Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 69 references

Electro-optic entanglement source for microwave to telecom quantum state transfer

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A millimeter-scale lithium-niobate resonator is predicted to produce microwave-optical entanglement at megabit rates using only tens of microwatts of pump power.

desk verdict A credible design-and-theory paper whose headline Mebit/s numbers are plausible but rest on unverified simulated g and optical Q; worth a serious referee, with the device parameters as the key risk. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.01470 v1 pith:IEM6MJT3 submitted 2019-09-03 quant-ph

Alfredo Rueda , William Hease , Shabir Barzanjeh , Johannes M. Fink This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords microwave-opticalentanglementelectro-opticmodulatorwhispering-galleryresonatorlithiumniobatequantumstatetransfercontinuousvariablessuperconductingcavityparametricdown-conversion
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 proposes a specific hardware design—a millimeter-sized lithium-niobate whispering-gallery resonator inside a superconducting microwave cavity—and develops the input-output theory for using it as a deterministic source of entangled microwave and telecom-wavelength optical fields. The central prediction is that continuous-variable entanglement can be generated at megabit-per-second rates with only tens of microwatts of optical pump power, because the design combines a very high optical quality factor with a sufficiently large electro-optic coupling. If this holds, it would give superconducting quantum processors a practical, low-power, broadband interface to fiber-optic quantum networks. The paper also derives quantum state transfer fidelities for teleportation and direct conversion, including for squeezed and cat states.

What carries the argument

The central object is a triply resonant cavity electro-optic modulator: a millimeter-sized lithium-niobate whispering-gallery resonator with superconducting thin-film electrodes inside a 3D microwave cavity, where the optical free spectral range is matched to the microwave resonance frequency. The interaction is the Pockels-effect three-wave mixing Hamiltonian $\hat H = \hbar g(\hat a_c^\dagger \hat a_s \hat a_\Omega + \hat a_\Omega^\dagger \hat a_s^\dagger \hat a_c)$; for a strong coherent pump this linearizes to a parametric down-conversion Hamiltonian $\hbar \alpha_p g(\hat a_o \hat a_\Omega + \hat a_\Omega^\dagger \hat a_o^\dagger)$ that squeezes the output fields. The figure of merit is the multi-photon cooperativity $C = 4 n_p g^2/(\kappa_o \kappa_\Omega)$, and the device geometry is engineered to maximize $C$ at minimal pump power through a high optical quality factor and a concentrated microwave electric field at the resonator rim.

What would settle it

Cool the assembled device, pump the optical mode with a known power, and measure the Stokes-sideband output photon flux; if the inferred cooperativity is far below the predicted curve, the megabit-per-second rates vanish. A direct measurement of $g$ via sideband-resolved photon conversion would settle the question without relying on the simulated value.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a triply resonant electro-optic modulator with finite-element-simulated coupling $g/2\pi \simeq 119$ Hz and an assumed intrinsic optical quality factor $Q_{i,o}\simeq 5\times10^8$ reaches a multi-photon cooperativity $C=1$ at roughly $25\text{--}65\,\mu$W pump power, and in an overcoupled configuration emits more than $1$ Mebit/s of microwave-optical entanglement over roughly $2$ MHz bandwidth. The entanglement is quantified by logarithmic negativity computed from the covariance matrix of the output fields, and the paper predicts that teleportation of squeezed coherent states approaches unit fidelity as $C\to 1$ in the lossless overcoupled limit, while for odd cat states direct transduction outperforms teleportation for $C>0.2$. These numbers are predictions based on simulation and partial characterization, not experimental demonstration.

