Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Broadband Polarization Compensation with Link Segment Reconstruction for Quantum Optical Links

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A four-plate compensator plus an eight-Stokes reconstruction makes middle-of-the-link polarization compensation deterministic and broadband.

desk verdict A genuinely useful engineering result: a four-plate compensator that tolerates wave-plate retardance errors and an eight-Stokes protocol for middle-link compensation, with experiments that support the claims but are statistically thin. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.17400 v1 pith:ZJ55I5F3 submitted 2026-07-19 quant-ph physics.optics

Qingyu Shi , Erwan Trad , Julien Chénedé , Tobias Vogl This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.optics PACS 03.67.-a42.25.Ja42.81.Gs
keywords polarizationcompensationSO(3)Muellermatrixquantumkeydistributionwave-platesynthesislink-segmentreconstructionStokesvectortomographyauxiliarywavelengthtrackingfiberbirefringence
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a polarization compensator placed inside a quantum optical link—not just at the receiver—can be made deterministic and broadband. The first claim is a synthesis result: three quarter-wave plates followed by a half-wave plate (Q-Q-Q-H) can produce any rotation of the Poincaré sphere (any SO(3) Mueller matrix) even when the wave plates' retardances deviate from their nominal values, provided the total retardance error is below π/2. The second claim is a measurement result: eight Stokes-vector measurements—two input states for each of four compensator settings—reconstruct the unknown Mueller matrices of the fiber segments before and after the compensator, so the correct compensating rotation can be computed directly. If both claims hold, a compensation node can be placed flexibly inside a network, operated far from the design wavelength, and updated without disturbing the quantum signal. The experiments support this: 0.41% polarization-induced excess QBER at 515 nm (118 nm off the 633 nm design), below 1% during 14 hours of temperature cycling with auxiliary-wavelength feedback, and 0.03–0.18% for several fiber and switch links.

What carries the argument

The Q-Q-Q-H stack—an extra quarter-wave plate in front of the classic Q-Q-H sequence—preconditions the target rotation so that the remaining three plates remain within a solvable branch; the sufficient condition ensures a continuous winding number that guarantees a zero residual. The eight-Stokes reconstruction uses the identity setting and three π/2 test rotations: for each setting, measuring H and D outputs yields two columns of the end-to-end matrix and the third by cross product; multiplying by the transpose of the identity-setting matrix isolates M_beta Ni M_beta^T, whose rotation axes give M_beta directly, and then M_alpha = M_beta^T E0. For auxiliary-wavelength tracking, measured Muel

What would settle it

Insert a known partial polarizer (polarization-dependent loss) between the compensator and the receiver, run the eight-Stokes protocol, and check whether the reconstructed M_beta stays a rotation and whether residual QBER stays below 1%; the paper's model predicts it will not, because PDL is explicitly excluded.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that a compensator embedded between two unknown polarization-transforming link segments can be set without iteration: by measuring eight Stokes vectors (H and D inputs for four compensator settings, N0=I and three π/2 rotations about the Stokes axes), one reconstructs the two segment matrices M_alpha and M_beta, and the required compensator is M = M_beta^T M_alpha^T. The paper also argues that the Q-Q-Q-H wave-plate stack can synthesize any SO(3) matrix under the conservative error bound |Δδ+|+|Δδ1|+|Δδ2|+|Δδ3| < π/2, by using the extra quarter-wave plate to precondition the target and a winding-number argument to guarantee a solution. Exper

