OSA's Digital Library

Journal of the Optical Society of America A

Journal of the Optical Society of America A


  • Editor: Stephen A. Burns
  • Vol. 25, Iss. 4 — Apr. 1, 2008
  • pp: 874–880

Positive-operator-valued-measure view of the ensemble approach to polarization optics

Sudha, A. V. Gopala Rao, A. R. Usha Devi, and A. K. Rajagopal  »View Author Affiliations

JOSA A, Vol. 25, Issue 4, pp. 874-880 (2008)

View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (150 KB)

Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools



The statistical ensemble formalism of Kim et al. [J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 433 (1987)] offers a realistic model for characterizing the effect of stochastic nonimage-forming optical media on the state of polarization of transmitted light. With suitable choice of the Jones ensemble, various Mueller transformations—some of which are hitherto unknown—are deduced. It is observed that the ensemble approach is formally identical to the positive-operator-valued measures (POVMs) on the quantum density matrix. This observation, in combination with the recent suggestion by Ahnert and Payne [Phys. Rev. A 71, 012330–1 (2005)] —in the context of generalized quantum measurement on single photon polarization states—that linear optics elements can be employed in setting up all possible POVMs enables us to propose a way of realizing different types of Mueller devices.

© 2008 Optical Society of America

OCIS Codes
(030.0030) Coherence and statistical optics : Coherence and statistical optics
(230.0230) Optical devices : Optical devices

ToC Category:
Optical Devices

Original Manuscript: June 25, 2007
Revised Manuscript: January 4, 2008
Manuscript Accepted: February 4, 2008
Published: March 17, 2008

Sudha, A. V. Gopala Rao, A. R. Usha Devi, and A. K. Rajagopal, "Positive-operator-valued-measure view of the ensemble approach to polarization optics," J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25, 874-880 (2008)

Sort:  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  


  1. K. Kim, L. Mandel, and E. Wolf, “Relationship between Jones and Mueller matrices for random media,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 433-437 (1987). [CrossRef]
  2. S. E. Ahnert and M. C. Payne, “General implementation of all possible positive-operator-value measurements of single photon polarization states,” Phys. Rev. A 71, 012330-1-4 (2005). [CrossRef]
  3. R. Barakat, “Bilinear constraints between elements of the 4×4 Mueller-Jones transfer matrix of polarization theory,” Opt. Commun. 38, 159-161 (1981). [CrossRef]
  4. R. Simon, “The connection between Mueller and Jones matrices of polarization optics,” Opt. Commun. 42, 293-297 (1982). [CrossRef]
  5. A. B. Kostinski, B. James, and W. M. Boerner, “Optimal reception of partially polarized waves,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 5, 58-64 (1988). [CrossRef]
  6. A. B. Kostinski, “Depolarization criterion for incoherent scattering,” Appl. Opt. 31, 3506-3508 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. J. J. Gil and E. Bernabeu, “A depolarization criterion in Mueller matrices,” Opt. Acta 32, 259-261 (1985). [CrossRef]
  8. R. Simon, “Mueller matrices and depolarization criteria,” J. Mod. Opt. 34, 569-575 (1987). [CrossRef]
  9. R. Simon, “Non-depolarizing systems and degree of polarization,” Opt. Commun. 77, 349-354 (1990) [CrossRef]
  10. M. Sanjay Kumar and R. Simon, “Characterization of Mueller matrices in polarization optics,” Opt. Commun. 88, 464-470 (1992). [CrossRef]
  11. R. Sridhar and R. Simon, “Normal form for Mueller matrices in polarization optics,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1903-1915 (1994). [CrossRef]
  12. D. G. M. Anderson and R. Barakat, “Necessary and sufficient conditions for a Mueller matrix to be derivable from a Jones matrix,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 2305-2319 (1994). [CrossRef]
  13. C. V. M. van der Mee and J. W. Hovenier, “Structure of matrices transforming Stokes parameters,” J. Math. Phys. 33, 3574-3584 (1992). [CrossRef]
  14. C. R. Givens and A. B. Kostinski, “A simple necessary and sufficient criterion on physically realizable Mueller matrices,” J. Mod. Opt. 40, 471-481 (1993). [CrossRef]
  15. C. V. M. van der Mee, “An eigenvalue criterion for matrices transforming Stokes parameters,” J. Math. Phys. 34, 5072-5088 (1993). [CrossRef]
  16. S. R. Cloude, “Group theory and polarization algebra,” Optik (Stuttgart) 75, 26-36 (1986).
  17. A. V. Gopala Rao, K. S. Mallesh, and Sudha, “On the algebraic characterization of a Mueller matrix in polarization optics I. Identifying a Mueller matrix from its N matrix,” J. Mod. Opt. 45, 955-987 (1998). [CrossRef]
  18. R. M. A. Azzam and N. M. Bashara, Ellipsometry and Polarized Light (North-Holland, 1977).
  19. A real 4-vector is called timelike, spacelike, and null, respectively, if Xt˜GXt>0, Xs˜GXs<0, and Xn˜GXn=0. Here we follow the conventions of K. N. Srinivasa Rao, The Rotation and Lorentz Groups and Their Representations for Physicists (Wiley, 1988).
  20. A linear combination of Mueller matrices Me with nonnegative coefficients pe is also a Mueller matrix. This is because each Mueller matrix {Me} transforms an initial Stokes vector into a final Stokes vector, and a linear combination of Stokes vectors with nonnegative coefficients pe is again a Stokes vector.
  21. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge U. Press, 2002).
  22. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Quantum Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge U. Press, 1995).
  23. S. R. Cloude, “Conditions for physical realizability of matrix operators in polarimetry,” Proc. SPIE 1166, 177-185 (1989).

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


Fig. 1

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited