Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Quantum entanglement distribution coexisting with high-rate, broadband classical optical communications over a real-world fiber connecting remote, synchronized nodes

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read O-band polarization-entangled photons survive a 24.4-km fiber trip alongside 1.6 Tbps of classical traffic with unchanged Bell-state fidelity.

desk verdict Solid and useful coexistence result; the measured 94.2% fidelity under a fully-loaded C-band holds up, but the 36.8 Tbps extrapolation is not tested. read the letter →

arxiv 2602.00253 v2 pith:642TAICT submitted 2026-01-30 quant-ph

Gina M. Talcott , Ahnnika I. Hess , Laura d'Avossa , Scott J. Kohlert , Fei I. Yeh , Jim Hao Chen , Joe J. Mambretti , Tim M. Rambo
show 3 more authors
Gregory S. Kanter Jordan M. Thomas Prem Kumar
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords quantumentanglementwavelength-divisionmultiplexingcoexistencespontaneousRamanscatteringO-bandC-bandWhiteRabbitsynchronizationdeployedfiber
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 shows that entanglement can be distributed over a real-world installed fiber link while high-power classical communications occupy the same fiber. Using O-band quantum channels at 1290/1310 nm, a fully loaded C-band classical system at 21.4 dBm, and an L-band White Rabbit synchronization signal, the authors achieve Bell-state fidelity of 94.2 ± 0.4% — identical to the dark-fiber case. They identify spontaneous Raman scattering as the main noise source and show that wavelength selection (anti-Stokes, <1300 nm) plus narrow filtering suppresses it. The result matters because it suggests quantum networks can piggyback on existing commercial fiber infrastructure without dedicated dark fiber, which is a major obstacle to scaling.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is wavelength-division multiplexing with a large spectral gap between quantum and classical channels: the O-band quantum signal at 1290 nm sits on the anti-Stokes side of the Raman gain profile relative to the C-band classical load, where spontaneous Raman scattering is orders of magnitude weaker. Narrow Fabry-Pérot etalon filters (7-GHz FWHM), dense WDM demultiplexing (>100 dB isolation), and a 300-ps coincidence time window further reject Raman noise, while a White Rabbit optical clock at 1590 nm synchronizes the remote nodes to ~3-ps RMS jitter, enabling tight temporal filtering. This combination selects the low-noise region of the O-band spectrum (1260-1290 nm) wher

What would settle it

Replace the ASE-filled portions of the C-band with modulated 800-Gbps channels at the same aggregate power (or vary the modulation format) and re-measure the O-band SpRS counts or the |Φ+⟩ fidelity; any significant change in noise or fidelity would invalidate the data-rate-independence assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that polarization-entangled photon pairs at 1290/1310 nm can be distributed over 24.4 km of installed metropolitan fiber while coexisting with a fully-loaded C-band classical optical line system operating at 21.4 dBm aggregate launch power and an L-band optical synchronization channel, with no measurable degradation in entanglement quality. The authors report Bell-state fidelity to the |Φ+⟩ state of 94.2 ± 0.4% in both dark-fiber and coexistence configurations, and a fidelity of 98.8 ± 0.1% between the coexistence and dark-fiber states, indicating that spontaneous Raman scattering from the high-power classical channels is effectively suppressed by the chosen wavelength a

