in future work . we thank j. dressel for discussions , helpful comments on the manuscript , and for collaborating in our first paper on this subject @xcite . we thank i. siddiqi and s. g. rajeev for discussions . this work was supported by us army research office grants no . w911nf-09 - 0 - 01417 and no . w911nf-15 - 1 - 0496 , by national science foundation grant dmr-1506081 , by john templeton foundation grant i d 58558 , and by development and promotion of science and technology talents project thailand . there are interesting comparisons between the path integral formalism we introduced in the main text and other path integral approaches built upon feynman path integral in quantum mechanics @xcite . as we have shown , our formalism is aimed at describing the probability distribution of quantum trajectories , paths of state of a system under continuous measurement , on its quantum state space ( such as hilbert space for pure states ) . each individual quantum trajectory in the path integral is realizable and tractable , as demonstrated experimentally , such as , in solid - state systems @xcite . however , for other path integral formalisms developed from the feynman path integral to investigate quantum systems under measurement @xcite , the evolution of the quantum state ( or wavefunction ) is based on interference of all possible classical paths in measurable configuration space ( such as the system s positions or spin states ) . thus , in this latter case , the integrations are over configuration coordinates of the measured system .    despite the differences in forms , the two approaches mentioned above can be related . the path integral via feynman s concept can be used to compute the probability distribution of the measurement results , which is then , as shown in the main text , one of the most important ingredients in constructing our stochastic paths in quantum state space . to elaborate this connection in more detail , we consider the path integral method presented by caves @xcite , for measurements providing information about the position @xmath493 of a nonrelativistic , one - dimensional quantum system , evolved in time . in that approach , the effect of measurements is to restrict the sum over paths by weighting each path differently depending on the measurement results . these weights appear in the path integral in ref . @xcite as the ` resolution amplitude ' , @xmath494 , which also accounts for the imprecision of the measurements . let us assume instantaneous position measurements that are equally distributed in times , at @xmath495 where @xmath496 , giving measurement readouts denoted by @xmath497 . the joint probability amplitude @xmath498 of the measurement records , and that the system is at @xmath499 at time @xmath500 , given an initial wavefunction @xmath501 , is in this form , @xmath502 where the position coordinates are denoted by @xmath503 at time @xmath504 , and the integral measure is defined as @xmath505 . we note here that we have modified the ordering of the measurements from the original version by caves , in which he assumed that the measurements start only after the initial state has evolved for time @xmath70 . we assume that this change has an infinitesimal effect on the probability amplitude as @xmath60 . the first bracketed term on the right hand side of eq .   describes the influence of the measurement . without it , the path integral will be the usual feynman path integral , exactly equal to @xmath506 or the wave function at the final time @xmath150 .    from eq . , the joint probability distribution function ( pdf ) of the sequence of measurement readouts can be obtained by integrating the square of the probability amplitude over the final coordinate @xmath499 , @xmath507 given the initial wavefunction @xmath501 .    in order to see that this joint pdf in eq . is the same as what we have earlier in the main text ( in this special case ) , we first rewrite this term @xmath508 as a probability amplitude right after one measurement ( @xmath509 ) and one unitary transformation ( @xmath510 ) . then , we obtain a probability density function for the first measurement outcome as @xmath511 . we further introduce an updated wavefunction @xmath512 , a result of a state @xmath513 that has gone through one measurement @xmath514 and one unitary transformation @xmath510 , @xmath515 where the denominator assures the correct norm of the wavefunction . then , the joint distribution of the measurement readouts of the first two times is given by @xmath516 . repeating this procedure further to the next measurement readouts @xmath517 , at the end , we obtain the full joint pdf , @xmath518 as a product of the conditional probability density functions , defined in a general form as @xmath519 . this is the joint pdf of the measurement readouts , the main component of the joint pdf in eq .  . to obtain an analogous form of the joint pdf in eq .  , we add probability density functions of the quantum state ( or wavefunction ) as delta functions to every single time step . we obtain the full joint pdf , @xmath520 where the update state in this case is written as @xmath521 as in eq .  . the integer @xmath6 is the dimension of the vector @xmath522 ( which maybe generalized to infinite dimension via a functional form of the @xmath523-function ) , and @xmath524 is called a joint probability density function of the measurement outcomes @xmath525 and the wavefunctions @xmath526 of the measured system . we note that our path integral presented in the main text deals with mixed states instead of pure states , and the system we consider is the qubit ( or spin ) system with the discrete basis , i.e. , @xmath527 . therefore , the operator @xmath514 in the discussion above is equivalent to what we have as the measurement operator @xmath528 , defined in section  [ sec - qubit ] , and the resolution function is a gaussian function , @xmath529 for @xmath530 and @xmath531 . it is also worth mentioning that in our approach , the stochastic trajectories in quantum state spaces can be thought of as classical trajectories in configuration space , such as trajectories on the bloch sphere can be considered as three - dimensional random walks in a unit - radius sphere . then , one could find connections between our path integral and the formalism in classical stochastic processes , such as the pilgram - sukhorukov - jordan - bttiker path integral @xcite , the martin - siggia - rose formalism , the wiener integral , or feynman - kac path integral ( see eqs . , , and ) , however , we do not cover the discussion in this paper . we show the derivation here , how the action in eq .   can be written in this form , @xmath532 = { \cal s}[\bar{u } ] - \frac{\tau_m}{2 \delta t } \sum_{k=0}^{n-1}(\eta_{k+1}-\eta_k)^2,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath533 is the optimal path , extremizing the action @xmath128 $ ] .    to see this , one can taylor expand the action eq .   in discrete forms , such as @xmath128 = { \cal s}[\bar{u } + \eta ] = { \cal s}[\bar{u } ] + { \cal s}'[{\bar u}]\eta + \frac{1}{2}{\cal s}'[{\bar u}]\eta^2 + o(\eta^3)$ ] , and show that higher order terms vanish ( @xmath534 ) . however , there is a simpler way to see this , using the action in a continuous form , @xmath535 which is the same action as in eq .  , with definitions of the time integral , @xmath536 , and the derivative , @xmath537 . in this form , one can see that the last two terms in the action can be integrated easily . the second term can be written in this general form , @xmath538 where @xmath539 . the contribution of this term to the action is only dependent on the boundary terms . therefore , we can write the last two terms in eq .   as equivalent to @xmath540 .    after this simplification , the first term in eq . can be written as @xmath541 , performing the integration by parts giving @xmath542 . the action is then given by , @xmath532 = { \cal s}[{\bar u } ] - \frac{\tau_m}{2}\!\!\ ! \int \!\!\ ! { \mathrm{d}}t \,{\dot \eta}(t)^2,\end{aligned}\ ] ] where , @xmath543 = -   \int_0^t \!\!\!{\mathrm{d}}t \left\ { \frac{\tau_m}{2 } { \dot { \bar u}}(t)^2 -   \tanh { \bar u}(t ) { \dot { \bar u}}(t ) + \frac{1}{2 \tau_m } \right\},\end{aligned}\ ] ] is the action in terms of the optimal solution @xmath544 . we show here the inverse of the matrix @xmath144 in eq .  , assuming that it is a square matrix with @xmath6 dimensions . the inverse matrix @xmath167 is given by , @xmath545 where the diagonal elements are of the form @xmath546 , where @xmath547 , and the other off - diagonal elements are @xmath176 for @xmath177 as verified by direct calculation . the solutions of the preselected and postselected average and variance in @xmath90 to infinite order are shown here . the average is given in terms of the infinite summation as , @xmath548 where the differentials in the bracket are evaluated at the optimal path @xmath533 . similarly , the variance is given by , @xmath549 the average @xmath550 are given explicitly in eq . in the main text . the numerical data presented in figure  [ fig - qnd ] , [ fig - corrlimit ] and [ fig - phasespace ] are from the simulation of quantum trajectories using monte carlo method . the numerical trajectories are generated in @xmath0-discrete steps of @xmath70 . starting from an initial state @xmath16 , each step , we randomly generate a measurement readout from a distribution , for example , @xmath551 , and compute a quantum state from the update equation @xmath552 $ ] ( or @xmath109 $ ] ) , repeating the procedures from @xmath553 to @xmath28 to get a full trajectory @xmath554 .    in figure  [ fig - qnd ] , we simulate the data using @xmath555 time steps , with the step size @xmath556 and @xmath557 . in figure [ fig - corrlimit ] , we use @xmath558 , @xmath559 , and @xmath560 , where the rabi frequency @xmath402 is set to @xmath448 . we note that in the main text we present these numbers in the unit of @xmath80 .    for the data presented in figure  [ fig - phasespace ] , where the rabi oscillation is linearly dependent on the highly fluctuating measurement readouts , the state update equation needs to be modified to minimize numerical errors in each time step of the calculation . the update state is then computed from @xmath561 $ ] , where the measurement operator @xmath562 and unitary operator @xmath563 are each divided into 10 pieces and are operated onto the qubit state @xmath564 alternately . we simulate the data using @xmath565 time steps , with the step size @xmath559 and @xmath557 . the feedback rabi oscillation is @xmath566 , where @xmath2 is a generated measurement readout at time @xmath3 . in the main text , the state updating procedure is based on the assumption that a measurement outcome is randomly generated from a readout distribution @xmath19 , which is a function of a state right before the measurement . however , in the limit when the measurement readout is highly fluctuating , for example , the standard deviation of the readout distribution is much larger than the measurement response , @xmath567 , we can approximate the readout as a sum of two parts , one being its average ( which is related to the measured system state ) and another being a zero - mean independent fluctuating noise . following the readout distribution in eq .  , the average of the readout at a time @xmath3 is exactly @xmath568 , therefore , we write @xmath569 where @xmath570 is a zero - mean gaussian white noise . the next step is to find a probability distribution for the independent noise @xmath570 , which we then approximate as having the same variance as the original distribution , which in this case the variance is @xmath571 . this approximation is valid as long as the variance is much larger than the separation between two outcomes @xmath572 and @xmath573 . a more rigorous proof can be done by writing @xmath574 where @xmath71 is a gaussian white noise with variance @xmath252 . note that @xmath71 is the time - derivative of the wiener increment , scaling as @xmath575 ( it calculus ) @xcite , therefore , in any expansion , we need to keep terms containing @xmath576 . using these rules , we can write , @xmath577 where these two equations are exactly equal in the expansion up to the first order of @xmath70 . the second line confirms that the distribution of @xmath570 is gaussian with the same variance @xmath571 and the mean @xmath123 . let us assume that @xmath92 is the only system variable we consider , where an update equation is written as @xmath578 and the probability density function for a measurement readout is proportional to @xmath579 . we then write the action for this system as , @xmath580 where @xmath184 is the conjugate variable . in this case , we could write the first term , @xmath581 , where @xmath582 , however , the matrix @xmath583 would not be a square matrix , and its inverse is not simply defined . therefore , we separate out one term , @xmath584 , from the sum , which symmetrizes the double sum , @xmath585 resulting in a square matrix @xmath586 , @xmath587 with the row index , @xmath588 to @xmath28 , and the column index , @xmath589 to @xmath0 . for the measurement readout term , we define its square matrix , @xmath590 with the row and column index being @xmath591 to @xmath28 .    as a result , we can rewrite the action @xmath34 into two separated terms , a free action @xmath592 and an interaction action @xmath201 , where @xmath593 the appearance of the first term in the interaction action , @xmath594 , is the reason we have the extra terms ( we represented them as @xmath281 ) in eq .  . we now show why the two - point correlation functions derived from our path integrals , such as the one derived from the free action in eq .  , that is @xmath595 consist of a left continuous heaviside step functions @xmath296 that behaves differently from the usual heaviside step function . this left continuous heaviside step function has the properties , @xmath297 and @xmath596 , while the usual heaviside step function has properties , @xmath597 , @xmath596 , and @xmath598 . this is true from a point of view of the discrete form of a correlation function , @xmath599 , that the propagator has this property @xmath600 when @xmath601 and it vanishes otherwise . let us start from writing a free generating function in a discrete form , @xmath602 $ ]    @xmath603= & \frac{\left(\frac{\delta t}{2 \pi}\right)^{\frac{n}{2}}}{(2 \pi i)^{n}}\int \!\!{\mathrm{d}}[x_k]_1^n \int \!\!{\mathrm{d}}[p_k]_0^{n-1 } \exp\left\{-\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum_{j=1}^{n }   p_{i}(g^{-1}_x)_{i , j } x_j + \sum_{k=0}^{n-1 } p_k ( j_p)_k \delta t + \sum_{k=1}^{n } ( j_x)_k x_k \delta t\right\}\\ & \times \int { \mathrm{d}}[\xi_k]_0^{n-1 } \exp\left\{- \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\xi_i ( g^{-1}_\xi)_{i , j } \xi_j    + \sum_{k=0}^{n-1 } \xi_k ( j_\xi)_k \delta t \right\}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    these matrix integrals can be carried out using multi - dimensional gaussian integrals . the first one is , @xmath604},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath184 is a pure imaginary @xmath6-dimensional vector , @xmath605 , are real vectors , and @xmath606 is a real and invertible matrix . another is , @xmath607)^{1/2}},\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath71 is a real @xmath6-dimensional vector and @xmath281 is a real and symmetric matrix . after integrating over all variables , the free generating function is given by , @xmath608    we note that the integrals generate a prefactor @xmath609 , knowing that @xmath610 , and another prefactor @xmath611 , which both are then canceled with the prefactor in eq .  . also , from eqs .  - , we can compute the inverses of them as , @xmath612 with the row index , @xmath613 to @xmath0 , and the column index , @xmath614 to @xmath28 , and @xmath615 with the row and column indices , @xmath591 to @xmath28 . now , let us compute the two - point correlation function @xmath616 ,    @xmath617_1^n \,{\mathrm{d}}[p_k]_0^{n-1 } { \mathrm{d}}[\xi_k]_0^{n-1 } ( x_a p_b ) \exp\left\{-\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum_{j=1}^{n } p_{i}(g^{-1}_x)_{i , j } x_j - \frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\xi_i   ( g^{-1}_\xi)_{i , j } \xi_j   \right\ } \\ \nonumber = & \frac{1}{\delta t}\frac{\partial}{\partial ( j_x)_a}\frac{1}{\delta t } \frac{\partial}{\partial ( j_p)_b } z_f[j_x , j_p , j_\xi ] \bigg |_{j_x , j_p , j_\xi=0 } \\ \nonumber = &   \frac{1}{\delta t}\frac{\partial}{\partial ( j_x)_a } \frac{1}{\delta t } \frac{\partial}{\partial ( j_p)_b}\exp\left[\sum_{i=1}^{n } \sum_{j=0}^{n-1 } ( j_x)_i ( g_x)_{i , j } ( j_p)_j \delta t^2\right ] \bigg |_{j_x , j_p=0}\\   = & ( g_x)_{a , b } =   \begin{cases } 1 & \text { , if , } a \ge b+1 \text { , or , } a > b , \\ 0 & \text { , otherwise . } \end{cases}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath618 . the conclusion in the last line comes from the fact that the square matrix , @xmath619 , has the row and column indices different by one time step ( see eq .  ) , which actually originates from the indices of , @xmath620 , and @xmath621 . continued from eq .  , we presented all 10 diagrams here ,    @xmath623\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v_0 $ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of b2,label = above:$v_{t_1}$](a1 ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = above:$v_0$](ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw ( bp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( ap ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+ \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2 ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+ \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2 ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture } +   \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2 ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$w$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( ap ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture } + \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v$,label = above right:$v$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of bp](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( bp ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture } \,+ \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v$,label = above right:$w$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of bp](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0.1 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.3 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle2 ] ( bp ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( cp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\\   { \nonumber}&+\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v$,label = above right:$v$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of bp](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.4 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](dd ) ; \coordinate[above=0.4 cm of dd , label = right:$v_0$](ep ) ; \coordinate[below=0 cm of dd , label = right:$v_0$](fp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( cp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( ep ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( fp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( ep ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( fp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\ ,   + \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v$,label = above right:$w$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$v$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of bp](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.4 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](dd ) ; \coordinate[above=0.4 cm of dd , label = right:$v_0$](ep ) ; \coordinate[below=0 cm of dd , label = right:$v_0$](fp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( cp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( ep ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( fp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( ep ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( fp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\ , + \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v$,label = above right:$v$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$w$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of bp](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.4 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](dd ) ; \coordinate[above=0.4 cm of dd , label = right:$w_0$](ep ) ; \coordinate[below=0 cm of dd , label = right:$v_0$](fp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( cp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( ep ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( fp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( ep ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( fp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture}\,+ \begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=0.6 cm and 0.8cm]\coordinate[label = below:$v_{t_2}$ ] ( b2 ) ; \coordinate[right = of b2,label = below:$v$,label = above right:$w$ ] ( bp ) ; \coordinate[above = of bp , label = below right:$v$,label = above:$w$ ] ( ap ) ; \coordinate[left=1.1 cm of ap , label = above:$v_{t_1}$ ] ( a1 ) ; \coordinate[right = of bp](cc ) ; \coordinate[above=0 cm of cc , label = right:$w_0$](cp ) ; \coordinate[below=0.4 cm of cc , label = right:$v_0$](dp ) ; \coordinate[right = of ap](dd ) ; \coordinate[above=0.4 cm of dd , label = right:$w_0$](ep ) ; \coordinate[below=0 cm of dd , label = right:$v_0$](fp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( a1 ) -- ( ap ) ; \draw[particle ] ( b2 ) -- ( bp ) ; \draw[gluon ] ( ap ) --   ( bp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( dp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( bp ) sin   ( cp ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( ep ) ; \draw[particle ] ( ap ) sin   ( fp ) ; \fill[black ] ( a1 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \fill[black ] ( b2 ) circle ( .05 cm ) ; \draw ( cp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( dp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( ep ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \draw ( fp ) circle ( .06 cm ) ; \end{tikzpicture},\\ { \nonumber}= & { v}_i^2 \,g_{{v}}(t_1,0 ) g_{{v}}(t_2,0 ) + \int { \mathrm{d}}t ' \left[g_{{v}}(t_1,t ' ) g_{{v}}(t_2,t')\left\{\kappa_2+\alpha { v}_i^2 g_{{v}}(t',0)^2 + \alpha { v}_i { w}_i g_{{v}}(t',0)g_{{w}}(t',0 ) \right\}^2\right],\\ = & { v}_i^2 e^{{\lambda}_2 t_1}e^ { { \lambda}_2 t_2}+ \int { \mathrm{d}}t ' \left [ e^{{\lambda}_2(t_1-t')}e^{{\lambda}_2(t_2-t')}\left\{\kappa_2 + \alpha { v}_i^2 \left(e^{{\lambda}_2 t'}\right)^2 + \alpha { v}_i { w}_i e^{{\lambda}_2 t ' } e^{{\lambda}_3 t ' } \right\}^2         \right],\end{aligned}\ ] ]      70ifxundefined [ 1 ] ifx#1 ifnum [ 1 ] # 1firstoftwo secondoftwo ifx [ 1 ] # 1firstoftwo secondoftwo `` `` # 1''''@noop [ 0]secondoftwosanitize@url [ 0 ]  + 12$12  & 12#1212_12%12@startlink[1]@endlink[0]@bib@innerbibempty @noop _ ( , ) @noop _ _  ( , ) @noop _ _  ( , ) @noop _ _  ( ,  ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physreva.87.032115 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.97.166805 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.101.200401 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physrevlett.112.080501 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.67.241305 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.112.170501 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * , ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physreva.49.2133 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physreva.62.012105 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase    10.1103/physrevx.3.021008 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.66.041401 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.72.245322 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.71.201305 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physreva.67.030301 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.100.160503 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * , ( ) @noop   @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevd.33.1643 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevd.35.1815 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physreva.36.5543 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1007/bf02894935 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.93.260604 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physreve.75.051919 [ * * , ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1186/s13408 - 015 - 0018 - 5 [ * * , ( ) , 10.1186/s13408 - 015 - 0018 - 5 ] @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physreva.8.423 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevlett.107.240501 [ * * ,   ( ) ] link:\doibase 10.1103/physreva.47.1652 [ * * , ( ) ] @noop _ _  ( , ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.63.085312 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop * * ,   ( ) link:\doibase 10.1103/physrevb.67.075303 [ * * ,   ( ) ] @noop _ _ ,  ed . ( ,  ) \doibase http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/aphy.1996.0052 [ * * ,   ( ) ]
Abstract:

Answer: we generalize and extend the stochastic path integral formalism and action principle for continuous quantum measurement introduced in [ a. chantasri , j. dressel and a. n. jordan , phys . rev . a * 88 * , 042110 ( 2013 ) ] , where the optimal dynamics , such as the most likely paths , is obtained by extremizing the action of the stochastic path integral . in this work , we apply exact functional methods as well as develop a perturbative approach to investigate the statistical behaviour of continuous quantum measurement . examples are given for the qubit case . for qubit measurement with zero qubit hamiltonian , we find analytic solutions for average trajectories and their variances while conditioning on fixed initial and final states . for qubit measurement with unitary evolution , we use the perturbation method to compute expectation values , variances , and multi - time correlation functions of qubit trajectories in the short - time regime . moreover , we consider continuous qubit measurement with feedback control , using the action principle to investigate the global dynamics of its most likely paths , and finding that in an ideal case , qubit state stabilization at any desired pure state is possible with linear feedback . we also illustrate the power of the functional method by computing correlation functions for the qubit trajectories with a feedback loop to stabilize the qubit rabi frequency .