Load-bearing premise

Everything depends on the real cryogenic device having the simulated coupling strength between microwave and light and the assumed ultra-low optical loss; neither quantity has been measured in the finished device with superconducting electrodes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At $P_p=65\,\mu$W and optical waveguide coupling $\eta_o=0.8$, the device is predicted to emit more than 1 Mebit/s of entangled microwave-optical pairs over about 2 MHz bandwidth at 10 mK.
  • A quantum link built on this source could teleport squeezed coherent states with near-unit fidelity as $C\to 1$, while direct transduction of cat states becomes the better protocol for $C>0.2$.
  • Operating at 800 mK instead of 10 mK reduces the maximum entanglement rate by roughly a factor of five, so thermalizing the waveguide to millikelvin temperatures is essential.
  • The same device, driven as a classical modulator, would reach a half-wave voltage $V_\pi$ as low as 12.4 mV and could serve as an efficient electro-optic modulator or frequency-comb generator.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because all predicted rates scale as $g^2 Q_{i,o}^2 Q_{i,\Omega}$, measuring the cooperativity at a single low pump power, for example from the output photon flux, would fix the entire predicted rate curve without requiring photon-statistics measurements.
  • The paper's theory applies to any triply resonant electro-optic transducer, so its formulas could be reused to compare bulk polished resonators against nanophotonic devices by substituting each platform's $g$, $Q$, and coupling parameters.
  • Since the entanglement bandwidth collapses as $C\to 1$, a practical source would likely need active pump-power stabilization to sit just below threshold; the paper does not discuss a feedback control scheme.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a cavity electro-optic transducer based on a LiNbO3 whispering-gallery-mode resonator placed inside a 3D microwave cavity with superconducting thin-film electrodes. It develops a quantum Langevin and input–output theory for microwave–optical parametric down-conversion, deriving output spectra, two-mode squeezing, covariance matrices, logarithmic negativity, entanglement-of-formation rates, and state-transfer fidelities for both teleportation and direct conversion protocols. Using a finite-element-simulated coupling rate g/2π = 119 Hz and an assumed optical quality factor Qi,o = 5×10^8 (Table I), it predicts >1 Mebit/s entanglement rates at roughly 2 MHz bandwidth with 65 µW pump power. The paper also compares teleportation and direct conversion for coherent, squeezed, and cat states, and claims a three-orders-of-magnitude pump-power advantage over the current state of the art.

Significance. If the assumed device parameters are realized, the proposed design would be a practical low-power microwave-to-telecom quantum interface and a meaningful step toward hybrid quantum networks. The theory is standard, internally consistent, and explicitly restricted to C<1; the paper provides closed-form expressions for bandwidths, variances, fidelities, and entanglement measures that are applicable to any triply-resonant electro-optic system. The main gap is experimental: the headline rates scale as g^2 Qi,o^2 Qi,Ω, and neither g nor the cryogenic, electrode-coated Qi,o is directly measured. Nonetheless, the manuscript is a self-contained design study with a clear, falsifiable prediction, which is valuable to the hybrid-quantum-network community.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II.C, Eq. (6), Table I, Fig. 6(b)] The central predictions (Mebit/s rates at 65 µW) rest on the simulated coupling rate g/2π = 119 Hz and the assumed intrinsic optical quality factor Qi,o = 5×10^8. Because C ∝ g^2 Qi,o^2 (Eq. (7)), a factor-3 reduction in either parameter lowers the cooperativity by roughly a factor of 9, moving the required pump power from 65 µW to about 0.6 mW and eliminating the advertised "few tens of microwatt" regime. The paper's own conclusion (Section VI) acknowledges that experimental tests are needed. Please provide a quantitative sensitivity analysis over plausible ranges of g, Qi,o, and Qi,Ω, and, if possible, a direct measurement or estimate of g in the final electrode geometry, including mesh-convergence and boundary-condition uncertainties for the FEM and justification of the 1/√2 standing-wave factor in Eq. (6). Without this, the abstract's prediction is not sufficiently supported.
  2. [Sec. II.C and Table I] The value Qi,Ω ≈ 3×10^3 is stated to come from "characterization measurements," but no experimental details, temperature, method, or uncertainty are given, and the value is a factor 4 below the material limit. Since Qi,Ω enters C linearly, this also affects the absolute rates and pump power. Please report the measurement conditions and an uncertainty estimate, or at least discuss the device-to-device variability of Qi,Ω.
  3. [Fig. 6(b) and abstract] The headline >1 Mebit/s rate is obtained for η_o = 0.8, while Table I lists η_o = 0.5 and gives 0.26 Mebit/s at C = 0.22. The abstract and title do not mention this coupling dependence of the claimed rate. Please state clearly in the abstract or introduction that the Mebit/s figure assumes a specific, not yet demonstrated optical waveguide coupling of η_o = 0.8.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (2)] The interaction Hamiltonian is written as g(a_Ω + a_Ω†)(a_c† + a_s†)(a_c + a_s). This omits the counter-rotating terms (a_c + a_c†)(a_s + a_s†) that are dropped by the rotating-wave approximation after Eq. (3). Please clarify that Eq. (2) is the RWA-reduced form or correct the expression.
  2. [Sec. II.C] The statement that Qi,o ≈ 5×10^8 is "backed by our experimental results at room temperature without the metal electrodes" should be accompanied by a reference or a brief description of those measurements, since the final device includes the superconducting film.
  3. [Sec. III, Eq. (12)] It should be stated explicitly that Eq. (12) is for zero-temperature input fields; the thermal-noise contributions are only included later in the spectra and covariance matrix.
  4. [Sec. IV.B, Eqs. (25)–(26)] The logarithmic negativity in Fig. 6(a) is computed from the zero-bandwidth covariance matrix Eq. (18); the manuscript should state this explicitly, since the entanglement rate is computed from the bandwidth-averaged covariance matrix.
  5. [General] Typos and wording: "who's" in Section I, "evanescant" in Section II.B, "hight" in Fig. 2 caption, and "Mebit/s" should be replaced with "Mbit/s" or "10^6 ebit/s" to avoid confusion with mebibit.
  6. [Table I] Table I should include the electrode gap d and the mode volumes used in the FEM simulation, so that the simulation can be reproduced.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the entanglement-rate and fidelity predictions follow from a standard quantum-Langevin model evaluated with independently obtained parameters; no predicted quantity is an input refit.

