Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 40 references

Dynamic Entanglement Distribution for Multi-User and Multi-Protocol Quantum Networking

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single reconfigurable optical core can dynamically route entanglement among six users over deployed metropolitan fibre, sustaining a full-mesh quantum network for 157.3 hours while also supporting slicing and multi-protocol operation.

desk verdict Real network result, overstated protocol claim: the q-ROADM full-mesh experiment is solid, but the SIAT timing is a calculation with an unvalidated overhead assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.15262 v1 pith:XPWI7AM2 submitted 2026-07-16 quant-ph

Rui Wang , Marcus J. Clark , Obada Alia , Sima Bahrani , Djeylan Aktas , Matej Peranić , Mario Stipčević , Martin Lončarić
show 3 more authors
John Rarity Siddarth K. Joshi Dimitra Simeonidou
This is my paper
classification quant-ph PACS 03.67.Hk
keywords quantumnetworksentanglementdistributionq-ROADMkeynetworkslicingauthenticationtransferDWDMmetropolitanfibre
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that dynamic, service-oriented entanglement distribution is achievable on deployed fibre using a reconfigurable optical core rather than a fixed passive splitter. The q-ROADM makes connectivity a software-level choice: the same six users can be wired as a full mesh, split into independent sliced sub-networks, or joined by an optional interconnection link without physical changes. The evidence includes a 157.3-hour stable full-mesh run with secret-key rates from 4.8 to 190 bps, a comparison of full-mesh versus time-shared partial-mesh strategies under two source/detector regimes, and a protocol-level demonstration where SIAT authentication of a new user is accelerated by configuring only the links each step requires. If these claims hold, one shared quantum infrastructure can adapt its topology and protocol to current link conditions and user demand.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the q-ROADM (quantum reconfigurable optical add-drop multiplexer): a demultiplexer divides the broadband entangled-photon source into 30 ITU 100-GHz wavelength channels, fibre polarisation controllers stabilise each channel against birefringence, a 192x192 optical fibre switch routes individual channels, and output multiplexers or wavelength-selective switches combine selected channels for each user. Because energy conservation ties channel λ_i to channel λ_-i, the switch can allocate a specific entangled wavelength pair to any chosen user pair. This device is what converts a single source and shared fibre plant into a programmable entanglement resource whose topolog

What would settle it

Run the SIAT protocol live on the same six-user q-ROADM network with full post-processing and measure wall-clock time for both authentication strategies under the favourable and challenging source/detector conditions. If the measured totals exceed the predicted 1356 s/1298 s or 6958 s/4371 s by more than the time-tag-exchange contribution, the g≈g^TT approximation underpinning the protocol-level claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central claim is that a quantum reconfigurable optical add-drop multiplexer (q-ROADM) can serve as the core of a metropolitan entanglement network. The q-ROADM slices one broadband entangled-photon source into 30 DWDM wavelength channels, pairs symmetric channels that carry polarisation-entangled photons, neutralises fibre-induced polarisation drift, and routes the pairs to six users. Using this core, the authors demonstrate six-user full-mesh BBM92 key distribution for 157.3 hours, programmable full-mesh/partial-mesh and sliced topologies, and the same infrastructure running the SIAT authentication-transfer protocol with multi-path flooding. The protocol timing