Load-bearing premise

The claim that spontaneous Raman scattering from a C-band spectrum filled with amplified spontaneous emission is identical to that from real modulated data channels, so that the measured coexistence fidelity at 1.6 Tbps represents the quantum performance at the extrapolated 36.8 Tbps.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Quantum networks can be deployed on the same fiber that carries commercial WDM traffic, eliminating the need for dedicated dark fiber in metropolitan links.
  • The demonstrated coexistence at 21.4 dBm aggregate classical power and 1.6 Tbps data rate is compatible with current telecom line systems; the authors argue the ASE-filled spectrum could carry up to 36.8 Tbps without changing the quantum noise level.
  • For O-band quantum channels, the paper provides a wavelength-allocation rule: channels below 1300 nm (especially 1260-1290 nm) offer the best visibility, while 1310 nm suffers roughly 6x more Raman noise.
  • Picosecond-level White Rabbit synchronization adds negligible timing jitter (about 3 ps RMS) relative to the 70-ps photon pulses, so remote quantum measurements can be synchronized over deployed fiber without degrading entanglement.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The extrapolation to 36.8 Tbps rests on the assumption that Raman noise is independent of the classical data modulation; if modulated channels generate a different Raman spectrum than ASE at the same total power, the real-world noise ceiling could be higher. A direct comparison of ASE-filled versus fully data-filled C-band would settle this.
  • The O-band's higher fiber loss (about 0.43 dB/km) will become more limiting at 50-100 km distances; even so, the orders-of-magnitude SpRS advantage over C-band/C-band coexistence may still favor O-band quantum channels for long-haul shared fiber.
  • Because the scheme relies on polarization encoding, polarization-mode dispersion and slow polarization drift on longer deployed links may require active polarization tracking; the current experiment's relatively short 24.4-km link may not reveal these effects.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports a field demonstration of O-band polarization-entangled photon pair distribution over 24.4 km of deployed fiber between Evanston and Chicago, simultaneously with a fully-loaded C-band optical line system (OLS) carrying two 800-Gbps channels plus ASE filling (21.4 dBm aggregate launch power) and an L-band White Rabbit synchronization signal. The authors measure the SpRS spectrum generated by the broad C-band source in the O-band, select 1290 nm for the quantum signal, and use narrow spectral filtering and a 300-ps coincidence window to suppress Raman noise. They report a Bell-state fidelity of 94.2 ± 0.4% with respect to |Φ+⟩ in both dark-fiber and coexistence conditions, and a fidelity of 98.8 ± 0.1% between the coexistence and dark-fiber states. They also present a wavelength-dependent SNR and visibility simulation based on measured loss and SpRS spectra to motivate the wavelength choice. The abstract and outlook claim that the system is suitable for 36.8-Tbps classical transmission without impact on the quantum channel.

Significance. If the claims are fully supported, this is a notable step toward integrating entanglement-based quantum networks into real-world telecommunications infrastructure. The direct measurement of unchanged Bell-state fidelity under a realistic high-power C-band load on deployed fiber with remote synchronized nodes is a valuable experimental contribution, especially because the OLS is a commercial system with ASE-filled spectrum, rather than a single-wavelength source. The SpRS spectral data for a broadband C-band pump are also useful for wavelength planning. The paper’s strengths include the direct comparison of dark-fiber and coexistence states, the use of deployed fiber, and the characterization of synchronization timing jitter. However, the extrapolation to 36.8 Tbps rests on an untested assumption about the equivalence of ASE and data-modulated channels for SpRS generation; this overreach does not undermine the measured coexistence result but does weaken the headline capacity claim.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2A, Eqs. (1)–(4) and Fig. 3(b)] The statement that classical data transmission 'could be increased to 36.8 Tbps without changing the impact on the quantum system' (end of §2A) and the corresponding record-bandwidth framing in the Abstract and §4 are not directly supported by the experiment. The measured coexistence scenario uses two 800-Gbps data channels with the remainder of the C-band filled by ASE. The argument that replacing ASE with modulated data channels has no effect on SpRS is cited to refs. [26,43] but is not tested here. SpRS may depend on the power spectral density distribution across the C-band if the Raman gain spectrum is not flat, and modulated channels could introduce nonlinear effects absent from broadband ASE. A concrete remedy would be to compare the O-band SpRS spectrum or the measured fidelity when the ASE is replaced by additional data-modulated channels at the same aggregate power. Without such
  2. [§2A, Eqs. (1)–(4), Fig. 3(b)] The wavelength-allocation simulation in Fig. 3(b) is presented as providing 'insights into the single channel quantum noise levels' and justifying the 1290-nm selection, but it is not an independent forward model. The simulation anchors all absolute SNR values to the measured SNR at 1290 nm and rescales the measured SpRS and loss spectra; the visibility curves are derived from the same measured quantities. As a result, the conclusion that 1260–1290 nm offers the best visibility is largely a restatement of the measured SpRS spectrum rather than a prediction validated by an independent measurement. The text should clarify that Fig. 3(b) is a scaling exercise for illustration, not a test of the wavelength-selection hypothesis.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are typographical errors that should be corrected: 'classsical' in the Introduction, 'nosie' in §2A, 'Univeristy' in the affiliations, and '1.6-Tpbs' in the summary paragraph. Also, 'SpRs' appears in §2B while 'SpRS' is used elsewhere; please standardize.
  2. [§2A] The SpRS characterization in Fig. 3(a) was performed at 18.3-dBm launch power, while the coexistence experiment uses 21.4 dBm. The text states that the reported spectrum is normalized by launch power and later scaled, but it would be helpful to explicitly state the linear-scaling assumption and its validity in the relevant power range.
  3. [§2B] The description of the White Rabbit jitter measurement is clear, but the inset diagrams in Fig. 4 are small and difficult to read, particularly the distinction between the one-TDC and two-TDC configurations. A larger or simplified schematic would improve reproducibility.
  4. [§3] The fidelity and visibility values are reported with Monte Carlo errors assuming Poisson statistics, but the text does not give the total coincidence counts or integration time for the tomography measurements. Reporting these (or the raw count matrices as supplementary data) would strengthen the statistical claims.
  5. [References] The novelty claim 'first implementation of entanglement-based quantum communications between two remote nodes coexisting with independent classical communications traffic' should be carefully checked against ref. [48] and other recent field trials; the authors may wish to add a sentence comparing the architecture and traffic load to those works.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Directly measured coexistence fidelity is self-contained; the 36.8-Tbps extrapolation rests on an untested but non-circular assumption.

