 term on the right-hand side of Eq. [(\[eq:s\])]{} vanishes. It is furthermore reasonable to suppose that an environmental heat bath in thermal equilibrium leads to a vanishing expectation value of the stochastic force $\hat{\boldsymbol{\xi}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:stochasticforce\])]{}. Consequently, presuming a vanishing shift $\mathbf{s}(t)$ seems appropriate for a typical measurement configuration. We will confirm this presumption further below for a specifically chosen initial state. Note that the linearity of Eqs. [(\[eq:inferredsystem\])]{} and [(\[eq:inferredobservables\])]{}, which is essential for the inference process, Eq. [(\[eq:inferredexpecation\])]{}, is a direct result of the bilinear structure of the Hamiltonian, Eq. [(\[eq:H\])]{}.

We assume here the non-pathological case that the interaction Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{\mathrm{int}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:H:int\])]{}, and the measurement vector $\hat{\mathbf{w}}(t)$ are chosen in such a way that inferring system observables from the pointers is possible in the first place, which is defined by the existence of the coefficient matrix $\mathbf{A}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:inferredobservables\])]{}. In other words, we require a sufficient information transfer from the system to the pointers. For example, for the classic Arthurs and Kelly model [@arthurs1965] with the interaction Hamiltonian mentioned in Sec. \[sec:generalopenpointer-basedsimultaneousmeasurements:hamiltonian\] and no environmental heat bath, measuring both pointer positions leads to an existing matrix $\mathbf{A}(t)$ for $t>0$, but measuring both pointer momenta does not [@busshardt2010].

Seeing now the role played by the inferred observables, we can quantify the uncertainty of a simultaneous pointer-based measurement with the help of the so-called noise operators [@arthurs1988] $$\begin{aligned}
 \label{eq:noiseoperators}
  \begin{pmatrix} \hat{N}_{\mathcal{X}}(t) \\ \hat{N}_{\mathcal{P}}(t) \end{pmatrix} \equiv \begin{pmatrix} \hat{\mathcal{X}}(t) - \hat{X}_{\mathrm{S}}(0) \\ \hat{\mathcal{P}}(t) - \hat{P}_{\mathrm{
term on the right - hand side of Eq.   [ (\[eq: s\ ]) ] { } vanishes. It is furthermore fair to presuppose that an environmental heat bath in thermal chemical equilibrium leave to a vanishing expectation value of the stochastic effect $ \hat{\boldsymbol{\xi}}(t)$, Eq.   [ (\[eq: stochasticforce\ ]) ] { }. Consequently, presume a vanishing transformation $ \mathbf{s}(t)$ seems appropriate for a typical measurement shape. We will confirm this presumption further below for a specifically chosen initial department of state. Note that the linearity of Eqs.   [ (\[eq: inferredsystem\ ]) ] { } and [ (\[eq: inferredobservables\ ]) ] { }, which is essential for the inference process, Eq.   [ (\[eq: inferredexpecation\ ]) ] { }, is a direct consequence of the bilinear structure of the Hamiltonian, Eq.   [ (\[eq: H\ ]) ] { }. 

 We assume here the non - pathological character that the interaction Hamiltonian $ \hat{H}_{\mathrm{int}}(t)$, Eq.   [ (\[eq: H: int\ ]) ] { }, and the measurement vector $ \hat{\mathbf{w}}(t)$ are chosen in such a way that inferring system observables from the arrow is possible in the first place, which is defined by the existence of the coefficient matrix $ \mathbf{A}(t)$, Eq.   [ (\[eq: inferredobservables\ ]) ] { }. In early words, we require a sufficient information transfer from the system to the pointers. For case, for the classic Arthurs and Kelly model [ @arthurs1965 ] with the interaction Hamiltonian mentioned in Sec.   \[sec: generalopenpointer - basedsimultaneousmeasurements: hamiltonian\ ] and no environmental heat bath, measuring both pointer positions leads to an existing matrix $ \mathbf{A}(t)$ for $ t>0 $, but measure both pointer momenta does not [ @busshardt2010 ]. 

