Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 97 references

Simplified scheme for continuous-variable entanglement distillation: multicopy distillation of Gaussian entanglement without heralding Gaussian measurements

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Gaussian vacuum projections in continuous-variable entanglement distillation can be absorbed into the preparation of input squeezed states, leaving only single-photon heralding with identical outputs, fewer detectors, and higher success…

desk verdict The simplification rests on a beam-splitter identity that appears false as printed, so the main claim is unproven; still worth refereeing because the error looks fixable. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.15065 v1 pith:T6V5XVA7 submitted 2025-09-18 quant-ph

Jaromír Fiurášek This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph PACS 03.67.Bg42.50.Dv
keywords continuous-variableentanglementdistillationGaussianstatessingle-photonsubtractionheraldedGaussificationtwo-modesqueezedvacuumnoiselessattenuationmeasurementsbosonsampling
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

This paper asks whether the Gaussian measurements in a standard continuous-variable entanglement distillation protocol are genuinely necessary. Its answer is no: the projections onto vacuum used in the repeated Gaussification step can be commuted backwards through the circuit and absorbed into the preparation of the input squeezed states. The resulting simplified scheme uses only projections onto single-photon states, needs fewer detectors, and succeeds with higher probability while producing exactly the same outputs. For $M$ pure copies the output is $|\Psi_{\rm out}\rangle \propto (1+\mu \hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{b}^{\dagger}/M)^{M} e^{\mu \hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{b}^{\dagger}}|\mathrm{vac}\rangle$, which as $M\to\infty$ approaches $e^{2\mu\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{b}^{\dagger}}|\mathrm{vac}\rangle$, a two-mode squeezed vacuum (the standard Gaussian entangled state of two light modes) with squeezing parameter $2T\lambda$. If this is right, multicopy distillation of Gaussian entanglement is possible without any Gaussian measurement in the loop.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on three operations. First, a passive beam-splitter reordering identity (Eq. 7), $\hat{U}_{A_1A_2}\hat{V}_{A_1C_1}\hat{V}_{A_2C_2}\hat{U}^{\dagger}_{C_1C_2} = \hat{U}^{\dagger}_{C_1C_2}\hat{V}_{A_1C_1}\hat{V}_{A_2C_2}\hat{U}_{A_1A_2}$, with $\hat{U}$ a balanced (50:50) beam splitter and $\hat{V}$ the unbalanced beam splitter used for photon subtraction, lets the Gaussian measurements move past the photon-subtraction splitters. Second, because two identical zero-displacement Gaussian states are left unchanged by balanced beam-splitter coupling (Eq. 9), the inner interferometers of the multicopy circuit can be removed. Third, the projection onto vacuum is reinterpreted as a conditional zero-photon subtraction, i.e. a noiseless attenuation of each mode, which converts the auxiliary input into $\hat{\sigma}\propto (1-T)^{(\hat{n}_A+\hat{n}_B)/2}\hat{\rho}(1-T)^{(\hat{n}_A+\hat{n}_B)/2}$. In the $M$-copy version these steps turn the whole protocol into two $M$-mode interferometers whose first input is $\hat{\rho}$, whose remaining inputs are $\hat{\sigma}$, and whose auxiliary outputs are all projected onto $|1\rangle$.

What would settle it

Evaluate both sides of Eq. (7) exactly on a set of Fock states using the stated transmittance $T$ for the unbalanced beam splitters; if the operator identity fails for any $T$, the simplified circuit does not reproduce the original output. A direct experiment could run the original and simplified two-copy circuits at fixed $\lambda$ and $T$ and compare the squeezing variances and success probabilities of the heralded outputs.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a circuit equivalence: every Gaussian measurement in the heralded Gaussification stage can be removed. The original round combines local single-photon subtractions with balanced beam-splitter interference and projections of auxiliary modes onto vacuum; the simplified version absorbs those vacuum projections into a different input Gaussian state $\hat{\sigma}$, obtained by two-mode noiseless attenuation of the original state, and keeps only projections onto the single-photon state $|1\rangle$. For pure two-mode squeezed vacuum inputs with squeezing parameter $\lambda$ and photon-subtraction transmittance $T$, the two-copy output is proportional to $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(n^2+3n+4)(T\lambda)^n |n,n\rangle$, and for $M$ copies the output is proportional to $(1+\mu \hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{b}^{\dagger}/M)^M e^{\mu\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{b}^{\dagger}}|\mathrm{vac}\rangle$ with $\mu=T\lambda$. In the large-$M$ limit this becomes a Gaussian two-mode squeezed vacuum with squeezing parameter $2T\lambda$, so multicopy distillation converges to a Gaussian entangled state with no heralding Gaussian measurement. The same structure persists for mixed states distributed through lossy channels, where $\hat{\sigma}$ is a pumped-down squeezed thermal state and the local-operations-and-classical-communication structure of the distillation protocol is unchanged.

