appear. To name a few, they might no longer work properly above a certain photon number input, electronics and signal processing of data can limit the resolution beyond what is allowed by the specific quantum nature of light, conditions in the laboratory can change randomly effectively reducing the sensitivity achievable in the experiment. Surely, all of these are [*technical*]{} rather than [*fundamental*]{} limitations, but in many situations the ultimate limit might be [*technical*]{} rather than [*fundamental*]{}. In this scenario, we show below that weak value amplification can be a [*valuable*]{} and an [*easy*]{} option to overcome all of these technical limitations, as it has been demonstrated in numerous experiments.

![Reduction of the probability of error using a weak value amplification scheme. (a) Minimum probability of error as a function of the photon number $N$ that leaves the interferometer. The two points highlighted corresponds to $N=10^6$, which yields $P_{\mathrm{error}}=1.3 \times 10^{-1}$, and $N=10^7$, which yields $P_{\mathrm{error}}=9.3 \times 10^{-5}$. (b) Number of photons ($N_{\mathrm{out}}$) after projection in the polarisation state $\hat{u}=1/\sqrt{2} \left[ \hat{x}+\hat{y}\exp(i\theta)
\right]$, as a function of the angle $\theta$. The input number of photons is $N=10^7$. The dot corresponds to the point $N_{\mathrm{out}}=10^6$ and $\theta=53.2^{\circ}$. Pulse width: $T_0$=1 ps; temporal 