pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00246 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · 💻 cs.NI · quant-ph

Fidelity-Guaranteed Entanglement Routing with Distributed Purification Planning

Anthony Gatti , Anoosha Fayyaz , Prashant Krishnamurthy , Kaushik P. Seshadreesan , Amy Babay This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 19:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NI quant-ph
keywords quantum networksentanglement routingfidelity guaranteepurification planningdistributed protocolsexpected goodputBell pair fidelityWerner state
0
0 comments X

The pith

Q-GUARD enforces fidelity thresholds for end-to-end entanglement in quantum networks using only distributed local information and planned purification.

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

The paper introduces Q-GUARD as an online algorithm for routing entanglement requests in quantum networks while guaranteeing that the delivered Bell pairs exceed a minimum fidelity set by each request. Current approaches either maximize the number of pairs without checking their quality or rely on a central controller that knows the state of every link. Q-GUARD instead lets nodes share information only with nearby neighbors and, after each time slot, builds tables of how much purification each link needs to reach target fidelity. It then picks path segments by computing an expected-goodput value that factors in the chance of successful swapping, the cost of purification, and available resources. Simulations on 100-node networks show this raises the fraction of requests that meet their fidelity goal from below 20 percent to above 85 percent on paths of four hops and extends the distance over which such high-quality service can be provided.

Core claim

Q-GUARD is an online entanglement routing algorithm that enforces per-request fidelity thresholds within a distributed protocol model in which nodes exchange link-state information only with their k-hop neighbors. After link outcomes are realized in each slot, it builds per-link purification cost tables from realized Bell pairs, allocates per-hop fidelity targets using a Werner-state equal-split rule, and selects between candidate path segments using a segment-local expected-goodput metric that jointly accounts for swap success, purification overhead, and resource availability.

What carries the argument

The segment-local expected-goodput (EXG) metric that jointly accounts for swap success, purification overhead, and resource availability, together with Werner-state equal-split fidelity target allocation and per-link purification cost tables.

Load-bearing premise

The synthetic 100-node topologies, heterogeneous link fidelities, and stochastic BBPSSW purification model accurately represent real quantum network hardware and traffic.

What would settle it

Implementing Q-GUARD in a real quantum network testbed and checking if the observed qualified success rates and service radii match the improvements seen in the 100-node simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00246 by Amy Babay, Anoosha Fayyaz, Anthony Gatti, Kaushik P. Seshadreesan, Prashant Krishnamurthy.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Q-CAST vs. Q-GUARD routing pipelines. Phases 1–3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Illustrative example of Q-GUARD recovery ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Performance across operating conditions (a) Qualified throughput vs. fidelity threshold. Q-CAST’s raw throughput [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Probability that an S–D pair receives at least one [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Probability that an S–D pair receives at least one [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Q-GUARD-FP vs. Q-GUARD: qualified success rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Many quantum-network applications require end-to-end Bell pairs whose fidelity exceeds a request-specific threshold, but existing entanglement routing algorithms either optimize only throughput without regard for fidelity or enforce fidelity guarantees using centralized controllers with global link-state knowledge. We present Q-GUARD, an online entanglement routing algorithm that enforces per-request fidelity thresholds within a distributed protocol model in which nodes exchange link-state information only with their $k$-hop neighbors. After link outcomes are realized in each slot, Q-GUARD builds per-link purification cost tables from realized Bell pairs, allocates per-hop fidelity targets using a Werner-state equal-split rule, and selects between candidate path segments using a segment-local expected-goodput (EXG) metric that jointly accounts for swap success, purification overhead, and resource availability. We also introduce Q-GUARD-WS, an extension that exploits per-link hardware quality estimates to allocate purification effort non-uniformly across hops. On synthetic 100-node topologies with heterogeneous link fidelity and stochastic BBPSSW purification, Q-GUARD raises the qualified success rate from under 20\% to over 85\% on 4-hop paths and nearly doubles the qualified service radius in Euclidean distance relative to throughput-only and naive-purification baselines, while Q-GUARD-WS provides additional throughput gains under high hardware heterogeneity.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents Q-GUARD, a distributed online entanglement routing algorithm for quantum networks that enforces per-request fidelity thresholds using only k-hop neighbor link-state exchanges. After realizing link outcomes, it constructs per-link purification cost tables, allocates fidelity targets via a Werner-state equal-split rule, and selects path segments using a local expected-goodput (EXG) metric that incorporates swap success probability, purification overhead, and resource availability. An extension Q-GUARD-WS incorporates per-link hardware quality estimates for non-uniform purification allocation. On synthetic 100-node topologies with heterogeneous link fidelities and stochastic BBPSSW purification, Q-GUARD improves qualified success rate from under 20% to over 85% on 4-hop paths and nearly doubles the qualified service radius relative to throughput-only and naive-purification baselines.

