arxiv: 2604.03495 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-03 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Remotely Preparing Many Qubits with a Single Photon

Tzula B. Propp , Benedikt Tissot , Anders S. S{\o}rensen , Stephanie D. C. Wehner

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 18:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph

keywords remote state preparationsingle photontemporal modesqubit preparationquantum networksqudit encodingreflection protocol

0 comments

The pith

A single photon in superposition over many temporal modes can remotely prepare multiple qubits at once while keeping success rates high.

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

The paper shows how a photon placed in a superposition of d temporal modes encodes up to log2(d) qubits of information. This encoding is used in a reflection-based protocol for remote state preparation, where the same single photon prepares all the target qubits simultaneously. Because only one photon must be transmitted and detected, the protocol maintains high success probability even when exponentially many modes are required. The approach bypasses the problem of short qubit lifetimes by preparing everything in one shot and reaches higher fidelities than sequential single-qubit schemes. For the special case of one qubit, the method also relaxes the need for precise phase stabilization.

Core claim

A photon in a superposition over d temporal modes encodes a qudit that carries log2(d) qubits; a reflection-based remote state preparation protocol uses this encoding to prepare many qubits at once, with success probability remaining high because only a single photon detection is required regardless of the number of qubits.

What carries the argument

Reflection-based remote state preparation protocol that encodes multiple qubits into the temporal-mode superposition of one photon and reflects it to transfer the state to the target qubits.

If this is right

Success probability for preparing many qubits stays high even though exponentially many temporal modes are needed.
Only one photon must be transmitted and detected to prepare an arbitrary number of qubits.
Simultaneous preparation removes the constraint of limited qubit coherence time.
Fidelities exceed those of existing sequential remote state preparation protocols.
Single-qubit remote state preparation requires less stringent phase stabilization than prior schemes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Quantum network protocols that rely on remote state preparation could reduce their total photon overhead by preparing batches of qubits with one transmission.
The same encoding might be extended to prepare multi-qubit entangled resources without sequential operations.
Realistic lossy channels would require error correction or mode-filtering techniques to preserve the claimed scaling.
The method suggests a route to scalable distributed quantum computation where photon resources are the main bottleneck.

Load-bearing premise

The protocol assumes ideal photon sources, perfect distinguishability between temporal modes, lossless reflections, and no decoherence during the entire multi-mode sequence.

What would settle it

An experiment in which success probability falls below the ideal scaling when the number of temporal modes is increased, due to photon loss or imperfect mode distinguishability in a real optical channel.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.03495 by Anders S. S{\o}rensen, Benedikt Tissot, Stephanie D. C. Wehner, Tzula B. Propp.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Tradeoff between fidelity F and success probability P when using a weak coherent pulse and photon number resolving detection. We compare the reflection based (R), single-click (SC), and double-click (DC) remote state preparation protocols, see legend. (a) a scenario limited by photon routing and detection where we take ηs = η0ηd = η1ηd and (b) a scenario limited by the matter-photon interaction where we… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Rate to prepare n = kq = 8 qubits within a sliding window of w = 2000/2 k−1 attempts using single-photon sources as a function of distance. Different distribution in q batches (photon detections) and k qubits prepared using a single photon are encoded in the linestyle, see legend. We also include the performance of DC-RSP. We assume ηt corresponding to transmission over a distance L in a fiber with a los… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Circuit illustrating an alternative implementa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Sketch of the input-output model for a single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Rate to prepare n = kq = 2 qubits within 2000/2 k−1 attempts using single-photon sources as a function of distance. Different distribution in q batches (photon detections) and k qubits prepared using a single photon are encoded in the linestyle, see legend. The remaining parameters are the same as for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

A single photon in a superposition of $d$ modes naturally encode a $d$-dimensional quantum system, a so-called qudit. We show that such superpositions can be leveraged to achieve a quantum speed-up of remote remote state preparation (RSP): a primitive for several quantum network protocols. For a superposition over $d\geq 2$ modes, the photon state can encode up to ${\rm Log}_2(d)$ qubits, which we exploit in a proposed reflection based RSP protocol with multiple variations. For single qubit RSP, we achieve a performance comparable to the best known existing schemes but with reduced requirements for phase stabilization. For many qubit RSP the achievable success rates remain high despite needing exponentially many temporal modes, since only one photon needs to be transmitted and detected to prepare multiple qubits. By simultaneously preparing many qubits at once, we bypass limited qubit lifetimes limited qubit lifetimes and improve fidelities beyond what is achievable with existing RSP protocols.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives a single-photon qudit protocol for remote multi-qubit state preparation that keeps photon count low, but the simultaneity claim runs into trouble with sequential temporal modes.