full rationale

The paper's central predictions (Mebit/s entanglement rates, transfer fidelities) are derived analytically from the linearized interaction Hamiltonian in Eq. (5), the quantum Langevin equations in Eq. (8), and input-output theory, with no free parameter adjusted to match the target rates. The numerical inputs are clearly labeled: g/2π = 119 Hz comes from finite-element simulation (Fig. 3a, Eq. 6), Qi,o = 5×10^8 is stated to be backed by room-temperature measurements without electrodes (Sec. II.C), and Qi,Ω = 3×10^3 comes from characterization measurements. No target quantity is fitted. The formulas for output photon flux, covariance matrix, logarithmic negativity, and transfer fidelity are derived from these inputs and are not post-hoc fits. Self-citations such as Ref. [40] are used as empirical support for the FSR mode matching and for the coupling formula; they do not carry the derivation by themselves, and they are not invoked to forbid alternatives. The acknowledged lack of direct cryogenic verification of g and Qi,o in the final metallized device is a support gap, not a circularity. The derivation chain is self-contained relative to its stated assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's predictions depend on four device parameters (g, Q_i,Omega, Q_i,o, eta) that come from simulation or choice rather than from a full experimental characterization of the final device. The physical theory is standard and adds no new axioms beyond the usual Markovian input-output treatment; the main uncertainty is whether the simulated parameters are realized in practice.

free parameters (4)
  • g/2pi = 119 Hz
    Microwave-optical coupling from finite-element simulation (Fig. 3a). All rates scale as g^2; this is the main enabling parameter.
  • Q_i,Omega = 3e3
    Measured microwave quality factor of the aluminum test cavity with 0.5 mm clamp rods (Section II.C).
  • Q_i,o = 5e8
    Assumed material-limited optical quality factor, backed by room-temperature measurements without electrodes and literature values; not measured at cryogenic temperature with the superconducting film.
  • eta_Omega, eta_o = 0.8, 0.5
    Chosen normalized waveguide couplings, described as 'for generality we chose an asymmetric coupling situation' (Table I).
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Quantum Langevin equations and input-output theory with Markovian white noise
    Used in Section III to derive the output scattering matrix D(omega) and the covariance matrix Eq. (18).
  • domain assumption Single-sideband approximation: only the Stokes sideband interacts
    Invoked in Section II.A by making the free spectral range asymmetric; the Hamiltonian Eq. (3) keeps only the Stokes process.
  • domain assumption Linearization: the pumped optical mode acts as a classical coherent field alpha_p
    Used to obtain the linearized Hamiltonian Eq. (5); valid for strong pump and C<1 (acknowledged in Section III).
  • domain assumption Cold waveguide: external thermal noise n_e,Omega(o) approximately 0
    Assumed after Eq. (18) and in Table I calculations; enables the simplified covariance matrix.
  • domain assumption Phase matching and FSR matching: m_c=m_s+m_Omega and Omega=FSR
    Required for the interaction in Eq. (3) and stated in Section II.B.
  • domain assumption Simplified coupling expression Eq. (6): microwave field is taken at the optical mode position with a 1/sqrt(2) standing-wave factor
    Converts the overlap integral in Eq. (4) into a local formula depending on E_Omega,z(r_o); used for the FEM-based g values.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electro-optic entanglement source for microwave to telecom quantum state transfer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IEM6MJT3

