Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Optimal distillation of photonic indistinguishability

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For any three-photon partially distinguishable input, the paper constructs the optimal three-mode heralded circuit that maximizes the distilled Hong-Ou-Mandel visibility, and demonstrates it on a quantum dot source.

desk verdict The optimized three-photon distillation protocol that accounts for the Bargmann triad phase is real and experimentally supported, but the 'optimal' claim is only proven for the specific heralded architecture of Fig. 1b, not for all heralded three-photon linear-optical schemes. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.02296 v1 pith:QYU5GA6W submitted 2025-09-02 quant-ph

Francesco Hoch , Anita Camillini , Giovanni Rodari , Eugenio Caruccio , Gonzalo Carvacho , Taira Giordani , Riccardo Albiero , Niki Di Giano
show 8 more authors
Giacomo Corrielli Francesco Ceccarelli Roberto Osellame Marco Robbio Leonardo Novo Nicolò Spagnolo Ernesto F. Galvão Fabio Sciarrino
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph PACS 03.67.-a42.50.Ex
keywords photonicindistinguishabilitydistillationHong-Ou-MandelvisibilityGrammatrixBargmanninvarianttriadphaselinearopticalcircuitsquantumdotsource
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 establishes that photon indistinguishability can be distilled to its theoretically maximal value by a three-mode linear-optical circuit whose design is computed from the full three-photon Gram matrix, including the collective triad phase. Earlier distillation circuits used a fixed unitary and ignored multiphoton phases, which makes them yield negative gain for the vast majority of input scenarios; the new recipe always achieves non-negative gain after an input permutation. The central formula expresses the final Hong-Ou-Mandel visibility as a ratio of two simple functions of the interferometer parameters, so the optimum is found by a two-parameter maximization, and the paper supplies the explicit unitary attaining it while also maximizing the success probability. Experiments with a demultiplexed quantum dot source and a programmable eight-mode photonic processor confirm the predicted distilled visibilities for real and complex Gram matrices, including cases where the old circuit fails. A correct protocol of this kind matters because it offers a resource-efficient, integrable error-mitigation step for photonic quantum computing and communication.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is a closed-form expression for the distilled Hong-Ou-Mandel visibility, Vf(S,φu), derived from the tensor-permanent formalism for partially distinguishable three-photon interference. It depends on the interferometer only through two parameters—S (the relative amplitude weight of the two paths) and φu (a phase of the unitary)—and on the input through the three pairwise visibilities V12,V13,V23 and the collective triad phase φ. Maximizing this ratio over S and φu, followed by a unitary-dilation construction of the optimal three-mode interferometer (Eq. B7) that also maximizes success probability, yields the claimed optimal protocol. The triad phase φ enters as the term

What would settle it

Fix an input Gram matrix (e.g., V12=V13=V23=0.5, φ=π/4), compute the distilled visibility of the claimed optimal unitary Eq. (B7) by the tensor-permanent formula, and compare it with a brute-force numerical maximization over all 3×3 unitaries (and all input permutations). If any unitary yields a visibility exceeding the maximum of Eq. (2) over S and φu, the optimality claim is falsified. Experimentally, the same comparison can be run by programming a set of random unitaries in a universal interferometer and checking that none beats the optimal one.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For any three-photon partially distinguishable input state, characterized by the three pairwise Hong-Ou-Mandel visibilities V12, V13, V23 and the Bargmann-invariant triad phase φ, the paper claims that the maximum distilled visibility attainable in the heralded architecture—in which two photons interfere in a three-mode interferometer and the emerging photon is compared with the third by a HOM measurement—is obtained by maximizing the explicit ratio Vf(S,φu) = [V12S² + V13 + 2S√(V12V13V23) cos(φ+φu)] / [1 + S² + 2S V23 cos(φu)] over the two real parameters S and φu that encode the interferometer. The paper constructs the unitary that attains this maximum (Eq. B7), using the unitary dilation