read the letter

The main point is a protocol that packs log2(d) qubits into one photon's superposition over d temporal modes and uses reflections to prepare them remotely with a single detection event. This is the concrete new piece: it extends standard RSP to the many-qubit regime without sending more photons as the qubit number grows. For the single-qubit case the performance lines up with existing schemes while cutting the phase-stabilization burden, which is a practical step forward for lab implementations. The scaling argument for many qubits is straightforward on paper: success probability stays reasonable because only one photon travels and gets detected. That part is cleanly laid out from the abstract onward. The soft spot is the timing. Temporal modes are ordered in time, so the full sequence for large d takes time proportional to the number of modes. Any qubit coupled to an early mode has to hold its state through the remaining interactions, which undercuts the claim that preparation happens simultaneously and bypasses coherence limits. The abstract treats this as solved by the superposition itself, but that does not follow without extra assumptions about parallel coupling or coherence times much longer than the sequence length. If the full manuscript shows a concrete fix or bounds the resulting error, the argument strengthens; otherwise the fidelity improvement rests on an unexamined premise. The underlying optics and measurement steps look standard and non-circular. No invented parameters or self-referential fitting appear. The work is aimed at quantum-network people who care about photon budgets and scaling. A reader who already knows RSP literature will see the resource-reduction angle quickly and can judge whether the timing detail matters for their use case. It is solid enough to send out for peer review so the protocol steps and any error analysis can be checked in detail.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a reflection-based remote state preparation (RSP) protocol that uses a single photon in a superposition of d temporal modes (with d exponential in the number of target qubits) to encode and prepare up to log2(d) qubits remotely. It claims that success probabilities remain high for multi-qubit cases because only one photon is transmitted and detected, and that simultaneous preparation of many qubits bypasses limited coherence times while achieving fidelities superior to existing RSP schemes; for the single-qubit case the protocol matches the best known performance with reduced phase-stabilization requirements.

Significance. If the protocol's quantitative claims hold under realistic conditions, the work would offer a resource-efficient route to multi-qubit RSP in quantum networks, reducing the number of photons that must be sent while potentially mitigating coherence-time constraints. The single-photon encoding of multiple qubits and the reported reduction in phase-stabilization overhead constitute practical advantages that could improve scalability of network primitives.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'by simultaneously preparing many qubits at once, we bypass limited qubit lifetimes' is undermined by the use of temporal modes. Because the modes are time-ordered, the reflection sequence spans a duration proportional to d = 2^n; any qubit coupled to an early mode must remain coherent for the full remaining sequence length. This sequential timing directly conflicts with the asserted simultaneity and the fidelity improvement that is said to follow from it.
Protocol description (and abstract): no explicit derivations of the success probability or fidelity expressions are supplied, nor is there an error analysis or numerical simulation of the multi-mode case. The quantitative assertion that 'success rates remain high' therefore rests on unverified assumptions about ideal photon sources, perfect temporal-mode distinguishability, lossless reflections, and negligible decoherence over the full sequence duration.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract contains the repeated phrase 'remote remote state preparation' and the duplicated clause 'limited qubit lifetimes limited qubit lifetimes'.
The manuscript would benefit from a timing diagram that explicitly shows the duration of the multi-mode sequence relative to typical qubit coherence times.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to improve clarity and provide additional supporting analysis.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that 'by simultaneously preparing many qubits at once, we bypass limited qubit lifetimes' is undermined by the use of temporal modes. Because the modes are time-ordered, the reflection sequence spans a duration proportional to d = 2^n; any qubit coupled to an early mode must remain coherent for the full remaining sequence length. This sequential timing directly conflicts with the asserted simultaneity and the fidelity improvement that is said to follow from it.

Authors: We agree that the temporal modes are time-ordered, so the total protocol duration scales with d and early-mode qubits must maintain coherence throughout the sequence. The wording 'simultaneously preparing many qubits at once' was meant to emphasize that a single photon transmission prepares the entire multi-qubit state, in contrast to schemes requiring separate photon transmissions per qubit. We will revise the abstract and protocol discussion to clarify this distinction, explicitly note the coherence-time requirement across the full sequence, and discuss its impact on achievable fidelity. revision: yes
Referee: Protocol description (and abstract): no explicit derivations of the success probability or fidelity expressions are supplied, nor is there an error analysis or numerical simulation of the multi-mode case. The quantitative assertion that 'success rates remain high' therefore rests on unverified assumptions about ideal photon sources, perfect temporal-mode distinguishability, lossless reflections, and negligible decoherence over the full sequence duration.