 interpret nowadays the role played by the inferred observables, we can quantify the doubt of a simultaneous arrow - based measurement with the help of the therefore - called noise operators [ @arthurs1988 ] $ $ \begin{aligned } 
  \label{eq: noiseoperators } 
   \begin{pmatrix } \hat{N}_{\mathcal{X}}(t) \\ \hat{N}_{\mathcal{P}}(t) \end{pmatrix } \equiv \begin{pmatrix } \hat{\mathcal{X}}(t) - \hat{X}_{\mathrm{S}}(0) \\ \hat{\mathcal{P}}(t) - \hat{P}_{\mathrm {
 tegm on the right-hand side of Eq. [(\[eq:s\])]{} vaniskws. It ms furtgermore feasonable to suppose that ai encironnental heat bath in thdrmal equplibrium oeadw to a vanishing exizctatjln vclne of the stochsstic forca $\hat{\boldsymbon{\xk}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:stochasticforce\])]{}. Consequently, pwesuminb w vanishing shyft $\kwthbr{s}(t)$ seems appropriate for a typicam measugement configuratoon. We will confirm this pgesulption further bellw for a spgdifyxally chosen initial suace. Note thaj the linearity of Eqs. [(\[eq:inferredrystek\])]{} and [(\[eq:indeerefmbservables\])]{}, whicr is essential for tve infetence process, Cq. [(\[eq:iifereedexpecation\])]{}, is a dicect result of the bylinear sdrbcture of the Hamiltobiqn, Eq. [(\[gq:H\])]{}.

We assjne fert tie hon-patjolkgical cass that the unteraction Hamiltomiwb $\hat{H}_{\mathrm{iht}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[qq:R:int\])]{}, and the measurement vector $\hat{\mathtf{w}}(f)$ are chosen in such a qay that inferring sydtem obsewvables from the pointers is possible in the firsd plare, whngm is eevined by the existence of the coefficient matwjx $\msthbf{A}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:innerredobservables\])]{}. On oyrer words, we tequire a aufficient informahion trwnsfee from tht sysyem to the pointers. For exanple, for the xlassic Arthurs anb Kelly modeu [@arjhurs1965] eith the interaction Haoiltknian mentilned in Ssz. \[sec:generalopenpuinner-bdsedsimultaneousmeasuremenes:hamiltoiian\] cnd no evvirpnmentwl heat bahh, measuring both pointeg posntionv leads to an existing matrix $\mathbf{A}(t)$ foc $t>0$, but measutinc bmth poincer mokenta does noe [@busshardt2010].

Seenng now che roue played gy the mnferred obsqrvables, we cdj quantify tie uncertwintt of a simuuganeous pointet-based mecfurenent with the help of fhe so-called nonrt iperators [@arthirs1988] $$\bedij{akidted}
 \label{eq:nmiseupefstors}
  \begin{kiabrib} \hay{N}_{\mathcal{X}}(t) \\ \hat{N}_{\matvcal{L}}(t) \end{pmatrix} \equif \negin{pmattix} \hat{\maehcal{X}}(t) - \hat{X}_{\kathrm{S}}(0) \\ \hat{\mathcap{P}}(t) - \iat{P}_{\mavhrm{
term on the right-hand side of Eq. It furthermore reasonable suppose that an equilibrium to a vanishing value of the force $\hat{\boldsymbol{\xi}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:stochasticforce\])]{}. Consequently, presuming vanishing shift $\mathbf{s}(t)$ seems appropriate for a typical measurement configuration. We will confirm presumption further below for a specifically chosen initial state. Note that the linearity Eqs. and which essential for the inference process, Eq. [(\[eq:inferredexpecation\])]{}, is a direct result of the bilinear structure of Hamiltonian, Eq. [(\[eq:H\])]{}. We assume here the non-pathological that the interaction Hamiltonian Eq. [(\[eq:H:int\])]{}, and the measurement $\hat{\mathbf{w}}(t)$ chosen in a that system observables from pointers is possible in the first place, which is defined by the existence of the coefficient matrix Eq. [(\[eq:inferredobservables\])]{}. words, we a information from the system pointers. For example, for the classic model [@arthurs1965] with the interaction Hamiltonian mentioned in \[sec:generalopenpointer-basedsimultaneousmeasurements:hamiltonian\] and environmental heat bath, measuring both pointer leads to an existing matrix $\mathbf{A}(t)$ for $t>0$, measuring both pointer momenta does not [@busshardt2010]. Seeing now the role played by the inferred can quantify the uncertainty a simultaneous pointer-based with help the noise operators $$\begin{aligned} \label{eq:noiseoperators} \begin{pmatrix} \hat{N}_{\mathcal{X}}(t) \\ \hat{N}_{\mathcal{P}}(t) \end{pmatrix} \equiv \begin{pmatrix} \hat{\mathcal{X}}(t) - \\ \hat{\mathcal{P}}(t) - \hat{P}_{\mathrm{
 term on the right-hand side of EQ. [(\[eq:s\])]{} vanishEs. It iS fuRthErMore ReasOnable to supposE That An environmental heat batH in thErMAl eqUIlIbriuM leads tO A vANIshInG eXpeCtATiOn valUe oF the stoChastic forCe $\hAt{\Boldsymbol{\xi}}(T)$, eq. [(\[Eq:stochastIcfOrce\])]{}. ConsequeNtlY, presuMiNg a VAnishIng Shift $\Mathbf{S}(T)$ seems AppropriaTe FOr a typICal measUREmEnt cOnfiguration. We wilL CoNFirm this presumPtion fUrTHeR BEloW foR a specificAlLy choSEn initiAL sTATE. NoTE that the lineaRity of Eqs. [(\[eq:INfeRredsyStEm\])]{} aND [(\[eq:infErredObSErvAbles\])]{}, which iS essEntial for The infERence prOCess, Eq. [(\[eQ:inferRedExpEcatIOn\])]{}, Is A diReCT reSUlT of THe bIlinear sTrUcTure oF the hAMILtonIan, eq. [(\[eq:h\])]{}.