Load-bearing premise

The optimality claim covers only the heralded architecture in which two photons enter the interferometer and the third is compared afterwards; the paper assumes without proof that protocols where all three photons interfere cannot be heralded, so a global optimum outside that class is not excluded.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Given the three pairwise visibilities and the triad phase, the recipe in Appendix B returns an explicit three-mode unitary that achieves the maximum possible distilled visibility for that input.
  • The protocol is guaranteed to give G ≥ 0 (after choosing the best input permutation), whereas the previously known fixed circuit U0 gives negative gain for about 91.6% of real and 87.4% of complex random Gram matrices.
  • For the balanced-visibility case with φ=π (visibilities ≤ 0.25), U0 gives no gain while the optimized circuit (S=1, φu=π) gives positive gain; for φ=±π/4 at V=0.5, the optimal circuit is the three-mode Fourier tritter with φu=∓2π/3.
  • The success probability can be maximized analytically among gain-optimal unitaries, so the protocol does not sacrifice visibility to gain heralding rate.
  • Because the protocol uses only three spatial modes and three photons, it can be embedded as a resource-efficient error-mitigation block in larger photonic circuits.

Reading between the lines

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

  • For N>3 photons the same tensor-permanent formalism should yield optimal heralded distillation circuits as well, but the closed-form visibility formula and the explicit unitary would need to be re-derived; a natural extension is to treat the set of all Bargmann invariants as the input.
  • A recursive application—distilling the output pair against a fresh photon—should push visibility toward unity while dropping success probability; working out the tradeoff curve would tell whether such recursion is practically useful.
  • Since the optimal circuit depends sensitively on the triad phase, deployed systems will need to monitor φ in situ (e.g., via a Fourier-interferometer measurement) and re-program the interferometer accordingly.
  • The optimality of Eq. (B7) is tested only against 50 random unitaries; a stronger check would be a numerical global search over all 3×3 unitaries for each input Gram matrix.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a three-photon protocol for distilling photonic indistinguishability. In the considered architecture (Fig. 1b), two photons pass through a three-mode interferometer U_D and are postselected to emerge one in each of two output modes; the photon in the first output mode is then compared by Hong-Ou-Mandel interference with a third, reference photon that did not enter U_D. The authors derive closed expressions for the postselected output visibility V_f and success probability P in terms of two parameters S and phi_u of U_D (Eqs. (2)-(3)), construct an explicit unitary that maximizes V_f and then P (Appendix B), and experimentally validate the protocol on an eight-mode integrated photonic processor fed by a demultiplexed quantum-dot source. They test several Gram matrices, including cases with non-zero three-photon Bargmann phase phi, and show that a previously used fixed interferometer U_0 often produces negative gain, whereas the optimized circuit produces positive gain. The paper also compares the optimized unitary against randomly sampled unitaries.

Significance. If the architecture is accepted as the intended class, this is a useful and well-executed contribution. The analytic parameterization of the distilled visibility and success probability is clean, the dependence on the collective triad phase is convincingly demonstrated experimentally, and the random-unitary comparison in Fig. 5 is a nice falsifiable test. The experimental platform is appropriate and the data are consistent with simulations that use measured input visibilities rather than fitting the output. However, the title and abstract claim an unqualified 'optimal distillation'. That global claim is not proven: the optimization over S and phi_u applies only to a two-photon-interference, one-reference-photon architecture, and the manuscript's argument for excluding all-three-photon interference schemes is not valid. The work is therefore stronger as an optimized and demonstrated protocol within a well-defined circuit family than as a proof of global optimality.