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that every link segment is a loss-normalized, non-depolarizing channel whose Mueller matrix belongs to SO(3); if polarization-dependent loss or depolarization appears, the reconstruction equations and the compensation formula M = M_beta^T M_alpha^T no longer apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With the Q-Q-Q-H stack, compensation works at 515 nm using 633 nm wave plates, with 0.41% excess QBER; the baseline Q-Q-H sequence gives 19.8% at the same wavelength.
  • Auxiliary-wavelength feedback kept excess QBER below 1% (median 0.115%) over 14 hours while the fiber spool was cycled between 15°C and 30°C.
  • The same reconstruction–synthesis procedure gives 0.03–0.18% excess QBER for 1 m fiber, 5 m fiber on paddles, an optical switch, and a 100 m spool.
  • The demonstrated 3×10^-3 relative auxiliary-wavelength spacing maps to about 4.6 nm at 1550 nm, on the order of six 100-GHz DWDM channels, so auxiliary-wavelength compensation is compatible with dense WDM.
  • Because the compensator setting is computed from eight measurements rather than iterative search, the method supports placement of the compensator at intermediate network nodes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the reconstruction only assumes SO(3) segments, it should transfer to any two-sided optical element whose internal state can be switched among known rotations; the same eight-measurement pattern could serve as a general tomography routine for embedded devices.
  • Extending the method to links with polarization-dependent loss or depolarization would require full 4×4 Mueller matrices and more than eight measurements; the paper explicitly leaves that case uncompensated.
  • The π/2 sufficient condition is conservative—the solver succeeded numerically at 515 nm where the condition fails—so the guaranteed wavelength range could probably be widened with a sharper analysis.
  • The demonstrated auxiliary spacing of 3×10^-3 relative wavelength suggests a telecom implementation at 1550 nm would need about 4.6 nm spacing, i.e., roughly six 100-GHz DWDM channels, which is feasible but leaves fewer intermediate channels.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a deterministic polarization-compensation framework for quantum optical links in which the compensator is embedded between two unknown channel segments. It makes two main contributions. First, it shows that a standard Q-Q-H wave-plate sequence is not universal when the wave-plate retardances deviate from their ideal values, and it introduces a Q-Q-Q-H four-wave-plate stack that can synthesize arbitrary SO(3) Mueller matrices under the sufficient condition |Δδ+|+|Δδ1|+|Δδ2|+|Δδ3| < π/2 (Supplemental S1, Eq. S104). A constructive angle-solving algorithm is provided. Second, it develops an eight-Stokes-vector protocol (Eqs. 4–9) that reconstructs the Mueller matrices Mα and Mβ of the link segments before and after an embedded compensator, allowing the required compensation matrix M = Mβ^T Mα^T to be computed directly. The protocol is validated experimentally with commercial zero-order 633 nm wave plates: at 640 nm and 515 nm the Q-Q-Q-H stack gives sub-percent polarization-induced excess QBER, in contrast to a Q-Q-H baseline, and low residual QBER is reported for various fiber devices and an optical switch. The paper further demonstrates auxiliary-wavelength interpolation and tracking, maintaining median excess QBER of 0.115% during a 14 h temperature-variation experiment on a 100 m fiber spool.

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper solves a genuine and practically relevant problem: compensator placement at intermediate network nodes requires separate knowledge of the two surrounding segments, and wavelength-flexible operation requires compensation schemes robust to non-ideal retardances. The mathematical derivation is detailed and internally consistent, and the experimental results support the central mechanism rather than being obtained by fitting parameters to minimize QBER. The paper is also commendably explicit about its scope, including the restriction to loss-normalized, non-depolarizing channels and the fact that Eq. (S104) is only a sufficient condition. The auxiliary-wavelength interpolation is a heuristic but is tested honestly, including a case where wide spacing fails. The main weakness is that the load-bearing SO(3) assumption and the accuracy of the test rotations are not quantitatively characterized, which leaves the experimental validation somewhat conditional. Still, the ideas are novel and the evidence is substantial for a Letter.