We asSume here the noN-paTholOGicAl casE that The iNtEractIon HamIltonIaN $\hat{H}_{\mathrm{int}}(t)$, eq. [(\[eq:h:int\])]{}, and thE meAsUreMeNt vecTOr $\hat{\mAthBf{w}}(T)$ are choSen in suCH a wAy THAT iNferring system obseRvABLeS from the PointeRS iS pOSsible in ThE fiRst pLACe, whiCh is DEfIned by thE existENcE oF the coeFfIcient MaTriX $\maThbf{A}(T)$, eq. [(\[eq:InferrEdobservAbles\])]{}. iN other words, we rEQuire a sufficiENt INFoRMatiOn tRansfer from The sYStem To thE PoIntERs. For ExampLe, FOr THe classic Arthurs and keLly modEl [@artHurs1965] with the inTeraction HAMILtonian mEntiONeD In Sec. \[sec:generaLopenPointer-basEDsimultaNeousMeasuremEnts:hamilTONian\] and nO enVirOnmEntAL HeAt bath, measuriNG Both PoInter poSitIons leaDs tO an ExiStiNg Matrix $\matHbf{A}(t)$ for $T>0$, bUt MeAsUriNg botH Pointer mOmEntA dOes Not [@buSShardt2010].

seeinG now ThE rOLe pLayed by THe INFerrEd ObServAblEs, We can QuanTIfy The unceRtainty of A siMUltaNeOuS pointeR-based measureMeNt with the hElP of The so-cALLed noise Operators [@arthurs1988] $$\begin{alIGned}
 \labEl{eQ:noisEopeRators}
  \begIn{pMatrix} \Hat{n}_{\MathcaL{X}}(t) \\ \hat{n}_{\mathCaL{P}}(t) \END{pmatRIX} \eQuiV \bEgin{pmatriX} \HAt{\mAthcaL{X}}(T) - \hat{x}_{\mathrm{s}}(0) \\ \hat{\mathcal{P}}(t) - \hat{P}_{\mAThrM{
 term on the right-hand si de of Eq.[(\[e q:s \]) ]{ } va nish es. It is furt h ermo re reasonable to suppo se th at an e n vi ronme ntal he a tb a thin  t her ma l  e quili bri um lead s to a van ish in g expectatio n  v alue of th e s tochastic fo rce  $\hat {\ bol d symbo l{\ xi}}( t)$, E q . [(\[ eq:stocha st i cforce \ ])]{}.C o ns eque ntly, presuming a va n ishing shift $ \mathb f{ s }( t ) $ s eem s appropri at e for a typic a lm e a sur e ment configur ation. We w i llconfir mthi s  presu mptio nf urt her below f or a  specific ally c h osen in i tial st ate. N ote  th at t h eli nea ri t y o f  E qs. [(\ [eq:infe rr ed syste m\]) ] { } and[(\ [eq: infer redobservable s\] )]{} ,  wh ich i s ess enti al  forthe in feren ce  process, Eq. [ (\[e q:inferre dex pe cat io n\])] { }, isa d ire ct resu lt of t h e b il i n e ar  structure of theHa m i lt onian, E q. [(\ [ eq :H \ ])]{}.
We  as sume h ere t he n o n- patholog ical c a se  t hat the  i nterac ti onHam ilton i an $ \hat{H }_{\math rm{in t }}(t)$, Eq. [( \ [eq:H:int\])] { }, a nd themea surement ve ctor $\ha t{\m a th bf{ w }}(t) $ are  c h os e n in such a way tha tinferr ing s ystem observa bles fromt h e  pointer s is po s sible in the f irstplace, whi c h is def inedby the e xistenceo f  the coe ffi cie ntmat r i x$\mathbf{A}(t ) $ , Eq .[(\[eq: inf erredob ser vab les \]) ]{ }. In oth er words ,we  r eq uir e a s u fficient  i nfo rm ati on tr a nsferfromthesy st e m t o the p o in t e rs.Fo rexam ple ,for t he c l ass ic Arth urs and K ell y  mod el  [ @arthur s1965] with t he  interacti on  Ha milton i a n mentio ned in Sec. \[sec:gener a lopenpo int er-ba seds imultaneo usm easure men t s:hami ltonia n\] a nd  no e nviro n m en tal  h eat bath,m e asu ringbo th p ointerpositions leads to anexisting matr ix$\ma t h bf {A} ( t) $  fo r$ t>0 $ ,  but measuringboth point er mo menta does not  [ @bussha rdt2010 ].