major comments (2)
  1. [Optimal distillation protocol (after Eq. (3))] The sentence excluding all-three-photon interference protocols is not justified. The text says such schemes 'cannot be considered heralded' because the two distilled photons would have a probability of bunching together. But a heralded protocol is defined by postselecting on a detection pattern; if the success pattern is one photon in each of two designated output modes, the two distilled photons are guaranteed to occupy different spatial modes, and bunching events are simply discarded. This is exactly how the paper's own pattern [1,1,0] works. Since Eqs. (2)-(3), the numerical maximization over (S, phi_u), and the unitary construction in Appendix B are all derived for the Fig. 1b architecture, the global 'optimality' asserted in the title, abstract, and Discussion is not established. The authors should either prove an upper bound that includes three-photon-interference heralded protocol
  2. [Discussion (paragraph 2) and Appendix C] The statement that the protocol is 'always able to provide a gain G >= 0' is trivially satisfied in the considered architecture: taking S = 0 in Eq. (2) gives V_f = V_13, so after relabeling inputs so that V_13 is the maximum, G = 0. This does not substantiate a claim of positive distillation gain. If the intended claim is that for every physical Gram matrix there is a circuit with strictly positive gain, that needs a separate condition and proof; otherwise the sentence should be reworded to avoid implying a substantive performance guarantee.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix C] The text says 'We prove that ... the protocol is suboptimal', but the supporting evidence is numerical (10000 random Gram matrices plotted in Fig. 6). Please replace 'prove' with 'show numerical evidence' unless an analytical theorem is added.
  2. [Appendix B, Eq. (B7)] The explicit unitary in Eq. (B7) has expressions with sqrt{1+cos(phi_u)} in denominators and is singular at phi_u = pi, which is one of the key optimal cases in the main text (the phi = pi example). Although the authors mention a row-switch variant for that case, a rigorous presentation should give the limiting form or a separate explicit matrix for phi_u = pi.
  3. [Data availability] The availability statement says data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Given the quantitative character of the claims (G_max, comparisons with random unitaries, simulated curves), depositing raw visibility counts and processing scripts would strengthen reproducibility.
  4. [Notation around Eq. (1)] The parameterization with G_12 = sqrt(V_12), G_23 = sqrt(V_23) e^{i phi}, G_13 = sqrt(V_13) is fine, but the text should state explicitly that the phase ambiguity of the individual internal states has been fixed, since the same Gram matrix can be represented by different-looking matrices related by diagonal unitary transformations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the distillation formula and optimality are derived from external tensor-permanent and unitary-dilation results, and the experiment is a predictive test, not a fit.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained: Eq. (A6) for the distilled visibility is obtained from the tensor-permanent formula of Tichy (Ref. 49) and Shchesnovich (Ref. 48), which are external, parameter-free results. The optimization over S and phi_u is a well-defined maximization of that formula, and the explicit unitary (Eq. B7) is constructed via the unitary dilation theorem (Ref. 50), also external. The experimental protocol first characterizes the input Gram matrix (visibilities and triad phase), then programs the processor with the unitary chosen from that characterization, and finally measures the output HOM visibility. There is no fitting of the model to the output data; the agreement in Figs. 4 and 5 is a genuine predictive test. The self-citations to the group's prior platform papers (Refs. 27, 47) and to Oszmaniec et al. (Ref. 46) are contextual or formal but are not load-bearing: the sufficiency of the Gram matrix/Bargmann invariant is independently derived from the tensor permanent formalism in Appendix A. The optimality claim is explicitly scoped to the heralded architecture of Fig. 1b; whether all-three-photon-interference protocols could be heralded is an open limitation, not a circular step. No step of the derivation reduces to its own input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The theoretical derivation rests on standard tensor permanent results and the unitary dilation theorem, plus two domain assumptions: the sufficiency of Gram matrix and Bargmann invariant for 3-photon probabilities, and the restriction to the specific heralded architecture. No free parameters are fitted to data; the optimization variables S and φu are parameters of the unitary, not outputs.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Tensor permanent formula (Eq. A5) correctly computes outcome probabilities for partially distinguishable photons.
    Assumed from Refs. [48,49]; used to derive Eqs. (2)-(3). If this formula fails, the optimality proof collapses.
  • standard math Unitary dilation theorem (Ref. [50]) can embed any contraction matrix as a submatrix of a unitary, and the constructed 3x3 matrix in Eq. (B7) is unitary.
    Used in Appendix B to construct the optimal unitary.
  • domain assumption For mixed internal states, the visibilities and the Bargmann invariant Tr(rho1 rho2 rho3) are sufficient to predict any 3-photon outcome probability.
    Stated in the theory section and used to extend the protocol to mixed states; the sufficiency is assumed, not proven.
  • ad hoc to paper The heralded architecture of Fig. 1b (two photons in the interferometer, one upper photon for verification) is the only class of distillation protocols considered; all-three-photon interference is excluded without proof.
    The paper argues such scenarios cannot be heralded, but does not provide a rigorous proof, so the global optimality claim is limited by this modeling choice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Optimal distillation of photonic indistinguishability." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QYU5GA6W

