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: many quantum phenomena , often radically different from our intuitive predictions , are attributed to the fundamental principle of quantum superposition that a physical system can be in a linear superposition of two distinct states . when the principle of quantum superposition is applied to multipartite physical systems , it manifests another interesting feature of quantum mechanics , namely quantum entanglement . quantum entanglement is nonclassical correlation between local systems and is now widely referred to as a key resource for quantum information processing . quantum phenomena are observed typically on microscopic scales . however , as illustrated in schrdinger s famous cat paradox @xcite , quantum mechanics does not preclude , in principle , the possibility of a macroscopic object being in a quantum superposition or being a part of quantum entanglement . natural questions then follow . if `` macroscopic _ and _ quantum '' is somehow a possible combination , how can we define , characterize and quantify `` macroscopic quantumness '' or `` quantum macroscopicity '' ? further , how and to what extent can we implement such macroscopic quantumness ?    of course , scientists have tried to answer these questions . in the early days of quantum mechanics , such attempts were primarily in the area of interpretations or philosophical discussions , as they are not within the reach of experimental tests or implementations . since then , however , a remarkable development of quantum and atom optics has been brought about , which has paved a way to control and detect individual quantum systems at the level of single photons and atoms . based on this progress , further efforts are being made to collectively control larger quantum systems , that is also closely related to the ability to perform quantum information processing @xcite . now , we may say that a significant amount of efforts made in physics and optics research in the last few decades are more or less related to explorations of macroscopic quantumness . in this paper , we review two major research topics on macroscopic quantumness  its quantifications and physical implementations using optical fields  and attempt to make remarks on them . we want to know whether and/or how much a physical system is _ both _ macroscopic _ and _ quantum . needless to say , it is not sufficient for a state to be either macroscopic or quantum . it should be _ quantum - mechanically macroscopic _ or _ macroscopically quantum_. this point may sound too obvious to make , but it is nontrivial to technically define and quantify macroscopic quantumness . leggett posed a question along this line as `` what is the correct measure of ` schrdingers - cattiness ' ? '' and commented , `` ideally , one would like a quantitative measure which corresponds to our intuitive sense '' @xcite . a number of proposals have been made for quantification of macroscopic quantum superpositions @xcite based on the effective number of particles that involve the superposition @xcite , distinguishability between the constituent states @xcite and operational interpretations @xcite . in the context of this paper , we would like to pose three requirements for a desirable measure of macroscopic quantumness . first , it should be applicable to a wide range of states , not limited to a specific type of states . second , we prefer to have a measure that quantifies the degree of a genuine superposition against a classical mixture , together with its effective size factor . in other words , it should be applicable not only to pure states but also to mixed states . third , if a state is given , the degree should be unambiguously determined . these points are important because our motivation is to compare different types of states being considered as candidates for macroscopic quantum superpositions using a conclusive measure . in view of these points , we shall review in chronological order such measures proposed to quantify macroscopic quantumness .      in 1980 , leggett in his pioneering work defined a measure called  disconnectivity " @xmath0 @xcite that quantifies genuine multipartite quantum correlations . suppose that we are interested in characterizing an @xmath1-mode bosonic system @xmath2 . we first obtain a reduced density operator @xmath3 ( @xmath4 ) from @xmath5 by tracing out every mode except for @xmath6 arbitrarily chosen modes . quantity @xmath7 is introduced as @xmath8 where @xmath9 $ ] is von - neumann entropy of @xmath3 . by definition , @xmath7 is set to be @xmath10 when both the numerator and the denominator are zero , and @xmath11 . the disconnectivity @xmath0 is defined as the largest integer @xmath6 that makes @xmath7 the smallest . for an ideal greenberger - horne - zeilinger ( ghz ) state @xmath12 with an orthogonal basis @xmath13 , it is clear that @xmath14 and @xmath15 for @xmath16 . its disconnectivity is then @xmath17 that is the largest @xmath6 minimizing @xmath7 to be @xmath18 . however , @xmath0 is always @xmath10 for mixed states @xmath19 regardless of the values of @xmath1 and @xmath20 as far as @xmath21 . this means that macroscopic quantumness for partially mixed states can not be identified by @xmath0 . leggett pointed out that so called  macroscopic quantum phenomena " such as superconductivity or superfluidity do not require the existence of a high-@xmath0 state . superfluidity can be explained by a product of identical bosonic states of which disconnectivity is obviously @xmath10 . a superconducting system described by @xmath1 cooper pairs , @xmath22 , also shows a small value of disconnectivity @xmath23 regardless of @xmath1 . on the other hand , multi - mode quantum correlations , in the form of pure states , always give large values of @xmath0 .    even though disconnectivity sensibly quantifies multipartite correlations for pure states , it is not always sensitive to distinguishability between the constituent states . this point shall be clearer in the following example discussed by dr _ et al . _ @xcite . dr _ et al . _ @xcite considered the effective size of a generalized form of the greenberger - horne - zeilinger ( ghz ) state : @xmath24 where @xmath25 . the disconnectivity of this state is found to be @xmath17 regardless of @xmath26 even though @xmath26 obviously contributes to the distinguishability between @xmath27 and @xmath28 . it would be of particular interest to know whether @xmath29 can still be a macroscopic superposition in comparison to an ideal ghz state when @xmath26 takes a small value . to put it concretely , they attempt to find out what size of the ideal ghz state ( i.e. @xmath30 ) state @xmath29 is equivalent to . two different methods lead to the same result that the effective size of state @xmath29 as a macroscopic superposition approaches @xmath31 when @xmath32 . the