Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 44 references

Quantum repeaters based on stationary and flying Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qudits

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a quantum repeater applying the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill code to both flying light qubits and stationary matter qubits can outperform either pure encoded scheme in intermediate parameter regimes.

desk verdict A plausible hybrid GKP repeater with an honest abstract, but the claimed crossover region rests on a memory/latency budget I cannot inspect; send it to review, not to press. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.00530 v1 pith:AYHR65O6 submitted 2025-08-01 quant-ph

Stefan Häussler , Peter van Loock This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph PACS 03.67.Hk03.67.Pp
keywords quantumrepeatersGKPcodebosonicerrorcorrectionquditsone-wayandtwo-wayschemesphotonlossmemoriescontinuous-variablecommunication
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that a quantum repeater need not choose between the two established architectures: one-way schemes that protect transmitted light against photon loss and two-way schemes that store encoded qubits in quantum memories. It proposes a hybrid in which the same Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) code runs on both the flying optical qudits and the stationary matter qudits, with the stationary part implemented on collective spin modes of atomic ensembles. The claim is that in intermediate regimes of link coupling efficiency and GKP squeezing, neither the pure one-way nor the pure two-way scheme is best; the hybrid is. If true, this gives long-range quantum communication a new design point whose experimental requirements are set by the middle of the parameter range, not by the extreme ends, and it makes the choice of architecture a tunable trade-off rather than a forced dichotomy.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) code, a bosonic quantum error-correcting code that stores a qudit in the phase space of an oscillator so that small displacements, the noise events behind photon loss and memory loss, can be detected and corrected. In this repeater the code is applied twice: to the flying optical qudits, giving the one-way protection of the transmitted signal, and to stationary qudits held in collective spin modes of atomic ensembles, giving a two-way-style encoded memory. The hybrid's work is to let the flying part correct transmission loss before the memory is asked to store the state, and let the stationary part correct memory loss during the waiting rounds, so the two error channels do not have to be handled by the same resource simultaneously.

What would settle it

A concrete falsifier would be a numerical simulation that includes finite GKP squeezing and a realistic memory decoherence model: if the hybrid's effective channel transmission never exceeds the maximum of the one-way and two-way curves for any link coupling efficiency, squeezing, or storage time, the central claim collapses. The same question can be posed experimentally with a two-segment repeater, comparing the three configurations under identical loss and memory parameters.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that error-correcting both halves of a quantum repeater, the light pulses traveling between stations and the qubits stored inside the stations, produces a protocol that is not merely a compromise but a separate, superior operating point. For an implementation based on GKP qudits, where the same bosonic code protects photon loss in transmission and memory loss on collective spin modes of atomic ensembles, the hybrid beats one-way and two-way encoded repeaters in intermediate regimes of link coupling efficiency and GKP squeezing. The benefit appears as an improved effective channel transmission and a better loss scaling, bought at the price of clock rate and segment length.

Load-bearing premise

The scheme assumes that the stored matter qubits are as reliable as the traveling light qubits and that waiting for classical signals does not destroy the memory before the hybrid's advantage is realized.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The hybrid repeater reaches higher effective channel transmission than a one-way GKP scheme when link coupling efficiency and squeezing are at intermediate, experimentally accessible values.
  • It achieves better loss scaling than a two-way scheme without asking the memories to carry the full correction burden.
  • Repeater design can trade clock rate and segment length for a much larger operating region, so the same physical hardware can serve different distance or rate regimes.
  • The relevant comparison is set by two parameters, link coupling efficiency and GKP squeezing, so experimental roadmaps can target the crossover region directly.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves implicit that the width of the intermediate regime is controlled by memory coherence time relative to classical communication latency; the better the memory, the wider the hybrid's advantage.
  • By symmetry, the same dual-encoding idea should transfer to other bosonic codes, with the split between flying and stationary error correction tuned continuously rather than fixed by GKP's structure.
  • A two-segment proof-of-principle experiment comparing end-to-end fidelity of the three protocols under equal link loss and storage time would test the claimed crossover directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes and analyzes a quantum repeater scheme that applies Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) quantum error correction to both flying (light) and stationary (matter) qudits, combining features of encoded one-way and two-way repeater protocols. The abstract claims that in intermediate parameter regimes, this hybrid approach yields superior effective channel transmission and loss scaling compared with either pure scheme, while sacrificing some advantages such as high clock rates and potentially large segment lengths. The provided full text is heavily corrupted and unreadable, so the report is based primarily on the abstract and the stated claims.