Authors: The full manuscript contains analytical derivations of the ideal-case success probability (heralded by single-photon detection, remaining independent of qubit number) and fidelity expressions. We acknowledge that a dedicated error analysis and numerical simulations under realistic imperfections (mode distinguishability, loss, decoherence) are not yet included. We will add an explicit derivations section, an error model, and supporting numerical results for the multi-mode case in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: protocol derives from standard superposition and measurement without self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper proposes a reflection-based remote state preparation protocol that encodes log2(d) qubits in a single photon's d-mode superposition and claims high success probability for multi-qubit cases because only one photon is transmitted. This follows directly from the protocol construction using established quantum optics principles of mode superposition, reflection, and detection; no parameters are fitted to the target result, no self-citations bear the central load, and no derivation step equates the output to its input by definition. The multi-qubit fidelity claim is a direct consequence of the single-photon encoding rather than a renamed or smuggled ansatz.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard quantum mechanics for photon states and measurements without introducing new free parameters, axioms beyond domain standards, or invented entities.

axioms (1)

standard math Standard quantum mechanics superposition and projective measurement for photon modes
Invoked throughout the protocol description for encoding and detection.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5476 in / 1116 out tokens · 51822 ms · 2026-05-13T18:05:28.789899+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

105 extracted references · 105 canonical work pages

[1]

The quantum internet

H. J. Kimble. “The quantum internet”. Na- ture453, 1023–1030 (2008)

work page 2008
[2]

Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead

Stephanie Wehner, David Elkouss, and Ronald Hanson. “Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead”. Sci- ence362(2018)

work page 2018
[3]

Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack

Lov K. Grover. “Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack”. Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 325–328 (1997)

work page 1997
[4]

Quantum algorithm for lin- ear systems of equations

Aram W. Harrow, Avinatan Hassidim, and Seth Lloyd. “Quantum algorithm for lin- ear systems of equations”. Phys. Rev. Lett.103(2009)

work page 2009
[5]

Optimal blind quantum computation

Atul Mantri, Carlos A. Pérez-Delgado, and Joseph F. Fitzsimons. “Optimal blind quantum computation”. Phys. Rev. Lett.111(2013)

work page 2013
[6]

Architectures for quantum simulation showing a quantum speedup

Juan Bermejo-Vega, Dominik Hangleiter, Martin Schwarz, Robert Raussendorf, and Jens Eisert. “Architectures for quantum simulation showing a quantum speedup”. Phys. Rev. X8(2018)

work page 2018
[7]

Quantifying quantum speedups: Improved classical simulation from tighter magic monotones

James R. Seddon, Bartosz Regula, Hakop Pashayan, Yingkai Ouyang, and Earl T. Campbell. “Quantifying quantum speedups: Improved classical simulation from tighter magic monotones”. PRX Quantum2(2021)

work page 2021
[8]

A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learning

Yunchao Liu, Srinivasan Arunachalam, and Kristan Temme. “A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learning”. Nat. Phys.17, 1013–1017 (2021)

work page 2021
[9]

Demonstration of algorithmic quantum speedup

Bibek Pokharel and Daniel A. Lidar. “Demonstration of algorithmic quantum speedup”. Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023)

work page 2023
[10]

Optimization by decoded quantum inter- ferometry

Stephen P. Jordan, Noah Shutty, Mary Wootters, Adam Zalcman, Alexander Schmidhuber, Robbie King, Sergei V. Isakov, Tanuj Khattar, and Ryan Babbush. “Optimization by decoded quantum inter- ferometry”. Nature646, 831–836 (2025)

work page 2025
[11]

Quantum advantage from measurement-induced en- tanglement in random shallow circuits

Adam Bene Watts, David Gosset, Yinchen Liu, and Mehdi Soleimanifar. “Quantum advantage from measurement-induced en- tanglement in random shallow circuits”. PRX Quantum6(2025)

work page 2025
[12]

Universal blind quantum computation

Anne Broadbent, Joseph Fitzsimons, and Elham Kashefi. “Universal blind quantum computation”. In 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. Page 517–526. IEEE (2009)

work page 2009
[13]