first method is based on the rate of decoherence and the second is related to the ghz entanglement distillation by local operations and classical communication ( locc ) . consider a dephasing process that is described by a completely positive map @xmath33 where @xmath34 , @xmath35 is time , @xmath36 is the dephasing rate , and @xmath37 is the pauli-@xmath38 operator . they show that the trace - norm of the off - diagonal elements for state @xmath29 is @xmath39 when @xmath32 and that it is @xmath40 for state @xmath30 . based on this comparison , they conclude that the effective size of the generalized ghz state @xmath29 is equivalent to that of an ideal ghz state @xmath30 of size @xmath31 for small values of @xmath26 . this conclusion is also derived from depolarizing decoherence where it gives exactly the same decay rate . of course , this analysis is limited only to a very specific type of states in the form of eq . ( [ eq : gen - ghz ] ) . bjrk and mana s suggestion @xcite is based on their observation that a quantum superposition is more sensitive than its constituent states for interferometric applications . let us consider a pure state @xmath41 with a measurement outcome distribution of observable @xmath42 as @xmath43 where @xmath44 is a function of a reasonably smooth form centered at @xmath45 with width @xmath46 . the operator @xmath47 is applied to state @xmath48 where @xmath49 corresponds to the degree of the interaction time and strength . generally , the overlap between the original and evolved states is @xmath50 which becomes zero when @xmath51 . in other words , the original state @xmath41 evolves to a state that is orthogonal to the original one at a certain interaction time @xmath52 . meanwhile , if there was only a single peak @xmath44 ( @xmath53 or @xmath54 ) for the distribution of @xmath48 , the overlap simply would be @xmath55 regardless of @xmath56 and its first local minimum ( or a half of the initial value ) would be found at @xmath57 . the measure of a macroscopic superposition in terms of interferometric sensitivity is defined as the ratio of the two interaction times : @xmath58 bjrk and mana s approach has a distinguishing feature as an operational measure based on a physical application even though it is devised only for pure states . there is an ambiguity applying this measure to mixed states about how close the evolved state should be to the orthogonal state in determining @xmath59 . this may lead to ambiguity in comparing different types of states . shimizu and miyadera proposed index @xmath60 @xcite that determines whether a given form of @xmath1-mode state @xmath62 becomes macroscopically quantum as @xmath1 increases . the index @xmath60 is obtained as @xmath63 where @xmath64 is the variance for observable @xmath65 with state @xmath48 , @xmath1 is the number of modes , and @xmath66 if @xmath67 is a nonzero constant . the maximum in eq . ( [ eq : pindex ] ) is taken over all possible additive observables represented by @xmath68 where @xmath69 is a local observable for mode @xmath6 . the value of index @xmath60 is found to be @xmath70 for ghz - type entanglement while @xmath71 for a simple product form of state . a state is considered to be macroscopically quantum if its index is @xmath70 . the index @xmath60 , however , can not be applied to mixed states . for example , a mixed state @xmath72 have the same value of index @xmath70 as an ideal ghz state . shimizu and morimae generalized the measure for arbitrary mixed states @xcite . the index @xmath61 for state @xmath73 is @xmath74 where @xmath75 is an arbitrary projection operator satisfying @xmath76 and @xmath77 $ ] . the correlation can be represented as @xmath78 where @xmath79 is an eigenstate of @xmath65 with eigenvalue @xmath80 . it becomes @xmath81 so that @xmath82 when there is non - negligible @xmath83 coherence @xmath84 between the macroscopically distinct states of @xmath85 . the indices @xmath60 and @xmath61 are equivalent for pure state , i.e. , index @xmath60 is a special case of index @xmath61 .    the index @xmath61 , as well as index @xmath60 , does not give a value for a given _ state _ ; rather it identifies what _ kinds _ ( or forms ) of states can scale to be macroscopically quantum when they become large multipartite states of @xmath86 . therefore , it can not be directly applied to a single - mode state such as @xmath87 where its macroscopicity depends on @xmath88 , nor is it a quantifier of macroscopic quantumness for a given state . cavalcanti and reid proposed an inequality of which violations verify macroscopic superpositions of continuous - variable states @xcite . suppose a generalized macroscopic superposition @xmath89 and a pointer - measurement @xmath90 giving macroscopically ranged outcomes @xmath91 . the domain for @xmath91 can be partitioned into three regions for @xmath92 , @xmath18 , and @xmath93 which correspond to @xmath94 , @xmath95 and @xmath96 , respectively . if the reference value @xmath97 is sufficiently large , two region @xmath92 and @xmath93 are called macroscopically distinct . in contrast to eq . ( [ eq : gs ] ) , a mixed state @xmath98 is not a macroscopic superposition in the sense that the outcomes of @xmath99 only spread for @xmath100 @xmath101 and those of @xmath102 for @xmath103 @xmath104 . in other words , state ( [ eq : rholr ] ) does not incorporate a macroscopic superposition since the coherence element is @xmath105 . the authors derived an inequality that should be satisfied by state  ( [ eq : rholr ] ) : @xmath106 with @xmath107 where @xmath108 are the normalized probability distributions for regions @xmath109 , and @xmath110 and @xmath111 are their means and variances , respectively . cavalcanti and reid s inequality can be applied to a wide range of states compared to previous measures , i.e. , applicable to arbitrary single - mode continuous - variable states and may be extended to multi - mode continuous - variable states if appropriate measurements are defined . however , it does not provide a degree of macroscopic quantumness , but it works as a criterion of macroscopic quantumness for a given state with respect to an arbitrarily chosen scale @xmath97 . its calculations involve nontrivial numerical integrations and optimization processes . et al . _ experimentally demonstrated violations of this inequality using gaussian states and showed that it critically depends on purity of the states @xcite . korsbakken _ et al_. @xcite suggested an effective size of an @xmath1-particle superposition state in the form of @xmath112 based on how many measurements are required to distinguish @xmath113 and @xmath114 . the size measure for state @xmath62 is defined by @xmath115 for given probability @xmath116 @xmath117 of distinguishing the two constituent states by measuring @xmath118 number of particles . the discrimination probability is calculated