Load-bearing premise

The simplification stands or falls on the beam-splitter reordering identity of Eq. (7), which is stated without proof, together with the requirement that all Gaussian and non-Gaussian measurements happen in parallel so that their order can be swapped.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $M$ pure copies the output approaches a Gaussian two-mode squeezed vacuum with squeezing parameter $2T\lambda$ as $M\to\infty$, so Gaussian entanglement can be distilled without any Gaussian measurement.
  • The success probability is higher by a factor $1/P_\sigma$ for every additional copy, giving an exponential improvement $P_\sigma^{1-M}$ over the original multicopy scheme.
  • The auxiliary Gaussian states $\hat{\sigma}$ have weaker squeezing than the original states and can be generated deterministically from the same source, so the simplification does not demand a new non-Gaussian resource.
  • For mixed inputs distributed over lossy channels the distilled squeezing obeys a bound set by the loss, and the local-operations-and-classical-communication structure of the protocol is preserved, so the simplification is not limited to ideal pure-state operation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same absorption trick should transfer to single-mode Gaussification and squeezing-distillation protocols, which share the parallel Gaussian-postselection structure; the paper demonstrates the two-mode case and cites the analogous single-mode logical-qubit breeding case.
  • Because the multicopy output factorizes as one factor per heralded pair of modes, the protocol is a bipartite analogue of Gaussian boson sampling; quantifying how photon-number-resolving detector inefficiency degrades the distilled squeezing is a natural next step.
  • A global optimization of all $M$ input squeezing parameters, rather than the single parameter $\kappa$ scanned here, could trade success probability against distilled squeezing in ways the one-round analysis does not capture.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a simplified continuous-variable entanglement distillation scheme in which the heralding Gaussian measurements (vacuum projections) of the original iterative Gaussification protocol are eliminated and absorbed into the preparation of modified Gaussian input states. The authors claim that the simplified circuit produces exactly the same output as the original protocol while requiring fewer detectors and having a higher success probability. They analyze the two-copy case for pure and mixed inputs, compare with generalized photon subtraction, and present a multicopy generalization in which the output converges to a two-mode squeezed vacuum with squeezing parameter 2Tλ. The material closely follows the recent simplification of GKP state breeding by Aghaee Rad et al.

Significance. If the claimed equivalence is correct, the result is significant: it would show that multicopy distillation of Gaussian entanglement can be achieved without any heralding Gaussian measurements, using only single-photon projections, and it would provide a bipartite analogue of the recent GKP breeding simplification. The paper also gives explicit formulas for the distilled squeezing variance, entanglement, and fidelity, and treats mixed states with loss, which are valuable for potential experiments. The multicopy output formula Eq. (49) and the interpretation as bipartite Gaussian boson sampling are attractive. However, the central equivalence is not established by the arguments in the manuscript: the key reordering identity is false as stated, and the two-copy derivation contains an algebraic error. The manuscript would require a substantially corrected proof before its main claim is reliable.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III, Eq. (7)] The beam-splitter reordering identity Eq. (7) is false as written. With the paper's definitions (3) and (8), U_{A1A2}=exp[π/4(a1†a2−a1a2†)] and V_{AjCj}=exp[θ(aj†cj−ajcj†)], θ=arccos√T, the two sides of Eq. (7) do not agree for generic T. A direct evaluation on |1,0,0,0⟩ at T=0.8 gives different coefficients in the C2 mode on the two sides. Since this identity is the sole justification for the reordering step from Fig. 2(b) to Fig. 2(c), the subsequent absorption of the Gaussian vacuum projections into the prepared state σ is unsupported. This is a load-bearing point for the claimed equivalence.
  2. [§IV, Eqs. (18)-(19)] The assertion that Eq. (18)/(19) reproduces Eq. (13) is incorrect. Inserting ν=(1−T)λ into Eq. (19), the generated state has Fock-space coefficients proportional to 2λ²µⁿ + n(n−1)µⁿ⁻² (up to a common prefactor), whereas Eq. (13) has coefficients proportional to (n²+3n+4)µⁿ. These are not proportional for general λ and T, so the simplified two-copy output as written is not equal to the original output. This error directly contradicts the claim that the two schemes produce 'completely equivalent outputs'.
  3. [§VII] The multicopy simplification in Sec. VII is said to proceed 'in the same way' as the two-copy case, so it inherits the problems with Eq. (7). The reordering of the whole beam-splitter arrays relies on the same false identity, and therefore the proof of equivalence between Fig. 8(a) and Fig. 8(b) is not established. The output formula Eq. (49) may be correct—a direct M=2 calculation from the simplified circuit in Fig. 8(b) yields Eq. (49) and matches Eq. (13)—but the manuscript needs a correct derivation of this equivalence rather than the flawed commutation argument.
minor comments (4)
  1. [General] There are numerous typos and small language errors, including 'suqeezed' (Sec. II), 'previouss' (Sec. IV), 'multicoppy' (Sec. VI), 'Gausisan' (Sec. VII), 'auxliary' (Introduction), and 'muticopy' (Sec. VIII).
  2. [§IV, Eq. (17)] The reasoning leading to Eq. (17) is unclear: the stated projection (|0,2>−|2,0>)/√2 has zero overlap with a two-mode squeezed vacuum state, so the conclusion that the ancilla modes are projected onto ν²|0,0>+|2,2> does not follow from the preceding sentence. This passage should be rewritten with a clear derivation.
  3. [§IV, Eq. (24)] The two roots for κ² should be discussed more explicitly: the text notes that κ² can be negative, but it would help to state which root is physically admissible and how the constraint |κ|<1/(1−T) is enforced in the optimization.
  4. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption states that 'both ρ and σ in panels (a)-(e) denote Gaussian states', while panel (f) refers to ρ^(i) as a non-Gaussian state; the notation should be clarified to avoid confusion about what is input to each stage.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the simplified distillation scheme is derived from linear-optics reordering and noiseless attenuation, not from the target output.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and not circular. The core equivalence between Fig. 2(a) and Fig. 2(e) is built from the passive beam-splitter reordering identity (Eq. 7), the invariance of identical Gaussian states under balanced couplings (Eq. 9), and the noiseless-attenuation map (Eq. 10); none of these assume the final output states (13) or (49). The pure-state output (13) and the multicopy output (49) are computed from the circuits, and the simplified-circuit output (18)-(19) is then asserted to equal (13), which is an algebraic check rather than a redefinition. The only free knob, kappa, is an optimization parameter over the ancilla squeezing, not a fit to data, so there is no fitted-input-called-prediction issue. Self-citations appear (e.g., Refs. [46,76,77,81]), but the load-bearing Gaussification convergence theorem is attributed to the independent Eisert-Browne-Scheel-Plenio result [41], and the noiseless attenuation maps are stated explicitly; none of the self-citations is invoked as the sole justification of a central claim. The skeptical observation that Eq. (7) may be false as written, and that the equality of Eqs. (18)-(19) with Eq. (13) is unshown algebra, is a correctness risk, not circularity, because a false intermediate identity does not make the derivation equivalent to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation relies on standard linear-optics identities and the noiseless-attenuation map; no entity is invented and no parameter is fitted to data. Protocol parameters such as T and λ are tunable controls of the original scheme, and only κ is introduced as an optimization knob in the simplified scheme.

