Abstract
Frequentist and Bayesian phase estimation strategies lead to conceptually different results on the state of knowledge about the true value of an unknown parameter. We compare the two frameworks and their sensitivity bounds to the estimation of an interferometric phase shift limited by quantum noise, considering both the cases of a fixed and a fluctuating parameter. We point out that frequentist precision bounds, such as the Cramér-Rao bound, for instance, do not apply to Bayesian strategies and vice versa. In particular, we show that the Bayesian variance can overcome the frequentist Cramér-Rao bound, which appears to be a paradoxical result if the conceptual difference between the two approaches are overlooked. Similarly, bounds for fluctuating parameters make no statement about the estimation of a fixed parameter.