as @xmath119+\tr[\rho_b^{(n)}e_b^{(n)}]\right)\ ] ] where @xmath120 are reduced density matrices for @xmath6 particles ( @xmath121 ) and @xmath122 are positive - operator valued measurements ( povms ) acting nontrivially only on @xmath6 particles . the maximum value of the discrimination probability is obtained when the povm is a projective measurement in the eigenbasis of @xmath123 @xmath124 obviously , the two constituent states of an ideal ghz state @xmath125 can be distinguished by a single particle @xmath37 measurement so that @xmath126 regardless of @xmath127 . korsbakken _ et al . _ applied this measure to superconducting flux qubits @xcite where a superposition of macroscopically distinct values of currents and magnetic moments is observed . they found the effective size of the flux qubits is surprisingly ( but not trivially ) small despite the apparent large difference in macroscopic observables . the reason is that only a small fraction of all electrons contribute to the superposition , while their speeds are high enough to yield large currents or magnetic moments . there is an ambiguity in using this measure due to the arbitrariness of the choice of @xmath127 . for example , the size of the superposition in the form of @xmath128 is found to be @xmath129 @xcite . therefore , for example , which of the two states , @xmath130 and @xmath131 , is more `` macroscopically quantum '' depends on the choice of @xmath127 . marquardt _ et al . _ define the size of quantum superposition by a number of particles that effectively involve the superposition @xcite . more precisely , for given constituent states @xmath113 and @xmath114 they count how many single - particle operations are required to convert @xmath113 into @xmath114 or vice versa . as a simple example , an @xmath1-product horizontal - polarization state @xmath132 can be converted into and a vertical - polarization state @xmath133 by acting @xmath134 , where @xmath135 and @xmath136 are creation and annihilation operators for corresponding modes of the subscripts . this operation is an @xmath1 number of single - particle operations , and the size of superposition @xmath137 is @xmath1 .    in general , @xmath114 is obtained by superposing different states as @xmath138 , where @xmath139 is a state converted from @xmath113 by at least @xmath140 single particle operations . the average effective particle number is then @xmath141 . in ref . @xcite , the authors considered @xmath142 and @xmath143 for modes @xmath144 and @xmath145 . the constituent state @xmath114 is expanded as @xmath146 with coefficients @xmath147 @xcite . the state @xmath148 can be obtained by applying @xmath140 times of the single particle operation @xmath149 to @xmath150 implying that its effective number is @xmath140 . the average effective number is then @xmath151 and it becomes @xmath1 for an ideal ghz state of @xmath152 . it is obvious that this measure can not be applied to mixed states .      in the phase space of mutually conjugate variables , the wigner function of a macroscopic quantum superposition typically shows an interference pattern with a high frequency . taking note of this point , lee and jeong @xcite defined a measure of macroscopic quantumness for an arbitrary harmonic - oscillator state . it simultaneously quantifies two different kinds of essential information : the degree of quantum coherence and the effective size of the physical system that involves the superposition . the basic idea is to take an integral @xmath154 , where @xmath155 $ ] is the characteristic function for state @xmath73 , in order to measure `` frequency '' and `` magnitude '' of the interference fringes at the same time in the wigner representation . in a continuous - variable phase space , it effectively quantifies _ both _ `` how widespread '' the constituent states of a given state are _ and _ `` how quantum mechanically pure '' coherences between those constituent states are , at the same time . the formal definition of the measure @xmath156 for an @xmath157-mode harmonic oscillator system @xcite is only slightly different : @xmath158 \left|    \chi \left ( \xi_1,\ , \xi_2,\ , \cdots,\ , \xi_m \right ) \right|^2\ ] ] where @xmath159 is the @xmath157-mode characteristic function , @xmath160 . the value @xmath161 has been inserted to make any coherent states or their product states ( regardless of their amplitudes ) a reference with @xmath162 , but it may be removed to guarantee positivity of the measure @xcite . the maximum possible value of @xmath153 for an optical state is shown to be its average photon number @xcite .    assuming the photon loss condition , @xmath163 with @xmath164=(decay rate @xmath165 time ) , it turns out that the measure is equivalent to the purity decay rate of the state @xmath166 where @xmath167 $ ] is the purity of state @xmath73 . this is consistent with the rapid decay of macroscopic superpositions , and the purity decay rate itself and eq . ( [ eq : ad ] ) may be an alternative definition of @xmath153 . it is possible to detect @xmath153 for optical states using overlap measurements without full tomography of quantum states @xcite . the measure @xmath153 is applicable to arbitrary harmonic oscillator systems including mixed and multi - mode states . it is decomposition - independent and straightforward to calculate for any states represented in the phase space , giving definite values for direct comparison between different types of states . frwis and dr suggested using the fisher information as a measure of macroscopic quantumness for spin systems @xcite . when estimating an unknown parameter , @xmath168 , caused by an unitary evolution @xmath169 with hamiltonian @xmath42 , the classical limit of the estimation uncertainty is determined by @xmath170 where @xmath1 is the system size . it is well known that this limit can be lowered down to @xmath171 using a quantum mechanically correlated probe state . more generally , the limit of the estimation uncertainty using probe state @xmath73 is given by the cramr - rao bound @xcite , @xmath172 , where @xmath173 is the quantum fisher information where @xmath174 and @xmath175 are eigenvalues and eigenvectors of @xmath73 . ] for a given additive hamiltonian @xmath42 . therefore , @xmath176 implies that state @xmath73 is capable of the parameter estimation over the classical limit . noting that this improvement is attributed to long - range quantum correlations in the state @xmath73 , fr@xmath177wis and d@xmath178r call it a genuine macroscopic quantum effect , not an accumulation of microscopic effects @xcite . they call a quantum state @xmath73 macroscopic if @xmath179 , where the maximization is taken over the entire set @xmath180 of additive operators .    