Load-bearing premise

The SIAT timing results rest on the assumption that for every link the authenticated classical communication is almost entirely time-tag exchange, with post-processing overhead such as error correction and status checks negligible by comparison; if that overhead is comparable, the reported authentication times and the 2587-s saving would not transfer to a live deployment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A metropolitan entanglement network can run unattended for days: after a single polarisation re-neutralisation, the six-user full-mesh network kept stable secret-key rates for more than 140 additional hours, surviving reconfiguration and a power outage.
  • There is no universally optimal allocation strategy; full-mesh generated more total key under a bright, low-jitter source, but time-shared partial-mesh won for many links under low heralding efficiency and high detector jitter, so the topology should be chosen from live link conditions.
  • Quantum network slicing works on shared fibre: independent sub-networks can run concurrently, and an interconnection link can be added or removed without significantly degrading the existing links.
  • New-user onboarding can be planned as a sequence of q-ROADM configurations; the SIAT execution time is order-dependent, with up to 2587 s difference between the two studied strategies under challenging conditions.
  • The same physical infrastructure can serve different protocols, not just QKD, provided the protocol can be expressed as a demand for particular user-pair links at particular times.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The 30-channel DWDM grid and the beam-splitter sharing described in the supplement suggest a scaling path beyond six users; the stated bottleneck is user modules and detector channels, not the routing core itself.
  • The reported SIAT times are timing-model results, not live protocol executions: they assume time-tag exchange dominates authenticated classical traffic on each link, so the 2587-s saving is best read as an upper bound until an end-to-end live run is measured.
  • The full-mesh versus partial-mesh comparison suggests a natural closed-loop controller: periodically measure per-link SKR and QBER, then let the q-ROADM re-select topology and pump power in response, something the paper demonstrates manually rather than automatically.
  • The same protocol-aware distribution layer could plausibly host entanglement-consuming services beyond key distribution, such as entanglement swapping or distributed quantum computing, whenever those services can be scheduled as a set of user-pair links.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a six-user entanglement-based quantum network enabled by a quantum reconfigurable optical add-drop multiplexer (q-ROADM) over deployed campus and metropolitan fibre in Bristol. The network is used to demonstrate full-mesh, partial-mesh, and sliced topologies, with long-term secret-key-rate monitoring over a claimed 157.3-hour period, and to compare full-mesh with time-shared partial-mesh operation under favourable and challenging source/detector conditions. The multi-protocol part of the claim is based on a timing analysis of the SIAT authentication-transfer protocol combined with flooding, using the measured secret-key rates and an explicit approximation for classical communication overhead. The paper's central experimental results are the q-ROADM architecture, the six-user BBM92 entanglement distribution, and the programmable topologies.