Blind topological measurement-based quantum computation

Tomoyuki Morimae and Keisuke Fu- jii. “Blind topological measurement-based quantum computation”. Nature Communi- cations3(2012)

work page 2012
[14]

Flow ambiguity: A path towards classi- cally driven blind quantum computation

Atul Mantri, Tommaso F. Demarie, Nico- lasC.Menicucci, andJosephF.Fitzsimons. “Flow ambiguity: A path towards classi- cally driven blind quantum computation”. Phys. Rev. X7(2017)

work page 2017
[15]

Private quantum computation: an introduction to blind quantum computing and related protocols

Joseph F. Fitzsimons. “Private quantum computation: an introduction to blind quantum computing and related protocols”. npj Quantum Inf.3(2017)

work page 2017
[16]

Verifiable blind quantum comput- ing with trapped ions and single photons

P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, D. Main, B. C. Nichol, E. M. Ainley, D. Leich- tle, A. Mantri, E. Kashefi, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, C. J. Ballance, and D. M. Lucas. “Verifiable blind quantum comput- ing with trapped ions and single photons”. Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024)

work page 2024
[17]

Optimiz- ing resource efficiencies for scalable full- stack quantum computers

MarcoFellous-Asiani, JingHaoChai, Yvain Thonnart, Hui Khoon Ng, Robert S. Whit- ney, and Alexia Auffèves. “Optimiz- ing resource efficiencies for scalable full- stack quantum computers”. PRX Quan- tum4(2023)

work page 2023
[18]

Energy-consumption advantage of quan- tum computation

Florian Meier and Hayata Yamasaki. “Energy-consumption advantage of quan- tum computation”. PRX Energy4(2025)

work page 2025
[19]

Combining energyefficiencyandquantumadvantagein cyclic machines

Waner Hou, Wanchao Yao, Xingyu Zhao, Kamran Rehan, Yi Li, Yue Li, Eric Lutz, Yiheng Lin, and Jiangfeng Du. “Combining energyefficiencyandquantumadvantagein cyclic machines”. Nat. Commun.16(2025)

work page 2025
[20]

Green quantum comput- ing in the sky

Wiem Abderrahim, Osama Amin, and 7 Basem Shihada. “Green quantum comput- ing in the sky”. npj Wireless Technol- ogy1(2025)

work page 2025
[21]

Bench- marking of quantum protocols

Chin-Te Liao, Sima Bahrani, Francisco Fer- reira da Silva, and Elham Kashefi. “Bench- marking of quantum protocols”. Scientific Reports12(2022)

work page 2022
[22]

Heuristic-free verification-inspired quan- tum benchmarking

Johannes Frank, Elham Kashefi, Do- minik Leichtle, and Michael de Oliveira. “Heuristic-free verification-inspired quan- tum benchmarking” (2024)

work page 2024
[23]

Measurement-based quantum com- putation with trapped ions

B. P. Lanyon, P. Jurcevic, M. Zwerger, C. Hempel, E. A. Martinez, W. Dür, H. J. Briegel, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos. “Measurement-based quantum com- putation with trapped ions”. Phys. Rev. Lett.111(2013)

work page 2013
[24]

Verifiable measurement-based quantum random sampling with trapped ions

Martin Ringbauer, Marcel Hinsche, Thomas Feldker, Paul K. Faehrmann, Juani Bermejo-Vega, Claire L. Edmunds, Lukas Postler, Roman Stricker, Chris- tian D. Marciniak, Michael Meth, Ivan Pogorelov, Rainer Blatt, Philipp Schindler, Jens Eisert, Thomas Monz, and Dominik Hangleiter. “Verifiable measurement-based quantum random sampling with trapped ions”. Nat. ...

work page 2025
[25]

Resource-efficient verifica- tion of quantum computing using serfling’s bound

Yuki Takeuchi, Atul Mantri, Tomoyuki Morimae, Akihiro Mizutani, and Joseph F. Fitzsimons. “Resource-efficient verifica- tion of quantum computing using serfling’s bound”. npj Quantum Inf.5(2019)

work page 2019
[26]

Verify- ing bqp computations on noisy devices with minimal overhead

Dominik Leichtle, Luka Music, Elham Kashefi, and Harold Ollivier. “Verify- ing bqp computations on noisy devices with minimal overhead”. PRX Quan- tum2(2021)

work page 2021
[27]

