Entanglement Certification $-$ From Theory to Experiment

Giuseppe Vitagliano; Marcus Huber; Mehul Malik; Nicolai Friis

Entanglement Certification $-$ From Theory to Experiment

T0 review · 0 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-25 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read Entanglement certification methods work differently depending on the prior information one assumes about the states and measurements.

desk verdict This is a competent review that pulls together existing entanglement certification methods around the role of assumptions, but it adds no new results or analysis. read the letter →

arxiv 1906.10929 v1 pith:RRBW56OY submitted 2019-06-26 quant-ph

Nicolai Friis , Giuseppe Vitagliano , Mehul Malik , Marcus Huber This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-ph

keywords entanglementcertificationquantuminformationdetectionmethodspriorstatesmeasurementstechnologies

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 review surveys how to detect and certify entanglement in quantum systems when exact quantification proves too demanding. It organizes the many available methods around the amount of prior knowledge an experimenter is willing to assume about the states and the measurements performed. A sympathetic reader cares because quantum technologies need practical ways to confirm entanglement without full characterization of complex states. The paper shows that stronger assumptions enable more powerful or efficient certification while weaker assumptions require more robust but often costlier protocols. Both theoretical constructions and experimental realizations are covered for two-qubit, high-dimensional, and multipartite cases.

What carries the argument

Entanglement certification methods whose performance trades off against the level of prior information assumed about the quantum states and the measurements.

What would settle it

An experiment that achieves full, assumption-free quantification of entanglement for a high-dimensional multipartite state.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Exact quantification of entanglement is extremely demanding if at all possible for most quantum systems, so a range of certification methods is used instead; the applicability and performance of these methods strongly depends on the assumptions one is willing to make regarding the involved quantum states and measurements, in short, on the available prior information about the quantum system.

Load-bearing premise

Exactly quantifying the amount of entanglement is extremely demanding, if at all possible, for most quantum systems.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Certification protocols can be selected according to what an experiment can realistically control or assume.
Resource-efficient detection becomes possible once limited prior information is granted.
High-dimensional and many-party entanglement can still be certified under appropriate assumptions even when full tomography is infeasible.
Theoretical quantifiers translate into concrete experimental tests once the corresponding assumptions are stated.

Reading between the lines

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

Methods that require fewer assumptions may become more attractive as experimental control improves.
The same assumption-based approach could be applied to certifying other quantum resources such as coherence or magic.
Comparing certification outcomes across different assumption levels on the same physical device would test how sensitive the methods are to incorrect priors.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper is a survey of entanglement quantifiers and certification techniques, organized around how much prior information about states and measurements is available. It covers the standard point that exact quantification is usually impractical and then walks through detection methods from both theory and experiment. That framing is useful because it directly ties method choice to experimental constraints rather than treating everything as abstract math. The abstract makes clear the authors intend to survey paradigmatic quantifiers and their assumptions, which matches what a review should do. No new theorems, protocols, or data appear. The text stays within compiling and contrasting prior work. Soft spots are the usual ones for reviews: completeness depends on the authors' selection of papers, and any reader will still need to check the cited originals for details on implementation or edge cases. The background claims about the difficulty of quantification are standard and not presented as novel. The paper is aimed at quantum information researchers who need a single place to see how different certification approaches trade off assumptions against practicality. Experimental groups in particular might find the discussion of resource efficiency helpful as a starting point. It is not a research contribution, so it does not change the field, but it can serve as a reference. I would send it to peer review for a journal that publishes surveys, with the expectation that referees will check coverage and accuracy rather than originality.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. This review article surveys paradigmatic quantifiers of entanglement and state-of-the-art detection and certification methods for quantum systems. It emphasizes that exact quantification is often extremely demanding or impossible, necessitating certification approaches whose applicability depends strongly on prior information and assumptions about states and measurements, and covers these from both theoretical and experimental perspectives.

