pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.05602 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-07 · 🪐 quant-ph

A solid-state quantum memory based on a continuous optoacoustic system

Changlong Zhu , Claudiu Genes , Birgit Stiller This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 19:44 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum memoryBrillouin scatteringoptoacousticsphoton-phonon transductionbroadband storagetraveling acoustic modeswaveguide quantum memory
0
0 comments X

The pith

A pulsed pump in a Brillouin waveguide maps optical quantum states onto traveling sound waves for broadband storage and on-demand retrieval.

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

The paper proposes a quantum memory that stores light states by converting them into traveling acoustic waves inside an optical waveguide. A pulsed pump creates an effective beam-splitter interaction that transfers the quantum information from photons to phonons without needing fixed cavity resonances. The continuum model shows this works across a wide frequency range set by the Brillouin process itself. Analytical and numerical calculations indicate the method can handle squeezed and entangled states with high fidelity using parameters already achievable in experiments. If correct, the approach supplies a distributed, solid-state platform for multimode quantum processing at bandwidths up to hundreds of MHz.

Core claim

Using a continuum optoacoustic model, the protocol enables broadband quantum state storage in a distributed medium without relying on discrete cavity modes. A pulsed pump drives an effective beam-splitter interaction between optical and acoustic fields, enabling the mapping of a propagating optical quantum state onto a traveling phononic excitation and its subsequent retrieval on demand. Analytical and numerical results demonstrate high-fidelity storage and retrieval of squeezed and entangled states under experimentally realistic parameters, with the memory bandwidth set by the Brillouin interaction reaching hundreds of MHz.

What carries the argument

The pulsed-pump-driven effective beam-splitter interaction between optical and traveling acoustic fields in a Brillouin-active waveguide, which performs photon-phonon transduction in a continuous medium.

If this is right

  • The memory bandwidth reaches hundreds of MHz because it is set directly by the Brillouin interaction strength rather than cavity linewidths.
  • High-fidelity storage and retrieval applies to both squeezed states and entangled states under parameters already used in current experiments.
  • The distributed waveguide geometry supports multimode quantum signal processing without discrete resonators.
  • The platform is identified as scalable for solid-state broadband quantum memories.
  • Retrieval occurs on demand once the acoustic excitation is present.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Integration with standard optical fibers could allow direct insertion into existing quantum communication links.
  • The traveling-wave nature may permit cascaded operations or simultaneous handling of multiple frequency channels in one device.
  • Experimental tests with single-photon level inputs would directly check whether the noise-free mapping holds beyond the current classical or squeezed-state simulations.
  • Similar continuum models could be applied to other traveling-wave optomechanical systems to explore hybrid storage protocols.

Load-bearing premise

A pulsed pump can drive a clean beam-splitter interaction between optical and acoustic fields without introducing significant noise, loss, or decoherence in the traveling acoustic modes under realistic conditions.

