pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.04987 · v2 · pith:BQHFRJXYnew · submitted 2025-11-07 · 🪐 quant-ph

Single and Double-click High-Rate Entanglement Generation Between Distant Ions Using Multiplexed Atomic Ensembles

Benedikt Tissot , Soubhadra Maiti , Emil R. Hellebek , Anders S{\o}ndberg S{\o}rensen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 20:13 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords entanglement generationtrapped ionsatomic ensemblesquantum memoriesspontaneous parametric down-conversionquantum networkssingle-click protocoldouble-click protocol
0
0 comments X

The pith

Matching a down-conversion source to ions and memories enables high-rate entanglement over hundreds of kilometers.

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

This paper extends an earlier protocol that interfaces trapped-ion processors with ensemble-based quantum memories. The extension works by matching a spontaneous parametric down-conversion source to both the ions and the memories. The match supports rapid entanglement generation between single trapped ions separated by hundreds of kilometers. It compares single-click and double-click protocols at the ion nodes, showing that the double-click version relaxes phase-stability demands but is limited by finite efficiencies while the single-click version requires stronger phase control. The preferred protocol therefore depends on available phase stabilization and the efficiencies of the ion and memory interfaces.

Core claim

By matching the spontaneous parametric down-conversion source to both the ions and the memories, the protocol enables rapid entanglement generation between single trapped ions over hundreds of kilometers; the double-click approach relaxes phase stability requirements but is strongly affected by finite efficiencies, whereas the single-click approach demands better phase control, so the optimal choice depends on experimental access to phase stabilization and interface efficiencies.

What carries the argument

Matching of a spontaneous parametric down-conversion source to both trapped ions and ensemble-based quantum memories, which creates the interface needed for the entanglement protocols.

If this is right

  • High-rate entanglement distribution between ions hundreds of kilometers apart becomes feasible.
  • Double-click protocols reduce the need for continuous phase stabilization but lower rates due to efficiency losses.
  • Single-click protocols can deliver higher rates provided phase stability is maintained.
  • The choice of protocol must be made according to the specific phase stabilization and efficiency values present in the lab.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This interface could support hybrid quantum networks that combine fast ion processors with long-lived ensemble memories.
  • The same matching technique might extend to other photon sources or memory types for higher performance.
  • Laboratory measurements of actual rates and fidelities under realistic efficiencies would directly test the protocol's viability.

Load-bearing premise

The spontaneous parametric down conversion source can be efficiently matched to both the trapped ions and the ensemble-based quantum memories while maintaining the required interface efficiencies and phase properties.

What would settle it

An experimental test that attempts the matching but yields entanglement rates between distant ions no higher than existing methods, or that fails to preserve the necessary phase properties across the interfaces.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.04987 by Anders S{\o}ndberg S{\o}rensen, Benedikt Tissot, Emil R. Hellebek, Soubhadra Maiti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Sketch of the fundamental steps of the single-click [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Sketch of the entanglement generation protocols, including a multimode repeater node at the center. The single-click [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Sketch of the edge node (EN) setup in the double [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a,c) Average preparation duration for remote ion-ion entanglement and (b,d) average worst case storage duration [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Sketch of the optical setup for single-click entangle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Optimized emission probabilities corresponding to Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In an accompanying paper [arxiv:2511.04488], we introduced an approach to interface trapped-ion quantum processors with ensemble-based quantum memories by matching a spontaneous parametric down conversion source to both the ions and the memories. This enables rapid entanglement generation between single trapped ions separated by distances of hundreds of kilometers. In this article, we extend the protocol and provide additional details of the analysis. Particularly, we compare a double-click and single-click approaches for the ion edge nodes. The double-click approach relaxes the phase stability requirement but is strongly affected by finite efficiencies. Choosing the optimal protocol thus depends on the access to the phase stabilization as well as the efficiencies of the interfaces of the ions and ensemble-based memories.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends the protocol from the accompanying paper (arXiv:2511.04488) that matches a spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) source to both trapped-ion transitions and ensemble-based quantum memories. It compares single-click (phase-sensitive) versus double-click (efficiency-limited) entanglement-generation schemes at the ion nodes and discusses how the optimal choice depends on access to phase stabilization and the values of the various interface efficiencies.