@misc{pith2026250902296,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Optimal distillation of photonic indistinguishability},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QYU5GA6W}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.02296}
}
read the original abstract

Imperfect photons' indistinguishability limits the performance of photonic quantum communication and computation . Distillation protocols, inspired by entanglement purification, enhance photons' indistinguishability by leveraging quantum interference in linear optical circuits. In this work, we present a three-photon distillation protocol optimized to achieve the maximum visibility gain, which requires consideration of multi-photon effects such as collective photonic phases. We employ interferometers with the minimum number of modes, optimizing also over the protocol's success probability. The developed protocol is experimentally validated with a platform featuring a demultiplexed quantum dot source interfaced with a programmable eight-mode laser-written integrated photonic processor. We achieve indistinguishability distillation with limited photonic resources and for several multi-photon distinguishability scenarios. This work helps to strengthen the role of distillation as a practical tool for photon-based quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.02296 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Conceptual scheme of the indistinguishability distillation protocol. a) Photon indistinguishability and the Hong-Ou-Mandel (HOM) effect. When two fully indistinguishable photons interfere on a balanced beamsplitter (BS), there is always photon bunching at the output. Conversely, if the photons are distinguishable, they can exit the BS in different ports. b) In a distillation protocol, the indistinguishability of inp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Experimental platform. Scheme of the experimental setup employed for the implementation of optimal distillation protocols. A stream of single photons is generated via a quantum-dot source, pumped in the cross-polarization configuration via a pulsed laser, operating in the RF excitation regime. The stream of photons is converted into a multiphoton input state on multiple spatial modes via a time-to-spatial demultiple… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Dependence of the optimal distillation circuit on the input indistinguishability scenario: a) A real-valued Gram matrix preparation is associated with a simple transformation requiring only two optical elements. b) With a more general complex-valued Gram matrix preparation, associated to internal states that are Pauli eigenvectors, the optimal circuit is a balanced Fourier interferometer. c) For the most general Gra… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Experimental characterization of the gain in distillation of indistinguishability. Panel a) shows the distilled visibilities Vdist and the gain G after the distillation process as a function of the maximum input pairwise visibility Vinput. The green dashed line describ…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Distilled HOM visibilities and success probabilities using randomly chosen interferometer designs, compared to the optimal design. Visibility gain vs success probability for the optimal unitary Uopt (red dot) and 50 random unitaries Urandom (orange dots). In cyan the t…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of the gain using the matrix U0 and the optimal one. Optimal Gain Gopt compared to that of the matrix U0 for real Gram matrices a) and for complex matrices b). In red, the line Gopt = G0. The gain can almost always be improved compared to that of the matrix …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Error Mitigation in Bosonic Systems via Virtual Distillation

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Passive linear interferometers implement virtual distillation for bosonic observables, recovering noise-suppressed number, phase-shift and quadrature expectations under loss and dephasing.

  2. Quantum advantage for single-photon state characterization

    quant-ph 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A multiphoton interference protocol gives more Fisher information about pairwise photon overlaps per detection event than pairwise Hong-Ou-Mandel measurements, demonstrated experimentally for three photons.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Flamini, N

    F. Flamini, N. Spagnolo, and F. Sciarrino, Reports on Progress in Physics 82, 016001 (2018)

    2018

  2. [2]

    are func- tions of the matrix elements of the unitary UD describing the interferometer, Vij = |⟨ψi|ψj⟩|2 are pairwise overlaps between the three pure states ρi = |ψi⟩⟨ψi|, and φ is the triad phase defined below Eq. (1). When instead the spectral functions describing all the inter- nal degrees of freedom of the photons are mixed, the Gram matrix formalism ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    P. Kok, W. J. Munro, K. Nemoto, T. C. Ralph, J. P. Dowling, and G. J. Milburn, Reviews of Modern Physics 79, 135 (2007)