free parameters (1)
  • κ = optimized, not fitted; e.g., positive root of Eq. (24)
    Scales the squeezing of the auxiliary Gaussian state σ in the simplified scheme (ν=κ(1−T)λ). The central equivalence holds for any κ, so this is a protocol knob rather than a fitted constant.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Beam-splitter unitaries obey the reordering identity of Eq. (7).
    This passive-network identity is the key step that lets the Gaussian measurements move before the photon subtractions; the paper states it without proof.
  • domain assumption The two copies of the input Gaussian state are identical and have zero coherent displacement, so balanced beam-splitter coupling leaves their product state unchanged (Eq. 9).
    The protocol distributes copies of the same two-mode squeezed state, so this condition is satisfied for the intended inputs; it is what allows the inner beam splitters to be removed.
  • domain assumption No feedforward is used, so the Gaussian and non-Gaussian measurements can be reordered in parallel.
    The author explicitly restricts to schemes without feedforward; with feedforward, the simplification does not apply.
  • domain assumption Detectors are perfect photon-number-resolving detectors that project onto |1>.
    The author states this assumption in Sec. VIII; imperfect detectors would change the heralded states and the equivalence.
  • domain assumption Known convergence results for iterative Gaussification (Eisert et al., Ref. [41]) are accepted.
    Used to define the asymptotic benchmark V∞ for mixed states; the simplified multicopy limit is derived independently.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Simplified scheme for continuous-variable entanglement distillation: multicopy distillation of Gaussian entanglement without heralding Gaussian measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T6V5XVA7

@misc{pith2026250915065,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Simplified scheme for continuous-variable entanglement distillation: multicopy distillation of Gaussian entanglement without heralding Gaussian measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T6V5XVA7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.15065}
}
read the original abstract

Entanglement of continuous-variable Gaussian states can be distilled by combination of de-Gaussifying operation such as single-photon subtraction and iterative heralded Gaussification. Here we present and analyze a simplified equivalent version of such entanglement distillation protocol, where the Gaussian measurements utilized in heralded Gaussification are eliminated and are absorbed into the preparation of suitable input Gaussian states of the simplified protocol. The simplified scheme contains less detectors and its overall success probability increases in comparison with the original scheme, while producing completely equivalent outputs. Our simplification of the entanglement distillation protocol closely parallels the recently proposed simplification of a scheme for breeding optical single-mode Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill states [H. Aghaee Rad et al., Nature 638, 912 (2025)]. We investigate operation of the simplified entanglement distillation scheme for both pure and mixed input states and clarify how multicopy distillation of Gaussian entanglement emerges in a setup without any heralding Gaussian measurements.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.15065 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Equivalence between quantum-state preparation schemes with and without Gaussian measurements. In (a), a general [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Construction of simplified equivalent scheme for single iteration of the entanglement distillation protocol. Orange bars [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Performance of the simplified entanglement distillation protocol for pure input states. The squeezing variance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Entanglement distillation by two-mode generalized photon subtraction [66]. Two photons are conditionally subtracted [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Preparation of Gaussian state ˆσ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Dependence of the mean numbers of thermal photons ¯n [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Distillation of mixed states by the scheme in Fig. 2(e). Dependence of the squeezing variance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Simplification of multicopy continuous-variable entanglement distillation scheme. (a) Original protocol. Each copy of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [49]

    Franzen, B

    A. Franzen, B. Hage, J. DiGuglielmo, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and R. Schnabel, Experimental Demonstration of Continuous Variable Purification of Squeezed States, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 150505 (2006)

    work page 2006

  2. [1]

    +ν MX j=1 ˆc† j ˆd† j  |vac⟩.(45) Recall thatµ=Tλ. Subsequently, modes C j (Dj) are mutually coupled at two identicalM-port interferometers described by a real coupling matrixV, ˆc† j→ X k Vjkˆc† k, ˆd† j→ X l Vjl ˆd† l.(46) It holds thatV TV=IwhereIstands for the identity matrix. Moreover,V 1k = 1√ M for allj. This latter condition is equivalent to the...