Significance. If the claims are taken at face value, the q-ROADM architecture is a significant step: a single reconfigurable optical core can distribute broadband entangled-photon pairs to six users, support multiple logical topologies, and sustain multi-user entanglement distribution over deployed fibre for an extended period. The data are presented honestly, including SNSPD interruptions, polarisation re-neutralisation, and a power outage. The quantitative SKR results and topology comparisons are useful for the quantum-networking community. The SIAT portion, however, is not a live protocol demonstration but a model-based timing estimate. After a clear reframing of that part, the experimental networking contribution is strong and well within the scope of the journal.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.4 and Supplement S3, Eqs. (S7)–(S14)] The SIAT 'showcase' is not an executed protocol run. The main text states that the timing analysis uses measured SKRs, and Supplement S3 explicitly assumes g_A−X ≈ g^TT_A−X, i.e. that all authenticated classical communication is dominated by time-tag exchange. The headline saving under the challenging condition (6958 s for Strategy 1 vs 4371 s for Strategy 2) is therefore a calculated projection, not a measured protocol-level result. The model also omits q-ROADM reconfiguration and fibre-polarisation neutralisation times when adding each new SIAT link. If real post-processing overhead, error-correction syndrome exchange, or reconfiguration delays are non-negligible, the quantitative protocol claims do not transfer to a live deployment. The manuscript should either present at least one live SIAT execution on a single link or clearly label the entire SIAT analysis as a simulation/projectio
  2. [§3.1 and Fig. 4] The claim of 'stable six-user full-mesh operation over more than 150 hours' is ambiguous. The narrative records a polarisation re-neutralisation at T1 = 18.43 h, SNSPD-cycling interruptions at T2 = 58.03 h and T3 = 82.03 h, reconfiguration for other experiments between these times, and a power outage lasting more than 24 hours shortly after T3. As written, the 157.3 h appears to be an elapsed deployment period, not a continuous interval of simultaneous full-mesh key generation on all 15 links. Since long-term stability is a central claim, the authors should define the uptime metric precisely: the total time during which all links produced usable keys, the number and duration of gaps, and how the power outage was handled. If the uninterrupted interval is substantially shorter, the abstract and conclusion should be adjusted.
  3. [§3.2, Figs. 5 and 6] The full-mesh/partial-mesh comparison uses a 40-minute full-mesh run and two 20-minute partial-mesh runs. The figures show accumulated keys, which conflate integration time with per-link key rate. The conclusion that partial-mesh configurations 'can outperform' the full-mesh configuration for many links under the challenging condition should be supported by time-normalised per-link rates, or the text should state explicitly that the comparison is in terms of accumulated keys over these unequal active windows. This is important for interpreting Fig. 6(b).
minor comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (3), §3.1] The SKR formula is asymptotic and assumes the phase error rate equals the bit error rate. The value of f_EC is not stated. For the lower-rate links (e.g. ~5–10 bps) and 10-minute integration blocks, finite-size corrections can be non-negligible. The authors should state the f_EC value and add a caveat that all quoted SKRs are asymptotic, or provide finite-size adjusted rates where relevant.
  2. [Fig. 4] In the zoomed panel, the locations of T1–T3 and the periods of reconfiguration/power loss are not marked. Adding shaded regions or vertical lines would make the stability narrative much easier to verify.
  3. [References] Reference [14] appears to duplicate Reference [6], and reference [23] is missing a full article title. A data-availability statement would also be helpful, given the long dataset.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the q-ROADM results are measured, and the SIAT timings are a model-based computation from measured SKRs under an explicitly stated approximation.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are experimental: six-user full-mesh SKRs are measured over 157.3 hours (Fig. 4), full-mesh vs partial-mesh comparisons use measured accumulated keys (Figs. 5-6), and slicing uses measured SKR/QBER (Fig. 7). The only potentially load-bearing calculation is the SIAT timing analysis in Sec. 3.4 and Supplement S3. That analysis is not a derivation of the result from the result: it takes measured SKRs R_l, forms a measured classical-to-secret-key ratio g_l = D_l/K_l (Eq. S7), and applies published Wegman-Carter and flooding formulas (Eqs. S8-S14) from Refs. [38,40]. The approximation g_A-X ≈ g^TT_A-X is explicitly acknowledged: 'the extra information needed for post-processing is not comparable to the information needed for time tagging exchange. Therefore, in this paper, we assume g_A-X≈g^TT_A-X for all the quantum links.' This is a stated modelling assumption about classical overhead, not an input defined in terms of the reported authentication times. Ref. [38] has overlapping authors but is an externally published protocol specification, not a uniqueness theorem invoked to force this paper's choices. The qualitative SIAT ordering (Strategy 2 faster under challenging conditions) follows from measured link rates and the min-rate flooding formula, not from circular reuse of the output. The SIAT caveat is a validation/correctness concern, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental claims rest on standard SPDC entanglement generation, DWDM channel-pair correlation, and fibre polarisation stabilisation. The main modelling choice is the explicitly stated g_A−X ≈ g^TT_A−X approximation in the SIAT timing analysis; it affects only the multi-protocol claim, not the core q-ROADM measurements. No new physical entities are postulated. The largest reproducible gaps are the unspecified f_EC and coincidence-window parameters used in the secret-key-rate calculation.