however , there are some cases where individual particles do not show long - range quantum correlation while local groups of them do @xcite . therefore , the aforementioned measure needs to be generalized to @xmath181 where @xmath182 is a set of extended additive operator @xmath183 with each @xmath184 locally acts on @xmath185 distinct groups of particles sized @xmath83 . as indices @xmath60 and @xmath61 , frwis and dr s approach in the forms of eq . ( [ eq : d2 ] ) can not be directly applied to a single - mode state . such a measure is defined as @xmath186 giving a definite number for a given state . this proposal is applicable to arbitrary spin systems . it was applied to cloned quantum states to find that they are macroscopically quantum @xcite . frwis and dr also compared @xcite several measures for spin systems @xcite and concluded that index @xmath60 and their fisher - information - base approach detect the most broad set of macroscopic quantum states among those . nimmrichter and hornberger @xcite call a quantum superposition of a mechanical system to be macroscopic , if its experimental demonstration allows one to rule out even a minimal modification of quantum mechanics . in order to specify such minimal modification , they consider an additional generator @xmath187 to the von neumann equation for @xmath1 particle density matrix @xmath5 as @xmath188 + \mathcal{l}_n ( \rho_n ) , \label{eq : vonneumann}\ ] ] where @xmath189\end{aligned}\ ] ] and @xmath190 is the weighted sum of the single particle operators @xmath191 $ ] giving position translation @xmath192 and momentum boost @xmath193 of the @xmath6-th particle of mass @xmath194 . here , @xmath195 , @xmath196 , and @xmath197 are the mass , the coherence time parameter , and the normalized distribution function for the reference particle , respectively . the reference particle is chosen to be an electron , and the distribution @xmath198 is taken to be a gaussian distribution with standard deviations @xmath199 and @xmath200 for position and momentum respectively . the role of the generator @xmath201 in eq . ( [ eq : vonneumann ] ) is to wipe out the coherence from the original distribution of @xmath5 in the position - momentum phase space .    for an experimental demonstration of a quantum superposition in a mechanical system , it rules out a certain region of the modification parameter so that there is a lower bound of the time parameter @xmath196 . if such a lower bound is larger , the superposition becomes more macroscopically quantum . the lower bounds of @xmath196 for interference experiments with neutrons , electrons , bose - einstein condensates , and molecules are obtained @xcite , and then the measure of macroscopicity is defined as @xmath202 where @xmath203 is the greatest lower bound of the time parameter @xmath196 . state - of - the - art interferometers achieve macroscopicities of up to @xmath204 @xcite . it can be applied to any mechanical phenomena and successfully addressed various experiments @xcite . however , it may require more investigations to find out whether macroscopicity witnessed by this measure is in line with the idea of genuine macroscopic superpositions , for example , in the context of refs . @xcite . sekatski _ et al . _ s measure for optical states is determined by how fuzzy ( or how classical ) a single - shot photon number measurement can be to distinguish two constituent states of a superposition @xcite . a pointer system is initially assumed to be in a gaussian position distribution @xmath205 with variance @xmath206 . when a quantum state @xmath207 interacts with the pointer , the final distribution of the pointer becomes @xcite @xmath208.\ ] ] for instance , if @xmath207 is an @xmath6 photon number state @xmath209 , the resultant distribution is exactly shifted by @xmath210 from the original one . when @xmath211 become larger , the resolution of the detector degrades and the detector is considered to be more `` classical . '' the probability of a correct discrimination between two constituent states , @xmath113 and @xmath114 , is @xmath212=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+d\left[p_a^\sigma(x),p_b^\sigma(x)\right]\right),\ ] ] where @xmath213=2^{-1}\int dx \vert p_a^\sigma(x)-p_b^\sigma(x)\vert$ ] is the trace distance between the outcome distributions @xmath214 and @xmath215 . the size of a superposition @xmath216 is then defined by the maximum tolerable @xmath211 for @xmath217 $ ] to reach a certain reference value @xmath218 .    a straightforward example discussed in ref . @xcite is a superposition of the vacuum and a coherent state @xmath219 ( unnormalized ) . the measure is obtained as @xmath220 for large @xmath221 , which is proportional to the average photon number @xmath222 for a fixed @xmath218 . a more controversial example is an entangled state generated by applying the displacement operation @xmath223 on single - photon entanglement @xcite @xmath224 this state can be rewritten as @xmath225 with @xmath226 and @xmath227 can be considered as the constituent states of entanglement . the measure is then found to be @xmath228 which is proportional to @xmath221 indicating that such a state is macroscopically quantum .    there arises a nontrivial question . the coherent states are considered to be the most classical states among all pure states @xcite . a coherent state @xmath229 can be rewritten as @xmath230 , and @xmath231 and @xmath232 are macroscopically distinguishable according to this approach . we then have to conclude that a coherent state , as far as its amplitude is large enough , is a macroscopic superposition , which would probably be unacceptable to many researchers in the community . it could also be controversial whether merely a local displacement operation can generate genuine macroscopic quantumness . various attempts have been made for generating and detecting macroscopic / mesoscopic quantum superpositions using atomic and molecular systems @xcite , optical setups @xcite , superconducting circuits @xcite , and other mechanical systems @xcite . quantum optics has provided a testbed for such experimental implementations in free - traveling light fields . for example , there has been remarkable progress in generating superpositions of coherent states ( scss ) and entangled coherent states ( ecss ) . another example is entanglement between macroscopic and microscopic systems in several different forms @xcite in line with schrdinger s original paradox @xcite . there are yet other examples for generating macroscopic quantum states such as squeezed macro - macro entanglement @xcite , ghz - type entanglement @xcite and noon states @xcite that are beyond the scope of this paper . in this section , we review several of such states and their generation schemes that have been suggested and experimentally performed . we also discuss their degrees as macroscopic quantum superpositions or entanglement based on some of the measures discussed in the previous section . let us first consider an