@misc{pith2026190901470,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electro-optic entanglement source for microwave to telecom quantum state transfer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IEM6MJT3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.01470}
}
read the original abstract

We propose an efficient microwave-photonic modulator as a resource for stationary entangled microwave-optical fields and develop the theory for deterministic entanglement generation and quantum state transfer in multi-resonant electro-optic systems. The device is based on a single crystal whispering gallery mode resonator integrated into a 3D microwave cavity. The specific design relies on a new combination of thin-film technology and conventional machining that is optimized for the lowest dissipation rates in the microwave, optical and mechanical domains. We extract important device properties from finite element simulations and predict continuous variable entanglement generation rates on the order of a Mebit/s for optical pump powers of only a few tens of microwatt. We compare the quantum state transfer fidelities of coherent, squeezed and non-Gaussian cat-states for both teleportation and direct conversion protocols under realistic conditions. Combining the unique capabilities of circuit quantum electrodynamics with the resilience of fiber optic communication could facilitate long distance solid-state qubit networks, new methods for quantum signal synthesis, quantum key distribution, and quantum enhanced detection, as well as more power-efficient classical sensing and modulation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.01470 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic representation of the cavity electro-optic modula [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Device implementation of the proposed cavity electro-optic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Simulated device parameters as a function of the gap size [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Output photon numbers of the microwave and optical resonator. (a) Output photon number spectral density at two bath temperatures [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Two-mode squeezing of the electro-optic output fields. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Entanglement and bandwidth of the electro-optic output [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Quantum state transfer. (a) EO teleportation scheme. The sender mixes the unknown optical input state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The existence of microwave-optical entanglement can be demonstrated using the quasi-probability Wigner function, which can be written in terms of the CM Eq

    For C = 0 the CM Eq.(18) takes on the values of the vacuum noise V = I4×4/2 and the CM diverges atC = 1. The existence of microwave-optical entanglement can be demonstrated using the quasi-probability Wigner function, which can be written in terms of the CM Eq. (18) and the optical and microwave quadratures ˆqk and ˆpk W (x) = exp(− 1 2[x· V−1· x)] π2 √ d...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Quantum information processing with supercon- ducting circuits: a review

    Wendin, G. Quantum information processing with supercon- ducting circuits: a review. Reports on Progress in Physics 80, 106001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    +ϵ4 3 ( 1 + ¯nΩ(ϵ2+ϵ2ϵ−2 3 −2+ ¯nΩ Cηo ) Cηo ), (36) where V± = (1 +ϵ2 3(e±2r− 1 + 2¯nΩ/(ηoC)), (37) ϵ2 = 1 + cosh(2r) andϵ3 = √4ηoηΩC (1+C) . Figure 7(e) shows the fidelity of state transfer for the squeezed coherent input state |ψin⟩ =|2, 1⟩ as a function of C for the system parameters in Table I at zero temperature (blue solid line), at 800 mK (blue das...

    work page

  4. [4]

    andϵ5 = 1 + 8ηΩ¯nΩ (1+C)2 , and the lower bound of this fidelity given by (1 + cos(φ))/(eα2 +e−α2 cos(φ)). In Fig. 7(e) we plot the conversion fidelity for the cat state |ψin⟩ =|2⟩−|− 2⟩ as a function ofC for the system parameters in Table I at zero tem- perature (red solid line), at 800 mK (red dashed line) as well as for a lossless systemηo =ηΩ = 1 (red d...

