pith. sign in

arxiv: 2212.02877 · v4 · submitted 2022-12-06 · 🪐 quant-ph

Scaling Network Topologies for Multi-User Entanglement Distribution

Muhammad Daud , Aeysha Khalique This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 10:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum networksentanglement distributionnetwork topologydecoherencequantum key distributiontree topologymulti-path routingscalability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Thin-connected tree networks accommodate more user pairs for entanglement distribution than lattice topologies under decoherence.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes a connected tree topology that adds redundant edges to support multi-path routing of entangled pairs. It conducts a qualitative scalability analysis of maximum user capacity across topologies while accounting for decoherence, concluding that thin-connected trees outperform more uniform lattice structures. The same advantage appears in quantum key distribution, where thin trees maintain better performance as decoherence increases. A sympathetic reader would care because large-scale quantum networks must distribute entanglement to many users before noise destroys the correlations.

Core claim

Thin-connected tree networks with redundant edges for multi-path routing can accommodate a larger number of user pairs than more evenly distributed lattice topologies in the presence of decoherence, and the quantum network of a thin tree topology is more robust against decoherence leading to better key distribution among multiple communicating parties.

What carries the argument

The connected tree topology, which adds redundant edges to a tree structure to enable multi-path routing of entangled pairs.

If this is right

  • Thin tree topologies scale to higher maximum user capacity in decoherence-limited regimes.
  • Quantum key distribution achieves higher rates across more parties in thin tree networks than in lattices.
  • Redundant edges in tree structures provide a practical advantage for multi-path entanglement routing.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Quantum network architects could favor controlled-redundancy trees when planning for many simultaneous user pairs.
  • Quantitative comparisons using explicit decoherence models would test whether the qualitative ordering holds for specific hardware parameters.
  • Similar topology comparisons could apply to other tasks such as quantum teleportation or distributed sensing that rely on shared entanglement.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that redundancy in thin trees improves multi-path routing success enough to offset decoherence and yield higher user capacity than lattices.

What would settle it

A quantitative model or simulation that assigns concrete decoherence rates and routing probabilities and finds lattice topologies supporting more simultaneous user pairs than thin trees.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2212.02877 by Aeysha Khalique, Muhammad Daud.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic diagram for PBS-based purification proto [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Examples of some network topologies, (a) A complete [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Shortest path routing manifesting in a network. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Multi-path routing strategy, (b)Temporal multi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. A graphical representation of tree topologies. (a) a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Trade-off is shown between fidelity of entangled pairs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Three different edge schemes in connected tree topol [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Path routing and network statistics for 64 node [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Network topologies with three temporal layers are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a) A minimal spanning tree network that has a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Future quantum internet relies on large-scale entanglement distribution. Quantum decoherence is a significant obstacle in large-scale networks, which otherwise perform better with multiple paths between the source and destination. We propose a new topology, connected tree, with a significant amount of redundant edges to support multi-path routing of entangled pairs. We qualitatively analyse the scalability of quantum networks to maximum user capacity in decoherence for different topologies. Our analysis shows that thin-connected tree networks can accommodate a larger number of user pairs than more evenly distributed lattice topology. We extend our analysis to quantum key distribution and show that the quantum network of a thin tree topology is more robust against decoherence and leads to better key distribution among multiple communicating parties.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a connected tree topology with redundant edges to enable multi-path routing for entanglement distribution in quantum networks. It performs a qualitative scalability analysis of maximum user capacity under decoherence across topologies and claims that thin-connected tree networks accommodate more user pairs than lattice topologies. The analysis is extended to quantum key distribution, where thin tree topologies are asserted to be more robust against decoherence.

Significance. If substantiated by an explicit model, the result would indicate that controlled-redundancy tree topologies can outperform regular lattices for multi-user entanglement distribution and QKD under decoherence, with potential implications for quantum network architecture design.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract: the claim that thin-connected tree networks accommodate a larger number of user pairs than lattice topologies is presented without any decoherence model, capacity definition, equations, success-probability curves, or numerical comparison, so the ordering between topologies cannot be verified.
  2. Abstract: the assumed relationship between topology redundancy, multi-path routing success probability, and decoherence effects that is required for thin trees to outperform lattices is not specified, which is load-bearing for the central scalability claim.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract would be clearer if it briefly defined 'thin-connected tree' and stated the precise topologies and user-capacity metric used in the comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed feedback. Our analysis is explicitly qualitative, as stated in the abstract and manuscript. We address the two major comments on the abstract below and will revise the abstract for improved clarity on the qualitative nature of the claims and the underlying assumptions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: the claim that thin-connected tree networks accommodate a larger number of user pairs than lattice topologies is presented without any decoherence model, capacity definition, equations, success-probability curves, or numerical comparison, so the ordering between topologies cannot be verified.