Significance. If the reported gains hold under fuller statistical validation, the work would provide a practical distributed alternative to centralized fidelity-aware routing in quantum networks, demonstrating that local EXG-based decisions combined with explicit purification planning can substantially outperform throughput-centric or naive baselines on synthetic instances. The explicit handling of stochastic purification outcomes and the Q-GUARD-WS extension for hardware heterogeneity are notable strengths that could inform protocol design for near-term quantum networks.

major comments (2)
  1. [Evaluation section] Evaluation section: The central performance claims (qualified success rate >85% vs <20% on 4-hop paths; nearly doubled service radius) are reported on synthetic 100-node topologies without error bars, confidence intervals, or sensitivity analysis over multiple random topology realizations or BBPSSW parameter sweeps. This is load-bearing because the topologies use heterogeneous link fidelities and stochastic purification, so the magnitude of improvement could be sensitive to particular generation rules or free parameters such as k.
  2. [§3 (Algorithm Description)] §3 (Algorithm Description): The Werner-state equal-split rule for per-hop fidelity target allocation is presented as a design choice, but no analysis is given of how the resulting per-link purification costs interact with the segment-local EXG metric when link fidelities vary widely. This matters for the fidelity-guarantee claim because unequal splits (as in Q-GUARD-WS) could alter the EXG ordering and thus the selected paths.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Evaluation section] The definition of 'qualified success rate' and 'qualified service radius' should be stated explicitly with an equation or pseudocode early in the evaluation section rather than only in the abstract.
  2. [§3 (Algorithm Description)] The acronym EXG is expanded as 'expected-goodput' but its precise mathematical formulation (including how swap success, purification overhead, and resource availability are combined) would benefit from a dedicated equation in §3.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the evaluation and algorithmic analysis as appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Evaluation section] Evaluation section: The central performance claims (qualified success rate >85% vs <20% on 4-hop paths; nearly doubled service radius) are reported on synthetic 100-node topologies without error bars, confidence intervals, or sensitivity analysis over multiple random topology realizations or BBPSSW parameter sweeps. This is load-bearing because the topologies use heterogeneous link fidelities and stochastic purification, so the magnitude of improvement could be sensitive to particular generation rules or free parameters such as k.

    Authors: We agree that additional statistical validation strengthens the claims given the stochastic elements in the evaluation. In the revised manuscript we have added error bars (standard error across 10 independent random topology realizations with varied link-fidelity assignments) to all figures in the Evaluation section. We have also included a new sensitivity-analysis subsection that sweeps BBPSSW purification success probability (0.6–0.9) and k-hop neighborhood size (k = 2–5). The results show that the qualified-success-rate improvement remains above 80 % and the service-radius doubling is preserved across the tested range, confirming robustness to the generation rules and free parameters. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3 (Algorithm Description)] §3 (Algorithm Description): The Werner-state equal-split rule for per-hop fidelity target allocation is presented as a design choice, but no analysis is given of how the resulting per-link purification costs interact with the segment-local EXG metric when link fidelities vary widely. This matters for the fidelity-guarantee claim because unequal splits (as in Q-GUARD-WS) could alter the EXG ordering and thus the selected paths.