free parameters (4)
  • η (key reservation fraction) = 1 in main-text SIAT comparison; 0.1–1.0 in Supplement S4
    Chosen protocol parameter in the SIAT timing model; Step 2 duration scales as 1/η. Not fitted to data, but directly affects the reported total authentication times.
  • ε_c (authentication insecurity) = 10^-9 and 10^-15
    Chosen security parameters for Wegman-Carter authentication in the SIAT analysis; timing depends logarithmically on ε_c.
  • f_EC (error-correction efficiency) = not stated
    Used in Eq. 3 for the asymptotic secret-key rate. The numerical value is not given in the main text or supplement, so computed SKRs cannot be independently reproduced.
  • coincidence window width = not stated
    Total coincidence counts, QBER, and SKR all depend on the chosen coincidence window, but its value is not reported.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The Sagnac-loop type-0 SPDC source produces the |Φ+⟩ state with photon pairs in symmetric wavelength channels λ_i and λ_-i.
    Section 2; standard SPDC entanglement generation. Underpins the assignment of each wavelength pair as one entanglement link.
  • domain assumption The 100 GHz DEMUX channel slicing preserves pairwise entanglement and the channels are sufficiently independent of each other in the full-mesh assignment.
    Supplement S2; if adjacent-channel leakage or crosstalk were significant, the 15-link full-mesh wavelength assignment would fail. Measured QBER partially validates this assumption.
  • domain assumption Fibre polarisation neutralisation with weak coherent reference states and FPC settings establishes the agreed H/V and D/A bases for all users over the deployed fibre.
    Supplement S1; the long-term data show polarisation drift requiring re-neutralisation at T1, so the assumption is valid only with periodic maintenance.
  • domain assumption For BBM92, the phase error rate equals the bit error rate in the asymptotic key-rate expression.
    Section 3 after Eq. 3: 'we assume that the phase error rate is equal to the measured bit error rate.' Standard basis-symmetry assumption for BB84/BBM92.
  • domain assumption The Wegman-Carter authentication key requirement formula (Eq. S9) and self-consistency condition (Eq. S10) from Refs. [38,40] apply to the SIAT timing calculation.
    Supplement S3; the protocol timing analysis rests on these published formulas.
  • ad hoc to paper For each link, g_A−X ≈ g^TT_A−X, i.e., the total authenticated classical communication is dominated by time-tag exchange and all other post-processing overhead is negligible.
    Supplement S3 states this explicitly: 'we assume g_A−X≈g^TT_A−X for all the quantum links.' This is load-bearing for the reported SIAT authentication times; if the overhead is not negligible, the calculated 2587 s saving changes.
  • domain assumption In flooding-based SIAT, each path's end-to-end key rate is limited by its slowest link, and the Step 1 transfer rate is limited by the slowest selected path.
    Supplement S3, Eqs. S12-S13; inherited from the flooding protocol model in Ref. [38].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamic Entanglement Distribution for Multi-User and Multi-Protocol Quantum Networking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XPWI7AM2

@misc{pith2026260715262,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamic Entanglement Distribution for Multi-User and Multi-Protocol Quantum Networking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XPWI7AM2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.15262}
}
read the original abstract

Dynamic entanglement distribution is a key requirement for scalable, multi-user and multi-protocol quantum networks. We demonstrate a metropolitan-scale entanglement-based quantum communication network enabled by a quantum reconfigurable optical add-drop multiplexer (q-ROADM), which dynamically distributes polarisation-entangled photon pairs from a broadband source to six users over deployed campus and metropolitan fibre. The network supports programmable full-mesh, partial-mesh and sliced sub-network configurations, enabling flexible allocation of entanglement resources according to link condition and service requirement. We demonstrate stable six-user full-mesh operation over more than 150 hours, compare full-mesh and time-shared partial-mesh strategies under different source and detector conditions, and realise quantum network slicing with optional/additional interconnection links. We also show that the same infrastructure can support different quantum protocols by showcasing Secure Inaugural Authentication-Transfer (SIAT) combined with Network flooding over multiple paths to improve the security of onboarding a new user. These results demonstrate a q-ROADM-enabled entanglement distribution architecture as a novel route towards reconfigurable, service-oriented quantum networking over optical fibre infrastructure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15262 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A 6-user entanglement-based quantum communication network architecture enabled by a q-ROADM. A [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) q-ROADM architecture for dynamic entan [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Temporal correlation histogram between Alice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: SKR of all 15 links in the six-user full-mesh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison between full-mesh and time-shared [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Accumulated secret keys for individual quantum links under full-mesh and time-shared partial-mesh [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Quantum network slicing in the six-user entanglement network. (a,c,e) Three slicing cases, C1–C3, where [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: SIAT and flooding protocol for authenticating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Time required to authenticate new user Alice into the five-user network using SIAT and flooding. Each bar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead,

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, “Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead,”Science, vol. 362, no. 6412, p. eaam9288, 2018

    2018

  2. [2]

    The quantum internet,

    H. J. Kimble, “The quantum internet,”Nature, vol. 453, pp. 1023–1030, 2008

    2008

  3. [3]

    Quantum re- peaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,

    K. Azuma, S. E. Economou, D. Elkouss, P. Hilaire, L. Jiang, H.-K. Lo, and I. Tzitrin, “Quantum re- peaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,”Reviews of Modern Physics, vol. 95, no. 4, p. 045006, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    Long-distance entanglement-based quantum key distribution,