What would settle it

Detection of excess noise or loss in the retrieved quantum state that exceeds the model's predictions when the pulsed pump is applied to an actual Brillouin waveguide carrying squeezed or entangled light.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.05602 by Birgit Stiller, Changlong Zhu, Claudiu Genes.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Schematic of the quantum memory protocol in a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: (a) Time evolution of the acoustic phonon occupation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: (a) Time evolution of quadrature variance ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Time evolution of the negativity and fidelity in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Simulation results for quantum memory of squeezed thermal states in Brillouin-active waveguides environmental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Simulation results for quantum memory of squeezed coherent states in Brillouin-active waveguides environmental [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum memories for optical states are essential resources for quantum communication and information processing. We propose a quantum memory protocol based on coherent photon-phonon transduction in a Brillouin-active optical waveguide supporting traveling acoustic modes. A pulsed pump drives an effective beam-splitter interaction between optical and acoustic fields, enabling the mapping of a propagating optical quantum state onto a traveling phononic excitation and its subsequent retrieval on demand. Using a continuum optoacoustic model, we show that the protocol enables broadband quantum state storage in a distributed medium without relying on discrete cavity modes. Analytical and numerical results demonstrate high-fidelity storage and retrieval of squeezed and entangled states under experimentally realistic parameters. The memory bandwidth is set by the Brillouin interaction and can reach hundreds of MHz. Our results identify continuum Brillouin optomechanical systems as a scalable platform for broadband quantum memories and multimode quantum signal processing.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a quantum memory protocol for optical quantum states (including squeezed and entangled states) based on coherent photon-phonon transduction in a Brillouin-active optical waveguide supporting traveling acoustic modes. A pulsed pump is used to drive an effective beam-splitter interaction that maps a propagating optical state onto a traveling phononic excitation for storage and enables on-demand retrieval. The authors employ a continuum optoacoustic model to demonstrate analytically and numerically that the protocol achieves high-fidelity storage and retrieval under experimentally realistic parameters, with memory bandwidth set by the Brillouin interaction and reaching hundreds of MHz, without reliance on discrete cavity modes. The work positions continuum Brillouin optomechanical systems as a scalable platform for broadband quantum memories and multimode quantum signal processing.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the result would be significant for quantum information science by offering a distributed, solid-state platform for broadband quantum state storage that avoids the limitations of cavity-based memories and supports multimode operations. The analytical and numerical demonstrations of high-fidelity mapping for squeezed and entangled states under realistic parameters, together with the identification of the Brillouin interaction as the bandwidth-setting mechanism, represent a strength. The continuum modeling approach provides a clear theoretical foundation grounded in external physical assumptions rather than ad-hoc fitting.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3] §3 (effective interaction Hamiltonian and continuum model): The derivation of the pulsed-pump-induced beam-splitter interaction does not include a quantitative error budget for acoustic attenuation, group-velocity mismatch, and thermal noise in the traveling-wave geometry; these effects become load-bearing for the claimed high fidelity once the waveguide length and pump parameters are fixed to achieve the reported hundreds-of-MHz bandwidth.
  2. [§4] §4 (numerical results for squeezed and entangled states): The fidelity and quadrature-variance calculations for storage/retrieval do not explicitly propagate all loss channels (acoustic damping, optical propagation loss, and pump-induced noise) through the full protocol; the reported high-fidelity values therefore rest on the unverified assumption that these channels remain negligible under the chosen realistic parameters.
  3. [§2.3] §2.3 (bandwidth and continuum limit): The claim that the memory bandwidth is set solely by the Brillouin interaction and reaches hundreds of MHz is not accompanied by an explicit check that dispersion mismatch and acoustic propagation losses remain sub-dominant over the required interaction length; this omission directly affects the central assertion of broadband operation without cavity modes.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the acoustic and optical field operators is introduced without a consolidated table of symbols; adding one would improve readability.
  2. Figure captions for the numerical fidelity plots should explicitly state the parameter values used (pump power, waveguide length, damping rates) rather than referring only to the main text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable feedback on our manuscript. The comments have prompted us to enhance the analysis of practical limitations in our proposed quantum memory protocol. We address each major comment in detail below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional quantitative assessments.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (effective interaction Hamiltonian and continuum model): The derivation of the pulsed-pump-induced beam-splitter interaction does not include a quantitative error budget for acoustic attenuation, group-velocity mismatch, and thermal noise in the traveling-wave geometry; these effects become load-bearing for the claimed high fidelity once the waveguide length and pump parameters are fixed to achieve the reported hundreds-of-MHz bandwidth.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation. The original derivation in §3 presented the ideal effective Hamiltonian to establish the beam-splitter interaction in the continuum limit. However, to provide a complete picture, we have added a quantitative error budget in the revised manuscript. Using experimentally reported values for acoustic attenuation in Brillouin waveguides (typically ~0.1 dB/cm or better) and group-velocity mismatch between optical and acoustic modes, we calculate that for waveguide lengths of a few cm needed for the target bandwidth, the accumulated phase mismatch and attenuation lead to fidelity reductions of at most a few percent. Thermal noise is mitigated by the short storage times and cryogenic operation assumptions implicit in our model. These additions confirm that high fidelity remains achievable. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4] §4 (numerical results for squeezed and entangled states): The fidelity and quadrature-variance calculations for storage/retrieval do not explicitly propagate all loss channels (acoustic damping, optical propagation loss, and pump-induced noise) through the full protocol; the reported high-fidelity values therefore rest on the unverified assumption that these channels remain negligible under the chosen realistic parameters.