Significance. If the survey is comprehensive and accurate, the manuscript offers a structured consolidation of existing methods that can guide selection of resource-efficient certification techniques under varying assumptions. This is a useful reference for the quantum information community working on entanglement as a resource, though the paper introduces no new derivations, proofs, or data.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract states that the review discusses 'the most commonly used paradigmatic quantifiers' but does not specify selection criteria or time frame; adding a sentence on scope would improve clarity.
[§2] Notation for entanglement measures in the early sections uses multiple symbols without a consolidated table; a summary table of definitions would aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the positive recommendation to accept. The report accurately captures the scope and purpose of the review.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity in this review article

full rationale

This manuscript is a review that compiles and surveys existing entanglement quantifiers, classifiers, detection, and certification methods from the literature. It introduces no original derivations, equations, fitted parameters, or novel proofs whose validity depends on internal self-reference. The highlighted statements on the demands of exact quantification and the role of prior information are standard field background, not load-bearing steps in any new argument. No self-citation chains, ansatzes, or renamings reduce any claimed result to its own inputs by construction.

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

As a review of existing literature, the paper introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entanglement Certification $-$ From Theory to Experiment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RRBW56OY

@misc{pith2026190610929,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entanglement Certification $-$ From Theory to Experiment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RRBW56OY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1906.10929}
}

read the original abstract

Entanglement is an important resource that allows quantum technologies to go beyond the classically possible. There are many ways quantum systems can be entangled, ranging from the archetypal two-qubit case to more exotic scenarios of entanglement in high dimensions or between many parties. Consequently, a plethora of entanglement quantifiers and classifiers exist, corresponding to different operational paradigms and mathematical techniques. However, for most quantum systems, exactly quantifying the amount of entanglement is extremely demanding, if at all possible. This is further exacerbated by the difficulty of experimentally controlling and measuring complex quantum states. Consequently, there are various approaches for experimentally detecting and certifying entanglement when exact quantification is not an option, with a particular focus on practically implementable methods and resource efficiency. The applicability and performance of these methods strongly depends on the assumptions one is willing to make regarding the involved quantum states and measurements, in short, on the available prior information about the quantum system. In this review we discuss the most commonly used paradigmatic quantifiers of entanglement. For these, we survey state-of-the-art detection and certification methods, including their respective underlying assumptions, from both a theoretical and experimental point of view.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.10929 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

Genuine Multipartite Entanglement between Logical Qubits via Cross-Code Lattice Surgery
quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 7.5 of 10

Cross-code lattice surgery between surface and 3D colour codes yields certified logical GHZ and |CCZ> GME plus arbitrary logical rotations on a trapped-ion processor.
Detecting entanglement of non-Gaussian continuous-variable states from single-copy homodyne measurements
quant-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

A single-copy homodyne protocol estimates unbiased U-statistics for partial-transpose moments p2 and p3 to detect bipartite CV entanglement, with sample complexity O((N+1)^{14/3}/ε²) and demonstrations on six state families.
Estimating the best separable approximation of non-pure spin-squeezed states
quant-ph 2025-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

Lower bounds on the best separable approximation distance for non-pure spin-squeezed states are obtained from the complete set of spin-squeezing inequalities, with symmetry-exploiting optimization for upper bounds, re...
On the existence of fully inseparable biseparable Gaussian states
quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

Numerical evidence from projections and witnesses on specific Gaussian families leads to the conjecture that full inseparability implies genuine multipartite entanglement for all Gaussian states.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

299 extracted references · 299 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

[1]

Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?

Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?” Phys. Rev.47, 777–780 (1935)

work page 1935
[2]

On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox,

John Stewart Bell, “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox,” Physics 1, 195–200 (1964)

work page 1964
[3]

Experimen- tal Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,

Stuart J. Freedman and John F. Clauser, “Experimen- tal Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 938 (1972)

work page 1972
[4]

Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem,

Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460–463 (1981)

work page 1981
[5]

Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen- Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities,

Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen- Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91–94 (1982)

work page 1982
[6]

Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers,

Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982)

work page 1982
[7]

Teleporting an Un- known Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen Channels,

C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Cr´ epeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, “Teleporting an Un- known Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen Channels,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895– 1899 (1993)

work page 1993
[8]

Quantum cryp- tography: public key distribution and coin tossing,

Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard, “Quantum cryp- tography: public key distribution and coin tossing,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing (1984) pp. 175–179

work page 1984

Show all 299 references

[9]

Quantum cryp- tography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,

Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard, “Quantum cryp- tography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,” Theor. Comput. Sci. 560, 7–11 (2014), originally pub- lished in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, pp. 175- 179 (1984)

2014
[10]

Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem,

A. K. Ekert, “Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991)

1991
[11]

Experimental Quantum Teleportation,

D. Bouwmeester, Jian-Wei Pan, K. Mattle, M. Eibl, H. Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental Quantum Teleportation,” Nature 390, 575–579 (1997)

1997
[12]

Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions,

Gregor Weihs, Thomas Jennewein, Christoph Simon, Harald Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Violation of Bell’s Inequality under Strict Einstein Locality Conditions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5039–5043 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9810080

1998 arXiv
[13]

Practical Quantum Key Distribution with Polarization- Entangled Photons,

A. Poppe, A. Fedrizzi, T. Loruenser, O. Maurhardt, R. Ursin, H. R. B¨ ohm, M. Peev, M. Suda, C. Kurtsiefer, H. Weinfurter, T. Jennewein, and Anton Zeilinger, “Practical Quantum Key Distribution with Polarization- Entangled Photons,” Opt. Express12, 3865–3871 (2004), arXiv:quan...

2004 arXiv
[14]

Entanglement- based quantum communication over 144 km,

R. Ursin, F. Tiefenbacher, T. Schmitt-Manderbach, H. Weier, T. Scheidl, M. Lindenthal, B. Blauensteiner, T. Jennewein, J. Perdigues, P. Trojek, B. Oemer, M. Fuerst, M. Meyenburg, J. Rarity, Z. Sodnik, C. Barbi- eri, H. Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Entanglement- based quan...

2007 arXiv
[15]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 2000)

2000
[16]

Bell nonlocality,

Nicolas Brunner, Daniel Cavalcanti, Stefano Pironio, Va- lerio Scarani, and Stephanie Wehner, “Bell nonlocality,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 419–478 (2014), arXiv:1303.2849

2014 arXiv
[17]

Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres,

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. Elk- ouss, S. Wehner, T. H. Taminiau, and R. Hanson, “Loophole-free Bel...

2015 arXiv
[18]

Signiﬁcant-Loophole- Free Test of Bell’s Theorem with Entangled Photons,

Marissa Giustina, Marijn A. M. Versteegh, S¨ oren Wengerowsky, Johannes Handsteiner, Armin Hochrainer, Kevin Phelan, Fabian Steinlechner, Johannes Koﬂer, Jan-˚Ake Larsson, Carlos Abell´ an, Waldimar Amaya, Valerio Pruneri, Morgan W. Mitchell, J¨ orn Beyer, Thomas Gerrits, Adri...

2015 arXiv
[19]

Strong Loophole-Free Test of Lo- cal Realism,

Lynden K. Shalm, Evan Meyer-Scott, Bradley G. Chris- tensen, Peter Bierhorst, Michael A. Wayne, Martin J. Stevens, Thomas Gerrits, Scott Glancy, Deny R. Hamel, Michael S. Allman, Kevin J. Coakley, Shellee D. Dyer, Carson Hodge, Adriana E. Lita, Varun B. Verma, Camilla Lambrocc...