major comments (3)
  1. [Link-segment reconstruction; S2.B/C] The reconstruction formulas rely on Mα, Mβ ∈ SO(3) at three points: Eq. (4) fills the third column by cross product, Eq. (6) cancels Mα using E0^T = Mα^{-1}, and Eq. (8) treats the extracted axes as an orthonormal frame. The paper explicitly states (Supplemental S1, after Eq. S1) that polarization-dependent loss and depolarization are not treated as compensable errors, but it never quantifies PDL or depolarization for the actual DUTs (1 m SMF, 5 m paddles, optical switch, 100 m spool). If a segment has even modest PDL, the measured intensity-normalized 3×3 matrix is not a rotation, and the SVD projection in S2.B/C will bias Mβ and hence Mα and the computed compensation. The reported sub-percent QBERs therefore do not distinguish a valid SO(3) regime from a hidden model violation. Please add a characterization of the DUTs' non-unitarity (e.g., Mueller polar decomposition or degree-of-pola
  2. [Eq. (4)–(8) and Supplemental S2] The protocol assumes the four test transformations N0..N3 are known exactly. In the experiment these N_i are implemented with the same Q-Q-Q-H stack, whose actual output rotations inherit the same retardance and positioning uncertainties the method is designed to overcome. Errors in the realized N_i rotate the extracted axes u_i, biasing Mβ; the subsequent orthonormalization removes only non-orthogonality, not a common systematic rotation. No independent calibration of the implemented N_i is reported. This is load-bearing because the reconstruction of Mβ and Mα is the basis for the compensation matrix in Eq. (3). Please quantify the accuracy of the realized N_i (for example, by measuring the actual Stokes response at each setting and comparing with the nominal N_i) or provide an error-budget argument that such errors are negligible at the reported QBER level.
  3. [Table I and four-DUT results] The experimental validation consists of single compensation runs: the stated x±y statistics are the mean and standard deviation over scanned input azimuths, not over repeated trials or independent reconstructions. This makes it difficult to assess run-to-run reproducibility, especially for the 0.051% and 0.055% figures, which are close to the measured hardware baseline of roughly 0.018% (Supplemental S3). Please report the number of independent reconstructions/compensation attempts and the spread of the resulting QBER values, or clearly state that each entry is a single run. This does not affect the mathematical claims, but it strengthens the empirical support.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 and caption] The text says the input state is prepared by 'a QWP followed by a linear polarizer'. If the polarizer comes after the QWP, the QWP would have no effect on the prepared state; presumably the order is a linear polarizer followed by a QWP. Please correct the wording or the figure labeling.
  2. [Synthesis, main text] Minor typo: 'we evaluate that the the sufficient condition is fulfilled' should read 'the sufficient condition'.
  3. [Supplemental S4.C] The interpolation uses a linear dependence on 1/λ and SLERP for the rotation axis. This is a reasonable heuristic, but it is not derived from a physical model; the paper should state more explicitly that this is an empirical model validated only on the tested DUTs and that failure for the wide-spacing spool case is expected under this model.
  4. [Supplemental S2.A] Equation (S124) gives the rotation axis extraction for general Θ. The main text and experiment use Θ=π/2; this choice is justified as maximizing the antisymmetric part. It would be helpful to state the expected noise amplification for small deviations of Θ from π/2, since the test rotations are themselves implemented with finite accuracy.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation chain is self-contained and the reported QBERs are independent measurements, not fitted quantities.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The Q-Q-Q-H synthesis theorem (Supplemental S1) proves reachability of arbitrary SO(3) Mueller matrices under Eq. (S104) via a winding-number argument built from the wave-plate Mueller matrices themselves; the angle solver matches the target matrix to the forward model using manufacturer retardance data, and no parameter is fitted to minimize measured QBER. The eight-Stokes reconstruction (Eqs. 4-9, S106-S132) is linear algebra on SO(3): C_i = E_i E_0^T = M_beta N_i M_beta^T, axes u_i come from antisymmetric parts, and M_alpha = M_beta^T E_0; none of these reduce to their inputs by construction. The test rotations N_i are defined matrices, and the reported QBERs are independent azimuth-scan measurements, not the optimization target. The explicit restriction to loss-normalized non-depolarizing channels (Supplemental S1, after Eq. S1) is a stated assumption, not a concealed circular step. The auxiliary-wavelength interpolation uses a fixed 1/lambda + SLERP model validated against measured Mueller matrices in S5; no free parameters are fit to residual QBER. Self-citations appear only in background lists and are not load-bearing. No uniqueness theorem is imported from prior work by the same authors; reachability is proven in the Supplemental Material. The 515 nm numerical check is explicitly described as not a proof, and the long-term feedback is an in-loop control demonstration rather than a separate prediction. The central claims are self-contained and externally benchmarked.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted physical constants appear in the central derivation; wave-plate angles are solved, not fit. The model relies on assumed SO(3) channels and manufacturer retardance data, and the auxiliary-wavelength interpolation is an empirical heuristic. The two listed free parameters are experimental or numerical settings rather than fitted physical constants.