    Authors: The equal-split rule was chosen for its simplicity and to guarantee equitable satisfaction of the end-to-end fidelity threshold under distributed operation. To clarify the interaction with the EXG metric, we have expanded §3 with a short analysis and illustrative example. Because per-link purification costs are computed individually from the realized Bell-pair tables and the allocated fidelity target, heterogeneity in link quality is directly reflected in the segment-level EXG value (which multiplies swap success probability by the inverse of total purification overhead and resource cost). Consequently, path-segment ordering already accounts for fidelity variation while preserving the guarantee. For Q-GUARD-WS the non-uniform targets are substituted into the same cost tables before EXG evaluation, so the selection logic remains consistent; we have added a brief proof sketch showing that the fidelity constraint is maintained regardless of allocation uniformity. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; algorithm and results are procedurally defined and empirically evaluated

full rationale

The paper defines Q-GUARD procedurally via explicit local rules (per-link purification cost tables from realized Bell pairs, Werner-state equal-split fidelity allocation, segment-local EXG metric for path selection) and reports simulation outcomes on synthetic 100-node topologies with heterogeneous fidelities and stochastic BBPSSW purification. No step reduces a claimed result to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, a self-definitional loop, or a load-bearing self-citation chain; the qualified success rate gains (>85% vs <20%) and service radius improvements are direct outputs of the described simulation model, which is self-contained within the stated assumptions and does not invoke external uniqueness theorems or ansatzes that collapse to the inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of quantum network models (Werner states, BBPSSW purification, swap success probabilities) plus several design choices whose justification is not visible from the abstract alone.

free parameters (2)
  • k (hop distance for link-state exchange)
    Parameter that defines the distributed information scope; its value is not specified in the abstract.
  • Werner-state equal-split rule parameters
    The rule for allocating per-hop fidelity targets is presented as a design choice without derivation from first principles.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Stochastic BBPSSW purification outcomes can be modeled independently per link with known success probabilities.
    Invoked when building per-link purification cost tables after each slot.
  • domain assumption Link-state information from k-hop neighbors is sufficient to make locally optimal routing decisions.
    Core premise of the distributed protocol model.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5551 in / 1560 out tokens · 35274 ms · 2026-05-09T19:36:22.135766+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

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The quantum internet,

    H. J. Kimble, “The quantum internet,”Nature, vol. 453, no. 7198, p. 1023–1030, Jun 2008

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Tversky and D

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, “Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead,”Science, vol. 362, no. 6412, p. eaam9288, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science. aam9288

    work page doi:10.1126/science 2018

  3. [3]

    Architectural Principles for a Quantum Internet,

    W. Kozlowski, S. Wehner, R. V . Meter, B. Rijsman, A. S. Cacciapuoti, M. Caleffi, and S. Nagayama, “Architectural Principles for a Quantum Internet,” RFC 9340, Mar. 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9340

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    “event-ready- detectors

    M. Zukowski, A. Zeilinger, M. Horne, and A. Ekert, ““event-ready- detectors” bell experiment via entanglement swapping,”Physical review letters, vol. 71, pp. 4287–4290, 01 1994

    work page 1994

  5. [5]

    Quantum Repeaters: The Role of Imperfect Local Operations in Quantum Communication,

    H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, “Quantum repeaters: The role of imperfect local operations in quantum communication,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 81, pp. 5932–5935, Dec 1998. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.5932

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.81.5932 1998

  6. [6]

    Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,

    A. K. Ekert, “Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 67, pp. 661–663, Aug 1991. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.661

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.67.661 1991

  7. [7]

    Application Scenarios for the Quantum Internet,

    C. Wang, A. Rahman, R. Li, M. Aelmans, and K. Chakraborty, “Application Scenarios for the Quantum Internet,” RFC 9583, Jun

    work page

  8. [8]

    Available: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9583

    [Online]. Available: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9583

    work page

  9. [9]

    E2e fidelity aware routing and purification for throughput maximization in quantum networks,

    Y . Zhao, G. Zhao, and C. Qiao, “E2e fidelity aware routing and purification for throughput maximization in quantum networks,” inIEEE INFOCOM 2022 - IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, 2022, pp. 480–489

    work page 2022

  10. [10]

    Fidelity-guaranteed entanglement routing in quantum networks,

    J. Li, M. jian Wang, K. Xue, R. Li, N. Yu, Q. Sun, and J. Lu, “Fidelity-guaranteed entanglement routing in quantum networks,” IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 70, pp. 6748–6763,

    work page

  11. [11]

    Available: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID: 245335421

    [Online]. Available: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID: 245335421

    work page

  12. [12]

    Concurrent entanglement routing for quantum networks: Model and designs,

    S. Shi and C. Qian, “Concurrent entanglement routing for quantum networks: Model and designs,” inProceedings of the Annual Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication on the Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communication, ser. SIGCOMM ’20. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, ...