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    Knill, R

    E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn, Nature 409, 46–52 (2001)

    work page 2001

  5. [5]

    Bouchard, A

    F. Bouchard, A. Sit, Y . Zhang, R. Fickler, F. M. Miatto, Y . Yao, F. Sciarrino, and E. Karimi, Reports on Progress in Physics 84, 012402 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    J. L. O’Brien, Science 318, 1567 (2007)

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    H. J. Briegel, D. E. Browne, W. D ¨ur, R. Raussendorf, and M. Van den Nest, Nature Physics 5, 19–26 (2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    J. C. Garcia-Escartin and P. Chamorro-Posada, Physical Review A 87, 052330 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    Chen, L.-C

    S. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y .-P. Guo, X.-M. Gu, X. Ding, R.-Z. Liu, J.-Y . Zhao, X. You, J. Qin, Y .-F. Wang, Y .-M. He, J. J. Renema, Y .-H. Huo, H. Wang, C.-Y . Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Physical Review Letters 132, 130603 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    Bartolucci, P

    S. Bartolucci, P. Birchall, H. Bomb ´ın, H. Cable, C. Dawson, M. Gimeno-Segovia, E. Johnston, K. Kieling, N. Nickerson, M. Pant, F. Pastawski, T. Rudolph, and C. Sparrow, Nature Communications 14, 912 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    M. Pont, G. Corrielli, A. Fyrillas, I. Agresti, G. Carvacho, N. Maring, P.-E. Emeriau, F. Ceccarelli, R. Albiero, P. H. Dias Ferreira, N. Somaschi, J. Senellart, I. Sagnes, M. Morassi, A. Lemaˆıtre, P. Senellart, F. Sciarrino, M. Liscidini, N. Belabas, and R. Osellame, npj Qua...

    2024

  4. [12]

    are func- tions of the matrix elements of the unitary UD describing the interferometer. Note that a similar argument and derivation can also be given for the more general case of mixed states describ- ing the internal degrees of freedom, as we briefly discuss in Appendix A. In...

    2018

  5. [13]

    H. Cao, L. M. Hansen, F. Giorgino, L. Carosini, P. Zah ´alka, F. Zilk, J. C. Loredo, and P. Walther, Physical Review Letters 132, 130604 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Gisin and R

    N. Gisin and R. Thew, Nature Photonics 1, 165–171 (2007)

    2007

  7. [15]

    Pirandola, J

    S. Pirandola, J. Eisert, C. Weedbrook, A. Furusawa, and S. L. 11 a) b) Figure 6. Comparison of the gain using the matrix U0 and the optimal one. Optimal Gain Gopt compared to that of the matrix U0 for real Gram matrices a) and for complex matrices b). In red, the line Gopt = G...

    2015

  8. [16]

    X.-M. Hu, Y . Guo, B.-H. Liu, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Nature Reviews Physics 5, 339–353 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Carvacho, F

    G. Carvacho, F. Andreoli, L. Santodonato, M. Bentivegna, R. Chaves, and F. Sciarrino, Nature Communications 8, 14775 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    Aaronson and A

    S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, in Proceedings of the Forty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’11 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY , USA,

  11. [19]

    D. J. Brod, E. F. Galv˜ao, A. Crespi, R. Osellame, N. Spagnolo, and F. Sciarrino, Advanced Photonics 1, 034001 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Photonic quantum convo- lutional neural networks with adaptive state injection,

    L. Monbroussou, B. Polacchi, V . Yacoub, E. Caruccio, G. Ro- dari, F. Hoch, G. Carvacho, N. Spagnolo, T. Giordani, M. Bossi, A. Rajan, N. D. Giano, R. Albiero, F. Ceccarelli, R. Osel- lame, E. Kashefi, and F. Sciarrino, “Photonic quantum convo- lutional neural networks with ad...