Significance. If the assumed interface efficiencies and residual phase stability can be realized, the scheme would enable heralded entanglement rates between distant trapped ions that are competitive with channel loss over hundreds of kilometers, thereby linking ion-based processors to ensemble memories. The provision of analytic expressions for the two protocols is a clear strength and supplies a concrete basis for experimental trade-off studies.

major comments (1)
  1. [Protocol Comparison and Rate Analysis] The headline claim of rapid long-distance entanglement rests on the product of all interface efficiencies (collection, spectral filtering, spatial mode overlap, frequency conversion) remaining high enough that the heralded probability per attempt exceeds channel loss and memory decoherence. The manuscript supplies analytic expressions for the single- and double-click protocols but does not report a full end-to-end numerical model that folds in measured values for ion-photon coupling, ensemble write-in efficiency, or residual phase drift; without those numbers the rate advantage remains conditional on optimistic assumptions stated only qualitatively.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'additional details of the analysis' without indicating which equations or figures contain the new quantitative comparisons; a brief pointer would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript, their positive assessment of its significance, and their recommendation for major revision. We address the single major comment below and have incorporated revisions to strengthen the presentation of the rate analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Protocol Comparison and Rate Analysis] The headline claim of rapid long-distance entanglement rests on the product of all interface efficiencies (collection, spectral filtering, spatial mode overlap, frequency conversion) remaining high enough that the heralded probability per attempt exceeds channel loss and memory decoherence. The manuscript supplies analytic expressions for the single- and double-click protocols but does not report a full end-to-end numerical model that folds in measured values for ion-photon coupling, ensemble write-in efficiency, or residual phase drift; without those numbers the rate advantage remains conditional on optimistic assumptions stated only qualitatively.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript would benefit from concrete numerical illustrations to make the conditional rate advantages more explicit. The analytic expressions derived in the paper are deliberately general so that experimental groups can substitute their own measured values for ion-photon coupling, ensemble write-in efficiency, spectral filtering, frequency conversion, and residual phase drift. To address the referee's point, we have added a new subsection (Section IV.C) that evaluates the heralded rates for both protocols using representative experimental parameters drawn from recent literature on ion-photon interfaces and ensemble memories. These examples quantify the efficiency thresholds and phase-stability requirements at which the single-click protocol becomes preferable, thereby converting the qualitative discussion into a quantitative trade-off analysis while preserving the generality of the closed-form expressions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Minor self-citation to accompanying paper for interface matching; protocol comparison adds independent analytic content.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Abstract]
    "In an accompanying paper [arxiv:2511.04488], we introduced an approach to interface trapped-ion quantum processors with ensemble-based quantum memories by matching a spontaneous parametric down conversion source to both the ions and the memories. This enables rapid entanglement generation between single trapped ions separated by distances of hundreds of kilometers."

    The headline claim of rapid long-distance entanglement generation is justified by direct reference to the interface-matching method introduced in the accompanying paper by the same author group, so the rate advantage is presented as following from that prior self-work rather than being independently re-derived or quantified with new end-to-end numbers in this manuscript.

full rationale

The manuscript extends prior work by comparing single-click versus double-click protocols using analytic expressions for entanglement rates under channel loss and decoherence. No fitted parameters from the present dataset are renamed as predictions, no self-defined quantities appear in the derivations, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is smuggled via self-citation. The reference to arXiv:2511.04488 supplies context for the SPDC-ion-ensemble matching but does not make the new comparison reduce to its inputs by construction. This is a standard minor self-citation that leaves the central claims self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The protocol rests on the assumption that a spontaneous parametric down-conversion source can be matched to both ion and ensemble interfaces with usable efficiencies; no free parameters are explicitly fitted in the abstract, but efficiencies are treated as variable inputs that determine protocol optimality.