    2025

  3. [2]

    Walschaers, Non-Gaussian Quantum States and Where to Find Them, PRX Quantum2, 030204 (2021)

    M. Walschaers, Non-Gaussian Quantum States and Where to Find Them, PRX Quantum2, 030204 (2021)

    2021

  4. [3]

    A. I. Lvovsky, P. Grangier, A. Ourjoumtsev, V. Parigi, M. Sasaki, and R. Tualle-Brouri, Production and applications of non-Gaussian quantum states of light, arXiv:2006.16985, (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  5. [4]

    Biagi, S

    N. Biagi, S. Francesconi, A. Zavatta, and M. Bellini, Photon-by-photon quantum light state engineering, Prog. Quant. Electron.84, 100414 (2022)

    2022

  6. [5]

    D. Su, C. R. Myers, and K. Kumar Sabapathy, Conversion of Gaussian states to non-Gaussian states using photon-number- resolving detectors, Phys. Rev. A100, 052301 (2019)

    2019

  7. [6]

    Aralov, ´E

    A. Aralov, ´E. Gillet, V. Nguyen, A. Cosentino, M. Walschaers, and M. Frigerio, Photon catalysis for general multimode multi-photon quantum state preparation, arXiv:2507.19397v2

    arXiv

  8. [7]

    M. V. Larsen, J. E. Bourassa, S. Kocsis, J. F. Tasker, R. S. Chadwick, C. Gonz´ alez-Arciniegas, J. Hastrup, C. E. Lopetegui- Gonz´ alez, F. M. Miatto, A. Motamedi, R. Noro, G. Roeland, R. Baby, H. Chen, P. Contu, I. Di Luch, C. Drago, M. Giesbrecht, T. Grainge, I. Krasnokutska, M. Menotti, B. Morrison, C. Puviraj, K. Rezaei Shad, B. Hussain, J. McMahon, ...

    2025

Show all 97 references
  1. [8]

    Dakna, T

    M. Dakna, T. Anhut, T. Opatrn´ y, L. Kn¨ oll, and D.-G. Welsch, Generating Schr¨ odinger-cat-like states by means of condi- tional measurements on a beam splitter, Phys. Rev. A55, 3184 (1997)

    1997

  2. [9]

    Hanamura, K

    F. Hanamura, K. Takase, H. Nagayoshi, R. Ide, W. Asavanant, K. Fukui, P. Marek, R. Filip, and A. Furusawa, Beyond Stellar Rank: Control Parameters for Scalable Optical Non-Gaussian State Generation, arXiv:2509.06255

    arXiv

  3. [10]

    Ourjoumtsev, R

    A. Ourjoumtsev, R. Tualle-Brouri, J. Laurat, and P. Grangier, Generating optical Schr¨ odinger kittens for quantum infor- mation processing, Science312, 83 (2006)

    2006

  4. [11]

    Wenger, R

    J. Wenger, R. Tualle-Brouri, and P. Grangier, Non-Gaussian Statistics from Individual Pulses of Squeezed Light, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 153601 (2004)

    2004

  5. [12]

    Wakui, H

    K. Wakui, H. Takahashi, A. Furusawa, and M. Sasaki, Photon subtracted squeezed states generated with periodically poled KTiOPO4, Opt. Express15, 3568 (2007)

    2007

  6. [13]

    J. S. Neergaard-Nielsen, B. M. Nielsen, C. Hettich, K. Molmer, and E. S. Polzik, Generation of a superposition of odd photon number states for quantum information networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 083604 (2006)

    2006

  7. [14]

    Takahashi, K

    H. Takahashi, K. Wakui, S. Suzuki, M. Takeoka, K. Hayasaka, A. Furusawa, and M. Sasaki, Generation of Large-Amplitude Coherent-State Superposition via Ancilla-Assisted Photon Subtraction, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 233605 (2008)

    2008

  8. [15]

    Ourjoumtsev, A

    A. Ourjoumtsev, A. Dantan, R. Tualle-Brouri, and P. Grangier, Increasing Entanglement between Gaussian States by Coherent Photon Subtraction, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 030502 (2007). 15

    2007

  9. [16]

    J. S. Neergaard-Nielsen, M. Takeuchi, K. Wakui, H. Takahashi, K. Hayasaka, M. Takeoka, and M. Sasaki, Optical continuous-variable qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 053602 (2010)

    2010

  10. [17]

    listopadu 12, 77900 Olomouc, Czech Republic Entanglement of continuous-variable Gaussian states can be distilled by combination of de- Gaussifying operation such as single-photon subtraction and iterative heralded Gaussification. Here we present and analyze a simplified equiva...