full rationale

The central experimental result—94.2 ± 0.4% fidelity to |Φ+⟩ under a 21.4-dBm fully loaded C-band OLS plus L-band clock, indistinguishable from the dark-fiber case, with 98.8 ± 0.1% fidelity to the dark-fiber state—is obtained by direct two-photon interference and quantum state tomography. No parameter of that result is fitted to the coexistence outcome; it is a measurement. The wavelength-allocation curves in Fig. 3(b) are explicitly labeled as simulations and are calibrated to measured inputs: “The SNR across the O-band is calculated by normalizing measured loss and SpRS noise spectra to the measured SNR at 1290 nm in our experiment.” Equations (1)–(4) propagate measured SpRS, loss, and herald-efficiency spectra; they are a transparent interpolation/rescaling of data rather than an independent derivation, but the paper does not use them to infer the directly measured entanglement fidelity. The 36.8-Tbps extrapolation does depend on the cited claim that SpRS “is only dependent on the wavelength and power rather than the classical data rate [26,43],” and the equivalence of ASE-filled spectrum to additional modulated data channels is not experimentally tested here. This is a support gap and a correctness risk, but not circularity: it is an assumption imported from prior work, not a conclusion that reduces to this paper’s own fitted inputs. Refs. [43] and [51] are prior experiments by the same group, but they are not invoked as a uniqueness theorem, and the core coexistence demonstration stands on the direct measurements reported in this paper. No load-bearing circular step is identifiable.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central entanglement-fidelity result is a direct measurement with no fitted parameters. The wavelength-allocation analysis (Fig. 3b) uses measured anchors (SNR at 1290 nm, loss spectrum, SpRS spectrum) and is a rescaling rather than a first-principles derivation. The main load-bearing assumptions are domain assumptions about SpRS behavior (unpolarized, power-only dependence, linear scaling) and the stability of the source between runs.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption SpRS noise from classical light in optical fiber is approximately unpolarized over long fibers
    Invoked in Section 3 to justify that all polarization measurement bases are equally affected by SpRS noise; sourced from refs. [43,65] and not directly measured in this experiment. If SpRS were partially polarized, the fidelity comparison across bases could hide polarization-dependent noise.
  • domain assumption SpRS depends only on wavelength and launch power, not on the classical data modulation or data rate
    Used in Section 2A and the Outlook to argue that replacing ASE-filled spectrum with real data channels (the 36.8-Tbps extrapolation) would not change the impact on the quantum channel; sourced from refs. [26,43]. This is the load-bearing assumption behind the '36 Tbps without impact' claim and is not tested in this experiment.
  • domain assumption The ASE-filled C-band spectrum produces the same SpRS as the actual 800-Gbps data channels
    Implied by Section 2A's statement that 'total transmitted classical power over a constant wavelength span is the relevant variable' for SpRS. This is necessary for the measured coexistence fidelity under 1.6 Tbps to represent the noise under a fully-loaded data system.
  • domain assumption SpRS scales linearly with classical launch power
    Used to normalize the SpRS spectrum measured at 18.3 dBm (Fig. 3a) to the 21.4-dBm launch power used in the entanglement runs. The manuscript does not test the linearity of this scaling, though it is standard for SpRS.
  • standard math Poisson statistics govern photon counting for the purposes of error estimation
    All reported error bars on visibilities and fidelities are Monte Carlo errors assuming Poisson photon-counting statistics (Section 3). This is a standard assumption for SNSPD counting experiments.
  • domain assumption The entangled photon source and polarization alignment are stable between the dark-fiber and coexistence measurement runs
    The comparison between the two scenarios assumes no drift in pump power, polarization alignment, or detector efficiency. The manuscript notes that the small observed variations 'could be due to experimental fluctuations in the pump power or alignment' (Section 3), acknowledging this assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum entanglement distribution coexisting with high-rate, broadband classical optical communications over a real-world fiber connecting remote, synchronized nodes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/642TAICT