scs in the form of @xmath233 where @xmath234 are coherent states of amplitudes @xmath235 , @xmath236 is a real relative phase factor , and @xmath237 is the normalization factor . the scss are often referred to as `` schrdinger cat states , '' provided that @xmath221 is reasonably large , probably due to the following two reasons . first , the coherent states are known as classical states due to several reasons @xcite . a classic criterion of nonclassicality for a quantum state is whether its @xmath238-function @xcite is well defined @xcite . the coherent states are the only kind of pure states that have well - defined @xmath238-functions @xcite . they are also robust against decoherence as `` pointer states '' @xcite and the closest analogy of classical point particles in the quantum phase space @xcite . second , the two coherent states , @xmath234 , are macroscopically distinguishable when @xmath221 is sufficiently large ; they can be efficiently discriminated using homodyne detection with a limited efficiency . therefore , an scs generates quantum interferences between these two `` classical '' but `` macroscopically distinct '' states as an analogy of schrdinger s paradox . _ studied nonclassical properties of scss such as sub - poissonian and oscillatory photon statistics @xcite . one may also consider entangled coherent states ( ecss ) and one of the simplest forms of such states is @xmath239 with normalization factor @xmath240 . several measures of macroscopic quantum superpositions confirm that scss and ecss are clearly macroscopically quantum . the values of measure @xmath153 for an scs and an ecs are found to be @xmath241 and @xmath242 for @xmath243 . in the case of @xmath244 , they are @xmath245 and @xmath246 . as another evidence , we numerically obtain the maximum value of @xmath97 for an scs to violate cavalcanti and reid s inequality  ( [ eq : cavalcanti ] ) @xcite using homodyne detection is @xmath247 which corresponds to the distance between the two peaks of the superposition in the phase space . yurke and stoler found that a coherent state in a kerr nonlinear medium evolves to an scs in the form of @xmath248 after a certain interaction time @xcite , based on the calculations for an anharmonic oscillator coupled to a zero - temperature heat bath by milburn and holmes @xcite . they explicitly referred it to as a `` quantum mechanical superposition of macroscopically distinguishable states '' @xcite , quoting einstein and schdinger @xcite . mecozzi and tombesi showed that a type of two - mode ecss can be generated using a two - mode nonlinear interaction @xcite . sanders proposed a scheme to generate ecss using a mach - zehnder interferometer with a single - mode kerr nonlinearity @xcite and later provided a comprehensive review on this kind of states @xcite . gerry suggested using a cross - kerr nonlinearity in a mach - zehnder inteferometer setup with two photodetectors to generate scss and ecss @xcite . similar schemes using cross - kerr effects and beam - splitter interferences were independently developed by dariano _ _ @xcite and howell and yeazell @xcite . paris devised a two - step scheme that generates a small scs using a kerr nonlinear effect and then amplifies it using @xmath249 nonlinearity @xcite . studied a method to generate scss and ecss via cross phase modulation in a double electromagnetically induced transparency ( eit ) regime @xcite . however , all these approaches have remained as theoretical proposals yet . the required levels of nonlinearities are extremely demanding even though there are developing techniques such as eit to obtain giant kerr effects @xcite . there have been trials to reduce the required levels of nonlinearities . _ found that it is possible to use a relatively weak single - mode kerr nonlinearity together with a conditioning homodyne measurement to generate scss @xcite . the idea of using a weak cross - kerr interaction has been discussed in the context of the development of the bell - state detection @xcite and quantum computation @xcite . it was explicitly shown @xcite that a cross - kerr nonlinearity can be used to generate scss and ecss and this approach can overcome decoherence due to photon losses . there exist nontrivial problems to overcome even at a theoretical level in order to utilize the approach based on a weak cross - kerr nonlinearity @xcite . recently , he _ _ showed that approximately ideal cross - kerr effects can be obtained using relatively weak interactions between photon pulses in atomic ensembles @xcite . non - deterministic methods based on linear optics and conditioning measurements have been investigated @xcite since initial attempts by several authors @xcite . _ showed that an scs with a small amplitude as @xmath250 can be well approximated ( @xmath251 ) by applying the squeezing operation on a single photon @xcite . it can be achieved by subtracting a single photon from a squeezed state and a number of experiments have been performed along this line @xcite . however , this type of experiment can not generate two separate peaks in the phase space with interferences between them because the resulting state is simply a squeezed form of the single photon . et al . _ attempted a different method : a number state is divided by a 50:50 beam splitter and conditioned by a homodyne detection to generate an scs @xcite . the experiment with a number state of @xmath252 has resulted in an approximate scs with @xmath253 with interferences between two clearly separate peaks in the phase space @xcite . it can be used to generate arbitrarily large scss if large number states are available @xcite . glancy and de vasconcelos provided a comprehensive review on various methods for producing scss in optical systems in 2008 @xcite . _ showed that multiple photon subtractions result in large squeezed scss with extremely high fidelities @xcite . in this way , demonstrations of subtracting two or more photons on a squeezed vacuum state have been performed to generate scss @xcite . -photon subtraction on a squeezed vacuum @xmath254 using a beam splitter ( bs ) with low reflectivity ( @xmath255 ) and a photodetector . ( b ) scs generation scheme using homodyne detection @xcite . homodyne conditioning for measurements outcomes @xmath256 using a 50:50 beam splitter ( bs ) and homodyne detection @xmath257 on a photon number state @xmath258 . the additional ( optional ) squeezed vacuum @xmath259 may be used to control the degree of squeezing @xmath260 of the the output scs . ( c ) the scs amplification scheme @xcite . two small scss with amplitudes @xmath221 may be used to conditionally generate an scs of a larger amplitude @xmath261 using two 50:50 beam splitters ( bs1 and bs2 ) , an auxiliary coherent state @xmath262 and two _ imperfect _ on / off photodetectors . ] many of the non - deterministic yet feasible schemes are categorized