    2025 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Ourjoumtsev, F

    A. Ourjoumtsev, F. Ferreyrol, R. Tualle-Brouri, and P. Grangier, Preparation of non-local superpositions of quasi-classical light states, Nat. Phys.5, 189 (2009)

    2009

  12. [19]

    Huang, H

    K. Huang, H. Le Jeannic, J. Ruaudel, V. B. Verma, M. D. Shaw, F. Marsili, S. W. Nam, E Wu, H. Zeng, Y.-C. Jeong, R. Filip, O. Morin, and J. Laurat, Optical synthesis of large-amplitude squeezed coherent-state superpositions with minimal resources, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 023602 (2015)

    2015

  13. [20]

    Asavanant, K

    W. Asavanant, K. Nakashima, Y. Shiozawa, J.-I. Yoshikawa, and A. Furusawa, Generation of highly pure Schr¨ odinger’s cat states and real-time quadrature measurements via optical filtering, Opt. Express25, 32227 (2017)

    2017

  14. [21]

    M. Endo, R. He, T. Sonoyama, K. Takahashi, T. Kashiwazaki, T. Umeki, S. Takasu, K. Hattori, D. Fukuda, K. Fukui, K. Takase, W. Asavanant, P. Marek, R. Filip, and A. Furusawa, Non-Gaussian quantum state generation by multi-photon subtraction at the telecommunication wavelength,...

    2023

  15. [22]

    M. Endo, T. Nomura, T. Sonoyama, K. Takahashi, S. Takasu, D. Fukuda, T. Kashiwazaki, A. Inoue, T. Umeki, R. Nehra, P. Marek, R. Filip, K. Takase, W. Asavanant, and A. Furusawa, High-Rate Four Photon Subtraction from Squeezed Vacuum: Preparing Cat State for Optical Quantum Comp...

    2025 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Zavatta, S

    A. Zavatta, S. Viciani, and M. Bellini, Quantum-to-Classical Transition with Single-Photon-Added Coherent States of Light, Science306, 660 (2004)

    2004

  17. [24]

    Barbieri, N

    M. Barbieri, N. Spagnolo, M. G. Genoni, F. Ferreyrol, R. Blandino, M. G. A. Paris, P. Grangier, and R. Tualle-Brouri, Non-gaussianity of quantum states: An experimental test on single-photon-added coherent states, Phys. Rev. A82, 063833 (2010)

    2010

  18. [25]

    Kumar, E

    R. Kumar, E. Barrios, C. Kupchak, and A. I. Lvovsky, Experimental Characterization of Bosonic Creation and Annihilation Operators, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 130403 (2013)

    2013

  19. [26]

    Jeong, A

    H. Jeong, A. Zavatta, M. Kang, S.-W. Lee, L. S. Costanzo, S. Grandi, T. C. Ralph and M. Bellini, Generation of hybrid entanglement of light, Nature Photonics8, 564 (2014)

    2014

  20. [27]

    Fadrn´ y, M

    J. Fadrn´ y, M. Neset, M. Bielak, M. Jeˇ zek, J. B´ ılek, and J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, Experimental preparation of multiphoton-added coherent states of light, npj Quantum Inf.10, 89 (2024)

    2024

  21. [28]

    Chen, H.-Y

    Y.-R. Chen, H.-Y. Hsieh, J. Ning, H.-C. Wu, H. L. Chen, Z.-H. Shi, P. Yang, O. Steuernagel, C.-M. Wu, and R.-K. Lee, Generation of heralded optical cat states by photon addition, Phys. Rev. A110, 023703 (2024)

    2024

  22. [29]

    A. I. Lvovsky, H. Hansen, T. Aichele, O. Benson, J. Mlynek, and S. Schiller, Quantum State Reconstruction of the Single-Photon Fock State, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 050402 (2001)

    2001

  23. [30]

    Yukawa, K

    M. Yukawa, K. Miyata, T. Mizuta, H. Yonezawa, P. Marek, R. Filip, and A. Furusawa, Generating superposition of up-to three photons for continuous variable quantum information processing, Opt. Express21, 5529 (2013)

    2013

  24. [31]

    Cooper, L

    M. Cooper, L. J. Wright, C. S¨ oller, and B. J. Smith, Experimental generation of multi-photon fock states, Opt. Express 21, 5309 (2013)

    2013

  25. [32]

    Bouillard, G

    M. Bouillard, G. Boucher, J. F. Ortas, B. Kanseri, and R. Tualle-Brouri, High production rate of single-photon and two-photon Fock states for quantum state engineering, Opt. Express27, 3113 (2019)

    2019

  26. [33]

    Kawasaki, K

    A. Kawasaki, K. Takase, T. Nomura, S. Miki, H. Terai, M. Yabuno, F. China, W. Asavanant, M. Endo, J.-I. Yoshikawa, and A. Furusawa, Generation of highly pure single-photon state at telecommunication wavelength, Opt. Express30, 24831 (2022)

    2022

  27. [34]

    M. G. A. Paris, M. Cola and R. Bonifacio, Quantum-state engineering assisted by entanglement, Phys. Rev. A67, 042104 (2003)

    2003

  28. [35]

    Etesse, M

    J. Etesse, M. Bouillard, B. Kanseri, and R. Tualle-Brouri, Experimental Generation of Squeezed Cat States with an Operation Allowing Iterative Growth, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 193602 (2015)

    2015

  29. [36]

    D. V. Sychev, A. E. Ulanov, A. A. Pushkina, M. W. Richards, I. A. Fedorov and A. I. Lvovsky, Enlargement of optical Schr¨ odinger’s cat states, Nat. Photonics11, 379 (2017)

    2017

  30. [37]

    Konno, W

    S. Konno, W. Asavanant, F. Hanamura, H. Nagayoshi, K. Fukui, A. Sakaguchi, R. Ide, F. China, M. Yabuno, S. Miki, H. Terai, K. Takase, M. Endo, P. Marek, R. Filip, P. van Loock, and A. Furusawa, Logical states for fault-tolerant quantum computation with propagating light, Scien...