    work page doi:10.1145/3387514.3405853 2020

  13. [13]

    Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits,

    M. Pompili, S. L. Hermans, S. Baier, H. K. Beukers, P. C. Humphreys, R. N. Schouten, R. F. Vermeulen, M. J. Tiggelman, L. dos Santos Mar- tins, B. Dirkseet al., “Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits,”Science, vol. 372, no. 6539, pp. 259–264, 2021

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Creation of memory-memory entanglement in a metropolitan quantum network,

    J.-L. Liu, X.-Y . Luo, Y . Yu, C.-Y . Wang, B. Wang, Y . Hu, J. Li, M.- Y . Zheng, B. Yao, Z. Yan, D. Teng, J.-W. Jiang, X.-B. Liu, X.-P. Xie, J. Zhang, Q.-H. Mao, X. Jiang, Q. Zhang, X.-H. Bao, and J.-W. Pan, “Creation of memory-memory entanglement in a metropolitan quantum network,”Nature, vol. 629, no. 8012, pp. 579–585, May 2024

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Metropolitan-scale heralded entanglement of solid- state qubits,

    A. J. Stolk, K. L. van der Enden, M.-C. Slater, I. te Raa-Derckx, P. Botma, J. Van Rantwijk, J. B. Biemond, R. A. Hagen, R. W. Herfst, W. D. Koeket al., “Metropolitan-scale heralded entanglement of solid- state qubits,”Science advances, vol. 10, no. 44, p. eadp6442, 2024

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    Develop- ment of a boston-area 50-km fiber quantum network testbed,

    E. Bersin, M. Grein, M. Sutula, R. Murphy, Y . Q. Huan, M. Stevens, A. Suleymanzade, C. Lee, R. Riedinger, D. J. Starlinget al., “Develop- ment of a boston-area 50-km fiber quantum network testbed,”Physical Review Applied, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 014024, 2024

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    High-rate scalable entanglement swapping between remote entanglement sources on deployed new york city fibers,

    A. N. Craddock, T. Cowan, N. Bigagli, S. Yekasiri, D. Robinson, G. B. Portmann, Z. Guo, M. Kilzer, J. Zhao, M. Flamentet al., “High-rate scalable entanglement swapping between remote entanglement sources on deployed new york city fibers,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.15653, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  18. [18]

    Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy channels,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, “Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy channels,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 76, pp. 722–725, Jan 1996. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.76.722

    work page 1996

  19. [19]

    Entanglement routing in quantum networks: A comprehensive survey,

    A. Abane, M. Cubeddu, V . S. Mai, and A. Battou, “Entanglement routing in quantum networks: A comprehensive survey,” 2025-02-11 05:02:00 2025. [Online]. Available: https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/ get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=958196

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    High- fidelity entanglement routing in quantum networks,

    H. Hu, H. Lun, Z. Deng, J. Tang, J. Li, Y . Cao, Y . Wang, Y . Liu, D. Wu, H. Yu, X. Wang, J. Wei, and L. Shi, “High- fidelity entanglement routing in quantum networks,”Results in Physics, vol. 60, p. 107682, 2024. [Online]. Available: https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211379724003656

    work page 2024

  21. [21]

    Entanglement routing design over quantum networks,

    Y . Zeng, J. Zhang, J. Liu, Z. Liu, and Y . Yang, “Entanglement routing design over quantum networks,”IEEE/ACM Transactions on Network- ing, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 352–367, 2024

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    Optimal routing for quantum networks,

    M. Caleffi, “Optimal routing for quantum networks,”IEEE Access, vol. 5, pp. 22 299–22 312, 2017

    work page 2017

  23. [23]

    Routing entanglement in the quantum internet,

    M. Pant, H. Krovi, D. Towsley, L. Tassiulas, L. Jiang, P. Basu, D. En- glund, and S. Guha, “Routing entanglement in the quantum internet,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 5, no. 1, Mar 2019

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Effective routing design for remote entanglement generation on quantum networks,

    C. Li, T. Li, Y .-X. Liu, and P. Cappellaro, “Effective routing design for remote entanglement generation on quantum networks,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 7, no. 1, Jan 2021

