Does quantum advantage for GW detection scale differently across LISA versus LIGO frequency bands?

Your question asks whether quantum-enhanced sensing provides different advantages in the low-frequency (LISA, ~mHz) versus ground-based (LIGO, ~100 Hz) regimes. The provided preprints address quantum limits for GW detection, but they don't directly compare quantum advantage scaling across these two frequency bands.

Here's what the archive does tell us:

Coupling mechanism dominates over frequency. The fundamental constraint isn't the frequency band itself, but how the gravitational wave couples to your sensor [AG-2026.03-158]. That paper establishes that laser interferometry (used by both LISA and LIGO) achieves coupling gains ~10^15 times better than atomic sensors, and this advantage is largely independent of the detector's operating frequency. The study identifies three coupling mechanisms—internal atomic, center-of-mass, and light-based—and shows the laser approach wins decisively across all regimes.

Quantum enhancements work within existing architectures. Recent work demonstrates quantum neural networks can achieve >98% classification accuracy for LISA GW signals [AG-2025.09-333], suggesting quantum machine-learning tools scale effectively in the space-based (low-frequency) domain. However, this is a data-analysis advantage, not a fundamental sensing advantage—it doesn't address whether squeezed light or other quantum resources improve *strain sensitivity* differently at mHz versus 100 Hz.

High-frequency detection faces steeper quantum barriers. For ultrahigh-frequency GWs (kHz–MHz), backgrounds lie *below* the quantum limit for most detection schemes [AG-2025.01-687], suggesting quantum noise becomes harder to beat as you climb in frequency. By contrast, LIGO and LISA operate where classical noise (shot noise, thermal noise) still dominates the budget, so quantum squeezing helps both—but the paper doesn't quantify whether the relative gain differs.

The archive doesn't directly address whether LISA's longer arms or lower frequency gives quantum squeezing a structural advantage over LIGO's configuration. That's the specific scaling comparison your question needs.