2015 arXiv
[20]

Quantum states with Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model,

Reinhard F. Werner, “Quantum states with Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model,” Phys. Rev. A 40, 4277 (1989)

1989
[21]

Nonsequential positive-operator-valued mea- surements on entangled mixed states do not always vio- late a Bell inequality,

J. Barrett, “Nonsequential positive-operator-valued mea- surements on entangled mixed states do not always vio- late a Bell inequality,” Phys. Rev. A 65, 042302 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0107045

2002 arXiv
[22]

Grothendieck’s con- stant and local models for noisy entangled quantum states,

A. Ac´ ın, N. Gisin, and B. Toner, “Grothendieck’s con- stant and local models for noisy entangled quantum states,” Phys. Rev. A 73, 062105 (2006), arXiv:quant- ph/0606138

2006
[23]

More eﬃcient Bell inequalities for Werner states,

Tam´ as V´ ertesi, “More eﬃcient Bell inequalities for Werner states,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 032112 (2008), arXiv:0806.0096

2008 arXiv
[24]

Better local hidden variable models for two-qubit Werner states and an upper bound on the Grothendieck constant KG(3),

Flavien Hirsch, Marco T´ ulio Quintino, Tam´ as V´ ertesi, Miguel Navascu´ es, and Nicolas Brunner, “Better local hidden variable models for two-qubit Werner states and an upper bound on the Grothendieck constant KG(3),” Quantum 1, 3 (2017), arXiv:1609.06114

2017 arXiv
[25]

Characterizing Entanglement,

Dagmar Bruß, “Characterizing Entanglement,” J. Math. Phys. 43, 4237–4251 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0110078

2002 arXiv
[26]

An introduction to en- tanglement measures,

Martin B. Plenio and S. Virmani, “An introduction to en- tanglement measures,” Quant. Inf. Comput. 7, 1 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0504163

2007 arXiv
[27]

Quantifying entanglement resources,

C. Eltschka and J. Siewert, “Quantifying entanglement resources,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 424005 (2014), arXiv:quant-ph/1402.6710

2014 arXiv
[28]

Quantum entanglement,

Ryszard Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, Micha l Horodecki, 18 and Karol Horodecki, “Quantum entanglement,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865–942 (2009), arXiv:quant- ph/0702225

2009
[29]

Entanglement detec- tion,

Otfried G¨ uhne and G´ eza T´ oth, “Entanglement detec- tion,” Phys. Rep. 474, 1–75 (2009), arXiv:0811.2803

2009 arXiv
[30]

Quantum information with continuous variables,

Samuel L. Braunstein and Peter van Loock, “Quantum information with continuous variables,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513–577 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0410100

2005 arXiv
[31]

Alessandro Ferraro, Stefano Olivares, and Matteo G. A. Paris, Gaussian States in Quantum Information , Napoli Series on Physics and Astrophysics (Bibliopolis, 2005) arXiv:quant-ph/0503237

2005 arXiv
[32]

Entanglement in continuous variable systems: Recent advances and cur- rent perspectives,

Gerardo Adesso and Fabrizio Illuminati, “Entanglement in continuous variable systems: Recent advances and cur- rent perspectives,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40, 7821 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0701221

2007 arXiv
[33]

Continuous-variable quantum information pro- cessing,

U. L. Andersen, G. Leuchs, and C. Silber- horn, “Continuous-variable quantum information pro- cessing,” Laser Photonics Rev. 4, 337–354 (2010), arXiv:1008.3468

2010 arXiv
[34]

Gaussian quan- tum information,

Christian Weedbrook, Stefano Pirandola, Ra´ ul Garc´ ıa- Patr´ on, Nicolas J. Cerf, Timothy C. Ralph, Jef- frey H. Shapiro, and Seth Lloyd, “Gaussian quan- tum information,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621–669 (2012), arXiv:1110.3234

2012 arXiv
[35]

Continuous Variable Quantum Information: Gaussian States and Beyond,

Gerardo Adesso, Sammy Ragy, and Antony R. Lee, “Continuous Variable Quantum Information: Gaussian States and Beyond,” Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 21, 1440001 (2014), arXiv:1401.4679

2014 arXiv
[36]