free parameters (2)
  • auxiliary wavelength spacing = 2 nm (669/671 nm) or 28 nm (658.3/686.5 nm)
    The spacing between auxiliary and signal wavelengths is chosen empirically to suit the DUT's spectral dispersion; the paper gives no model predicting the required spacing.
  • solver residual tolerance = unspecified
    The Q-Q-Q-H angle-solving algorithm accepts a solution when the residual F_b(D) is below a tolerance; the tolerance value is not reported, which affects numerical reproducibility.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Optical link segments are loss-normalized, non-depolarizing channels represented by M in SO(3).
    Statement after Eq. (S1): 'Polarization dependent loss and depolarization are not included in the present model.' The entire reconstruction and synthesis rely on this.
  • domain assumption Wave-plate retardances and angle orientations are known from manufacturer data and calibration, so the Q-Q-Q-H Mueller matrix is M3 M2 M1 M+.
    Supplemental S1.A/S1.D evaluates the sufficient condition using datasheet retardance values; the angle-solving algorithm assumes this exact plate model.
  • ad hoc to paper Auxiliary-wavelength Mueller matrices interpolate linearly in axis-angle coordinates as a function of 1/lambda.
    Supplemental S4.C defines inverse-wavelength interpolation and SLERP; no first-principles guarantee is given, and the paper shows device-dependent accuracy.
  • domain assumption The compensator can realize the four known test rotations N0..N3 sufficiently accurately at the operating wavelength.
    Reconstruction Eqs. (6)-(8) assume Ei = M_beta Ni M_alpha with known Ni; implementation uses the same Q-Q-Q-H solver, so accuracy depends on waveplate calibration.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Broadband Polarization Compensation with Link Segment Reconstruction for Quantum Optical Links." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZJ55I5F3

@misc{pith2026260717400,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Broadband Polarization Compensation with Link Segment Reconstruction for Quantum Optical Links},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZJ55I5F3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.17400}
}
read the original abstract

Polarization-encoded quantum communication requires compensation of polarization transformations induced by the optical links. If the compensator is embedded between two channel segments, the transformations before and after the compensator must be treated separately. Moreover, standard three-wave-plate polarization controllers can become non-universal when their retardances deviate from their ideal values. To address these two challenges, we introduce a four-wave plate compensator that synthesizes arbitrary SO(3) polarization transformations over a broad wavelength range, and an eight-Stokes vector protocol that reconstructs the two link-segment Mueller matrices on either side of the compensator. Our experiment reveals that the four-plate sequence suppresses polarization-induced excess quantum bit error rate (QBER) to the sub-percent level at an operating wavelength more than 100 nm from the design wavelength without further optimization. Combined with two auxiliary wavelengths, our scheme tracks the temperature-driven drift of a strongly wavelength-sensitive fiber spool while keeping the excess QBER below 1%. These results support flexible compensator placement and wavelength channel selection, as well as non-interruptive polarization control in wavelength-division-multiplexed quantum optical links.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.17400 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Experimental setup. In the present implementation, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Long-term monitoring of a 100 m fiber spool with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Quantum cryptogra- phy: Public key distribution and coin tossing, Theoreti- cal Computer Science560, 7–11 (2014)

    2014

  2. [2]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and N. D. Mermin, Quan- tum cryptography without bell’s theorem, Physical Re- view Letters68, 557–559 (1992)

    1992

  3. [3]

    J. Chen, G. Wu, L. Xu, X. Gu, E. Wu, and H. Zeng, Stable quantum key distribution with active polarization control based on time-division multiplexing, New Journal of Physics11, 065004 (2009)

    2009

  4. [4]

    C. Wang, H. Guo, J. Ren, Y. Cao, C. Peng, and W. Liu, Experimental validation of dynamic polarization com- pensation in ground-satellite quantum key distribution, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy57, 1233–1237 (2014)

    2014

  5. [5]

    D.-D. Li, S. Gao, G.-C. Li, L. Xue, L.-W. Wang, C.-B. Lu, Y. Xiang, Z.-Y. Zhao, L.-C. Yan, Z.-Y. Chen, G. Yu, and J.-H. Liu, Field implementation of long-distance quantum key distribution over aerial fiber with fast polar- ization feedback, Optics Express26, 22793–22800 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Wengerowsky, S