@misc{pith2026260200253,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum entanglement distribution coexisting with high-rate, broadband classical optical communications over a real-world fiber connecting remote, synchronized nodes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/642TAICT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.00253}
}
read the original abstract

Compatibility with existing classical network infrastructure offers a scalable path towards deploying large-scale quantum networks. Here, we demonstrate O-band polarization-encoded quantum entanglement distribution over an installed 24.4-km fiber while coexisting with a state-of-the-art fully-loaded C-band classical communications line system and a picosecond-level precision L-band synchronization signal. The classical system carries two 800-Gbps channels while the remainder of the C-band is filled with amplified spontaneous emission, as is standard for such state-of-the-art communications systems. We examine the spontaneous Raman scattering spectrum generated from this broadband C-band light and offer insights into wavelength allocation for O-band quantum channels. Optimal wavelength selection and narrow filtering enable well-preserved Bell state fidelity when coexisting with 21.4-dBm aggregate launch power across the C-band suitable for 36-Tbps transmission. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first implementation of entanglement-based quantum communications between two remote nodes coexisting with independent classical communications traffic. We demonstrate coexistence of quantum entanglement with ultra-high power levels and record classical bandwidth, offering promise for real-world entanglement-based networking integrated within high-capacity communications infrastructure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.00253 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Entanglement is distributed over 24.4 km of deployed fiber from Evanston to Chicago. The quantum signal is mul￾tiplexed to propagate with a state-of-the-art classical commu￾nications system and optical synchronization clock. (EPPS = entangled photon pair source, OLS Tx (Rx) = classical optical line system transmitter (receiver), SNSPD = superconducting nanowire single photon detector, TDC = time-to-digital con￾verte… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. , where the optical power is measured directly after the transmitter). Because the dominant source of noise for quantum communications in this system is contributed by spontaneous Raman scattering [43], total transmitted classical power over a constant wavelength span is the relevant variable for determin￾ing the amount of generated noise. Significantly, the fact that the power spectrum remains constant regardless o… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Left axis (red dots): Single photon counts across the O-band from spontaneous Raman scattering (SpRS) over the 24.4-km deployed fiber due to the classical OLS at 18.3 dBm. Counts are reported in kilo-counts per second (kilo-cps) nor￾malized by classical launch power and tunable bandpass filter bandwidth. Right axis (black stars): Transmission loss over the 24.4-km deployed fiber as a function of wavelength. (b) … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Histograms of photon arrival time difference relative to an identical signal copy for either one TDC (black stars) or two TDCs synchronized by White Rabbit (red dots). Inserts show diagrams of the experimental setups for jitter measure￾ments on (a) one TDC and (b) two …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Diagram of experimental implementation of entanglement distribution. The Sagnac loop source generates polarization en￾tangled photon pairs at 1290 nm and 1310 nm by second harmonic generation cascaded with non-degenerate spontaneous paramet￾ric down-conversion. The 131…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Two-photon interference curves after entanglement dis￾tribution over the deployed 24-km fiber for (a) dark fiber and (b) coexistence with the C-band OLS (operating at 21.4-dBm launch power) and the 1590-nm optical clock. Coincidence counts are reported for 8 second int…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Real and imaginary parts of calculated density ma￾trices of the entangled photon state after distribution in the 24.4-km link for (a) dark fiber and (b) coexistence with the OLS and synchronization channel. Fidelity to the |Φ+⟩ Bell state is 94.2 ± 0.4% for both measur…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Broadband Polarization Compensation with Link Segment Reconstruction for Quantum Optical Links