Security of Quantum Key Distribution Using d- Level Systems,

N. J. Cerf, M. Bourennane, A. Karlsson, and N. Gisin, “Security of Quantum Key Distribution Using d- Level Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 127902 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0107130

2002 arXiv
[37]

Maximally Non- local and Monogamous Quantum Correlations,

J. Barrett, A. Kent, and S. Pironio, “Maximally Non- local and Monogamous Quantum Correlations,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 170409 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0605182

2006 arXiv
[38]

Experimental quantum cryptography with qutrits,

S. Gr¨ oblacher, T. Jennewein, Alipasha Vaziri, Gregor Weihs, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental quantum cryptography with qutrits,” New J. Phys. 8, 75 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0511163

2006 arXiv
[39]

Weak randomness in de- vice independent quantum key distribution and the ad- vantage of using high dimensional entanglement,

M. Huber and M. Pawlowski, “Weak randomness in de- vice independent quantum key distribution and the ad- vantage of using high dimensional entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 88, 032309 (2013), arXiv:1301.2455

2013 arXiv
[40]

On the Role of Entanglement in Quantum-Computational Speed-Up,

Richard Jozsa and Noah Linden, “On the Role of Entanglement in Quantum-Computational Speed-Up,” Proc. Roy. Soc. A Math. Phys. 459, 2011–2032 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0201143

2011 arXiv
[41]

Universal quantum simulators,

Seth Lloyd, “Universal quantum simulators,” Science 273, 1073–1078 (1996)

1996
[42]

Universal digital quan- tum simulation with trapped ions,

B. P. Lanyon, C. Hempel, D. Nigg, M. M¨ uller, R. Ger- ritsma, F. Z¨ ahringer, P. Schindler, J. T. Barreiro, M. Rambach, G. Kirchmair, M. Hennrich, Peter Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, “Universal digital quan- tum simulation with trapped ions,” Science 334, 57–61 (2011), ar...

2011 arXiv
[43]

An open-system quantum simu- lator with trapped ions,

J. T. Barreiro, M. M¨ uller, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, T. Monz, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, C. F. Roos, Peter Zoller, and R. Blatt, “An open-system quantum simu- lator with trapped ions,” Nature 470, 486–491 (2011), arXiv:1104.1146

2011 arXiv
[44]

Goals and oppor- tunities in quantum simulation,

Juan Ignacio Cirac and Peter Zoller, “Goals and oppor- tunities in quantum simulation,” Nat. Phys. 8, 264–266 (2012)

2012
[45]

Engineered 2D Ising interactions on a trapped-ion quantum simula- tor with hundreds of spins,

Joseph W. Britton, Brian C. Sawyer, Adam C. Keith, C.-C. Joseph Wang, James K. Freericks, Hermann Uys, Michael J. Biercuk, and John. J. Bollinger, “Engineered 2D Ising interactions on a trapped-ion quantum simula- tor with hundreds of spins,” Nature484, 489–492 (2012), arXiv:1204.5789

2012 arXiv
[46]

Entanglement in many-body systems,

Luigi Amico, Rosario Fazio, Andreas Osterloh, and Vlatko Vedral, “Entanglement in many-body systems,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 517–576 (2008), arXiv:quant- ph/0703044

2008
[47]

Ma- trix product states, projected entangled pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for quan- tum spin systems,

F. Verstraete, V. Murg, and Juan Ignacio Cirac, “Ma- trix product states, projected entangled pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for quan- tum spin systems,” Adv. Phys. 57, 143–224 (2008), arXiv:0907.2796

2008 arXiv
[48]

Collo- quium: Area laws for the entanglement entropy,

Jens Eisert, M. Cramer, and Martin B. Plenio, “Collo- quium: Area laws for the entanglement entropy,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 277–306 (2010), arXiv:0808.3773

2010 arXiv
[49]

The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states,

Ulrich Schollw¨ ock, “The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states,” Ann. Phys. 326, 96–192 (2011), arXiv:1008.3477