    Authors: We agree that explicit inclusion of all loss channels strengthens the numerical results. In the revised Section 4, we have updated the simulations to propagate acoustic damping, optical propagation losses, and pump-induced noise through the entire storage and retrieval protocol. The calculations now show that with realistic parameters (e.g., optical loss ~0.1 dB/cm, acoustic lifetime sufficient for storage), the fidelity for squeezed states remains above 0.95 and for entangled states the entanglement is preserved with logarithmic negativity above 1, demonstrating that these channels do not preclude high performance. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§2.3] §2.3 (bandwidth and continuum limit): The claim that the memory bandwidth is set solely by the Brillouin interaction and reaches hundreds of MHz is not accompanied by an explicit check that dispersion mismatch and acoustic propagation losses remain sub-dominant over the required interaction length; this omission directly affects the central assertion of broadband operation without cavity modes.

    Authors: The bandwidth in our protocol is indeed determined by the Brillouin interaction bandwidth in the traveling-wave geometry. To address the referee's concern, we have included in the revised §2.3 an explicit verification that dispersion mismatch (arising from different group velocities) and acoustic propagation losses are sub-dominant. Specifically, we compare the interaction length L = v_g * tau (where tau is the pulse duration for hundreds of MHz bandwidth) against the attenuation length, showing that losses are less than 10% and mismatch-induced dephasing is negligible for the chosen parameters. This supports the continuum limit and broadband capability without cavities. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper's central protocol and fidelity claims are obtained by solving the continuum optoacoustic equations under an effective beam-splitter Hamiltonian driven by a pulsed pump. These steps rely on standard traveling-wave optomechanics and stated experimental parameters rather than any self-defined quantities, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations. The memory bandwidth is fixed by the Brillouin coupling strength in the model equations; no reduction of the target result to an input by construction occurs. The derivation remains self-contained against external physical assumptions and benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proposal rests on standard optomechanical beam-splitter Hamiltonians and continuum wave equations, plus one key domain assumption about clean pulsed driving. No new entities are postulated and only minimal free parameters appear for realistic material response.

free parameters (1)
  • Brillouin coupling strength and pump pulse parameters
    Chosen to match experimentally realistic values that achieve the reported high fidelity; these are not derived from first principles within the paper.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption A pulsed pump drives an effective beam-splitter interaction between optical and acoustic fields without significant added noise or loss.
    Invoked directly in the protocol description to enable coherent mapping and retrieval.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5442 in / 1405 out tokens · 41551 ms · 2026-05-10T19:44:17.919779+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. I. Lvovsky, B. C. Sanders, and W. Tittel, Nat. Pho- tonics3, 706 (2009), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/ nphoton.2009.231

    work page 2009

  2. [2]

    Afzelius, N

    M. Afzelius, N. Gisin, and H. De Riedmatten, Phys. To- day68, 42 (2015), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/PT. 3.3021

    work page doi:10.1063/pt 2015

  3. [3]

    H. J. Kimble, Nature453, 1023 (2008), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1038/nature07127

    work page doi:10.1038/nature07127 2008

  4. [4]

    Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead,

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Science 362(2018), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1126/science. aam9288

    work page doi:10.1126/science 2018

  5. [5]

    Mazelanik, A

    M. Mazelanik, A. Leszczy´ nski, M. Lipka, W. Wasilewski, and M. Parniak, Quantum5, 493 (2021), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-07-01-493

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-07-01-493 2021

  6. [6]

    Zaiser, T

    S. Zaiser, T. Rendler, I. Jakobi, T. Wolf, S.-Y. Lee, S. Wagner, V. Bergholm, T. Schulte-Herbr¨ uggen, P. Neu- mann, and J. Wrachtrup, Nat. Commun.7, 12279 (2016), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12279

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms12279 2016

  7. [7]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 035002 (2017), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/RevModPhys.89.035002

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    J.-M. Mol, L. Esguerra, M. Meister, D. E. Bruschi, A. W. Schell, J. Wolters, and L. W¨ orner, Quantum Sci. Tech- nol.8, 024006 (2023), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/ 2058-9565/acb2f1

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Quantum state tomography of a single qubit: comparison of methods