Significance. If the claimed crossover exists, the hybrid design would represent a new design point for long-range quantum communication, potentially combining the rate advantages of one-way schemes with the loss resilience of two-way schemes. The conceptual idea is interesting, and the abstract is honest about the trade-offs. However, the current submission contains no readable derivations, equations, figures, or numerical results, and no quantitative memory/latency model for the stationary GKP qudits. The significance of the claim therefore cannot be assessed from the available material; a complete, readable manuscript is required before the contribution can be evaluated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Full text] The full text is unreadable; the only intelligible portion is the abstract. No equations, derivations, protocol details, or numerical results are accessible. The central claim of hybrid superiority in intermediate parameter regimes is therefore completely unsupported. This is not a matter of a flawed argument but of the absence of any checkable technical content. The authors must provide a readable manuscript with the full protocol description, the analysis, and the comparison against the one-way and two-way baselines.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that the hybrid 'sacrifices some of their advantages such as high clock rates' and 'potentially large segment lengths.' The claimed superiority in intermediate regimes must be shown to hold after accounting for these costs. The required comparison metric (e.g., secret-key rate per second or per-mode effective transmission at fixed total distance) and a memory decoherence model for stationary GKP qudits stored in collective spin modes are not visible. If the comparison prices only per-mode transmission at fixed distance, then classical communication latency and memory dephasing are not fully priced, and including them may shrink or eliminate the claimed hybrid region.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract does not define the 'intermediate parameter regimes' quantitatively. The paper should specify the relevant ranges of link coupling efficiency and GKP squeezing and show the phase boundary where the hybrid outperforms both the pure one-way and pure two-way schemes. Without such a quantitative definition, the existence claim is not falsifiable and cannot be checked against experimental parameters.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The word 'occuring' should be spelled 'occurring'.
  2. [Abstract] The abbreviation 'GKP' is used without expansion in the abstract; spell out 'Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill' at first use.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase 'effective channel transmission and loss scaling' is ambiguous; a formal definition of the figure of merit is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No identifiable circularity: the hybrid-repeater claim is a three-way performance comparison, not a fitted parameter or self-citation re-derivation.

full rationale

The central claim in the abstract is an existence claim: in intermediate parameter regimes, the combined GKP repeater outperforms both the encoded one-way and two-way schemes. This is a comparative statement, and the abstract supplies the physical ingredients (QEC on flying and stationary qubits, photon-loss codes, encoded memories) without defining the hybrid's advantage into those ingredients. No fitted parameter is called a prediction; no equation from the available text exhibits a quantity equal to its own input by construction; and no load-bearing self-citation is visible. The abstract explicitly concedes costs, stating that the hybrid is 'sacrificing some of their advantages such as high clock rates, independent of classical communication times (one-way), and potentially large segment lengths (two-way),' which means the claimed superiority must emerge from a quantitative trade-off rather than from a definition. The supplied full text is corrupted and largely unreadable, so the deeper derivation chain cannot be audited; that is a verifiability limitation, not evidence of circularity. Accordingly, no circular step can be quoted, and the appropriate score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The abstract identifies only domain assumptions about the physical systems and error models. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. No free parameters fitted to data are evident from the abstract; the GKP squeezing and coupling efficiencies are resource parameters that are presumably scanned over a range rather than fitted to match a target. The full text is needed to identify any additional ad hoc assumptions.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Photon loss during transmission is modeled by a standard bosonic loss channel with efficiency eta, and GKP photon loss codes can correct this loss.
    The abstract claims enhanced effective transmission via photon loss codes, which presupposes the standard loss channel model and the error-correction capability of GKP codes against photon loss.
  • domain assumption Stationary GKP qudits can be stored in collective spin modes of atomic ensembles, and memory loss on these modes is correctable by the GKP code.
    The abstract explicitly mentions 'memory loss, for instance, occurring on collective spin modes of atomic ensembles,' which is a physical and hardware-specific assumption about the memory implementation.
  • domain assumption The one-way and two-way GKP encodings can be combined such that their error-correction capabilities compose without introducing additional uncorrectable errors beyond the individual loss models.
    The hybrid protocol's superiority in intermediate regimes depends on the two encoding layers working together effectively; the abstract does not show the concatenation details or any additional error channels from the combination.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum repeaters based on stationary and flying Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qudits." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AYHR65O6