    G. Ribordy, J. Brendel, J.-D. Gautier, N. Gisin, and H. Zbinden, “Long-distance entanglement-based quantum key distribution,”Physical Review A, vol. 63, no. 1, p. 012309, 2000

    2000

  5. [5]

    Entanglement-based secure quantum cryptog- raphy over 1,120 kilometres,

    J. Yin, Y.-H. Li, S.-K. Liao, M. Yang, Y. Cao, L. Zhang, J.-G. Ren, W.-Q. Cai, W.-Y. Liu, S.-L. Li 8 et al., “Entanglement-based secure quantum cryptog- raphy over 1,120 kilometres,”Nature, vol. 582, no. 7813, pp. 501–505, 2020

    2020

  6. [6]

    Quantum inter- net: Networking challenges in distributed quantum computing,

    A. S. Cacciapuoti, M. Caleffi, F. Tafuri, F. S. Catal- iotti, S. Gherardini, and G. Bianchi, “Quantum inter- net: Networking challenges in distributed quantum computing,”IEEE Network, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 137– 143, 2020

    2020

  7. [7]

    Experimental quan- tum teleportation,

    D. Bouwmeester, J.-W. Pan, K. Mattle, M. Eibl, H. Weinfurter, and A. Zeilinger, “Experimental quan- tum teleportation,”Nature, vol. 390, no. 6660, pp. 575–579, 1997

    1997

  8. [8]

    Advances in quantum telepor- tation,

    S. Pirandola, J. Eisert, C. Weedbrook, A. Furusawa, and S. L. Braunstein, “Advances in quantum telepor- tation,”Nature photonics, vol. 9, no. 10, pp. 641–652, 2015

    2015

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Quantumteleportationcoexistingwithclassicalcom- munications in optical fiber,

    J. M. Thomas, F. I. Yeh, J. H. Chen, J. J. Mam- bretti, S. J. Kohlert, G. S. Kanter, and P. Kumar, “Quantumteleportationcoexistingwithclassicalcom- munications in optical fiber,”Optica, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1700–1707, 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    Teleportation systems toward a quantum internet,

    R. Valivarthi, S. I. Davis, C. Peña, S. Xie, N. Lauk, L. Narváez, J. P. Allmaras, A. D. Beyer, Y. Gim, M. Husseinet al., “Teleportation systems toward a quantum internet,”PRX Quantum, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 020317, 2020

    2020

  3. [11]

    Quantum telepor- tation across a metropolitan fibre network,

    R. Valivarthi, M. l. G. Puigibert, Q. Zhou, G. H. Aguilar, V. B. Verma, F. Marsili, M. D. Shaw, S. W. Nam, D. Oblak, and W. Tittel, “Quantum telepor- tation across a metropolitan fibre network,”Nature Photonics, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 676–680, 2016

    2016

  4. [12]

    Distributed quantum computation over noisy channels,

    J. I. Cirac, A. Ekert, S. F. Huelga, and C. Macchi- avello, “Distributed quantum computation over noisy channels,”Physical Review A, vol. 59, no. 6, p. 4249, 1999

    1999

  5. [13]

    Distributed quantum computing across an optical network link,

    D. Main, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, B. C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, and D. M. Lucas, “Distributed quantum computing across an optical network link,”Nature, vol. 638, no. 8050, pp. 383–388, 2025

    2025

  6. [14]

    Quantum inter- net: Networking challenges in distributed quantum computing,

    A. S. Cacciapuoti, M. Caleffi, F. Tafuri, F. S. Catal- iotti, S. Gherardini, and G. Bianchi, “Quantum inter- net: Networking challenges in distributed quantum computing,”IEEE Network, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 137– 143, 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Osi stack redesign for quantum networks: Requirements, tech- nologies, challenges, and future directions,

    S. Ahmed, M. K. Saeed, and A. Khokhar, “Osi stack redesign for quantum networks: Requirements, tech- nologies, challenges, and future directions,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.12195, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Scalable network for simultaneous pairwise quantum key distribution via entanglement-based time-bin coding,