Remote state preparation

Charles H. Bennett, David P. DiVincenzo, Peter W. Shor, John A. Smolin, Bar- bara M. Terhal, and William K. Wootters. “Remote state preparation”. Phys. Rev. Lett.87(2001)

work page 2001
[28]

Oblivious remote state preparation

Debbie W. Leung and Peter W. Shor. “Oblivious remote state preparation”. Phys- ical Review Letters90(2003)

work page 2003
[29]

Decoherence of an n-qubit quantum memory

Thomas Gorin, Carlos Pineda, and Thomas H. Seligman. “Decoherence of an n-qubit quantum memory”. Physical Review Letters99(2007)

work page 2007
[30]

Measurement-based quantum computer in the gapped ground state of a two- body hamiltonian

Gavin K. Brennen and Akimasa Miyake. “Measurement-based quantum computer in the gapped ground state of a two- body hamiltonian”. Physical Review Let- ters101(2008)

work page 2008
[31]

Quan- tum fourier transform using dynamic cir- cuits

Elisa Bäumer, Vinay Tripathi, Alireza Seif, Daniel Lidar, and Derek S. Wang. “Quan- tum fourier transform using dynamic cir- cuits”. Physical Review Letters133(2024)

work page 2024
[32]

Optimal remote state preparation

Dominic W. Berry and Barry C. Sanders. “Optimal remote state preparation”. Phys- ical Review Letters90(2003)

work page 2003
[33]

Remote preparation of a single- mode photonic qubit by measuring field quadrature noise

S. A. Babichev, B. Brezger, and A. I. Lvovsky. “Remote preparation of a single- mode photonic qubit by measuring field quadrature noise”. Physical Review Let- ters92(2004)

work page 2004
[34]

Remote preparation of single-photon “hybrid

Julio T. Barreiro, Tzu-Chieh Wei, and Paul G. Kwiat. “Remote preparation of single-photon “hybrid” entangled and vector-polarization states”. Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010)

work page 2010
[35]

Entangle- ment between a diamond spin qubit and a photonic time-bin qubit at telecom wave- length

Anna Tchebotareva, Sophie L. N. Hermans, Peter C. Humphreys, Dirk Voigt, Peter J. Harmsma, Lun K. Cheng, Ad L. Verlaan, Niels Dijkhuizen, Wim de Jong, Anaïs Dréau, and Ronald Hanson. “Entangle- ment between a diamond spin qubit and a photonic time-bin qubit at telecom wave- length”. Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019)

work page 2019
[36]

Reconfigurable quan- tum local areanetwork over deployedfiber

Muneer Alshowkan, Brian P. Williams, Philip G. Evans, Nageswara S.V. Rao, Emma M. Simmerman, Hsuan-Hao Lu, Navin B. Lingaraju, Andrew M. Weiner, Claire E. Marvinney, Yun-Yi Pai, Ben- jamin J. Lawrie, Nicholas A. Peters, and Joseph M. Lukens. “Reconfigurable quan- tum local areanetwork over deployedfiber”. PRX Quantum2(2021)

work page 2021
[37]

Single-click protocols for re- mote state preparation using weak coherent pulses

Janice van Dam, Emil R. Hellebek, Tzula B. Propp, Junior R. Gonzales-Ureta, Anders S. Sørensen, and Stephanie D. C. Wehner. “Single-click protocols for re- mote state preparation using weak coherent pulses” (2025)

work page 2025
[38]

Quantum strategies to over- come classical multiplexing limits

Tzula B. Propp, B. Davies, J. Grimber- gen, H. Hellebek, J. R. Gonzales-Ureta, J. van Dam, J. A. Slater, A. Sørensen, and S. Wehner. “Quantum strategies to over- come classical multiplexing limits” (2025). arXiv:2510.06099

work page arXiv 2025
[39]

Hardware require- mentsfortrapped-ion-basedverifiableblind quantum computing with a measurement- only client

J van Dam, G Avis, Tz B Propp, F Fer- reira da Silva, J A Slater, T E Northup, 8 and S Wehner. “Hardware require- mentsfortrapped-ion-basedverifiableblind quantum computing with a measurement- only client”. Quantum Sci. Technol.9, 045031 (2024)

work page 2024
[40]

A one-way quantum computer

Robert Raussendorf and Hans J. Briegel. “A one-way quantum computer”. Physical Review Letters86, 5188–5191 (2001)

work page 2001
[41]

Quantum computa- tional universality of hypergraph states with pauli-x and z basis measurements