@misc{pith2026250800530,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum repeaters based on stationary and flying Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qudits},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AYHR65O6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.00530}
}
read the original abstract

There are various approaches to long-range quantum communication based on conceptually different forms of quantum repeaters. Here we explore a quantum repeater scheme that employs quantum error correction (QEC) both on the flying (light) qubits and on the stationary (matter) qubits. The idea is to combine the benefits of encoded one-way and two-way schemes where effective channel transmission and loss scaling are enhanced by means of photon loss codes and encoded quantum memories, respectively, while sacrificing some of their advantages such as high clock rates, independent of classical communication times (one-way), and potentially large segment lengths (two-way). More specifically, we illustrate, propose, and analyze such a quantum repeater using the bosonic Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) code which naturally enables encoding and QEC of qudits, protecting them against transmission and memory loss, the latter, for instance, occuring on collective spin modes of atomic ensembles. While the encoded one-way and two-way schemes on their own either require very high repeater link coupling efficiencies and GKP squeezing or allow for experimentally more feasible, small values of these parameters, respectively, we find that there are intermediate parameter regimes where the combined repeater protocol is superior.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bennett \ and\ author G

    author author C. Bennett \ and\ author G. Brassard \ ( year 1984 )\ pp.\ pages 175--179 NoStop

    work page 1984

  2. [2]

    Cuomo , author M

    author author D. Cuomo , author M. Caleffi , \ and\ author A. S. \ Cacciapuoti ,\ https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-qtc.2020.0002 journal journal IET Quantum Communication \ volume 1 ,\ pages 3 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    work page arXiv 2020

  3. [3]

    Takeoka , author S

    author author M. Takeoka , author S. Guha , \ and\ author M. M. \ Wilde ,\ 10.1038/ncomms6235 journal journal Nature Communications \ volume 5 ,\ pages 5235 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/ncomms6235 2014

  4. [4]

    Pirandola , author R

    author author S. Pirandola , author R. Laurenza , author C. Ottaviani , \ and\ author L. Banchi ,\ 10.1038/ncomms15043 journal journal Nature Communications \ volume 8 ,\ pages 15043 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/ncomms15043 2017

  5. [5]

    Pirandola ,\ 10.1038/s42005-019-0147-3 journal journal Communications Physics \ volume 2 ,\ pages 51 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    author author S. Pirandola ,\ 10.1038/s42005-019-0147-3 journal journal Communications Physics \ volume 2 ,\ pages 51 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/s42005-019-0147-3 2019

  6. [6]

    \ Briegel , author W

    author author H.-J. \ Briegel , author W. D\"ur , author J. I. \ Cirac , \ and\ author P. Zoller ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.5932 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 81 ,\ pages 5932 ( year 1998 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.81.5932 1998

  7. [7]

    Muralidharan , author L

    author author S. Muralidharan , author L. Li , author J. Kim , author N. Lütkenhaus , author M. D. \ Lukin , \ and\ author L. Jiang ,\ 10.1038/srep20463 journal journal Scientific Reports \ volume 6 ,\ pages 20463 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/srep20463

  8. [8]

    Jiang , author J

    author author L. Jiang , author J. M. \ Taylor , author K. Nemoto , author W. J. \ Munro , author R. Van Meter , \ and\ author M. D. \ Lukin ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.032325 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 79 ,\ pages 032325 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/physreva.79.032325