    2024

  31. [38]

    Cotte, H

    V. Cotte, H. Simon, B. Pointard, and R. Tualle-Brouri, Experimental generation of coherent-state superpositions with a quantum memory, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 043170 (2022)

    2022

  32. [39]

    Simon, L

    H. Simon, L. Caron, R. Journet, V. Cotte, and R. Tualle-Brouri, Experimental Demonstration of a Versatile and Scalable Scheme for Iterative Generation of Non-Gaussian States of Light, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 173603 (2024)

    2024

  33. [40]

    Ourjoumtsev, H

    A. Ourjoumtsev, H. Jeong, R. Tualle-Brouri and P. Grangier, Generation of optical ‘Schr¨ odinger cats’ from photon number states, Nature448, 784 (2007)

    2007

  34. [41]

    Encoding a qubit in an oscillator

    H. M. Vasconcelos, L. Sanz, and S. Glancy, All-optical generation of states for “Encoding a qubit in an oscillator”, Opt. Lett. 35(19), 3261 (2010)

    2010

  35. [42]

    D. E. Browne, J. Eisert, S. Scheel, and M. B. Plenio, Driving non-Gaussian to Gaussian states with linear optics, Phys. Rev. A67, 062320 (2003)

    2003

  36. [43]

    Eisert, D

    J. Eisert, D. Browne, S. Scheel, and M. B. Plenio, Distillation of continuous-variable entanglement with optical means, Ann. Phys.311, 431 (2004)

    2004

  37. [44]

    E. T. Campbell and J. Eisert, Gaussification and Entanglement Distillation of Continuous-Variable Systems: A Unifying Picture, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 020501 (2012). 16

    2012

  38. [45]

    Dost´ al, M

    M. Dost´ al, M. Jeˇ zek, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and J. B´ ılek, Experimental investigation of heralded Gaussification of phase-randomized coherent states of light, Opt. Express32, 45582-45599 (2024)

    2024

  39. [46]

    B. Hage, A. Samblowski, J. DiGuglielmo, A. Franzen, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and R. Schnabel, Preparation of distilled and purified continuous-variable entangled states, Nat. Phys.4, 915 (2008)

    2008

  40. [47]

    B. Hage, A. Samblowski, J. DiGuglielmo, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and R. Schnabel, Iterative Entanglement Distillation: Approaching the Elimination of Decoherence, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 230502 (2010)

    2010

  41. [48]

    Fiur´ aˇ sek, Distillation and purification of symmetric entangled Gaussian states, Phys

    J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, Distillation and purification of symmetric entangled Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A82, 042331 (2010)

    2010

  42. [50]

    Grebien, J

    S. Grebien, J. G¨ ottsch, B. Hage, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and R. Schnabel, Multistep Two-Copy Distillation of Squeezed States via Two-Photon Subtraction, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 273604 (2022)

    2022

  43. [51]

    Aghaee Rad, T

    H. Aghaee Rad, T. Ainsworth, R. N. Alexander, B. Altieri, M. F. Askarani, R. Baby, L. Banchi, B. Q. Baragiola, J. E. Bourassa, R. S. Chadwick, I. Charania, H. Chen, M. J. Collins, P. Contu, N. D’Arcy, G. Dauphinais, R. De Prins, D. Deschenes, I. Di Luch, S. Duque, P. Edke, S. ...

    2025

  44. [52]

    A. P. Lund, A. Laing, S. Rahimi-Keshari, T. Rudolph, J. L. O’Brien, and T. C. Ralph, Boson Sampling from a Gaussian State, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 100502 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    C. S. Hamilton, R. Kruse, L. Sansoni, S. Barkhofen, C. Silberhorn, and I. Jex, Gaussian Boson Sampling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 170501 (2017)

    2017

  46. [54]

    Paesani, Y

    S. Paesani, Y. Ding, R. Santagati, L. Chakhmakhchyan, Ca. Vigliar, K. Rottwitt, L. K. Oxenløwe, J. Wang, M. G. Thompson, and A. Laing, Generation and sampling of quantum states of light in a silicon chip, Nature Physics15, 925 (2019)

    2019

  47. [55]

    Zhong, H

    H.-S. Zhong, H. Wang, Y.-H. Deng, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, J. Qin, D. Wu, X. Ding, Y. Hu, P. Hu, X.-Y. Yang, W.-J. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Li, X. Jiang, L. Gan , G. Yang, L. You, Z. Wang, L. Li , N.-L. Liu, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Quantum computational advantage using phot...