free parameters (1)
  • interface efficiencies
    Efficiencies of the ion and ensemble memory interfaces are treated as key variables that decide between single-click and double-click performance; no specific fitted values are given in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption A spontaneous parametric down-conversion source can be matched to both trapped ions and ensemble-based memories.
    This matching is presented as the enabling step for rapid entanglement generation over long distances.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5674 in / 1234 out tokens · 21478 ms · 2026-05-21T20:13:09.108950+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    1− tan2 θ ηm + tan2 θ (1−η)|α 1|2 − 2ηm ηm + tan2 θ pd T|ν(t c)|2 η|α 1|2 # ,(16) A0 = (1−η m) tan2 θ ηm + tan2 θ

    Edge node state generation Having detailed the entanglement generation step within the BB shared between both proposed protocols, it remains to study the generation step in the ENs be- fore we can turn to calculating the state after the opti- cal entanglement swaps between BB and EN memories. Here we begin with the (two) single-click approach within the E...

    work page

  2. [2]

    II, we now investigate the state after the probabilistic swaps of the memories

    Optical entanglement swaps Having calculated the single-click EN state in the previous section and BB state in Sec. II, we now investigate the state after the probabilistic swaps of the memories. As depicted in Fig. 1(c), the optical swap between the memories is analogous to the interference process within the entanglement generation stage, i.e., photons ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    We follow the approach of Ref

    Communication Rate After calculating the final ion-ion state, as well as the success probabilities of the different steps, we now use these to calculate the duration to prepare the ion-ion state. We follow the approach of Ref. [46] to account for parallelization of different operations within the average time it takes to create a link. Since the initial g...

    work page

  4. [4]

    double-emission

    Purification The analysis up to this point focused on the funda- mental single-click protocol. As noted in the beginning, single-click protocols are known to suffer from an effect called vacuum growth [30, 31]. This vacuum growth can also be seen in the preceding analysis, where we see that vacuum admixture in the ENA 0 [see Eq. (17)] and BBB 0 [see Eq. (...

    work page

  5. [5]

    But we also noted in the analysis of the generation steps (Sec

    Phase stability In the preceding analysis, we assumed the system to be phase stable. But we also noted in the analysis of the generation steps (Sec. IV B and IV C 1), that if there is a difference in the optical paths, it can lead to a phase imprinted on the coherence of the density matrix. It is instructive to follow this phase in a simplified picture by...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Note that we again treat dark counts perturbatively, thus disregarding dou- ble dark count events

    + pd T|ν(t c)|2η′|β1|2N , andA ′ 0 =A 0|tc→t′c. Note that we again treat dark counts perturbatively, thus disregarding dou- ble dark count events. In the following, we again assume that the modes are ideally matched and for simplicity take the average effect of dark counts into account by substituting|ν(t c)|2 →1/T a (for anyt c). Here, both rails contain...

    work page

  7. [7]

    [46] to account for asymmetric simultaneous entanglement generation in calculating the average duration to create an ion-ion link

    Communication Rate As for the two-single-click protocol, we follow Ref. [46] to account for asymmetric simultaneous entanglement generation in calculating the average duration to create an ion-ion link. Again, for simplicity, we assume that if a central repeater is employed, the resulting halves are both prepared, and then the final swaps are performed at...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Appendix B: Additional information on the derivation of the BB state In the main text we introduced the state heralded within the BB [Eq

    Therefore, we summarize the losses in a single loss channela L, bL per physical channel a, b. Appendix B: Additional information on the derivation of the BB state In the main text we introduced the state heralded within the BB [Eq. (10)]. In the following, we provide additional details of the derivation. Based on the SPDC+M model discussed in Secs. II and...

    work page

  9. [9]

    + 2A1 sin2 θB0 +p dA0B0, P S1C1 = T|f(t c)|2 4 A1(B1 −B ′ 1),(D3) PS1C ′ 1 = T|f(t c)|2 4 2 cos2 θA1B′ 1 +A ′ 1(B1 +B ′

    work page

  10. [10]