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A four-wave-plate stack plus an eight-Stokes-vector protocol can compensate two fiber segments around an embedded controller, holding polarization-induced excess QBER below 1% even 118 nm off the design wavelength.

  2. Towards Quantum Networks: Characterizing Raman Noise over Metropolitan-scale Fiber Network

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Field measurements on a 7 km metro fiber show C-band Raman noise from O-band classical light matches lab trends, with extra local spectral anomalies, and identify quieter DWDM channels for quantum use.

  3. Optimization of C-band quantum traffic coexisting with O-band classical traffic: preliminary results

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A fourth-degree polynomial spectral profile, scaled by source power and effective fiber length, fits measured C-band SpRS from 1310 nm commercial SFPs and identifies a noise minimum near 1535 nm.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Wehner, D

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Science362, eaam9288 (2018)

    2018

  2. [2]

    H. J. Kimble, Nature453, 1023 (2008)

    2008

  3. [3]

    S. K. Joshi, D. Aktas, S. Wengerowsky,et al., Sci. Adv.6, eaba0959 (2020)

    2020

  4. [4]

    Alshowkan, B

    M. Alshowkan, B. P . Williams, P . G. Evans,et al., PRX Quantum2, 040304 (2021)

    2021

  5. [5]

    Valivarthi, M

    R. Valivarthi, M. G. Puigibert, Q. Zhou,et al., Nat. Photonics10, 676 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    S. J. Ben Y oo, S. K. Singh, M. B. On,et al., IEEE Commun. Mag.62, 76 (2024)

    2024

  7. [7]

    I. A. Burenkov, A. Semionov, Hala,et al., Opt. Express31, 11431 (2023)

    2023

  8. [8]

    Zhang, R

    Y . Zhang, R. Broberg, A. Zhu,et al., Science389, 940 (2025)

    2025

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    Townsend, Electron

    P . Townsend, Electron. Lett.33, 188 (1997)

    1997

  2. [10]

    T. E. Chapuran, P . Toliver, N. A. Peters,et al., New J. Phys.11, 105001 (2009)

    2009

  3. [11]

    Aleksic, F

    S. Aleksic, F . Hipp, D. Winkler,et al., Opt. Express23, 10359 (2015)

    2015

  4. [12]

    J. F . Dynes, W. W.-S. Tam, A. Plews,et al., Sci. Reports6, 35149 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    Eraerds, N

    P . Eraerds, N. Walenta, M. Legré,et al., New J. Phys.12, 063027 (2010)

    2010

  6. [14]

    B. Qi, W. Zhu, L. Qian, and H.-K. Lo, New J. Phys.12, 103042 (2010)

    2010

  7. [15]

    K. A. Patel, J. F . Dynes, I. Choi,et al., Phys. Rev. X2, 041010 (2012)

    2012

  8. [16]

    Geng, G.-J

    J.-Q. Geng, G.-J. Fan-Yuan, S. Wang,et al., Opt. Lett.46, 6099 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Geng, G.-J

    J.-Q. Geng, G.-J. Fan-Yuan, S. Wang,et al., Opt. Lett.46, 2573 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Gavignet, E

    P . Gavignet, E. Pincemin, F . Herviou,et al., J. Light. Technol.42, 1321 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Mao, B.-X

    Y . Mao, B.-X. Wang, C. Zhao,et al., Opt. Express26, 6010 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    F . Honz, F . Prawits, O. Alia,et al., J. Light. Technol.41, 3587 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    T. Dou, R. Liu, S. Liao,et al., Opt. Express32, 28356 (2024). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    2024

  14. [22]

    Coexistence Transmission of 33.4-Tb/s O-band Coherent Classical Channels and a C-band QKD Channel over 80 km,