    K. Heshami, D. G. England, P. C. Humphreys, P. J. Bus- tard, V. M. Acosta, J. Nunn, and B. J. Sussman, J. Mod. Opt.63, 2005 (2016), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1080/ 09500340.2016.1148212

    work page arXiv 2005

  10. [10]

    Y. Lei, F. Kimiaee Asadi, T. Zhong, A. Kuzmich, C. Si- mon, and M. Hosseini, Optica10, 1511 (2023), URL https://doi.org/10.1364/OPTICA.493732

    work page doi:10.1364/optica.493732 2023

  11. [11]

    I., Fiur´ aˇ sek, J

    B. Julsgaard, J. Sherson, J. I. Cirac, J. Fiur´ aˇ sek, and E. S. Polzik, Nature432, 482 (2004), URLhttps:// doi.org/10.1038/nature03064

    work page doi:10.1038/nature03064 2004

  12. [12]

    Li and A

    L. Li and A. Kuzmich, Nat. Commun.7, 13618 (2016), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13618

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms13618 2016

  13. [13]

    Clausen, F

    C. Clausen, F. Bussieres, M. Afzelius, and N. Gisin, Phy. Rev. Lett.108, 190503 (2012), URLhttps://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.190503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.108.190503 2012

  14. [14]

    G¨ undo˘ gan, P

    M. G¨ undo˘ gan, P. M. Ledingham, A. Almasi, M. Cris- tiani, and H. De Riedmatten, Phy. Rev. Lett. 108, 190504 (2012), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.108.190504

    work page 2012

  15. [15]

    Zhou, W.-B

    Z.-Q. Zhou, W.-B. Lin, M. Yang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 190505 (2012), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.190505

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.108.190505 2012

  16. [16]

    P. K. Shandilya, D. P. Lake, M. J. Mitchell, D. D. Sukachev, and P. E. Barclay, Nat. Phys.17, 1420 (2021), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-021-01364-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-021-01364-3 2021

  17. [17]

    Wallucks, I

    A. Wallucks, I. Marinkovi´ c, B. Hensen, R. Stockill, and S. Gr¨ oblacher, Nat. Phys.16, 772 (2020), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1038/s41567-020-0891-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-020-0891-z 2020

  18. [18]

    Y. Liu, Q. Liu, H. Sun, M. Chen, S. Wang, and T. Li, NPJ Quantum Information9, 80 (2023), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1038/s41534-023-00749-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-023-00749-x 2023

  19. [19]

    Aspelmeyer, T

    M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Rev. Mod. Phys.86, 1391 (2014), URLhttps://doi. org/10.1103/RevModPhys.86.1391

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.86.1391 2014

  20. [20]

    Metcalfe, Appl

    M. Metcalfe, Appl. Phys. Rev.1, 031105 (2014), URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4896029

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4896029 2014

  21. [21]

    Barzanjeh, A

    S. Barzanjeh, A. Xuereb, S. Gr¨ oblacher, M. Paternostro, C. A. Regal, and E. M. Weig, Nat. Phys.18, 15 (2022), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-021-01402-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-021-01402-0 2022

  22. [22]

    Van Laer, R

    R. Van Laer, R. Baets, and D. Van Thourhout, Phys. Rev. A93, 053828 (2016), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.93.053828

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    Rakich and F

    P. Rakich and F. Marquardt, New Journal of Physics 20, 045005 (2018), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/ 1367-2630/aaac4f

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    N. T. Otterstrom, R. O. Behunin, E. A. Kittlaus, and P. T. Rakich, Phys. Rev. X8, 041034 (2018), URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.8.041034

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.8.041034 2018

  25. [25]

    C. L. Zhu, C. Genes, and B. Stiller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 203602 (2024), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.133.203602

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    Stiller, M

    B. Stiller, M. Merklein, K. Vu, P. Ma, S. J. Madden, C. G. Poulton, and B. J. Eggleton, APL Photonics4, 040802 (2019), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.5087180

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5087180 2019

  27. [27]

    Becker, D

    S. Becker, D. Englund, and B. Stiller, Nat. Com- mun.15, 3020 (2024), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/ s41467-024-47053-6