    The success probability of the first swap is given byP S1 = R S dtc2PS1/T, whereP S1 is given by the trace of the unnormalized density matrixP S1ρS1 andSis the support off

    + 2A2B0 +p d cos2 θA1B0,(D4) PS1C ′′ 1 = T|f(t c)|2 4 2 sin2 θA1B′ 1 + 4A0B2 +p d 1 2 A0B1,(D5) PS1C2 = T|f(t c)|2 4 4A′ 1B2 + 2 cos2 θA1B2 +A 2(B1 +B ′ 1) +p d cos2 θ 2 A1B1,(D6) PS1C ′ 2 = T|f(t c)|2 4 [2A1B2], P S1C3 = T|f(t c)|2 4 [4A2B2],(D7) 17 where all terms apart fromC 0 andC 1 have at most a leading order linear in one of the parameters treated ...

    work page

  11. [11]

    Optim.jl

    + (C2 + cos2 θC ′ 2)(F ′ 1 +F 1 cos2 θ) +p dF1C1 cos4 θ.(D12) The success probability for the second swap isPS2 = R S dtc2PS2/T, whereP S2 is given by the trace of the unnormalized density matrixP S2ρS2. Appendix E: Double-click repeater-less communication rate In Sec. IV D 1 we discussed the communication rate of the double-click protocol in the presence...

    work page

  12. [12]

    Tissot, S

    B. Tissot, S. Maiti, E. R. Hellebek, and A. S. Sørensen, Hybrid single-ion atomic-ensemble node for high-rate re- mote entanglement generation, arxiv:2511.xxxxx (2025), companion paper

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature453, 1023 (2008)

    work page 2008

  14. [14]

    Wehner, D

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Quantum in- ternet: a vision for the road ahead, Sci362, eaam9288 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    A. K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s the- orem, Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 661 (1991)

    work page 1991

  16. [16]

    Ac´ ın, N

    A. Ac´ ın, N. Brunner, N. Gisin, S. Massar, S. Pironio, and V. Scarani, Device-independent security of quantum cryptography against collective attacks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 230501 (2007)

    work page 2007

  17. [17]

    Gisin and R

    N. Gisin and R. Thew, Quantum communication, Nat. Photonics1, 165 (2007)

    work page 2007

  18. [18]

    Pirandola, U

    S. Pirandola, U. L. Andersen, L. Banchi, M. Berta, D. Bunandar, R. Colbeck, D. Englund, T. Gehring, C. Lupo, C. Ottaviani, J. L. Pereira, M. Razavi, J. S. Shaari, M. Tomamichel, V. C. Usenko, G. Vallone, P. Vil- loresi, and P. Wallden, Advances in quantum cryptogra- phy, Adv. Opt. Photonics12, 1012 (2020)

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Wasilewski, K

    W. Wasilewski, K. Jensen, H. Krauter, J. J. Renema, M. V. Balabas, and E. S. Polzik, Quantum noise limited and entanglement-assisted magnetometry, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 133601 (2010)

    work page 2010

  20. [20]

    Cassens, B

    C. Cassens, B. Meyer-Hoppe, E. Rasel, and C. Klempt, Entanglement-enhanced atomic gravimeter, Phys. Rev. X15, 011029 (2025)

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    Cuomo, M

    D. Cuomo, M. Caleffi, and A. S. Cacciapuoti, Towards a distributed quantum computing ecosystem, IET Quan- tum Communication1, 3 (2020)

    work page 2020

  22. [22]

    J. S. Bell, On the einstein podolsky rosen paradox, Physics Physique Fizika1, 195 (1964)

    work page 1964

  23. [23]

    J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theo- ries, Phys. Rev. Lett.23, 880 (1969)

    work page 1969

  24. [24]

    Hensen, H

    B. Hensen, H. Bernien, A. E. Dr´ eau, A. Reiserer, N. Kalb, M. S. Blok, J. Ruitenberg, R. F. L. Vermeulen, R. N. Schouten, C. Abell´ an, W. Amaya, V. Pruneri, M. W. Mitchell, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, D. Elkouss, S. Wehner, T. H. Taminiau, and R. Hanson, Loophole- free Bell inequality violation using electron spins sepa- rated by 1.3 kilometres, Nature5...