    S. Beppu, D. J. Elson, S. Murai,et al., “Coexistence Transmission of 33.4-Tb/s O-band Coherent Classical Channels and a C-band QKD Channel over 80 km,” inOptical Fiber Communication Conference (OFC) 2025 (2025), paper T u3D.2,(Optica Publishing Group, 2025), p. Tu3D.2

    2025

  15. [23]

    N. A. Peters, P . Toliver, T. E. Chapuran,et al., New J. Phys.11, 045012 (2009). Publisher: IOP Publishing

    2009

  16. [24]

    Tanaka, M

    A. Tanaka, M. Fujiwara, S. W. Nam,et al., Opt. Express16, 11354 (2008). Publisher: Optica Publishing Group

    2008

  17. [25]

    Grünenfelder, R

    F . Grünenfelder, R. Sax, A. Boaron, and H. Zbinden, Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 124001 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Wang, K.-H

    L.-J. Wang, K.-H. Zou, W. Sun,et al., Phys. Rev. A95, 012301 (2017)

    2017

  19. [27]

    J. F . Dynes, A. Wonfor, W. W.-S. Tam,et al., npj Quantum Inf.5, 101 (2019). Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2019

  20. [28]

    X. Peng, P . Lü, Y . Ying,et al., J. Light. Technol.43, 10806 (2025)

    2025

  21. [29]

    Kumar, H

    R. Kumar, H. Qin, and R. Alléaume, New J. Phys.17, 043027 (2015). Publisher: IOP Publishing

    2015

  22. [30]

    Kawakami, H

    T. Kawakami, H. Kawahara, T. Okamura, and W. Maeda, Entropy27 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    T. A. Eriksson, T. Hirano, B. J. Puttnam,et al., Commun. Phys.2, 9 (2019). Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2019

  24. [32]

    A. A. E. Hajomer, I. Derkach, V. C. Usenko,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 170804 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    R. C. Berrevoets, T. Middelburg, R. F . L. Vermeulen,et al., Commun. Phys.5, 186 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Valivarthi, P

    R. Valivarthi, P . Umesh, C. John,et al., Quantum Sci. Technol.4, 045002 (2019)

    2019

  27. [35]

    Demonstration of a coexis- tence scheme between polarization-entangled QKD and classical data channels,

    F . Hipp, M. Hentschel, S. Aleksic,et al., “Demonstration of a coexis- tence scheme between polarization-entangled QKD and classical data channels,” inQuantum Optics,, vol. 9900 J. Stuhler and A. J. Shields, eds., International Society for Optics and Photonics (SPIE, 2016), p. 99000P

    2016

  28. [36]

    Y .-R. Fan, Y . Luo, Z.-C. Zhang,et al., Phys. Rev. A108, L020601 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    Field trial of a dynamically switched quantum network supporting co-existence of entanglement, prepare-and-measure qkd and classical channels,

    R. Wang, R. Y ang, M. J. Clark,et al., “Field trial of a dynamically switched quantum network supporting co-existence of entanglement, prepare-and-measure qkd and classical channels,” in49th European Conference on Optical Communications (ECOC 2023),, vol. 2023 (2023), pp. 1682–1685

    2023

  30. [38]

    Holloway, E

    C. Holloway, E. Meyer-Scott, C. Erven, and T. Jennewein, Opt. Express 19, 20597 (2011)

    2011

  31. [39]

    Luo, Y .-R

    Y . Luo, Y .-R. Fan, K. Guo,et al., Phys. Rev. A112, 062602 (2025)

    2025

  32. [40]

    Kapoor, S

    K. Kapoor, S. Xie, J. Chung,et al., IEEE J. Quantum Electron.59, 1 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Ramesh, D

    A. Ramesh, D. R. Reilly, K. F . Lee,et al., Opt. Commun.576, 131305 (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    Valivarthi, L

    R. Valivarthi, L. Narváez, S. I. Davis,et al., J. Light. Technol.40, 7668 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    J. M. Thomas, G. S. Kanter, and P . Kumar, Opt. Express31, 43035 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Distribution of fiber- generated polarization entangled photon-pairs over 100 km of standard fiber in oc-192 wdm environment,