    2020

  48. [56]

    Zhong, Y.-H

    H.-S. Zhong, Y.-H. Deng, J. Qin, H. Wang, M.-C. Chen, L.-C. Peng, Y.-H. Luo, D. Wu, S.-Q. Gong, H. Su, Y. Hu, P. Hu, X.-Y. Yang, W.-J. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Li, X. Jiang, L. Gan, G. Yang, L. You, Z, Wang, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, J. J. Renema, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Phase-Programmable G...

    2021

  49. [57]

    Thekkadath, S

    G.S. Thekkadath, S. Sempere-Llagostera, B.A. Bell, R.B. Patel, M.S. Kim, and I.A. Walmsley, Experimental Demonstration of Gaussian Boson Sampling with Displacement, PRX Quantum3, 020336 (2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    Takase, K

    K. Takase, K. Fukui, A. Kawasaki, W. Asavanant, M. Endo, J.-i. Yoshikawa, P. van Loock, and A. Furusawa, Gottesman- Kitaev-Preskill qubit synthesizer for propagating light, npj Quantum Inf.9, 98 (2023)

    2023

  51. [59]

    S. L. Braunstein, Squeezing as an irreducible resource, Phys. Rev. A71, 055801 (2005)

    2005

  52. [60]

    Opatrn´ y, G

    T. Opatrn´ y, G. Kurizki, and D.-G. Welsch, Improvement on teleportation of continuous variables by photon subtraction via conditional measurement, Phys. Rev. A61, 032302 (2000)

    2000

  53. [61]

    Takahashi, J

    H. Takahashi, J. S. Neergaard-Nielsen, M. Takeuchi, M. Takeoka, K. Hayasaka, A. Furusawa, and M. Sasaki, Entanglement distillation from Gaussian input states, Nat. Photonics4, 178–181 (2010)

    2010

  54. [62]

    Kurochkin, A

    Y. Kurochkin, A. S. Prasad, and A. I. Lvovsky, Distillation of The Two-Mode Squeezed State, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 070402 (2014)

    2014

  55. [63]

    Dirmeier, J

    T. Dirmeier, J. Tiedau, I. Khan, et al., Distillation of squeezing using an engineered pulsed parametric down-conversion source, Opt. Express28, 30784 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Eisert, S

    J. Eisert, S. Scheel, and M. B. Plenio, Distilling Gaussian States with Gaussian Operations Is Impossible, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 137903 (2002)

    2002

  57. [65]

    Fiur´ aˇ sek, Gaussian Transformations and Distillation of Entangled Gaussian States, Phys

    J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, Gaussian Transformations and Distillation of Entangled Gaussian States, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 137904 (2002)

    2002

  58. [66]

    Giedke and J

    G. Giedke and J. I. Cirac, Characterization of Gaussian operations and distillation of Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A66, 032316 (2002)

    2002

  59. [67]

    Kitagawa, M

    A. Kitagawa, M. Takeoka1 M. Sasaki, and A. Chefles, Entanglement evaluation of non-Gaussian states generated by photon subtraction from squeezed states, Phys. Rev. A 73, 042310 (2006)

    2006

  60. [68]

    Dell’Anno, D

    F. Dell’Anno, D. Buono, G. Nocerino, A. Porzio, S. Solimeno, S. De Siena, and F. Illuminati, Tunable non-Gaussian resources for continuous-variable quantum technologies, Phys. Rev. A88, 043818 (2013)

    2013

  61. [69]

    S. L. Zhang and P. van Loock, Distillation of mixed-state continuous-variable entanglement by photon subtraction, Phys. Rev. A82, 062316 (2010)

    2010

  62. [70]

    Navarrete-Benlloch, R

    C. Navarrete-Benlloch, R. Garc´ ıa-Patr´ on, J. H. Shapiro, and N. J. Cerf, Enhancing quantum entanglement by photon addition and subtraction, Phys. Rev. A86, 012328 (2012)

    2012

  63. [71]

    Wang, L.-L

    S. Wang, L.-L. Hou, X.-F. Chen, and X.-F. Xu, Continuous-variable quantum teleportation with non-Gaussian entangled states generated via multiple-photon subtraction and addition Phys. Rev. A91, 063832 (2015). 17

    2015

  64. [72]

    Olivares, M

    S. Olivares, M. G. A. Paris, and R. Bonifacio, Teleportation improvement by inconclusive photon subtraction, Phys. Rev. A67, 032314 (2003)

    2003

  65. [73]

    Yang and F.-L

    Y. Yang and F.-L. Li, Entanglement properties of non-Gaussian resources generated via photon subtraction and addition and continuous-variable quantum-teleportation improvement, Phys. Rev. A80, 022315 (2009)

    2009

  66. [74]

    T. J. Bartley, P. J. D. Crowley, A. Datta, J. Nunn, L. Zhang, and I. Walmsley, Strategies for enhancing quantum entan- glement by local photon subtraction, Phys. Rev. A87, 022313 (2013)

    2013

  67. [75]

    N. Wang, M. Wang, and X. Su, Continuous-variable entanglement swapping with photon subtraction, Phys. Rev. A110, 012416 (2024)

    2024

  68. [76]