    Authors: The abstract is a high-level summary of the qualitative scalability analysis detailed in the full manuscript. The ordering between topologies follows from qualitative arguments on how decoherence impacts user capacity differently in tree versus lattice structures, with trees benefiting from redundant paths. No numerical curves or explicit models are provided because the analysis is qualitative rather than quantitative. We will revise the abstract to explicitly note the qualitative basis of the comparison and direct readers to the relevant sections for the reasoning. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Abstract: the assumed relationship between topology redundancy, multi-path routing success probability, and decoherence effects that is required for thin trees to outperform lattices is not specified, which is load-bearing for the central scalability claim.

    Authors: The relationship is explained in the manuscript: redundant edges in connected trees support multi-path routing, which increases the probability of successful entanglement distribution under decoherence relative to lattices. We agree the abstract does not specify this assumption explicitly. We will revise the abstract to include a concise statement of this relationship to better support the central claim. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; qualitative scalability claim presented as analysis outcome without self-referential definitions or fitted predictions

full rationale

The abstract states a qualitative analysis of topologies for entanglement distribution under decoherence, concluding that thin-connected trees support more user pairs than lattices. No equations, parameters, or derivations appear that reduce by construction to inputs (no self-definitional relations, no fitted inputs renamed as predictions). No self-citations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes are invoked in the provided text. The central claim is framed as resulting from analysis rather than tautological or load-bearing self-reference, making the derivation self-contained against external benchmarks. This matches the default expectation of no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be identified.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5636 in / 1019 out tokens · 25591 ms · 2026-05-24T10:25:07.537356+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    con- nected tree

    Thus after purification, the entanglement is improved between Alice and Bob. D. Entanglement swapping Entanglementswappingisoneofthemostfundamental tools in realising a large-scale entanglement distribution 4 network. In entanglement swapping, Alice and Bob each prepareanentangledpair |ϕ+⟩a1a2 and |ϕ+⟩b1b2, andeach sends one photon from the pair to a mutu...

    work page 1959

  2. [2]

    C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Quantum cryptogra- phy: Public key distribution and coin tossing, Theo- retical Computer Science560, 7 (2014), theoretical As- pects of Quantum Cryptography – celebrating 30 years of BB84

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Lauk et al., Perspectives on quantum transduction, Quantum Science and Technology5, 020501 (2020)

    N. Lauk et al., Perspectives on quantum transduction, Quantum Science and Technology5, 020501 (2020)

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    W. J. Munro, N. L. Plparo, and K. Nemoto, Quantum multiplexing, in 2019 Conference on Lasers and Electro- Optics (CLEO) (2019) pp. 1–2

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature453, 1023 (2008)

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Chen et al., An integrated space-to-ground quan- tum communication network over 4,600 kilometres, Na- ture 589, 214 (2021)

    Y.-A. Chen et al., An integrated space-to-ground quan- tum communication network over 4,600 kilometres, Na- ture 589, 214 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [8]

    Stucki, et al., Long-term performance of the swis- squantum quantum key distribution network in a field environment, New Journal of Physics13, 123001 (2011)

    D. Stucki, et al., Long-term performance of the swis- squantum quantum key distribution network in a field environment, New Journal of Physics13, 123001 (2011)

    work page 2011

  9. [9]

    Peev, et al., The secoqc quantum key distribution network in vienna, New Journal of Physics11, 075001 (2009)

    M. Peev, et al., The secoqc quantum key distribution network in vienna, New Journal of Physics11, 075001 (2009)

    work page 2009

  10. [10]

    Ruihong and M

    Q. Ruihong and M. Ying, Research progress of quantum repeaters, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 1237, 052032 (2019)

    work page 2019

  11. [11]

    Valivarthi, et al., Teleportation systems toward a quantum internet, PRX Quantum1, 020317 (2020)

    R. Valivarthi, et al., Teleportation systems toward a quantum internet, PRX Quantum1, 020317 (2020)

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    P. P. Rohde,The Quantum Internet: The Second Quan- tum Revolution (Cambridge University Press, 2021)

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    C.-W. Chou, J. Laurat, H. Deng, K. S. Choi, H. de Ried- matten, D. Felinto, and H. J. Kimble, Functional quantum nodes for entanglement distribution over scalable quantum networks, Science 316, 1316 (2007), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1140300