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Schoelkopf, R. J. & Girvin, S. M. Wiring up quantum systems. Nature 451, 664–669 (2008)

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    Maring, N. et al. Photonic quantum state transfer between a cold atomic gas and a crystal. Nature 551, 485 EP – (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Kurpiers, P. et al. Deterministic quantum state transfer and remote entanglement using microwave photons. Nature 558, 264–267 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [8]

    Chou, K. S. et al. Deterministic teleportation of a quantum gate between two logical qubits. Nature 561, 368–373 (2018)

    2018

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Liao, S.-K. et al. Satellite-relayed intercontinental quantum net- work. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 030501– (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    Braunstein, S. L. & van Loock, P. Quantum information with continuous variables. Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513–577 (2005)

    2005

  3. [11]

    Hofheinz, M. et al. Synthesizing arbitrary quantum states in a superconducting resonator. Nature 459, 546–549 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    Eichler, C. et al. Observation of two-mode squeezing in the microwave frequency domain. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 113601 (2011)

    2011

  5. [13]

    6(a) we plotEN as a function of the cooperativity for two different temperatures 10 mK (solid line) and 800 mK (dashed line)

    In Fig. 6(a) we plotEN as a function of the cooperativity for two different temperatures 10 mK (solid line) and 800 mK (dashed line). One can see that a significant amount of microwave-optical entanglement is generatedEN∼ 1, even for moderate values ofC, increasing with higher ...

  6. [14]

    Vlastakis, B. et al. Deterministically encoding quantum infor- mation using 100-photon schrdinger cat states. Science 342, 607– (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    Weedbrook, C. et al. Gaussian quantum information. Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621–669 (2012)

    2012

  8. [16]

    Furusawa, A. et al. Unconditional quantum teleportation. Sci- ence 282, 706–709 (1998)

    1998

  9. [17]

    Lee, N. et al. Teleportation of nonclassical wave packets of light. Science 332, 330–333 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    & Fabre, C

    Laurat, J., Coudreau, T., Treps, N., Maˆıtre, A. & Fabre, C. Con- ditional preparation of a quantum state in the continuous vari- able regime: Generation of a sub-poissonian state from twin beams. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 213601 (2003)

    2003

  11. [19]

    Pogorzalek, S. et al. Secure quantum remote state preparation of squeezed microwave states. arXiv:1902.00453 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Andrews, R. W. et al. Bidirectional and efficient conversion between microwave and optical light. Nature Physics 10, 321– 326 (2014)

    2014

  13. [21]

    Higginbotham, A. P. et al. Harnessing electro-optic correlations in an efficient mechanical converter. Nature Physics 14, 1038– 1042 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    Barzanjeh, S. et al. Stationary entangled radiation from mi- cromechanical motion. Nature 570, 480–483 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    & Vitali, D

    Genes, C., Mari, A., Tombesi, P. & Vitali, D. Robust entangle- ment of a micromechanical resonator with output optical fields. Phys. Rev. A 78, 032316 (2008)

    2008

  16. [24]

    S., Zoller, P

    Stannigel, K., Rabl, P., Sørensen, A. S., Zoller, P. & Lukin, M. D. Optomechanical transducers for long-distance quantum communication. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 220501 (2010)

    2010

  17. [25]

    & Milburn, G

    Barzanjeh, S., Vitali, D., Tombesi, P. & Milburn, G. J. En- tangling optical and microwave cavity modes by means of a nanomechanical resonator. Phys. Rev. A 84, 042342 (2011)

    2011

  18. [26]

    J., Tombesi, P

    Barzanjeh, S., Abdi, M., Milburn, G. J., Tombesi, P. & Vitali, D. Reversible optical-to-microwave quantum interface. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 130503 (2012). 12

    2012

  19. [27]

    & Clerk, A

    Wang, Y .-D. & Clerk, A. A. Reservoir-engineered entangle- ment in optomechanical systems. Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 253601– (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Robust photon entanglement via quantum interfer- ence in optomechanical interfaces

    Tian, L. Robust photon entanglement via quantum interfer- ence in optomechanical interfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 233602 (2013)