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    Giustina, M

    M. Giustina, M. A. M. Versteegh, S. Wengerowsky, J. Handsteiner, A. Hochrainer, K. Phelan, F. Steinlech- 20 ner, J. Kofler, J.- ˚A. Larsson, C. Abell´ an, W. Amaya, V. Pruneri, M. W. Mitchell, J. Beyer, T. Gerrits, A. E. Lita, L. K. Shalm, S. W. Nam, T. Scheidl, R. Ursin, B. Wittmann, and A. Zeilinger, Significant-loophole-free test of Bell’s theorem with...

    work page 2015

  26. [26]

    Storz, J

    S. Storz, J. Sch¨ ar, A. Kulikov, P. Magnard, P. Kurpiers, J. L¨ utolf, T. Walter, A. Copetudo, K. Reuer, A. Akin, J.- C. Besse, M. Gabureac, G. J. Norris, A. Rosario, F. Mar- tin, J. Martinez, W. Amaya, M. W. Mitchell, C. Abel- lan, J.-D. Bancal, N. Sangouard, B. Royer, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Loophole-free Bell inequality violation with superconducti...

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    C.-W. Chou, J. Laurat, H. Deng, K. S. Choi, H. de Ried- matten, D. Felinto, and H. J. Kimble, Functional quan- tum nodes for entanglement distribution over scalable quantum networks, Sci316, 1316 (2007)

    work page 2007

  28. [28]

    Yuan, Y.-A

    Z.-S. Yuan, Y.-A. Chen, B. Zhao, S. Chen, J. Schmied- mayer, and J.-W. Pan, Experimental demonstration of a bdcz quantum repeater node, Nature454, 1098 (2008)

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    Y. Yu, F. Ma, X.-Y. Luo, B. Jing, P.-F. Sun, R.-Z. Fang, C.-W. Yang, H. Liu, M.-Y. Zheng, X.-P. Xie, W.-J. Zhang, L.-X. You, Z. Wang, T.-Y. Chen, Q. Zhang, X.-H. Bao, and J.-W. Pan, Entanglement of two quantum mem- ories via fibres over dozens of kilometres, Nature578, 240 (2020)

    work page 2020

  30. [30]

    D. L. Moehring, P. Maunz, S. Olmschenk, K. C. Younge, D. N. Matsukevich, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, En- tanglement of single-atom quantum bits at a distance, Nature449, 68 (2007)

    work page 2007

  31. [31]

    L. J. Stephenson, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, S. An, P. Drmota, T. G. Ballance, K. Thirumalai, J. F. Good- win, D. M. Lucas, and C. J. Ballance, High-rate, high- fidelity entanglement of qubits across an elementary quantum network, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 110501 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Krutyanskiy, M

    V. Krutyanskiy, M. Galli, V. Krcmarsky, S. Baier, D. A. Fioretto, Y. Pu, A. Mazloom, P. Sekatski, M. Canteri, M. Teller, J. Schupp, J. Bate, M. Meraner, N. San- gouard, B. P. Lanyon, and T. E. Northup, Entanglement of trapped-ion qubits separated by 230 meters, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 050803 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Bernien, B

    H. Bernien, B. Hensen, W. Pfaff, G. Koolstra, M. S. Blok, L. Robledo, T. H. Taminiau, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, L. Childress, and R. Hanson, Heralded entan- glement between solid-state qubits separated by three metres, Nature497, 86 (2013)

    work page 2013

  34. [34]

    Sipahigil, R

    A. Sipahigil, R. E. Evans, D. D. Sukachev, M. J. Bu- rek, J. Borregaard, M. K. Bhaskar, C. T. Nguyen, J. L. Pacheco, H. A. Atikian, C. Meuwly, R. M. Camacho, F. Jelezko, E. Bielejec, H. Park, M. Lonˇ car, and M. D. Lukin, An integrated diamond nanophotonics platform for quantum-optical networks, Sci354, 847 (2016)