    C. Liang, K. F . Lee, J. Chen, and P . Kumar, “Distribution of fiber- generated polarization entangled photon-pairs over 100 km of standard fiber in oc-192 wdm environment,” in2006 Optical Fiber Communica- tion Conference and the National Fiber Optic Engineers Conference, (2006)

    2006

  37. [45]

    Sauge, M

    S. Sauge, M. Swillo, S. Albert-Seifried,et al., Opt. Express15, 6926 (2007)

    2007

  38. [46]

    Quantum entanglement distribution coexisting with classical fiber communication,

    C. Yuan, H. Yu, Z. Zhang,et al., “Quantum entanglement distribution coexisting with classical fiber communication,” inAsia Communications and Photonics Conference (ACPC) 2019,(Optica Publishing Group, 2019), p. T2F .2

    2019

  39. [47]

    X. Jing, C. Qian, X. Zheng,et al., Chip3, 100083 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    Rahmouni, P

    A. Rahmouni, P . S. Kuo, Y . S. Li-Baboud,et al., J. Opt. Commun. Netw. 16, 781 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    M. B. On, R. Proietti, G. Gül,et al., J. Light. Technol.42, 3504 (2024)

    2024

  42. [50]

    M. Sena, M. Flament, S. Andrewski,et al., J. Opt. Commun. Netw.17, 1072 (2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    J. M. Thomas, F . I. Y eh, J. H. Chen,et al., Optica11, 1700 (2024)

    2024

  44. [52]

    Cantono, R

    M. Cantono, R. Schmogrow, M. Newland,et al., J. Light. Technol.38, 1050 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    Mambretti, J

    J. Mambretti, J. Chen, and F . Y eh, Comput. Networks61, 118 (2014). Special issue on Future Internet Testbeds – Part I

    2014

  46. [54]

    McKenzie, A

    W. McKenzie, A. M. Richards, S. Patel,et al., Appl. Phys. Lett.125, 164004 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    White rabbit: a ptp application for robust sub-nanosecond synchronization,

    M. Lipi´nski, T. Włostowski, J. Serrano, and P . Alvarez, “White rabbit: a ptp application for robust sub-nanosecond synchronization,” in2011 IEEE International Symposium on Precision Clock Synchronization for Measurement, Control and Communication,(2011), pp. 25–30

    2011

  48. [56]

    Hollenbeck and C

    D. Hollenbeck and C. D. Cantrell, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B19, 2886 (2002)

    2002

  49. [57]

    Optimal filtering and generation of entangled photons for quantum applications in the presence of noise,

    J. M. Thomas, A. R. Cameron, A. Pathiranage,et al., “Optimal filtering and generation of entangled photons for quantum applications in the presence of noise,” (2025)

    2025

  50. [58]

    Takesue and K

    H. Takesue and K. Shimizu, Opt. Commun.283, 276 (2010). Letter 10

    2010

  51. [59]

    M. T. Liu and H. C. Lim, Opt. Express21, 30358 (2013)

    2013

  52. [60]

    Martini, J

    M. Martini, J. Bruin, and M. Kolarczik, Swabian Instruments GmbH Appl. NoteSI-0007(2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    Comparing teleportation to direct transmission in high-noise fibers carrying classi- cal communications,

    J. M. Thomas, G. M. Talcott, G. S. Kanter, and P . Kumar, “Comparing teleportation to direct transmission in high-noise fibers carrying classi- cal communications,” in2025 Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics (CLEO),(2025), pp. 1–2

    2025

  54. [62]

    Arahira, N

    S. Arahira, N. Namekata, T. Kishimoto,et al., Opt. Express19, 16032 (2011)

    2011

  55. [63]

    S. X. Wang and G. S. Kanter, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron.15, 1733 (2009)

    2009

  56. [64]

    Photonic state tomography,

    J. Altepeter, E. Jeffrey, and P . Kwiat, “Photonic state tomography,” (Academic Press, 2005), pp. 105–159

    2005

  57. [65]

    J. C. Chapman, J. M. Lukens, M. Alshowkan,et al., Phys. Rev. Appl. 19, 044026 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 1895 (1993). Publisher: American Physical Society

    1993

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.