    E. Fitzke, L. Bialowons, T. Dolejsky, M. Tippmann, O. Nikiforov, F. Wissel, M. Gunkel, and T. Walther, “Scalable network for simultaneous pairwise quantum key distribution via entanglement-based time-bin coding,”PRX Quantum, vol. 3, p. 020341, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    The evolution of quantum key distribu- tion networks: On the road to the qinternet,

    Y. Cao, Y. Zhao, J. Wang, X. Zhang, S. X. Ng, and L. Hanzo, “The evolution of quantum key distribu- tion networks: On the road to the qinternet,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 839–894, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Madqci: a heterogeneous and scalable sdn-qkd network deployed in production facilities,

    V. Martinet al., “Madqci: a heterogeneous and scalable sdn-qkd network deployed in production facilities,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 10, p. 80, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Feasibility of quantum key distribution through a dense wave- length division multiplexing network,

    B. Qi, W. Zhu, L. Qian, and H.-K. Lo, “Feasibility of quantum key distribution through a dense wave- length division multiplexing network,”New Journal of Physics, vol. 12, no. 10, p. 103042, 2010

    2010

  12. [20]

    A quantum access network,

    B. Fröhlich, J. F. Dynes, M. Lucamarini, A. W. Sharpe, Z. Yuan, and A. J. Shields, “A quantum access network,”Nature, vol. 501, no. 7465, pp. 69– 72, 2013

    2013

  13. [21]

    An entanglement-based wavelength-multiplexedquantumcommunicationnet- work,

    S. Wengerowsky, S. K. Joshi, F. Steinlechner, H. Hübel, and R. Ursin, “An entanglement-based wavelength-multiplexedquantumcommunicationnet- work,”Nature, vol. 564, no. 7735, pp. 225–228, 2018

    2018

  14. [22]

    A trusted node–free eight- user metropolitan quantum communication network,

    S. K. Joshi, D. Aktas, S. Wengerowsky, M. Lončarić, S. P. Neumann, B. Liu, T. Scheidl, G. C. Lorenzo, Ž. Samec, L. Klinget al., “A trusted node–free eight- user metropolitan quantum communication network,” Science advances, vol. 6, no. 36, p. eaba0959, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Aktaset al.,Laser & Photonics Reviews, vol

    D. Aktaset al.,Laser & Photonics Reviews, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 451–457, 2016

    2016

  16. [24]

    40-user fully connected entanglement-based quantum key distri- bution network without trusted node,

    X. Liu, J. Liu, R. Xue, H. Wang, H. Li, X. Feng, F. Liu, K. Cui, Z. Wang, L. Youet al., “40-user fully connected entanglement-based quantum key distri- bution network without trusted node,”PhotoniX, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2022

    2022

  17. [25]

    A 15-user quantum secure direct commu- nication network,

    Z. Qi, Y. Li, Y. Huang, J. Feng, Y. Zheng, and X. Chen, “A 15-user quantum secure direct commu- nication network,”Light: Science & Applications, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Entanglement distribution in optical networks,

    A. Ciurana, V. Martin, J. Martinez-Mateo, B. Schrenk, M. Peev, and A. Poppe, “Entanglement distribution in optical networks,”IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, vol.21, no.3, pp. 37–48, 2014

    2014

  19. [27]

    Quantum entanglement network enabled by 9 a state-multiplexing quantum light source,

    Y.-R. Fan, Y. Luo, K. Guo, J.-P. Wu, H. Zeng, G.- W. Deng, Y. Wang, H.-Z. Song, Z. Wang, L.-X. You et al., “Quantum entanglement network enabled by 9 a state-multiplexing quantum light source,”Light: Science & Applications, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 189, 2025

    2025

  20. [28]

    Adaptive band- width management for entanglement distribution in quantum networks,

    N. B. Lingaraju, H.-H. Lu, S. Seshadri, D. E. Leaird, A. M. Weiner, and J. M. Lukens, “Adaptive band- width management for entanglement distribution in quantum networks,”Optica, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 329– 332, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Toward a reconfigurable quantum network enabled by a broadband entangled source,

    E. Y. Zhu, C. Corbari, A. Gladyshev, P. G. Kazansky, H.-K. Lo, and L. Qian, “Toward a reconfigurable quantum network enabled by a broadband entangled source,”JOSA B, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. B1–B6, 2019