into two major approaches . one is based on the squeezing operation and photon subtractions @xcite and the other is based on the number state generation and homodyne detection @xcite . figures  [ fig - scs](a ) and 1(b ) present schematics of the two approaches . in fact , either the multiple photon subtraction from a squeezed vacuum @xcite or homodyning on the one part of the number state divided by a beam splitter @xcite yields a _ squeezed _ scs , i.e. @xmath263 where @xmath264 is the squeezing operator with the squeezing parameter @xmath260 as depicted in fig . [ fig - scs ] . in principle , as far as one could perform the photon number subtraction of many photons @xcite or generate a large number state @xcite , a squeezed scs of a large amplitude and high fidelity can be obtained . in order to generate a normal scs ( without squeezing ) with high fidelity @xmath265 , in addition to the scheme in ref . @xcite , one may use an additional squeezed vacuum as shown in fig . [ fig - scs](b ) @xcite . a generation scheme for arbitrary scss with unbalanced ratios was suggested @xcite and experimentally demonstrated @xcite . it is worth noting that large scss may be obtained in a non - deterministic way out of small scss using realistic on / off detectors and an auxiliary coherent state as shown in fig . [ fig - scs](c ) @xcite , and there exists an alternative amplification scheme using homodyne detection @xcite . in general , the scss and ecss are sensitive to a lossy environment and detection inefficiency as their amplitudes become large @xcite . theoretical attempts were made using the squeezing operation to make the scss more robust against losses @xcite or to amplify them @xcite . schemes for entanglement purification for mixed ecss @xcite and concentration for pure ecss @xcite were investigated using bell - state measurements @xcite . et al_. devised and experimentally demonstrated a method to generate an ecs in a remote way using two scss and two photodetectors @xcite . et al_. suggested another scheme for the same purpose that is made to be more robust against detection inefficiency using an auxiliary coherent state @xcite . proposals to distribute ecss using the quantum repeater protocol were also suggested @xcite . superpositions and entanglement of multiple numbers of coherent states have been theoretically studied @xcite . experimentally demonstrated quantum teleportation of a single - photon - subtracted squeezed vacuum ( i.e. , an approximate scs ) using the continuous variable teleportation protocol @xcite . generalization of scss and ecss to highly mixed forms has been studied for testing quantum theory in an even more `` classical '' limit @xcite . the wide scope of applications using scss and ecss includes quantum teleportation @xcite , quantum computation @xcite , precision measurements @xcite , bell - type inequality tests @xcite , leggett - type inequality tests @xcite , quantum contextuality tests @xcite and quantum steering @xcite . in particular , quantum teleportation and computation schemes using scss and ecss are considered as a strong candidate for the optical implementation of quantum computation in terms of the resource requirement and loss tolerance @xcite . a proof - of - principle experiment of this type of teleportation scheme was performed by neergaard - nielsen _ et al_. @xcite . there have been attempts to generate entanglement between microscopic and macroscopic ( or quantum and classical ) states of light by using several different methods @xcite . implementations of such micro - macro entanglement are of special interest in relation to schrdinger s cat paradox where a cat as a macroscopic classical object and an atom as a microscopic quantum system are entangled @xcite . we limit our discussions to several examples using free - traveling optical systems mainly from a theoretical point of view , while there are other examples such as atom - field entanglement @xcite . de martini _ et al_. suggested @xcite and experimentally demonstrated @xcite a scheme depicted in fig . [ fig - micro - macro]a to amplify a local part of microscopic entanglement using quantum injected optical parametric amplification ( qiopa ) @xcite @xcite . the microscopic entanglement is supposed to be a polarization entangled state , @xmath266 , where @xmath267 ( @xmath268 ) is the left ( right ) circularly polarization state for mode @xmath269 ( @xmath270 ) . one of the modes , say @xmath270 , is amplified to be `` macroscopic '' using qiopa @xcite . the states @xmath271 and @xmath272 then evolve to two orthogonal states with different photon number distributions as @xmath273 where @xmath274 ( @xmath275 ) is the photon number state with @xmath276 photons and the right ( left ) circularly polarization , and @xmath277 are real coefficients ] with the amplification constant @xmath278 . the amplification results in entanglement between microscopic and macroscopic states : @xmath279    it is straightforward to verify that state @xmath280 has the maximum value of measure @xmath153 @xcite as @xmath281 that corresponds to its average photon number . this result is implied in the fact that the qiopa causes @xmath282 and @xmath283 to be macroscopically quantum as seen in eq . ( [ eq : process ] ) . in fact , @xmath284 and @xmath285 themselves have the maximum values of @xmath153 . however , it is a separate question whether @xmath284 and @xmath285 are truly macroscopically distinct in this type of entanglement . in ref . @xcite , the two states @xmath284 and @xmath285 are considered to be macroscopically distinct in the sense that their average photon numbers for the @xmath286-polarization are @xmath287 and @xmath288 , respectively . however , as we discussed in sec . [ dcn ] , this type of approach leads to a problem that becomes more noticeable when it is applied to a single - mode superposition . once again , the example of a strong coherent state , @xmath289 with @xmath244 , may be considered for a comparison . it can be simply shown that the difference between the average photon numbers of constituent states @xmath231 and @xmath232 is @xmath290 , i.e. , it monotonically increases with @xmath221 although a coherent state would not be regarded as a macroscopic superposition . in spite of this ambiguity , a strong nonclassical feature of state @xmath280 seems evident based on the high value of @xmath153 . a perfect discrimination of @xmath284 and @xmath285 by a single - shot measurement requires a photon - number resolving detector for a parity measurement . in the real experiment @xcite , an alternative procedure called the `` orthogonality filter '' was used where @xmath284 and @xmath285 are discriminated by field intensity measures for each polarization in a non - deterministic and approximate way . there have been considerable debates and discussions @xcite over whether the state generated in ref . @xcite possesses genuine entanglement and how to verify this type of entanglement more clearly . sekatski _ et al . _ proposed a scheme that uses the displacement operation for an amplification process to generate macroscopic entanglement @xcite . the state is generated by locally displacing each mode of single - photon entanglement as @xmath291 . they claim @xmath292 and @xmath293 are macroscopically distinguishable since they exhibit 3 times different photon number variances @xcite . _ @xcite and lvovsky _ et  al . _ @xcite experimentally realized a simpler variant @xmath294 in eq . ( [ eq : gisinstate ] ) , where only one of the modes is displaced for generating micro - macro entanglement ( see fig . [ fig - micro - macro]b ) .    