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    P. C. Humphreys, N. Kalb, J. P. J. Morits, R. N. Schouten, R. F. L. Vermeulen, D. J. Twitchen, M. Markham, and R. Hanson, Deterministic delivery of remote entanglement on a quantum network, Nature 558, 268 (2018)

    work page 2018

  36. [36]

    Lago-Rivera, S

    D. Lago-Rivera, S. Grandi, J. V. Rakonjac, A. Seri, and H. de Riedmatten, Telecom-heralded entanglement be- tween multimode solid-state quantum memories, Nature 594, 37 (2021)

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    X. Liu, J. Hu, Z.-F. Li, X. Li, P.-Y. Li, P.-J. Liang, Z.-Q. Zhou, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Heralded entanglement distribution between two absorptive quantum memories, Nature594, 41 (2021)

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    Ruskuc, C.-J

    A. Ruskuc, C.-J. Wu, E. Green, S. L. N. Hermans, W. Pa- jak, J. Choi, and A. Faraon, Multiplexed entanglement of multi-emitter quantum network nodes, Nature639, 54–59 (2025)

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, and J. M. Sage, Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges, Appl. Phys. Rev.6, 021314 (2019)

    work page 2019

  40. [40]

    S. A. Moses, C. H. Baldwin, M. S. Allman, R. An- cona, L. Ascarrunz, C. Barnes, J. Bartolotta, B. Bjork, P. Blanchard, M. Bohn, J. G. Bohnet, N. C. Brown, N. Q. Burdick, W. C. Burton, S. L. Campbell, J. P. Campora, C. Carron, J. Chambers, J. W. Chan, Y. H. Chen, A. Chernoguzov, E. Chertkov, J. Colina, J. P. Curtis, R. Daniel, M. DeCross, D. Deen, C. Delan...

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Sangouard, C

    N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics, Rev. Modern Phys.83, 33 (2011)

    work page 2011

  42. [42]

    H. K. Beukers, M. Pasini, H. Choi, D. Englund, R. Han- son, and J. Borregaard, Remote-entanglement proto- cols for stationary qubits with photonic interfaces, PRX Quantum5, 010202 (2024)

    work page 2024

  43. [43]

    L.-M. Duan, M. D. Lukin, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Long- distance quantum communication with atomic ensembles and linear optics, Nature414, 413 (2001)

    work page 2001

  44. [44]

    J. V. Rakonjac, D. Lago-Rivera, A. Seri, M. Mazzera, S. Grandi, and H. de Riedmatten, Entanglement between a telecom photon and an on-demand multimode solid- state quantum memory, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 210502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    H¨ anni, A

    J. H¨ anni, A. E. Rodr´ ıguez-Moldes, F. Appas, S. Wengerowsky, D. Lago-Rivera, M. Teller, S. Grandi, and H. de Riedmatten, Heralded entanglement of on-demand spin-wave solid-state quantum memories for multiplexed quantum network links, Phys. Rev. X15, 041003 (2025)

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    Teller, S

    M. Teller, S. Plascencia, C. S. Jachimska, S. Grandi, and H. de Riedmatten, A solid-state temporally multiplexed quantum memory array at the single-photon level, npj Quantum Information11, 92 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    E. R. Hellebek, K. Mølmer, and A. S. Sørensen, Characterization of the multimode nature of single- photon sources based on spontaneous parametric down- conversion, Phys. Rev. A110, 023728 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    Keller, B

    M. Keller, B. Lange, K. Hayasaka, W. Lange, and H. Walther, Continuous generation of single photons with controlled waveform in an ion-trap cavity system, Nature 21 431, 1075 (2004)

    work page 2004

  49. [49]

    H. G. Barros, A. Stute, T. E. Northup, C. Russo, P. O. Schmidt, and R. Blatt, Deterministic single-photon source from a single ion, New J. Phys.11, 103004 (2009)

    work page 2009

  50. [50]