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    author author A. G. \ Fowler , author D. S. \ Wang , author C. D. \ Hill , author T. D. \ Ladd , author R. Van Meter , \ and\ author L. C. L. \ Hollenberg ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.180503 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 104 ,\ pages 180503 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    doi

  2. [10]

    author author W. J. \ Munro , author A. M. \ Stephens , author S. J. \ Devitt , author K. A. \ Harrison , \ and\ author K. Nemoto ,\ 10.1038/nphoton.2012.243 journal journal Nature Photonics \ volume 6 ,\ pages 777 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    2012 doi

  3. [11]

    Azuma , author K

    author author K. Azuma , author K. Tamaki , \ and\ author H.-K. \ Lo ,\ 10.1038/ncomms7787 journal journal Nature Communications \ volume 6 ,\ pages 6787 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    Muralidharan , author J

    author author S. Muralidharan , author J. Kim , author N. L\"utkenhaus , author M. D. \ Lukin , \ and\ author L. Jiang ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.250501 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 112 ,\ pages 250501 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    doi

  5. [13]

    Ewert , author M

    author author F. Ewert , author M. Bergmann , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.210501 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 117 ,\ pages 210501 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  6. [14]

    Ewert \ and\ author P

    author author F. Ewert \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.95.012327 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 95 ,\ pages 012327 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

  7. [15]

    \ Lee , author T

    author author S.-W. \ Lee , author T. C. \ Ralph , \ and\ author H. Jeong ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.100.052303 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 100 ,\ pages 052303 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    Gottesman , author A

    author author D. Gottesman , author A. Kitaev , \ and\ author J. Preskill ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.64.012310 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 64 ,\ pages 012310 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001 doi

  9. [17]

    H\"aussler \ and\ author P

    author author S. H\"aussler \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.111.062611 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 111 ,\ pages 062611 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    2025 doi

  10. [18]

    Schmidt , author D

    author author F. Schmidt , author D. Miller , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.109.042427 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 109 ,\ pages 042427 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    Fukui , author R

    author author K. Fukui , author R. N. \ Alexander , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.033118 journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 3 ,\ pages 033118 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  12. [20]

    Rozp e dek , author K

    author author F. Rozp e dek , author K. Noh , author Q. Xu , author S. Guha , \ and\ author L. Jiang ,\ 10.1038/s41534-021-00438-7 journal journal npj Quantum Information \ volume 7 ,\ pages 102 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  13. [21]

    Rozp e e dek , author K

    author author F. Rozp e e dek , author K. P. \ Seshadreesan , author P. Polakos , author L. Jiang , \ and\ author S. Guha ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.043056 journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 5 ,\ pages 043056 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    doi

  14. [22]

    Hammerer , author A

    author author K. Hammerer , author A. S. \ S rensen , \ and\ author E. S. \ Polzik ,\ 10.1103/RevModPhys.82.1041 journal journal Rev. Mod. Phys. \ volume 82 ,\ pages 1041 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  15. [23]

    Omanakuttan \ and\ author T

    author author S. Omanakuttan \ and\ author T. J. \ Volkoff ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.022428 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 108 ,\ pages 022428 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Holstein \ and\ author H

    author author T. Holstein \ and\ author H. Primakoff ,\ 10.1103/PhysRev.58.1098 journal journal Phys. Rev. \ volume 58 ,\ pages 1098 ( year 1940 ) NoStop

    1940 doi

  17. [25]

    Calsamiglia \ and\ author N

    author author J. Calsamiglia \ and\ author N. L \"u tkenhaus ,\ 10.1007/s003400000484 journal journal Applied Physics B \ volume 72 ,\ pages 67 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001 doi

  18. [26]

    Knill , author R

    author author E. Knill , author R. Laflamme , \ and\ author G. J. \ Milburn ,\ 10.1038/35051009 journal journal Nature \ volume 409 ,\ pages 46 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001 doi

  19. [27]

    author author W. P. \ Grice ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.84.042331 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 84 ,\ pages 042331 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    2011 doi

  20. [28]

    Ewert \ and\ author P

    author author F. Ewert \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.140403 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 113 ,\ pages 140403 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014 doi

  21. [29]

    author author M. J. \ Bayerbach , author S. E. \ D’Aurelio , author P. van Loock , \ and\ author S. Barz ,\ 10.1126/sciadv.adf4080 journal journal Science Advances \ volume 9 ,\ pages eadf4080 ( year 2023 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv...