    2013

  21. [29]

    Zhong, C. et al. Heralded Generation and Detection of Entangled Microwave–Optical Photon Pairs. arXiv e-prints arXiv:1901.08228 (2019). arXiv:1901.08228

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Bochmann, J., Vainsencher, A., Awschalom, D. D. & Cleland, A. N. Nanomechanical coupling between microwave and opti- cal photons. Nature Physics 9, 712–716 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    Forsch, M. et al. Microwave-to-optics conversion us- ing a mechanical oscillator in its quantum groundstate. arXiv:1812.07588v1 (2018)

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Shao, L. et al. Microwave-to-optical conversion using lithium niobate thin-film acoustic resonators. arXiv:1907.08593 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Hisatomi, R. et al. Bidirectional conversion between mi- crowave and light via ferromagnetic magnons. Phys. Rev. B 93, 174427 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    B., Savchenkov, A

    Matsko, A. B., Savchenkov, A. A., Ilchenko, V . S., Seidel, D. & Maleki, L. On fundamental quantum noises of whisper- ing gallery mode electro-optic modulators. Opt. Express 15, 17401–17409 (2007)

    2007

  27. [35]

    Cavity quantum electro-optics

    Tsang, M. Cavity quantum electro-optics. Physical Review A 81, 063837 (2010)

    2010

  28. [36]

    Cavity quantum electro-optics

    Tsang, M. Cavity quantum electro-optics. II. Input-output rela- tions between traveling optical and microwave fields. Physical Review A 84, 043845 (2011)

    2011

  29. [37]

    Javerzac-Galy, C. et al. On-chip microwave-to-optical quan- tum coherent converter based on a superconducting resonator coupled to an electro-optic microresonator. Phys. Rev. A 94, 053815 (2016)

    2016

  30. [38]

    Soltani, M. et al. Efficient quantum microwave-to-optical con- version using electro-optic nanophotonic coupled resonators. Phys. Rev. A 96, 043808– (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    & Levi, A

    Cohen, D., Hossein-Zadeh, M. & Levi, A. Microphotonic mod- ulator for microwave receiver. Electronics Letters 37, 300–301 (2001)

    2001

  32. [40]

    S., Savchenkov, A

    Ilchenko, V . S., Savchenkov, A. A., Matsko, A. B. & Maleki, L. Whispering-gallery-mode electro-optic modulator and photonic microwave receiver. Journal of the Optical Society of America B 20, 333–342 (2003)

    2003

  33. [41]

    V ., Savchenkov, A

    Strekalov, D. V ., Savchenkov, A. A., Matsko, A. B. & Yu, N. Ef- ficient upconversion of subterahertz radiation in a high-Q whis- pering gallery resonator. Optics Letters 34, 713–715 (2009)

    2009

  34. [42]

    V .et al

    Strekalov, D. V .et al. Microwave whispering-gallery resonator for efficient optical up-conversion. Physical Review A. 80, 033810–5 (2009)

    2009

  35. [43]

    Botello, G. S.-a. et al. Sensitivity limits of millimeter-wave photonic radiometers based on efficient electro-optic upconvert- ers. Optica 5, 1210–1219 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    Rueda, A. et al. Efficient microwave to optical photon conver- sion: an electro-optical realization. Optica 3, 597–604 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    Fan, L. et al. Superconducting cavity electro-optics: A platform for coherent photon conversion between superconducting and photonic circuits. Science Advances 4 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    V ., Marquardt, C., Matsko, A

    Strekalov, D. V ., Marquardt, C., Matsko, A. B., Schwefel, H. G. L. & Leuchs, G. Nonlinear and quantum optics with whis- pering gallery resonators. Journal of Optics 18, 123002 (2016)

    2016

  39. [47]

    Muralidharan, S. et al. Optimal architectures for long distance quantum communication. Scientific Reports 6, 20463– (2016)

    2016

  40. [48]

    Leidinger, M. et al. Comparative study on three highly sensi- tive absorption measurement techniques characterizing lithium niobate over its entire transparent spectral range. Opt. Express 23, 21690–21705 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    Sanchez, A. R. R. Resonant Electrooptics . doctoralthe- sis, Friedrich-Alexander-Universit¨at Erlangen-N¨urnberg (FAU) (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    & Tobar, M