    Tissot and G

    B. Tissot and G. Burkard, Efficient high-fidelity flying qubit shaping, Phys. Rev. Research6, 013150 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    T. Wilk, S. C. Webster, A. Kuhn, and G. Rempe, Single-atom single-photon quantum interface, Sci317, 488 (2007)

    work page 2007

  52. [52]

    Stute, B

    A. Stute, B. Casabone, P. Schindler, T. Monz, P. O. Schmidt, B. Brandst¨ atter, T. E. Northup, and R. Blatt, Tunable ion-photon entanglement in an optical cavity, Nature485, 482 (2012)

    work page 2012

  53. [53]

    M. Bock, P. Eich, S. Kucera, M. Kreis, A. Lenhard, C. Becher, and J. Eschner, High-fidelity entanglement be- tween a trapped ion and a telecom photon via quantum frequency conversion, Nat. Commun.9, 1998 (2018)

    work page 1998

  54. [54]

    Krutyanskiy, M

    V. Krutyanskiy, M. Canteri, M. Meraner, V. Krcmarsky, and B. Lanyon, Multimode ion-photon entanglement over 101 kilometers, PRX Quantum5, 020308 (2024)

    work page 2024

  55. [55]

    Simon, H

    C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, M. Afzelius, N. Sangouard, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin, Quantum repeaters with pho- ton pair sources and multimode memories, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 190503 (2007)

    work page 2007

  56. [56]

    Zhao, Z.-B

    B. Zhao, Z.-B. Chen, Y.-A. Chen, J. Schmiedmayer, and J.-W. Pan, Robust creation of entanglement between re- mote memory qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 240502 (2007)

    work page 2007

  57. [57]

    G. Avis, R. Knegjens, A. S. Sørensen, and S. Wehner, Asymmetric node placement in fiber-based quantum net- works, Phys. Rev. A109, 052627 (2024)

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Jiang, J

    L. Jiang, J. M. Taylor, and M. D. Lukin, Fast and robust approach to long-distance quantum communication with atomic ensembles, Phys. Rev. A76, 012301 (2007)

    work page 2007

  59. [59]

    Coopmans, S

    T. Coopmans, S. Brand, and D. Elkouss, Improved ana- lytical bounds on delivery times of long-distance entan- glement, Phys. Rev. A105, 012608 (2022)

    work page 2022

  60. [60]

    Tissot, S

    B. Tissot, S. Maiti, E. R. Hellebek, and A. S. Sørensen, The code supporting the findings of this manuscript is provided as ancillary files of the arxiv submission (2025)

    work page 2025

  61. [61]

    Zhao, Y.-A

    B. Zhao, Y.-A. Chen, X.-H. Bao, T. Strassel, C.-S. Chuu, X.-M. Jin, J. Schmiedmayer, Z.-S. Yuan, S. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, A millisecond quantum memory for scalable quantum networks, Nat. Phys.5, 95 (2008)

    work page 2008

  62. [62]

    Wang, C.-Y

    P. Wang, C.-Y. Luan, M. Qiao, M. Um, J. Zhang, Y. Wang, X. Yuan, M. Gu, J. Zhang, and K. Kim, Single ion qubit with estimated coherence time exceeding one hour, Nat. Comm.12, 233 (2021)

    work page 2021

  63. [63]

    Drmota, D

    P. Drmota, D. Main, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, M. A. Weber, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, C. J. Ballance, and D. M. Lucas, Robust quantum memory in a trapped-ion quantum network node, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 090803 (2023)

    work page 2023

  64. [64]

    Riebe, T

    M. Riebe, T. Monz, K. Kim, A. S. Villar, P. Schindler, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt, Deterministic entanglement swapping with an ion-trap quantum com- puter, Nat. Phys.4, 839 (2008)

    work page 2008

  65. [65]

    P. K. Mogensen and A. N. Riseth, Optim: A mathe- matical optimization package for Julia, Journal of Open Source Software3, 615 (2018)

    work page 2018