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1140300 2007

  14. [14]

    Yuan, Y.-A

    Z.-S. Yuan, Y.-A. Chen, B. Zhao, S. Chen, J. Schmied- mayer, and J.-W. Pan, Experimental demonstration of a bdcz quantum repeater node, Nature454, 1098 (2008)

    work page 2008

  15. [15]

    Kheirkhah, I

    M. Kheirkhah, I. Wakeman, and G. Parisis, Multipath transport and packet spraying for efficient data delivery in data centres, Computer Networks162, 106852 (2019)

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    W. J. Munro, K. Azuma, K. Tamaki, and K. Nemoto, In- side quantum repeaters, IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics21, 78 (2015)

    work page 2015

  17. [17]

    Sun, et al., Quantum teleportation with indepen- dent sources and prior entanglement distribution over a network, Nature Photonics10, 671 (2016)

    Q.-C. Sun, et al., Quantum teleportation with indepen- dent sources and prior entanglement distribution over a network, Nature Photonics10, 671 (2016)

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Autebert, et al., Multi-user quantum key distribution with entangled photons from an algaas chip, Quantum Science and Technology1, 01LT02 (2016)

    C. Autebert, et al., Multi-user quantum key distribution with entangled photons from an algaas chip, Quantum Science and Technology1, 01LT02 (2016)

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    Herbauts, B

    I. Herbauts, B. Blauensteiner, A. Poppe, T. Jennewein, and H. Hübel, Demonstration of active routing of entan- glement in a multi-user network, Opt. Express21, 29013 (2013)

    work page 2013

  20. [20]

    Wang, et al., A dynamic multi-protocol entangle- ment distribution quantum network, in 2022 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC) (2022) pp

    R. Wang, et al., A dynamic multi-protocol entangle- ment distribution quantum network, in 2022 Optical Fiber Communications Conference and Exhibition (OFC) (2022) pp. 1–3

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Inagaki, N

    T. Inagaki, N. Matsuda, O. Tadanaga, M. Asobe, and H. Takesue, Entanglement distribution over 300 km of fiber, Opt. Express21, 23241 (2013)

    work page 2013

  22. [22]

    Yin, et al., Satellite-based entanglement distribu- tion over 1200 kilometers, Science 356, 1140 (2017), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aan3211

    J. Yin, et al., Satellite-based entanglement distribu- tion over 1200 kilometers, Science 356, 1140 (2017), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aan3211

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aan3211 2017

  23. [23]

    Leone, N

    H. Leone, N. R. Miller, D. Singh, N. K. Langford, and P. P. Rohde, Qunet: Cost vector analysis and multi- path entanglement routing in quantum networks (2021), arXiv:2105.00418 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    T. J. Proctor, P. A. Knott, and J. A. Dunningham, Mul- tiparameter estimation in networked quantum sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 080501 (2018)

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    T. J. Proctor, P. A. Knott, and J. A. Dunning- ham, Multiparameter estimation in networked quan- tum sensors, Physical Review Letters120, 10.1103/phys- revlett.120.080501 (2018)

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2018

  26. [26]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy chan- nels, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 722 (1996)

    work page 1996

  27. [27]

    Pan and A

    J.-w. Pan and A. Zeilinger, Greenberger-horne-zeilinger- state analyzer, Phys. Rev. A57, 2208 (1998)

    work page 1998

  28. [28]

    J.-W. Pan, D. Bouwmeester, H. Weinfurter, and A. Zeilinger, Experimental entanglement swapping: En- tangling photons that never interacted, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3891 (1998)

    work page 1998

  29. [29]

    Haji and S

    M. Haji and S. Ramin, Thin trees in some families of graphs, Ph.D. thesis (2018)

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    E. W. Dijkstra, A note on two problems in connexion with graphs, Numerische Mathematik1, 269 (1959). 13

    work page 1959

  31. [31]

    Mustafa, X

    H. Mustafa, X. Zhang, Z. Liu, W. Xu, and A. Perrig, Jamming-resilient multipath routing, IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing9, 852 (2012)

    work page 2012

  32. [32]

    Deutsch, A

    D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Quantum privacy ampli- fication and the security of quantum cryptography over noisy channels, Physical Review Letters77 (1996)

    work page 1996

  33. [33]

    J. S. Sidhu and P. Kok, Geometric perspective on quan- tum parameter estimation, AVS Quantum Science 2, 014701 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1116/1.5119961

    work page doi:10.1116/1.5119961 2020

  34. [34]