S e eing no w the rol e playedby  the i nfe rred obser vables,we can qu a ntify th e unc ert aintyof  asimul taneou s  po inter -based  m easure mentwi th the h elp of the so-called no ise op erato rs[@arthurs 198 8 ] $ $\begin{a lign ed}
 \labe l{e q:n oiseo per a tors} 
  \ b eg in{ p matri x} \ h at{N}_{\m a th cal { X }} (t) \\ \hat { N } _{\ mathc al{ P }}(t)\end {pmatrix} \equiv\ begin{pmatrix}  \ha t { \ma thc a l{X} }( t) - \hat{X}_{ \ma th r m {S}}(0)\\  \hat{\math cal{P}}( t) - \ha t{P}_{ \mathr m{
 term_on the_right-hand side of Eq. [(\[eq:s\])]{}_vanishes. It_is_furthermore reasonable_to_suppose that an_environmental heat bath_in thermal equilibrium leads_to a vanishing_expectation_value of the stochastic force $\hat{\boldsymbol{\xi}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:stochasticforce\])]{}. Consequently, presuming a vanishing shift $\mathbf{s}(t)$ seems_appropriate_for a_typical_measurement_configuration. We will confirm this_presumption further below for a_specifically chosen_initial state. Note that the linearity of Eqs. [(\[eq:inferredsystem\])]{}_and_[(\[eq:inferredobservables\])]{}, which is_essential for the inference process, Eq. [(\[eq:inferredexpecation\])]{}, is a direct_result of the bilinear structure of_the Hamiltonian, Eq. [(\[eq:H\])]{}.

We_assume_here_the non-pathological case that_the interaction Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_{\mathrm{int}}(t)$, Eq. [(\[eq:H:int\])]{}, and_the measurement vector $\hat{\mathbf{w}}(t)$ are chosen_in such a way that inferring system_observables from the pointers is possible_in the first place, which_is defined_by the existence of the_coefficient matrix $\mathbf{A}(t)$,_Eq. [(\[eq:inferredobservables\])]{}. In_other words, we_require a sufficient information transfer from_the system to_the pointers. For example, for the_classic_Arthurs and Kelly_model_[@arthurs1965]_with the_interaction Hamiltonian mentioned_in_Sec. \[sec:generalopenpointer-basedsimultaneousmeasurements:hamiltonian\] and_no_environmental heat bath, measuring both pointer_positions_leads to an existing matrix $\mathbf{A}(t)$ for_$t>0$, but measuring both_pointer_momenta does not [@busshardt2010].

Seeing_now the role played by_the inferred observables, we can quantify_the uncertainty_of a_simultaneous pointer-based measurement with the help of the so-called noise operators_[@arthurs1988] $$\begin{aligned}
 \label{eq:noiseoperators}
  \begin{pmatrix} \hat{N}_{\mathcal{X}}(t)_\\ \hat{N}_{\mathcal{P}}(t) \end{pmatrix} \equiv_\begin{pmatrix} \hat{\mathcal{X}}(t)_-_\hat{X}_{\mathrm{S}}(0) \\ \hat{\mathcal{P}}(t)_-_\hat{P}_{\mathrm{