in refs . @xcite , it was shown that a single shot photon number measurement can distinguish between @xmath292 and @xmath293 in the macroscopic part ( @xmath270 ) of state ( [ eq : gisinstate ] ) with 74% probability for @xmath244 . it can be improved up to 90% by changing the basis of the initial microscopic state into @xmath295 . however , we already discussed in secs . [ dcn ] and [ sec : amp - mm ] that this type of approach does not seem very convincing . the value of measure @xmath153 for @xmath296 , as well as @xmath297 , is exactly the same to that of microscopic single - photon entanglement @xmath298 . in fact , measure @xmath153 is invariant under the displacement operation that does not change the structure of phase space distributions of any states @xcite . the same principle is applied to cavalcanti and reid s inequality @xcite so that neither @xmath296 nor @xmath297 is found macroscopically quantum .    in the experiments @xcite , entanglement was detected after applying the `` reverse '' displacement operation , @xmath299 , to state ( [ eq : gisinstate ] ) . _ observed entanglement with more than 500 photons using photodetectors @xcite . _ achieved the displacement operations with @xmath300 and entanglement was observed using homodyne tomography @xcite . ghobadi _ et al . _ @xcite investigated an alternative proposal to create micro - macro entanglement by applying the squeezing operation @xmath264 to one mode of single - photon entanglement as @xmath301 . it was shown that two states @xmath302 and @xmath303 can be discriminated by the mean photon number contained in each state which are 3 times different for large enough squeezing . the squeezing operation changes the structure of the phase space distribution and the degree of macroscopic quantumness @xmath304 increases as @xmath260 becomes larger while the tricky issue explained above on macroscopic distinctness between @xmath302 and @xmath303 remains . this state can be categorized into the same type of state with the one in eq . ( [ martinistate ] ) . recently , hybrid entanglement between particle - like ( or quantum ) and wave - like ( or classical ) states was experimentally demonstrated by jeong _ _ @xcite and morin _ a form of such state is @xmath305 it takes the maximum value of @xmath153 for @xmath244 as @xmath306 . s scheme uses an idea of superposing two distinct quantum operations . initially , a coherent state @xmath307 and the vacuum are prepared with two photon addition devices @xcite and a beam splitter with appropriate ratio as shown in fig . [ fig - micro - macro](c ) . when only of the two detectors d1 and d2 clicks , one does not know which mode the single photon was added to . the resulting state is then superposition as @xmath308 ( unnormalized ) that can be made to be an approximate state of @xmath309 by applying an appropriate displacement operation . however , hybrid entanglement with only small values of @xmath221 can be obtained in this way . experimentally , a fidelity of @xmath310 and entanglement of negativity @xmath311 were shown with @xmath312 @xcite . more sophisticated methods such as the tele - amplification method @xcite need be used to obtain large values of @xmath221 for such hybrid states @xcite . et  al . _ s experiment @xcite is based on a similar type of idea but using the photon subtraction with a beam splitter and a photodetector , a two - mode squeezed state with a very low gain , and a single - mode squeezed state in order to generate a slightly different type of target state such as @xmath313 . entanglement of negativity @xmath314 and fidelity @xmath315 were observed with amplitude @xmath316 @xcite . this type of idea is also found in andersen and neergaard - nielsen s previous proposal where a single photon , a single - mode squeezed state and a detector with a beam splitter for the photon subtraction are required @xcite . the target states of all these schemes @xcite show strong properties as macroscopic quantum states , i.e. , the maximum values of @xmath153 for @xmath244 . kreis and van loock investigated how to classify and quantify various types of hybrid entanglement between discrete and continuous variable states @xcite . entanglement between microscopic and macroscopic states is closely related to schrdinger s gedankenexperiment @xcite . micro - macro ( or hybrid - type ) entangled states are useful for loophole - free bell - type inequality tests @xcite , quantum information processing @xcite , and exploring quantum gravity @xcite . in particular , optical hybrid states benefit from both their discrete- and continuous - variable features in such a way that they are useful resources for quantum teleportation @xcite , quantum computation @xcite , and quantum key distribution @xcite . sheng _ et al . _ proposed an entanglement purification scheme for hybrid entanglement using linear optics elements and photon number measurements @xcite . we have reviewed and discussed proposed measures of macroscopic quantumness together with several attempts for implementing macroscopic quantum states using optical fields . in line with our discussions , three @xcite among the discussed measures seem to be a little more general than the others in the sense that they are applicable to various kinds of quantum states and serve as unambiguous quantifiers . those measures are particularly suitable for light fields @xcite , spin systems @xcite , and mechanical systems @xcite , respectively . it seems that the former two @xcite stick to the idea of genuine macroscopic quantum superpositions @xcite , i.e. , superpositions of macroscopically distinct states or genuine macroscopic quantum effects over mere accumulation of microscopic quantum effects . on the other hand , the latter @xcite seems to approach macroscopic quantumness in a broader way . it would be interesting to find out relations between measures for different physical systems from an inclusive point of view . very recently , frwis _ et al . _ investigated macroscopic quantumness of several optical states using measures for spin systems @xcite . they mapped a photonic state into a spin state using an ideal interaction model and found that some different measures show strong mathematical connections and give a similar classification of macroscopic quantum states . there have been various attempts to generate macroscopic quantum states using light fields . the arbitrariness of the decomposition for a quantum state leads to a question of whether certain quantum states @xcite are truly macroscopically quantum , at a theoretical level , even though they seem so with certain criteria @xcite . we exemplified the case where even a coherent state , @xmath229 , is categorized into a macroscopic superposition under a certain decomposition using this type of approach @xcite . perhaps , this suggests that more stringent considerations are necessary for classifications of macroscopic quantum states . this work was supported by the national research foundation of korea ( nrf ) grant funded by the korea government ( msip ) ( no . 