Yuki Takeuchi, Tomoyuki Morimae, and Masahito Hayashi. “Quantum computa- tional universality of hypergraph states with pauli-x and z basis measurements”. Scientific Reports9(2019)

work page 2019
[42]

Improved resource state for verifi- able blind quantum computation

Qingshan Xu, Xiaoqing Tan, and Rui Huang. “Improved resource state for verifi- able blind quantum computation”. Entropy 22, 996 (2020)

work page 2020
[43]

Preparing remote states for genuine quantum networks

Shih-Hsuan Chen, Chan Hsu, Yu-Chien Kao, Bing-Yuan Lee, Yuan-Sung Liu, Yueh-Nan Chen, and Che-Ming Li. “Preparing remote states for genuine quantum networks”. Communications Physics7(2024)

work page 2024
[44]

Surface code quantum communication

Austin G Fowler, David S Wang, Charles D Hill, ThaddeusDLadd, RodneyVanMeter, and Lloyd C L Hollenberg. “Surface code quantum communication”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 180503 (2010)

work page 2010
[45]

Quantum teleportation of physical qubits into logical code spaces

Yi-Han Luo, Ming-Cheng Chen, Manuel Erhard, Han-Sen Zhong, Dian Wu, Hao- Yang Tang, Qi Zhao, Xi-Lin Wang, Keisuke Fujii, Li Li, Nai-Le Liu, Kae Nemoto, William J. Munro, Chao-Yang Lu, Anton Zeilinger, and Jian-Wei Pan. “Quantum teleportation of physical qubits into logical code spaces”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118(2021)

work page 2021
[46]

Robust teleportation of a surface code and cascade of topological quantum phase transitions

Finn Eckstein, Bo Han, Simon Trebst, and Guo-Yi Zhu. “Robust teleportation of a surface code and cascade of topological quantum phase transitions”. PRX Quan- tum5(2024)

work page 2024
[47]

Stabilizer formalism for op- erator quantum error correction

David Poulin. “Stabilizer formalism for op- erator quantum error correction”. Physical Review Letters95(2005)

work page 2005
[48]

Operator quantum error- correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories

Dave Bacon. “Operator quantum error- correcting subsystems for self-correcting quantum memories”. Physical Review A73(2006)

work page 2006
[49]

Fault-tolerant quantum computation with high threshold in two dimensions

Robert Raussendorf and Jim Harrington. “Fault-tolerant quantum computation with high threshold in two dimensions”. Physical Review Letters98(2007)

work page 2007
[50]

Towards practical classical processing for the surface code

Austin G. Fowler, Adam C. Whiteside, and Lloyd C. L. Hollenberg. “Towards practical classical processing for the surface code”. Physical Review Letters108(2012)

work page 2012
[51]

Realizationofanerror-correcting surface code with superconducting qubits

Youwei Zhao, Yangsen Ye, He-Liang Huang, Yiming Zhang, Dachao Wu, Hui- jie Guan, Qingling Zhu, Zuolin Wei, Tan He, Sirui Cao, Fusheng Chen, Tung-Hsun Chung, Hui Deng, Daojin Fan, Ming Gong, Cheng Guo, Shaojun Guo, Lianchen Han, Na Li, Shaowei Li, Yuan Li, Futian Liang, Jin Lin, Haoran Qian, Hao Rong, Hong Su, Lihua Sun, Shiyu Wang, Yulin Wu, Yu Xu, Chong ...

work page 2022
[52]

Real-time quantum error cor- rection beyond break-even

V. V. Sivak, A. Eickbusch, B. Royer, S. Singh, I. Tsioutsios, S. Ganjam, A. Mi- ano, B. L. Brock, A. Z. Ding, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret. “Real-time quantum error cor- rection beyond break-even”. Nature616, 50–55 (2023)

work page 2023
[53]

Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold

Rajeev Acharya, Dmitry A. Abanin, Laleh Aghababaie-Beni, Igor Aleiner, Trond I. Andersen, Markus Ansmann, Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Abraham Asfaw, Nikita Astrakhantsev, Juan Ata- laya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Brian Ballard, Joseph C. Bardin, Johannes Bausch, Andreas Bengtsson, Alexander Bilmes, Sam Blackwell, Sergio Boixo, Gina Bortoli, Alexandre Bourass...

work page 2024
[54]