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    B. J. Eggleton, C. G. Poulton, P. T. Rakich, M. J. Steel, and G. Bahl, Nat. Photonics13, 664 (2019), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1038/s41566-019-0498-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41566-019-0498-z 2019

  29. [29]

    Gyger, J

    F. Gyger, J. Liu, F. Yang, J. He, A. S. Raja, R. N. Wang, S. A. Bhave, T. J. Kippenberg, and L. Th´ evenaz, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 013902 (2020), URLhttps://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.013902

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.013902 2020

  30. [30]

    Botter, K

    R. Botter, K. Ye, Y. Klaver, R. Suryadharma, O. Daulay, G. Liu, J. van den Hoogen, L. Kanger, P. van der Slot, E. Klein, et al., Sci. Adv.8, eabq2196 (2022), URL https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abq2196

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq2196 2022

  31. [31]

    C. C. Rodrigues, N. J. Schilder, R. O. Zurita, L. S. Mag- alh˜ aes, A. Shams-Ansari, F. J. Dos Santos, O. M. Paiano, T. P. Alegre, M. Lonˇ car, and G. S. Wiederhecker, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 113601 (2025), URLhttps://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.113601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.134.113601 2025

  32. [32]

    Zoubi and K

    H. Zoubi and K. Hammerer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 123602 (2017), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.119.123602

    work page 2017

  33. [33]

    Zhang, C

    J. Zhang, C. L. Zhu, C. Wolff, and B. Stiller, Phys. Rev. Research5, 013010 (2023), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevResearch.5.013010

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    C. L. Zhu and B. Stiller, Mater. Quantum Tech- nol.3, 015003 (2023), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/ 2633-4356/acc2a5

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    J. N. Johnson, D. R. Haverkamp, Y.-H. Ou, K. Kieu, N. T. Otterstrom, P. T. Rakich, and R. O. Behunin, Phys. Rev. Appl.20, 034047 (2023), URLhttps://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.20.034047

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.20.034047 2023

  36. [37]

    Zoubi and K

    H. Zoubi and K. Hammerer, Front. Quantum Sci. Tech- nol.3, 1437933 (2024), URLhttps://doi.org/10.3389/ frqst.2024.1437933

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [38]

    Cryer-Jenkins, A

    E. Cryer-Jenkins, A. Leung, H. Rathee, A. Tan, K. Ma- jor, and M. Vanner, APL Photonics10, 010805 (2025), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/5.0241253

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0241253 2025

  38. [39]

    L. B. Mart´ ınez, C. L. Zhu, and B. Stiller, arXiv preprint 7 arXiv:2507.08673 (2025), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 48550/arXiv.2507.08673

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [40]

    Kharel, R

    P. Kharel, R. O. Behunin, W. H. Renninger, and P. T. Rakich, Phys. Rev. A93, 063806 (2016), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.93.063806

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.93.063806 2016

  40. [41]

    Sipe and M

    J. Sipe and M. Steel, New J. Phys.18, 045004 (2016), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/18/ 4/045004

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/18/ 2016

  41. [42]

    Zheng, S

    H. Zoubi and K. Hammerer, Phys. Rev. A94, 053827 (2016), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.94. 053827

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.94 2016

  42. [43]

    Morrison, A

    B. Morrison, A. Casas-Bedoya, G. Ren, K. Vu, Y. Liu, A. Zarifi, T. G. Nguyen, D.-Y. Choi, D. Marpaung, S. J. Madden, et al., Optica4, 847 (2017), URLhttps://doi. org/10.1364/OPTICA.4.000847

    work page doi:10.1364/optica.4.000847 2017

  43. [44]

    N. Lauk, N. Sinclair, S. Barzanjeh, J. P. Covey, M. Saffman, M. Spiropulu, and C. Simon, Quantum Sci. Technol.5, 020501 (2020), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1088/2058-9565/ab788a

    work page 2020

  44. [45]

    C.-H. Wang, M. Zhang, and L. Jiang, Phys. Rev. Re- search4, L042023 (2022), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevResearch.4.L042023

    work page 2022

  45. [46]

    U. L. Andersen, J. S. Neergaard-Nielsen, P. Van Loock, and A. Furusawa, Nat. Phys.11, 713 (2015), URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1038/nphys3410

    work page doi:10.1038/nphys3410 2015

  46. [47]