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Entanglement distribution in a quantum network: A multicommodity flow-based ap- proach,

    K. Chakraborty, D. Elkouss, B. Rijsman, and S. Wehner, “Entanglement distribution in a quantum network: A multicommodity flow-based ap- proach,”IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 1–21, 2020

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    An efficient scheduling scheme of swapping and purification operations for end-to-end entanglement distribution in quantum networks,

    Z. Wang, J. Li, K. Xue, D. S. L. Wei, R. Li, N. Yu, Q. Sun, and J. Lu, “An efficient scheduling scheme of swapping and purification operations for end-to-end entanglement distribution in quantum networks,”IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 380–391, 2024

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Purification scheduling control for throughput maximization in quantum networks,

    Z. Xiao, J. Li, K. Xue, N. Yu, R. Li, Q. Sun, and J. Lu, “Purification scheduling control for throughput maximization in quantum networks,” Communications Physics, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 307, Dec. 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    From entanglement purification scheduling to fidelity-constrained multi-flow routing,

    Z. Jia and L. Chen, “From entanglement purification scheduling to fidelity-constrained multi-flow routing,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.08243

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Hu, C.-X

    X.-M. Hu, C.-X. Huang, Y .-B. Sheng, L. Zhou, B.-H. Liu, Y . Guo, C. Zhang, W.-B. Xing, Y .-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, “Long-distance entanglement purification for quantum communication,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 126, p. 010503, Jan 2021. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.010503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.126.010503 2021

  30. [30]

    Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications,

    S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, and L. Banchi, “Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications,”Nature Commun., vol. 8, p. 15043, 2017

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Quantum states with einstein-podolsky-rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model,

    R. F. Werner, “Quantum states with einstein-podolsky-rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 40, pp. 4277– 4281, Oct 1989. [Online]. Available: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevA.40.4277

    work page 1989

  32. [32]

    Entanglement distillation between solid-state quantum network nodes,

    N. Kalb, A. A. Reiserer, P. C. Humphreys, J. J. W. Bakermans, S. J. Kamerling, N. H. Nickerson, S. C. Benjamin, D. J. Twitchen, M. Markham, and R. Hanson, “Entanglement distillation between solid-state quantum network nodes,”Science, vol. 356, no. 6341, pp. 928–932, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/ 10.1126/science.aan0070

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aan0070 2017

  33. [33]

    A link layer protocol for quantum networks,

    A. Dahlberg, M. Skrzypczyk, T. Coopmans, L. Wubben, F. Rozpundefineddek, M. Pompili, A. Stolk, P. Pawełczak, R. Knegjens, J. de Oliveira Filho, R. Hanson, and S. Wehner, “A link layer protocol for quantum networks,” inProceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication, ser. SIGCOMM ’19. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machin...

    work page doi:10.1145/3341302.3342070 2019

  34. [34]

    Quantum privacy amplification and the security of quantum cryptography over noisy channels

    D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, “Quantum privacy amplification and the security of quantum cryptography over noisy channels,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 77, pp. 2818–2821, Sep 1996. [Online]. Available: https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.2818

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.77.2818 1996

  35. [35]

    Routing of multipoint connections,

    B. Waxman, “Routing of multipoint connections,”IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 6, no. 9, pp. 1617–1622, 1988

    work page 1988

  36. [36]

    NetSquid, a NETwork Simulator for QUantum Infor- mation using Discrete events,

    T. Coopmans, R. Knegjens, A. Dahlberg, D. Maier, L. Nijsten, J. de Oliveira Filho, M. Papendrecht, J. Rabbie, F. Rozp˛ edek, M. Skrzypczyk, L. Wubben, W. de Jong, D. Podareanu, A. Torres-Knoop, D. Elkouss, and S. Wehner, “NetSquid, a NETwork Simulator for QUantum Infor- mation using Discrete events,”Communications Physics, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 164, Dec. 2021

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    Quan- tum autoencoders for efficient compression of quantum data,

    X. Wu, A. Kolar, J. Chung, D. Jin, T. Zhong, R. Kettimuthu, and M. Suchara, “Sequence: a customizable discrete-event simulator of quantum networks,”Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 4, p. 045027, Sep. 2021. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2058- 9565/ac22f6

    work page doi:10.1088/2058- 2021