    2025

  13. [21]

    F. Hoch, E. Caruccio, G. Rodari, T. Francalanci, A. Suprano, T. Giordani, G. Carvacho, N. Spagnolo, S. Koudia, M. Proietti, C. Liorni, F. Cerocchi, R. Albiero, N. Di Giano, M. Gardina, F. Ceccarelli, G. Corrielli, U. Chabaud, R. Osellame, M. Dis- penza, and F. Sciarrino, Natur...

    2025

  14. [22]

    Spagnolo, C

    N. Spagnolo, C. Vitelli, L. Aparo, P. Mataloni, F. Sciarrino, A. Crespi, R. Ramponi, and R. Osellame, Nature Communica- tions 4, 1606 (2013)

    2013

  15. [23]

    A. J. Menssen, A. E. Jones, B. J. Metcalf, M. C. Tichy, S. Barz, W. S. Kolthammer, and I. A. Walmsley, Physical Review Letters 118, 153603 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    S. Agne, T. Kauten, J. Jin, E. Meyer-Scott, J. Z. Salvail, D. R. Hamel, K. J. Resch, G. Weihs, and T. Jennewein, Physical Review Letters 118, 153602 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    D. J. Brod, E. F. Galv˜ao, N. Viggianiello, F. Flamini, N. Spag- nolo, and F. Sciarrino, Physical Review Letters 122, 063602 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    Giordani, D

    T. Giordani, D. J. Brod, C. Esposito, N. Viggianiello, M. Ro- mano, F. Flamini, G. Carvacho, N. Spagnolo, E. F. Galv˜ao, and F. Sciarrino, New Journal of Physics 22, 043001 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    M. Pont, R. Albiero, S. E. Thomas, N. Spagnolo, F. Ceccarelli, G. Corrielli, A. Brieussel, N. Somaschi, H. Huet, A. Harouri, A. Lemaˆıtre, I. Sagnes, N. Belabas, F. Sciarrino, R. Osellame, P. Senellart, and A. Crespi, Physical Review X 12, 031033 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    Seron, L

    B. Seron, L. Novo, and N. J. Cerf, Nature Photonics17, 702–709 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Observation of lie algebraic invariants in quantum linear optics,

    G. Rodari, T. Francalanci, E. Caruccio, F. Hoch, G. Carvacho, T. Giordani, N. Spagnolo, R. Albiero, N. Di Giano, F. Ceccarelli, G. Corrielli, A. Crespi, R. Osellame, U. Chabaud, and F. Sciar- rino, “Observation of lie algebraic invariants in quantum linear optics,” (2025), arX...

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    P. I. Sund, R. Uppu, S. Paesani, and P. Lodahl, Physical Review A 109, 042613 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Senellart, G

    P. Senellart, G. Solomon, and A. White, Nature Nanotechnology 12, 1026–1039 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    Caspani, C

    L. Caspani, C. Xiong, B. J. Eggleton, D. Bajoni, M. Liscidini, M. Galli, R. Morandotti, and D. J. Moss, Light: Science and Applications 6, e17100 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    Somaschi, V

    N. Somaschi, V . Giesz, L. De Santis, J. C. Loredo, M. P. Almeida, G. Hornecker, S. L. Portalupi, T. Grange, C. Ant´on, J. Demory, C. G ´omez, I. Sagnes, N. D. Lanzillotti-Kimura, A. Lema ´ıtre, A. Auffeves, A. G. White, L. Lanco, and P. Senellart, Nature Photonics 10, 340–345 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    R. Uppu, F. T. Pedersen, Y . Wang, C. T. Olesen, C. Papon, X. Zhou, L. Midolo, S. Scholz, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig, and P. Lodahl, Science Advances 6, eabc8268 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    J. I. Cirac, A. K. Ekert, and C. Macchiavello, Physical Review Letters 82, 4344 (1999)

    1999

  28. [36]

    J.-W. Pan, S. Gasparoni, R. Ursin, G. Weihs, and A. Zeilinger, Nature 423, 417 (2003)

    2003

  29. [37]