    Briegel, W

    H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quan- tum repeaters: The role of imperfect local operations in quantum communication, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 5932 (1998)

    work page 1998

  35. [35]

    N.Sangouard, C.Simon, H.deRiedmatten,andN.Gisin, Quantumrepeaters basedonatomicensemblesandlinear optics, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 33 (2011)

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    C.Simonetal.,Quantummemories,TheEuropeanPhys- ical Journal D58, 1 (2010)

    work page 2010

  37. [37]

    Coopmans et al., NetSquid, a NETwork simulator for QUantum information using discrete events, Communi- cations Physics4, 10.1038/s42005-021-00647-8 (2021)

    T. Coopmans et al., NetSquid, a NETwork simulator for QUantum information using discrete events, Communi- cations Physics4, 10.1038/s42005-021-00647-8 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-021-00647-8 2021

  38. [38]

    Diadamo, J

    S. Diadamo, J. Notzel, B. Zanger, and M. M. Bese, QuNetSim: A software framework for quantum networks, IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering2, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Dahlberg and S

    A. Dahlberg and S. Wehner, SimulaQron—a simulator for developing quantum internet software, Quantum Sci- ence and Technology4, 015001 (2018)

    work page 2018

  40. [40]

    Nemoto, M

    K. Nemoto, M. Trupke, S. J. Devitt, B. Scharfenberger, K. Buczak, J. Schmiedmayer, and W. J. Munro, Photonic quantumnetworksformedfromnv-centers,ScientificRe- ports 6, 26284 (2016)

    work page 2016

  41. [41]

    C. E. Bradley, J. Randall, M. H. Abobeih, R. C. Berrevoets, M. J. Degen, M. A. Bakker, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and T. H. Taminiau, A ten-qubit solid- state spin register with quantum memory up to one minute, Phys. Rev. X9, 031045 (2019)

    work page 2019

  42. [42]

    Einstein, B

    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Can quantum- mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?, Phys. Rev.47, 777 (1935)

    work page 1935

  43. [43]

    J. S. Bell, On the einstein podolsky rosen paradox, Physics Physique Fizika1, 195 (1964)

    work page 1964

  44. [44]

    A. K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on bell’s the- orem, Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 661 (1991)

    work page 1991

  45. [45]

    S. Wang, W. Chen, Z.-Q. Yin, H.-W. Li, D.-Y. He, Y.-H. Li, Z. Zhou, X.-T. Song, F.-Y. Li, D. Wang, H. Chen, Y.- G. Han, J.-Z. Huang, J.-F. Guo, P.-L. Hao, M. Li, C.-M. Zhang, D. Liu, W.-Y. Liang, C.-H. Miao, P. Wu, G.-C. Guo, and Z.-F. Han, Field and long-term demonstration of a wide area quantum key distribution network, Opt. Express 22, 21739 (2014)

    work page 2014

  46. [46]

    Preskill, Lecture Notes for Physics 229:Quantum In- formation and Computation (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2015)

    J. Preskill, Lecture Notes for Physics 229:Quantum In- formation and Computation (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2015)

    work page 2015

  47. [47]

    W.Dür, H.-J.Briegel, J.I.Cirac,andP.Zoller,Quantum repeaters based on entanglement purification, Physical Review A59, 169 (1999)

    work page 1999

  48. [48]

    Deutsch, A

    D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Quantum privacy ampli- fication and the security of quantum cryptography over noisy channels, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 2818 (1996)

    work page 1996

  49. [49]

    Preskill, Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    J. Preskill, Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    Zhang, S.-X

    L. Zhang, S.-X. Ye, Q. Liu, and H. Chen, Multipath con- currententanglementroutinginquantumnetworksbased on virtual circuit, in2022 4th International Conference on Advances in Computer Technology, Information Sci- ence and Communications (CTISC) (2022) pp. 1–5

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Chakraborty, D

    K. Chakraborty, D. Elkouss, B. Rijsman, and S. Wehner, Entanglementdistributioninaquantumnetwork: Amul- ticommodity flow-based approach, IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering1, 1 (2020)

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    Zhong et al., Quantum computational ad- vantage using photons, Science 370, 1460 (2020), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abe8770

    H.-S. Zhong et al., Quantum computational ad- vantage using photons, Science 370, 1460 (2020), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abe8770

    work page doi:10.1126/science.abe8770 2020

  53. [53]

    J.-W. Pan, C. Simon, Č. Brukner, and A. Zeilinger, En- tanglementpurificationforquantumcommunication,Na- ture 410, 1067 (2001)

    work page 2001