Multi-client distributed blind quantum computation with the qline architecture

Beatrice Polacchi, Dominik Leichtle, Leonardo Limongi, Gonzalo Carvacho, Giorgio Milani, Nicolò Spagnolo, Marc Ka- plan, Fabio Sciarrino, and Elham Kashefi. “Multi-client distributed blind quantum computation with the qline architecture”. Nature Communications14(2023)

work page 2023
[55]

How to share a quan- tum secret

Richard Cleve, Daniel Gottesman, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. “How to share a quan- tum secret”. Physical Review Letters83, 648–651 (1999)

work page 1999
[56]

Towards experimental 10 demonstration of quantum position veri- fication using single photons

Kirsten Kanneworff, Mio Poortvliet, Dirk Bouwmeester, Rene Allerstorfer, Philip Verduyn Lunel, Florian Speel- man, Harry Buhrman, Petr Steindl, and Wolfgang Löffler. “Towards experimental 10 demonstration of quantum position veri- fication using single photons”. Quantum Science and Technology10, 045004 (2025)

work page 2025
[57]

Experimental verifiable multiclient blind quantum computing on a qline architecture

Beatrice Polacchi, Dominik Leichtle, Gon- zaloCarvacho, GiorgioMilani, NicolòSpag- nolo, Marc Kaplan, Elham Kashefi, and Fabio Sciarrino. “Experimental verifiable multiclient blind quantum computing on a qline architecture”. Physical Review Let- ters134(2025)

work page 2025
[58]

Remote state preparation: Arbitrary remote control of photon polar- ization

Nicholas A. Peters, Julio T. Barreiro, Michael E. Goggin, Tzu-Chieh Wei, and Paul G. Kwiat. “Remote state preparation: Arbitrary remote control of photon polar- ization”. Physical Review Letters94(2005)

work page 2005
[59]

Remote preparation of an atomic quantum memory

Wenjamin Rosenfeld, Stefan Berner, Jür- gen Volz, Markus Weber, and Harald We- infurter. “Remote preparation of an atomic quantum memory”. Physical Review Let- ters98(2007)

work page 2007
[60]

Qubit tele- portation between a memory-compatible photonic time-bin qubit and a solid-state quantum network node

Mariagrazia Iuliano, Marie-Christine Slater, Arian J. Stolk, Matthew J. Weaver, Tanmoy Chakraborty, Elsie Loukiantchenko, Gustavo C. do Amaral, Nir Alfasi, Mariya O. Sholkina, Wolfgang Tittel, and Ronald Hanson. “Qubit tele- portation between a memory-compatible photonic time-bin qubit and a solid-state quantum network node”. npj Quantum Information10(2024)

work page 2024
[61]

A single quantum cannot be cloned

W. K. Wootters and W. H. Zurek. “A single quantum cannot be cloned”. Nature299, 802–803 (1982)

work page 1982
[62]

Tele- porting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and einstein-podolsky-rosen channels

Charles H. Bennett, Gilles Brassard, Claude Crépeau, Richard Jozsa, Asher Peres, and William K. Wootters. “Tele- porting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and einstein-podolsky-rosen channels”. Physical Review Letters70, 1895–1899 (1993)

work page 1993
[63]

Noncommuting mixed states cannot be broadcast

Howard Barnum, Carlton M. Caves, Christopher A. Fuchs, Richard Jozsa, and Benjamin Schumacher. “Noncommuting mixed states cannot be broadcast”. Physi- cal Review Letters76, 2818–2821 (1996)

work page 1996
[64]

Unconditionally verifiable blind quan- tum computation

Joseph F. Fitzsimons and Elham Kashefi. “Unconditionally verifiable blind quan- tum computation”. Physical Review A96(2017)

work page 2017
[65]

Verifiable blind observable es- timation: A composably secure pro- tocol for near-term quantum advantage tasks

Bo Yang, Elham Kashefi, and Harold Ol- livier. “Verifiable blind observable es- timation: A composably secure pro- tocol for near-term quantum advantage tasks” (2025). quant-ph:2510.08548

work page arXiv 2025
[66]

Op- timised resource construction for verifi- able quantum computation

Elham Kashefi and Petros Wallden. “Op- timised resource construction for verifi- able quantum computation”. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 50, 145306 (2017)

work page 2017
[67]

Verifiable measurement-only blind quan- tum computing with stabilizer testing

Masahito Hayashi and Tomoyuki Morimae. “Verifiable measurement-only blind quan- tum computing with stabilizer testing”. Physical Review Letters115(2015)

work page 2015
[68]