    Ricci, F

    M. Ricci, F. D. Martini, N. J. Cerf, R. Filip, J. Fiur ´aˇsek, and C. Macchiavello, Physical Review Letters 93, 170501 (2004)

    2004

  30. [38]

    Bravyi and A

    S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Physical Review A71, 022316 (2005)

    2005

  31. [39]

    Salart, O

    D. Salart, O. Landry, N. Sangouard, N. Gisin, H. Herrmann, B. Sanguinetti, C. Simon, W. Sohler, R. T. Thew, A. Thomas, and H. Zbinden, Physical Review Letters 104, 180504 (2010)

    2010

  32. [40]

    Sparrow, Quantum interference in universal linear optical devices for quantum computation and simulation, Ph.D

    C. Sparrow, Quantum interference in universal linear optical devices for quantum computation and simulation, Ph.D. thesis, Imperial College London (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Marshall, Physical Review Letters 129, 213601 (2022)

    J. Marshall, Physical Review Letters 129, 213601 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Somhorst, B

    F. Somhorst, B. Sau¨er, S. van den Hoven, and J. Renema, Physi- cal Review Applied 23, 044003 (2025)

    2025

  35. [43]

    Saied, J

    J. Saied, J. Marshall, N. Anand, and E. G. Rieffel, Physical Review Applied 23, 034079 (2025)

    2025

  36. [44]

    C. F. D. Faurby, L. Carosini, H. Cao, P. I. Sund, L. M. Hansen, F. Giorgino, A. B. Villadsen, S. N. van den Hoven, P. Lodahl, S. Paesani, J. C. Loredo, and P. Walther, Physical Review Letters 133, 033604 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    V . S. Shchesnovich and M. E. O. Bezerra, Phys. Rev. A 98, 033805 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    A. E. Jones, A. J. Menssen, H. M. Chrzanowski, T. A. W. Wolterink, V . S. Shchesnovich, and I. A. Walmsley, Physical Review Letters 125, 123603 (2020)

    2020

  39. [47]

    C. K. Hong, Z. Y . Ou, and L. Mandel, Physical Review Letters 59, 2044 (1987)

  40. [48]

    Oszmaniec, D

    M. Oszmaniec, D. J. Brod, and E. F. Galv ˜ao, New Journal of Physics 26, 013053 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    Experimental observation of counter-intuitive features of photonic bunching,

    G. Rodari, C. Fernandes, E. Caruccio, A. Suprano, F. Hoch, T. Giordani, G. Carvacho, R. Albiero, N. D. Giano, G. Cor- rielli, F. Ceccarelli, R. Osellame, D. J. Brod, L. Novo, N. Spag- nolo, E. F. Galv˜ao, and F. Sciarrino, “Experimental observation of counter-intuitive feature...

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    V . S. Shchesnovich, Physical Review A91, 013844 (2015)

    2015

  43. [51]

    M. C. Tichy, Physical Review A 91, 022316 (2015)

    2015

  44. [52]

    Levy and O

    E. Levy and O. M. Shalit, Rocky Mountain Journal of Mathe- matics 44, 203 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    Fernandes, R

    C. Fernandes, R. Wagner, L. Novo, and E. F. Galv˜ao, Physical Review Letters 133, 190201 (2024). 12

    2024

  46. [54]

    Gazzano, S

    O. Gazzano, S. Michaelis de Vasconcellos, C. Arnold, A. Nowak, E. Galopin, I. Sagnes, L. Lanco, A. Lemaˆıtre, and P. Senellart, Nature Communications 4, 1425 (2013)

    2013

  47. [55]

    Thomas, M

    S. Thomas, M. Billard, N. Coste, S. Wein, Priya, H. Ollivier, O. Krebs, L. Taza¨ırt, A. Harouri, A. Lemaitre, I. Sagnes, C. An- ton, L. Lanco, N. Somaschi, J. Loredo, and P. Senellart, Physical Review Letters 126, 233601 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    Pentangelo, N

    C. Pentangelo, N. Di Giano, S. Piacentini, R. Arpe, F. Ceccarelli, A. Crespi, and R. Osellame, Nanophotonics 13, 2259–2270 (2024)

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.