    Goryachev, M., Kostylev, N. & Tobar, M. E. Single-photon level study of microwave properties of lithium niobate at mil- likelvin temperatures. Physical Review B 92, 060406 (2015)

    2015

  43. [51]

    Weis, R. S. & Gaylord, T. K. Lithium niobate: Summary of physical properties and crystal structure. Applied Physics A 37, 191–203 (1985)

    1985

  44. [52]

    & service), I

    Wong, K., of Electrical Engineers, I. & service), I. I. Prop- erties of Lithium Niobate . EMIS datareviews series (IN- SPEC/Institution of Electrical Engineers, 2002)

    2002

  45. [53]

    McPeak, K. M. et al. Plasmonic films can easily be better: Rules and recipes. ACS Photonics 2, 326–333 (2015). PMID: 25950012, arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1021/ph5004237

    2015 doi

  46. [54]

    Raki ´c, A. D. Algorithm for the determination of intrinsic op- tical constants of metal films: application to aluminum. Appl. Opt. 34, 4755–4767 (1995)

    1995

  47. [55]

    Nguyen, D. T. et al. Ultrahigh q-frequency product for optome- chanical disk resonators with a mechanical shield. Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 241112 (2013)

    2013

  48. [56]

    Brecht, T. et al. Multilayer microwave integrated quantum cir- cuits for scalable quantum computing. Npj Quantum Informa- tion 2, 16002 EP – (2016)

    2016

  49. [57]

    Wenner, J. et al. Surface loss simulations of superconducting coplanar waveguide resonators. Applied Physics Letters 99, 113513 (2011)

    2011

  50. [58]

    Gardiner, C. W. & Zoller, P. Quantum Noise (Springer Series in Synergetics, 2004)

    2004

  51. [59]

    Paris, M. G. A., Illuminati, F., Serafini, A. & De Siena, S. Purity of gaussian states: Measurement schemes and time evolution in noisy channels. Phys. Rev. A 68, 012314– (2003)

    2003

  52. [60]

    & Werner, R

    Vidal, G. & Werner, R. F. Computable measure of entangle- ment. Phys. Rev. A 65, 032314 (2002)

    2002

  53. [61]

    Plenio, M. B. Logarithmic negativity: A full entanglement monotone that is not convex. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 090503 (2005)

    2005

  54. [62]

    Braunstein, S. L. & Kimble, H. J. Teleportation of continuous quantum variables. Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 869–872 (1998)

    1998

  55. [63]

    Quantum fidelity for Gaussian states describing the evo- lution of open systems

    Isar, A. Quantum fidelity for Gaussian states describing the evo- lution of open systems. The European Physical Journal Special Topics 160, 225–234 (2008)

    2008

  56. [64]

    Improving the fidelity of continuous-variable tele- portation via local operations

    Fiur ´aˇsek, J. Improving the fidelity of continuous-variable tele- portation via local operations. Phys. Rev. A 66, 012304 (2002)

    2002

  57. [65]

    B., Polzik, E

    Owari, M., Plenio, M. B., Polzik, E. S., Serafini, A. & Wolf, M. M. Squeezing the limit: quantum benchmarks for the teleportation and storage of squeezed states. New Journal of Physics 10, 113014 (2008)

    2008

  58. [66]

    Wittmann, C. et al. Demonstration of near-optimal discrimi- nation of optical coherent states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 210501 (2008)

    2008

  59. [67]

    L., Martin, P

    Cook, R. L., Martin, P. J. & Geremia, J. M. Optical coherent state discrimination using a closed-loop quantum measurement. Nature 446, 774 EP – (2007)

    2007

  60. [68]

    & Lonar, M

    Zhang, M., Wang, C., Cheng, R., Shams-Ansari, A. & Lonar, M. Monolithic ultra-high-q lithium niobate microring res- onator. Optica 4, 1536–1537 (2017)

    2017

  61. [69]

    & Schwefel, H

    Rueda, A., Sedlmeir, F., Kumari, M., Leuchs, G. & Schwefel, H. G. L. Resonant electro-optic frequency comb. Nature 568, 378–381 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.