Quantum fast fourier transform and quan- tum computation by linear optics

Ronen Barak and Yacob Ben-Aryeh. “Quantum fast fourier transform and quan- tum computation by linear optics”. Jour- nal of the Optical Society of America B24, 231 (2007)

work page 2007
[69]

Spectrally engineering photonic en- tanglement with a time lens

J. M. Donohue, M. Mastrovich, and K. J. Resch. “Spectrally engineering photonic en- tanglement with a time lens”. Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016)

work page 2016
[70]

Photonic architecture for scalable quantum informa- tion processing in diamond

Kae Nemoto, Michael Trupke, Simon J. Devitt, Ashley M. Stephens, Burkhard Scharfenberger, Kathrin Buczak, Tobias Nöbauer, Mark S. Everitt, Jörg Schmied- mayer, and William J. Munro. “Photonic architecture for scalable quantum informa- tion processing in diamond”. Phys. Rev. X 4, 031022 (2014)

work page 2014
[71]

Entanglement genera- tion using single-photon pulse reflection in realistic networks

Ferdinand Omlor, Benedikt Tissot, and Guido Burkard. “Entanglement genera- tion using single-photon pulse reflection in realistic networks”. Phys. Rev. A111, 012612 (2025)

work page 2025
[72]

Modu- lar architectures and entanglement schemes for error-corrected distributed quantum computation

Siddhant Singh, Fenglei Gu, Sébastian de Bone, Eduardo Villaseñor, David Elk- ouss, and Johannes Borregaard. “Modu- lar architectures and entanglement schemes for error-corrected distributed quantum computation”. npj Quantum Informa- tion12(2025)

work page 2025
[73]

Enhanc- ing optical imaging via quantum computa- tion

Aleksandr Mokeev, Babak Saif, Mikhail D. Lukin, and Johannes Borregaard. “Enhanc- ing optical imaging via quantum computa- tion”. PRX Quantum7, 010318 (2026)

work page 2026
[74]

Entanglement distri- bution with minimal memory requirements using time-bin photonic qudits

Yunzhe Zheng, Hemant Sharma, and Jo- hannes Borregaard. “Entanglement distri- bution with minimal memory requirements using time-bin photonic qudits”. PRX Quantum3(2022)

work page 2022
[75]

Efficient high- dimensional entangled state analyzer with linear optics

Niv Bharos, Liubov Markovich, and Jo- 11 hannes Borregaard. “Efficient high- dimensional entangled state analyzer with linear optics”. Quantum9, 1711 (2025)

work page 2025
[76]

Scalable photonic quantum computation through cavity-assisted interactions

L.-M. Duan and H. J. Kimble. “Scalable photonic quantum computation through cavity-assisted interactions”. Pys. Rev. Lett.92, 127902 (2004)

work page 2004
[77]

A quan- tum gate between a flying optical photon and a single trapped atom

Andreas Reiserer, Norbert Kalb, Gerhard Rempe, and Stephan Ritter. “A quan- tum gate between a flying optical photon and a single trapped atom”. Nature508, 237–240 (2014)

work page 2014
[78]

A quantum phase switch between a single solid-state spin and a pho- ton

Shuo Sun, Hyochul Kim, Glenn S. Solomon, and Edo Waks. “A quantum phase switch between a single solid-state spin and a pho- ton”. Nature Nanotechnology11, 539– 544 (2016)

work page 2016
[79]

An integrated nanopho- tonic quantum register based on silicon- vacancy spins in diamond

C. T. Nguyen, D. D. Sukachev, M. K. Bhaskar, B. Machielse, D. S. Levonian, E. N. Knall, P. Stroganov, C. Chia, M. J. Burek, R. Riedinger, H. Park, M. Lončar, and M. D. Lukin. “An integrated nanopho- tonic quantum register based on silicon- vacancy spins in diamond”. Phys. Rev. B 100, 165428 (2019)

work page 2019
[80]

Quantum network nodes based on dia- mond qubits with an efficient nanopho- tonic interface

C. T. Nguyen, D. D. Sukachev, M. K. Bhaskar, B. Machielse, D. S. Levonian, E. N. Knall, P. Stroganov, R. Riedinger, H. Park, M. Lončar, and M. D. Lukin. “Quantum network nodes based on dia- mond qubits with an efficient nanopho- tonic interface”. Phys. Rev. Letters123, 183602 (2019)

work page 2019

Showing first 80 references.