    2019

  22. [30]

    Flexible entanglement-distribution network with an algaas chip for secure communications,

    F. Appas, F. Baboux, M. I. Amanti, A. Lemaítre, F. Boitier, E. Diamanti, and S. Ducci, “Flexible entanglement-distribution network with an algaas chip for secure communications,”npj Quantum In- formation, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Flexible cloud/user- centric entanglement and photon pair distribution with synthesizable optical router,

    F. Laudenbach, B. Schrenk, M. Achleitner, N. Vokić, D. Milovančev, and H. Hübel, “Flexible cloud/user- centric entanglement and photon pair distribution with synthesizable optical router,”IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 1–9, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    Experimental real- ization of an entanglement access network and secure multi-party computation,

    X.-Y. Chang, D.-L. Deng, X.-X. Yuan, P.-Y. Hou, Y.-Y. Huang, and L.-M. Duan, “Experimental real- ization of an entanglement access network and secure multi-party computation,”Scientific reports, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 29453, 2016

    2016

  25. [33]

    Demonstration of active routing of entanglement in a multi-user network,

    I. Herbauts, B. Blauensteiner, A. Poppe, T. Jen- newein, and H. Huebel, “Demonstration of active routing of entanglement in a multi-user network,” Optics express, vol. 21, no. 23, pp. 29013–29024, 2013

    2013

  26. [34]

    Coexistence of entanglement-based quantum channels with DWDM classical channels over hollow core fibre in a four node quantum commu- nication network,

    M. J. Clark, O. Alia, S. Bahrani, G. T. Jasion, H. Sakr, P. Petropoulos, F. Poletti, G. T. Kanel- los, J. Rarity, R. Nejabati, S. K. Joshi, R. Wang, and D. Simeonidou, “Coexistence of entanglement-based quantum channels with DWDM classical channels over hollow core fibre in a ...

    2025

  27. [35]

    Entanglement distribution over metropolitan fiber using an on-chip broadband polarization-entangled photon source,

    Z.-H. Jiang, Y. Chen, W. Yan, C. Lu, W. Wen, Y.- Y. An, L. Chen, Y. Liu, H.-Y. Liu, Z. Xieet al., “Entanglement distribution over metropolitan fiber using an on-chip broadband polarization-entangled photon source,”Physical Review Applied, vol. 24, no. 4, p. 044098, 2025

    2025

  28. [36]

    Reconfigurable en- tanglement distribution network based on pump man- agement of a spontaneous four-wave mixing source,

    J. Liu, D. Liu, Z. Jin, Z. Lin, H. Li, L. You, X. Feng, F. Liu, K. Cui, W. Zhanget al., “Reconfigurable en- tanglement distribution network based on pump man- agement of a spontaneous four-wave mixing source,” Science Advances, vol. 10, no. 50, p. eado9822, 2024

    2024

  29. [37]

    Quantum fusion of independent networks based on multi-user entanglement swapping,

    Y. Huang, Y. Yang, H. Li, J. Wang, J. Qiu, Z. Qi, Y. Zhang, Y. Li, Y. Zheng, and X. Chen, “Quantum fusion of independent networks based on multi-user entanglement swapping,”Nature Photonics, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 87–95, 2026

    2026

  30. [38]

    Scalable authentication and optimal flooding in a quantum network,

    N. R. Solomons, A. I. Fletcher, D. Aktas, N. Venkat- achalam, S. Wengerowsky, M. Lončarić, S. P. Neu- mann, B. Liu, Ž. Samec, M. Stipčevićet al., “Scalable authentication and optimal flooding in a quantum network,”PRX Quantum, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 020311, 2022

    2022

  31. [39]

    Quantum cryptography without bell’s theorem,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and N. D. Mermin, “Quantum cryptography without bell’s theorem,” Physical review letters, vol. 68, no. 5, p. 557, 1992

    1992

  32. [40]

    New hash functions and their use in authentication and set equality,

    M. N. Wegman and J. L. Carter, “New hash functions and their use in authentication and set equality,” Journal of computer and system sciences, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 265–279, 1981. 10 Supplementary Material S1 Quantum Network Polarisation Neu- tralisation Polarisation neutralisat...

    1981

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.