    S. Wengerowsky, S. K. Joshi, F. Steinlechner, H. H¨ ubel, and R. Ursin, An entanglement-based wavelength- multiplexed quantum communication network, Nature 564, 225–228 (2018)

    2018

  7. [7]

    Agnesi, M

    C. Agnesi, M. Avesani, L. Calderaro, A. Stanco, G. Fo- letto, M. Zahidy, A. Scriminich, F. Vedovato, G. Vallone, and P. Villoresi, Simple quantum key distribution with qubit-based synchronization and a self-compensating po- larization encoder, Optica7, 284–290 (2020)

    2020

  8. [8]

    S. K. Joshi, D. Aktas, S. Wengerowsky, M. Lonˇ cari´ c, S. P. Neumann, B. Liu, T. Scheidl, G. C. Lorenzo, ˇZ. Samec, L. Kling, A. Qiu, M. Razavi, M. Stipˇ cevi´ c, J. G. Rarity, and R. Ursin, A trusted node–free eight-user metropoli- tan quantum communication network, Science Advances 6, eaba0959 (2020)

    2020

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Kupko, M

    T. Kupko, M. von Helversen, L. Rickert, J.-H. Schulze, A. Strittmatter, M. Gschrey, S. Rodt, S. Reitzenstein, and T. Heindel, Tools for the performance optimization of single-photon quantum key distribution, npj Quantum Information6, 29 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Y. Shi, T. Gerrits, and O. Slattery, Towards continuous fiber birefringence compensation with single-photon-level light, inCLEO 2023(Optica Publishing Group, 2023) p. JTh2A.24

    2023

  3. [11]

    W.-B. Luo, Y. Li, Y.-H. Li, X.-Y. Tao, H.-Z. Chen, A. Hua, W.-Q. Cai, J. Yin, J.-G. Ren, S.-K. Liao, and C.-Z. Peng, Research on polarization compensation for practical satellite-based quantum key distribution, Op- tics Communications570, 130925 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Y. Tan, J. Wang, J. Wu, and Z. He, Real-time polariza- tion compensation method in quantum communication based on channel muller parameters detection, Commu- nications Engineering3, 57 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Y. Zhou, P. Malik, F. Fertig, M. Bock, T. Bauer, T. van Leent, W. Zhang, C. Becher, and H. Weinfurter, Long- lived quantum memory enabling atom-photon entangle- ment over 101 km of telecom fiber, PRX Quantum5, 020307 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    H. Ko, S. Kechrimparis, Y. H. Ko, K. J. Kim, B. S. Choi, C. M. Kropf, C. J. Youn, and J. Bae, Secure quantum communication with the preservation of optimal mea- surements, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Commu- nications43, 2798–2809 (2025)

    2025

  7. [15]

    X. Shi, Y. Li, J. Du, L. Zhou, R. Yang, E. T. Lim, S. S. Mohanraj, M. Zhao, X. Chen, and X. Wang, Integrated polarization-entangled photon source for wavelength-multiplexed quantum networks, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.22680 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Zhang, H

    X. Zhang, H. Zhang, R. M. Chua, J. Eng, M. Me- unier, J. A. Grieve, W.-B. Gao, and A. Ling, Polarization-encoded quantum key distribution with a room-temperature telecom single-photon emitter, Na- tional Science Review12, 10.1093/nsr/nwaf147 (2025)

    2025 doi

  9. [17]

    G. M. Talcott, A. I. Hess, L. d’Avossa, S. J. Kohlert, F. I. Yeh, J. H. Chen, J. J. Mambretti, T. M. Rambo, G. S. Kanter, and J. M. Thomas, Synchronized distribution of quantum entanglement coexisting with high-rate, broad- band classical optical communications over a real-wor...

    2026 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Ulrich and A

    R. Ulrich and A. Simon, Polarization optics of twisted single-mode fibers, Applied Optics18, 2241–2251 (1979)

    1979

  11. [19]

    Chartier, A

    T. Chartier, A. Hideur, C. ¨Ozkul, F. Sanchez, and G. M. St´ ephan, Measurement of the elliptical birefringence of single-mode optical fibers, Applied Optics40, 5343–5353 (2001)

    2001

  12. [20]

    P. R. Banner, S. L. Rolston, and J. W. Britton, bifrost: A first-principles model of polarization mode dispersion in optical fiber, Physical Review Applied25, 034054 (2026)

    2026

  13. [21]

    J. Wu, Y. Tan, L. Zhang, Y. Dou, Z. Song, J. Jia, R. Shu, Z. He, and J. Wang, Research on a real-time polarization compensation method for dynamic quantum communi- cation terminals, Optics and Lasers in Engineering149, 106794 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Simon and N

    R. Simon and N. Mukunda, Minimal three-component SU(2) gadget for polarization optics, Physics Letters A 143, 165–169 (1990)

    1990

  15. [23]

    Bagini, R

    V. Bagini, R. Borghi, F. Gori, M. Santarsiero, F. Frezza, G. Schettini, and G. S. Spagnolo, The simon - mukunda polarization gadget, European Journal of Physics17, 279 (1996)

    1996

  16. [24]

    Wang, J.-G

    S.-K. Wang, J.-G. Ren, C.-Z. Peng, S. Jiang, and X.-B. Wang, Realization of arbitrary inverse unitary transfor- mation of single mode fibre by using three wave plates, Chinese Physics Letters24, 2471 (2007)

    2007

  17. [25]

    V. K. Yadav, V. Venkataraman, and J. Ghosh, Telecom source of tunable polarization-entanglement distribution up to 100-km for multi-user qkd over metro-area fiber- optic networks, APL Quantum2, 10.1063/5.0241324 (2025)

    2025 doi

  18. [26]

    Seo, J.-H

    H. Seo, J.-H. Kim, U. S. Kim, S.-Y. Yoo, H. S. Park, S. M. 7 Lee, Y.-C. Jeong, and Y.-H. Kim, Hyperentanglement- enabled noise-resilient quantum communication over a 40 km intra-city fiber network, Optica13, 977–983 (2026)

    2026

  19. [27]

    Aiello and J

    A. Aiello and J. Woerdman, Linear algebra for mueller calculus, arXiv preprint math-ph/0412061 (2004)

    2004 arXiv

  20. [28]

    D. H. Goldstein,Polarized light(CRC press, 2017)

    2017

  21. [29]

    See Supplemental Material for derivations of the nonideal wave plate reachability conditions, details of the Q-Q-Q- H angle-solving algorithm, the eight-Stokes vector recon- struction protocol, and additional experimental methods and results, which includes Ref. [38]

  22. [30]

    G. B. Xavier, N. Walenta, G. Vilela de Faria, G. P. Tem- por˜ ao, N. Gisin, H. Zbinden, and J. P. von der Weid, Ex- perimental polarization encoded quantum key distribu- tion over optical fibres with real-time continuous birefrin- gence compensation, New Journal of Physics11, ...

    2009

  23. [31]

    Abasifard, C

    M. Abasifard, C. Cholsuk, R. G. Pousa, A. Kumar, A. Zand, T. Riel, D. K. L. Oi, and T. Vogl, The ideal wavelength for daylight free-space quantum key distribu- tion, APL Quantum1, 10.1063/5.0186767 (2024)

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    Cholsuk, F

    C. Cholsuk, F. A˘ glarcı, D. K. Oi, S. Ate¸ s, and T. Vogl, A decoy-like protocol for quantum key distribution: En- hancing the performance with imperfect single photon sources, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.09454 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    H. Dong, P. Shum, M. Yan, J. Zhou, G. Ning, Y. Gong, and C. Wu, Measurement of mueller matrix for an op- tical fiber system with birefringence and polarization- dependent loss or gain, Optics communications274, 116–123 (2007)

    2007

  26. [34]

    Tentori and A

    D. Tentori and A. Garcia-Weidner, Jones birefringence in twisted single-mode optical fibers, Optics Express21, 31725–31739 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Steininger, T

    E. Steininger, T. Mieling, and P. T. Chru´ sciel, Elastically induced phase-shift and birefringence in optical fibers, Open Research Europe5, 99 (2025)

    2025

  28. [36]

    Deutscher Wetterdienst, Climate Data Center, Daily station observations of soil temperature station data for germany,https://opendata.dwd.de/climate_ environment/CDC/observations_germany/climate/ daily/soil_temperature/, accessed 2026-07-19

    2026

  29. [37]

    International Telecommunication Union,Recommenda- tion ITU-T G.694.1: Spectral grids for WDM applica- tions: DWDM frequency grid, Recommendation ITU-T G.694.1 (International Telecommunication Union, 2020)

    2020

  30. [38]

    K. Shoemake, Animating rotation with quaternion curves, inProceedings of the 12th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, SIG- GRAPH ’85 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1985) p. 245–254. 8 Supplemental Material S1. CONSTRUCTI...