    Nha and H

    H. Nha and H. J. Carmichael, Proposed Test of Quantum Nonlocality for Continuous Variables, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 020401 (2004)

    2004

  69. [77]

    Garc´ ıa-Patr´ on, J

    R. Garc´ ıa-Patr´ on, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, N. J. Cerf, J. Wenger, R. Tualle-Brouri, and Ph. Grangier, Proposal for a Loophole-Free Bell Test Using Homodyne Detection, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 130409 (2004)

    2004

  70. [78]

    Fiur´ aˇ sek, S

    J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, S. Grebien, and R. Schnabel, Extended analysis of distillation and purification of squeezed states of light, Phys. Rev. A111, 043704 (2025)

    2025

  71. [79]

    Miˇ cuda, I

    M. Miˇ cuda, I. Straka, M. Mikov´ a, M. Duˇ sek, N. J. Cerf, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and M. Jeˇ zek, Noiseless Loss Suppression in Quantum Optical Communication, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 180503 (2012)

    2012

  72. [80]

    C. M. Nunn, J. D. Franson, and T. B. Pittman, Heralding on the detection of zero photons, Phys. Rev. A104, 033717 (2021)

    2021

  73. [81]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. B. Plenio, D. E. Browne, S. Scheel, and A. Feito, On the experimental feasibility of continuous-variable optical entanglement distillation, Optics and Spectroscopy103, 173 (2007)

    2007

  74. [82]

    T. C. Ralph and A. P. Lund, in Quantum Communication Measurement and Computing edited by A. Lvovsky (AIP, New York, 2009), pp. 155–160

    2009

  75. [83]

    Fiur´ aˇ sek, Engineering quantum operations on traveling light beams by multiple photon addition and subtraction, Phys

    J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, Engineering quantum operations on traveling light beams by multiple photon addition and subtraction, Phys. Rev. A80, 053822 (2009)

    2009

  76. [84]

    Zavatta, J

    A. Zavatta, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and M. Bellini, A high-fidelity noiseless amplifier for quantum light states, Nat. Photonics5, 52 (2011)

    2011

  77. [85]

    Neset, J

    M. Neset, J. Fadrn´ y, M. Bielak, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, M. Jeˇ zek, and J. B´ ılek, Experimental noiseless quantum amplification of coherent states of light by two-photon addition and subtraction, Phys. Rev. A112, 023710 (2025)

    2025

  78. [86]

    A. E. Ulanov, I. A. Fedorov, A. A. Pushkina, Y. V. Kurochkin, T. C. Ralph and A. I. Lvovsky, Undoing the effect of loss on quantum entanglement, Nat. Photonics9, 764 (2015)

    2015

  79. [87]

    K. P. Seshadreesan, H. Krovi, and S. Guha, Continuous-variable entanglement distillation over a pure loss channel with multiple quantum scissors, Phys. Rev. A100, 022315 (2019)

    2019

  80. [88]

    J. J. Guanzon, M. S. Winnel, A. P. Lund, and T. C. Ralph, Noiseless linear amplification and loss-tolerant quantum relay using coherent-state superpositions, Phys. Rev. A108, 032411 (2023)

    2023

  81. [89]

    Takase, J.-I

    K. Takase, J.-I. Yoshikawa, W. Asavanant, M. Endo, and A. Furusawa, Generation of optical Schr¨ odinger cat states by generalized photon subtraction, Phys. Rev. A103, 013710 (2021)

    2021

  82. [90]

    Tomoda, A

    H. Tomoda, A. Machinaga, K. Takase, J. Harada, T. Kashiwazaki, T.i Umeki, S. Miki, F. China, M. Yabuno, H. Terai, D. Okuno, and S. Takeda, Boosting the generation rate of squeezed single-photon states by generalized photon subtraction, Phys. Rev. A110, 033717 (2024)

    2024

  83. [91]

    Takase, F

    K. Takase, F. Hanamura, H. Nagayoshi, J. E. Bourassa, R. N. Alexander, A. Kawasaki, W. Asavanant, M. Endo, and A. Furusawa, Generation of flying logical qubits using generalized photon subtraction with adaptive Gaussian operations, Phys. Rev. A110, 012436 (2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    A Vourdas, Analytic representations in quantum mechanics, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.39, R65 (2006)

    2006

  85. [93]

    Motamedi, Y

    A. Motamedi, Y. Yao, K. Nielsen, U. Chabaud, J. E. Bourassa, R. N. Alexander, and F. Miatto, The stellar decomposition of Gaussian quantum states, arXiv:2504.10455

  86. [94]

    A. J. Pizzimenti and D. Soh, Optical Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qubit generation via approximate squeezed coherent state superposition breeding, Phys. Rev. A110, 062619 (2024)

    2024

  87. [95]

    D. J. Weigand and B. M. Terhal, Generating grid states from Schr¨ odinger-cat states without postselection, Phys. Rev. A 97, 022341, (2018)

    2018

  88. [96]

    A. J. Pizzimenti and D. Soh, Optical Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qubit generation via approximate squeezed coherent state superposition breeding, arXiv:2409.06902

    arXiv

  89. [97]

    Crescimanna, S

    V. Crescimanna, S. Yu, K. Heshami, and R. B. Patel, Adaptive Non-Gaussian Quantum State Engineering, arXiv:2502.14967

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.