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    \ Guo , author G.-Y

    author author Y.-P. \ Guo , author G.-Y. \ Zou , author X. Ding , author Q.-H. \ Zhang , author M.-C. \ Xu , author R.-Z. \ Liu , author J.-Y. \ Zhao , author Z.-X. \ Ge , author L.-C. \ Peng , author K.-M. \ Xu , author Y.-Y. \ Lou , author Z. Ning , author L.-J. \ Wang , aut...

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Calsamiglia ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.65.030301 journal journal Phys

    author author J. Calsamiglia ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.65.030301 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 65 ,\ pages 030301 ( year 2002 ) NoStop

    2002 doi

  24. [32]

    Carollo \ and\ author G

    author author A. Carollo \ and\ author G. M. \ Palma ,\ in\ https://opg.optica.org/abstract.cfm?URI=CLEO_Europe-2001-QC281 booktitle Laser 2001 - World of Photonics 15th International Conference on Lasers and Electrooptics in Europe \ ( publisher Optica Publishing Group ,\ yea...

    2001

  25. [33]

    Dušek ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/S0030-4018(01)01565-6 journal journal Optics Communications \ volume 199 ,\ pages 161 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    author author M. Dušek ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/S0030-4018(01)01565-6 journal journal Optics Communications \ volume 199 ,\ pages 161 ( year 2001 ) NoStop

    2001 doi

  26. [34]

    Bharos , author L

    author author N. Bharos , author L. Markovich , \ and\ author J. Borregaard ,\ @noop \ ( year 2024 ) ,\ http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.15066 arXiv:2401.15066 [quant-ph] NoStop

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Noh , author V

    author author K. Noh , author V. V. \ Albert , \ and\ author L. Jiang ,\ 10.1109/TIT.2018.2873764 journal journal IEEE Transactions on Information Theory \ volume 65 ,\ pages 2563 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2018

  28. [36]

    Knill ,\ 10.1038/nature03350 journal journal Nature \ volume 434 ,\ pages 39 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    author author E. Knill ,\ 10.1038/nature03350 journal journal Nature \ volume 434 ,\ pages 39 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    2005 doi

  29. [37]

    author author N. K. \ Bernardes , author L. Praxmeyer , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.83.012323 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 83 ,\ pages 012323 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    2011 doi

  30. [38]

    Shchukin , author F

    author author E. Shchukin , author F. Schmidt , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.100.032322 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 100 ,\ pages 032322 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    Kamin , author E

    author author L. Kamin , author E. Shchukin , author F. Schmidt , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.023086 journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 5 ,\ pages 023086 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    Budinger , author A

    author author N. Budinger , author A. Furusawa , \ and\ author P. van Loock ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.023332 journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 6 ,\ pages 023332 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  33. [41]

    author author I. L. \ Chuang , author D. W. \ Leung , \ and\ author Y. Yamamoto ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.56.1114 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 56 ,\ pages 1114 ( year 1997 ) NoStop

    1997 doi

  34. [42]

    author author C. H. \ Bennett , author D. P. \ DiVincenzo , \ and\ author J. A. \ Smolin ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.3217 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 78 ,\ pages 3217 ( year 1997 ) NoStop

    1997 doi

  35. [43]

    Schumacher \ and\ author M

    author author B. Schumacher \ and\ author M. A. \ Nielsen ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.2629 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 54 ,\ pages 2629 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  36. [44]

    Lloyd ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.55.1613 journal journal Phys

    author author S. Lloyd ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevA.55.1613 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 55 ,\ pages 1613 ( year 1997 ) NoStop

    1997 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.