2010 - 0018295 ) and the center for theoretical physics at seoul national university . iskhakov , i. n. agafonov , m. v. chekhova , g. o. rytikov , g. leuchs , phys . rev . a 84 ( 2011 ) 045804 . iskhakov , m. v. chekhova , g. o. rytikov , g. leuchs , phys . 106 ( 2011 ) 113602 . iskhakov , i. n. agafonov , m. v. chekhova , g. leuchs , phys . ( 2012 ) 150502 . b. kanseri , t. sh . iskhakov , g. rytikov , m. v. chekhova , g. leuchs , phys . a 87 ( 2013 ) 032110 . b. sanders , phys . a 40 ( 1989 ) 2417 . a. n. boto , p. kok , d. s. abrams , s. l. braunstein , c. p. williams , j. p. dowling , phys . rev . lett . 85 ( 2000 ) 2733 . p. kok , h. lee , j. p. dowling , phys . a 65 ( 2002 ) 052104 . i. afek , o. ambar , y. silberberg , science 328 ( 2010 ) 879 - 881 . s. olivares , m. g. a. paris , j. opt . b : quantum semiclass . opt . 7 ( 2005 ) s616 . m. s. kim , e. park , p. l. knight , h. jeong , phys . a 71 ( 2005 ) 043805 . s. olivares , m. g. a. paris , laser physics 16 ( 2006 ) 1533 . k. s. lee , m. s. kim , s .- d . lee , v. buzk , j. kor . ( 1993 ) 197 . x. wang , phys . a 64 ( 2001 ) 022303 . s. j. van enk , phys . 91 ( 2003 ) 017902 . s. j. van enk , phys . a 72 ( 2005 ) 022308 . n. lee , h. benichi , y. takeno , s. takeda , j. webb , e. huntington , a. furusawa , science 332 ( 2011 ) 330 . h. jeong , t. c. ralph , phys . 97 ( 2006 ) 100401 . h. jeong , t. c. ralph , phys . a 76 ( 2007 ) 042103 . s. j. van enk , o. hirota , phys . a 64 ( 2001 ) 022313 . h. jeong , m. s. kim , j. lee , phys . a 64 ( 2001 ) 052308 . h. jeong , m. s. kim , phys . a 65 ( 2002 ) 042305 . t. c. ralph , a. gilchrist , g. j. milburn , w. j. munro , s. glancy , phys . a 68 ( 2003 ) 042319 . a. p. lund , t. c. ralph , h. l. haselgrove , phys . ( 2008 ) 030503 . p. marek , j. fiurek , phys . a. 82 ( 2010 ) 014304 . a. p. lund , t. c. ralph , h. l. haselgrove , new j. phys . 13 ( 2011 ) 115015 . j. kim , j. lee , s .- w . ji , h. nha , p. m. anisimov , j. p. dowling , arxiv:1012.5872 ( 2010 ) . c. c. gerry , r. a. campos , phys . a 64 ( 2001 ) 063814 . c. c. gerry , a. benmoussa , r. a. campos , phys . a 66 ( 2002 ) 013804 . r. a. campos , c. c. gerry , a. benmoussa , phys . a 68 ( 2003 ) 023810 . c. r. myers , t. c. ralph , phys . a 66 ( 2002 ) 023819 . j. joo , w. j. munro , t. p. spiller , phys . ( 2011 ) 083601 . o. hirota , k. kato , d. murakami , arxiv:1108.1517 ( 2011 ) . j. joo , k. park , h. jeong , w. j. munro , k. nemoto , t. p. spiller , phys . rev . a 86 ( 2012 ) 043828 . a. mann , b. c. sanders , w. j. munro , phys . rev . a 51 ( 1995 ) 989 . r. filip , j. ehck , m. duek , j. opt . b : quantum semiclass . opt . 3 ( 2001 ) 341 . d. wilson , h. jeong , m. s. kim , j. mod . 49 ( 2002 ) 851 . h. jeong , w. son , m. s. kim , d. ahn , c. brukner , phys . rev . a 67 ( 2003 ) 012106 . j. wenger , m. hafezi , f. grosshans , r. tualle - brouri , p. grangier , phys . a 67 ( 2003 ) 012105 . m. stobiska , h. jeong , t. c. ralph , phys . rev . a 75 ( 2007 ) 052105 . h. jeong , phys . a 78 ( 2008 ) 042101 . lee , h. jeong phys . a * 80 * , 052105 ( 2009 ) . c. c. gerry , j. mimih , a. benmoussa , phys . rev . a 80 ( 2009 ) 022111 . h. jeong , m. paternostro , t. c. ralph , phys . 102 ( 2009 ) 060403 . y. lim , m. paternostro , j. lee , m. kang , h. jeong , phys . rev . a 85 ( 2012 ) 062112 . b. t. kirby , j. d. franson , phys . rev . a 87 ( 2013 ) 053822 . b. t. kirby , j. d. franson , phys . rev . a 89 ( 2014 ) 033861 . m. paternostro , h. jeong , phys . a 81 ( 2010 ) 032115 . lee , m. paternostro , h. jeong , phys . a 83 ( 2011 ) 022102 . g. mckeown , m. g. a. paris , m. paternostro , phys . a 83 ( 2011 ) 062105 . lee , s .- w . ji , h. nha , j. opt . b 30 ( 2013 ) 2483 . t. c. ralph , g. j. pryde , prog . opt . 54 ( 2009 ) 209 . j. s. neergaard - nielsen , y. eto , c .- w . lee , h. jeong , m. sasaki , nat . photon . 7 ( 2013 ) 439 . f. de martini , phys . 81 ( 1998 ) 2842 . f. de martini , phys . lett . a 250 ( 1998 ) 15 . p. sekatski , b. sanguinetti , e. pomarico , n. gisin , c. simon , phys . a 82 ( 2010 ) 053814 . r. ghobadi , a. lvovsky , c. simon , phys . ( 2013 ) 170406 . n. bruno , a. martin , p. sekatski , n. sangouard , r. t. thew , n. gisin , nat . ( 2013 ) 545 . a. i. lvovsky , r. ghobadi , a. chandra , a. s. prasad , c. simon , nat . ( 2013 ) 541 . s. raeisi , p. sekatski , c. simon , phys . ( 2011 ) 250401 . s. raeisi , w. tittel , c. simon , phys . ( 2012 ) 120404 . p. sekatski , n. brunner , c. branciard , n. gisin , c. simon , phys . 103 ( 2009 ) 113601 . n. spagnolo , c. vitelli , m. paternostro , f. de martini , f. sciarrino , phys . rev . a 84 ( 2011 ) 032102 . m. stobi ' nska , p. sekatski , a. buraczewski , n. gisin , g. leuchs , phys . a 84 ( 2011 ) 034104 . h. kwon , h. jeong , phys . a 88 ( 2013 ) 052127 . m. stobi ' nska , f. tppel , p. sekatski , a. buraczewski , phys . rev . a 89 ( 2014 ) 022119 . f. de martini , f. sciarrino , c. vitelli , arxiv:0804.0341 ( 2008 ) . a. furusawa , p. van loock , quantum teleportation and entanglement : a hybrid approach to optical quantum information processing , john wiley and sons , new york , 2011 . p. van loock , laser & photon . rev . 5 ( 2011 ) 167 . k. park , s .- w . lee , h. jeong , phys . a 86 ( 2012 ) 062301 . lee , h. jeong , phys . a 87 ( 2013 ) 022326 . j. rigas , o. ghne , n. ltkenhaus , phys . a 73 ( 2006 ) 012341 . c. wittmann , j. frst , c. wiechers , d. elser , h. hseler , n. ltkenhaus , g. leuchs , opt . express 18 ( 2010 ) 4499 .
Abstract:

Answer: we present a review and discussions on characterizations and quantifications of macroscopic quantum states as well as their implementations and applications in optical systems . we compare and criticize different measures proposed to define and quantify macroscopic quantum superpositions and extend such comparisons to several types of optical quantum states actively considered for experimental implementations within recent research topics .