    1985

  31. [39]

    Choose a trial value ofD∈[−π, π)

  32. [40]

    (S26): 2χR1 = arcsin (cosDsin ∆δ 3 cos ∆δ2 + cos ∆δ3 sin ∆δ2).(S33)

    Calculate 2χ R1 from Eq. (S26): 2χR1 = arcsin (cosDsin ∆δ 3 cos ∆δ2 + cos ∆δ3 sin ∆δ2).(S33)

  33. [41]

    (S32) for all admissible branches ofB

    Solve Eq. (S32) for all admissible branches ofB. For each branchb, continue the following steps separately

  34. [42]

    (S30): θ(b) 1 (D) =ψ R0 − 1 2 atan2 (cos 2χR1 sin ∆δ1 sinB b + cos ∆δ1 sin 2χR1,cos 2χ R1 cosB b),(S34) where 2ψR0 = atan2(SR0,y, SR0,x)

    For the selected branchB b(D), calculateθ 1 from Eq. (S30): θ(b) 1 (D) =ψ R0 − 1 2 atan2 (cos 2χR1 sin ∆δ1 sinB b + cos ∆δ1 sin 2χR1,cos 2χ R1 cosB b),(S34) where 2ψR0 = atan2(SR0,y, SR0,x)

  35. [43]

    Apply the first QWP to obtain ⃗SR1 =M 1 ⃗SR0,(S35) and calculate its azimuthal coordinate 2ψR1 = atan2(SR1,y, SR1,x).(S36)

  36. [44]

    (S27): θ(b) 2 (D) =ψ R1 − 1 2 atan2 (sin ∆δ3 sin ∆δ2 cosD−cos ∆δ 3 cos ∆δ2,sin ∆δ 3 sinD).(S37)

    Calculateθ 2 from Eq. (S27): θ(b) 2 (D) =ψ R1 − 1 2 atan2 (sin ∆δ3 sin ∆δ2 cosD−cos ∆δ 3 cos ∆δ2,sin ∆δ 3 sinD).(S37)

  37. [45]

    Calculate θ(b) 3 (D) =θ (b) 2 (D) + D 2 .(S38) 12

  38. [46]

    Build the Mueller matrix of the Q-Q-H sequenceM QQH =M 3M2M1 using the candidate angles θ(b) 1 (D), θ(b) 2 (D), θ(b) 3 (D)

  39. [47]

    Evaluate the residual Fb(D) =∥M QQH −M∥ F .(S39)

  40. [48]

    at least

    For each branchb, numerically solve the scalar equationF b(D) = 0 forD∈[−π, π). A valid solution on branch bexists only when this equation has a root. We locate the root by minimizing the residualF b(D) and accept the solution only when the residual is below a specified tolera...

  41. [49]

    We use the phase-fixed Jones representative J= a b −b∗ a∗ ,|a| 2 +|b| 2 = 1.(S134) The remaining sign ambiguityJ→ −Jleaves the Mueller matrix unchanged

    Mueller to Jones LetM∈SO(3) be the three-component Mueller matrix. We use the phase-fixed Jones representative J= a b −b∗ a∗ ,|a| 2 +|b| 2 = 1.(S134) The remaining sign ambiguityJ→ −Jleaves the Mueller matrix unchanged. The rotation angleϑis determined from ϑ= arccos Tr(M)−1 2...

  42. [50]

    short fiber

    Jones to Mueller Conversely, if the Jones matrix is written in the form of Eq. (S134), with|a| 2 +|b| 2 = 1, its corresponding three- component Mueller matrix is M=   1−2[Re(b) 2 + Im(a)2] 2[Im(b) Re(b) + Re(a) Im(a)] 2[Im(b) Im(a)−Re(a) Re(b)] 2[Im(b) Re(b)−Re(a) Im(a)] 1−2...

    2025

Pith tools

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