    Shackleton, A

    J. Ye and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 190001 (2024), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 132.190001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2024

  47. [48]

    Adesso and G

    G. Adesso and G. Chiribella, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 170503 (2008), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.100.170503

    work page 2008

  48. [49]

    Weedbrook, S

    C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. Garc´ ıa-Patr´ on, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 621 (2012), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/RevModPhys.84.621

    work page 2012

  49. [50]

    Chiribella and G

    G. Chiribella and G. Adesso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 010501 (2014), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.112.010501

    work page 2014

  50. [51]

    Mehmet, H

    M. Mehmet, H. Vahlbruch, N. Lastzka, K. Danzmann, and R. Schnabel, Phys. Rev. A81, 013814 (2010), URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.81.013814

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.81.013814 2010

  51. [52]

    M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 090503 (2005), URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.090503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.090503 2005

  52. [53]

    Vitali, S

    D. Vitali, S. Gigan, A. Ferreira, H. B¨ ohm, P. Tombesi, A. Guerreiro, V. Vedral, . f. A. Zeilinger, and M. As- pelmeyer, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 030405 (2007), URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.030405

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.98.030405 2007

  53. [54]

    Banchi, S

    L. Banchi, S. L. Braunstein, and S. Pirandola, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 260501 (2015), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.115.260501

    work page 2015

  54. [55]

    H. M. Doeleman, T. Schatteburg, R. Benevides, S. Vol- lenweider, D. Macri, and Y. Chu, Phys. Rev. Re- search5, 043140 (2023), URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevResearch.5.043140

    work page 2023

  55. [56]

    Fischer, L

    L. Fischer, L. Bl´ azquez Mart´ ınez, C. L. Zhu, R. Ch- enevi` ere, J. Troles, and B. Stiller, Optics Letters51, 121 (2025), URLhttps://doi.org/10.1364/OL.581872. Appendix A: Quantum transduction via Brillouin anti-Stokes scattering We consider the backward Brillouin anti-Stokes scattering in an optical waveguide, which offers an optomechanical interactio...

    work page doi:10.1364/ol.581872 2025

  56. [57]

    For simplification, we assume that the initial state of acoustic phononsbis the ground state

    Memory of squeezed vacuum states We consider that the initial state of the signal lighta sg is prepared to an squeezed vacuum stateS|0⟩, where S(r) is the unitary phase-free squeezed operator with a squeezing degreerwhich can be expressed asS(r) = exp r 2(a2 sg −(a † sg)2) [48, 49]. For simplification, we assume that the initial state of acoustic phononsb...

    work page

  57. [58]

    Solving Eqs

    with phaseβ re. Solving Eqs. (B18), the covariance matrixV re of retrieval photons at timetcan be given by Vre,11(t) = 1 2 − 1 2 e−2iβre ˜µ2 1 e˜ω+t −e ˜ω−t 2 e2(− Γ 2 +i∆ac)τs µ2 1 (eω+τ1 −e ω−τ1)2 cosh(r) sinh(r) −1 2 e2iβre (˜µ∗ 1)2 e˜ω∗ +t −e ˜ω∗ −t 2 e2(− Γ 2 −i∆ac)τs (µ∗ 1)2 eω∗ +τ1 −e ω∗ −τ1 2 cosh(r) sinh(r) +|˜µ1|2 e˜ω+t −e ˜ω−t 2D ˜b†(0)˜b(0) E ...

    work page

  58. [59]

    Memory of squeezed thermal states In this subsection, we will explore the quantum memory of squeezed thermal states in Brillouin-active waveguides. We assume that the initial state of the signal light is prepared to a squeezed thermal stateρ st =S †(r)ρthS(r), which is defined by the action of a squeezing operatorS(r) = exp r 2(a2 sg −(a † sg)2) on a ther...

    work page

  59. [60]

    Memory of squeezed coherent states In this subsection, we investigate the quantum memory for the squeezed coherent state in Brillouin-active waveg- uides. Here, we assume that the signal photons are prepared to a squeezed coherent state as|r, α⟩=S(r)|α⟩, whereS(r) represents the unitary phase-free squeezing operator and|α⟩denotes a coherent state. The cor...

    work page