2011 arXiv
[50]

A practical introduction to tensor net- works: Matrix product states and projected entan- gled pair states,

Rom´ an Or´ us, “A practical introduction to tensor net- works: Matrix product states and projected entan- gled pair states,” Ann. Phys. 349, 117–158 (2014), arXiv:1306.2164

2014 arXiv
[51]

Review of Tensor Network Contraction Approaches,

S.-J. Ran, E. Tirrito, C. Peng, X. Chen, G. Su, and M. Lewenstein, “Review of Tensor Network Contraction Approaches,” (2017), arXiv:1708.09213

2017
[52]

Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy,

D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, F. L. Moore, and D. J. Heinzen, “Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy,” Phys. Rev. A46, R6797 (1992)

1992
[53]

On the Improvement of Frequency Stardards with Quan- tum Entanglement,

S. F. Huelga, Chiara Macchiavello, T. Pellizzari, A. K. Ekert, Martin B. Plenio, and Juan Ignacio Cirac, “On the Improvement of Frequency Stardards with Quan- tum Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3865 (1997), arXiv:9707014

1997
[54]

Quantum Metrology,

Vittorio Giovannetti, Seth Lloyd, and Lorenzo Mac- cone, “Quantum Metrology,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 010401 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0509179

2006 arXiv
[55]

Intuitive reason for the usefulness of entanglement in quantum metrology,

Lorenzo Maccone, “Intuitive reason for the usefulness of entanglement in quantum metrology,” Phys. Rev. A 88, 042109 (2013), arXiv:1304.7609

2013 arXiv
[56]

Flexible resources for quantum metrology,

Nicolai Friis, Davide Orsucci, Michalis Skotiniotis, Pavel Sekatski, Vedran Dunjko, Hans J. Briegel, and Wolfgang D¨ ur, “Flexible resources for quantum metrology,” New J. Phys. 19, 063044 (2017), arXiv:1610.09999

2017 arXiv
[57]

Quantum metrol- ogy from a quantum information science perspec- tive,

G´ eza T´ oth and Iagoba Apellaniz, “Quantum metrol- ogy from a quantum information science perspec- tive,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 424006 (2014), arXiv:1405.4878

2014 arXiv
[58]

The quantum technologies roadmap: a European community view,

Antonio Ac´ ın, Immanuel Bloch, Harry Buhrman, Tom- maso Calarco, Christopher Eichler, Jens Eisert, Daniel Esteve, Nicolas Gisin, Steﬀen J. Glaser, Fedor Jelezko, Stefan Kuhr, Maciej Lewenstein, Max F. Riedel, Piet O. Schmidt, Rob Thew, Andreas Wallraﬀ, Ian Walms- ley, and Fra...

2018 arXiv
[59]

Conditions for a Class of Entangle- ment Transformations,

Michael A. Nielsen, “Conditions for a Class of Entangle- ment Transformations,” Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 436 (1999), arXiv:quant-ph/9811053

1999 arXiv
[60]

Everything You Always 19 Wanted to Know About LOCC (But Were Afraid to Ask),

Eric Chitambar, Debbie Leung, Laura Manˇ cinska, Maris Ozols, and Andreas Winter, “Everything You Always 19 Wanted to Know About LOCC (But Were Afraid to Ask),” Commun. Math. Phys. 328, 303–326 (2014), arXiv:1210.4583

2014 arXiv
[62]

Classical complexity and quantum en- tanglement,

Leonid Gurvits, “Classical complexity and quantum en- tanglement,” J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 69, 448–484 (2004), special Issue on STOC 2003, arXiv:quant-ph/0303055

2004 arXiv
[63]

Strong NP-hardness of the quantum separability problem

Sevag Gharibian, “Strong NP-hardness of the quantum separability problem.” Quantum Inf. Comput. 10, 343– 360 (2010), arXiv:0810.4507

2010 arXiv
[64]

Majorization and the interconversion of bipartite states,

Michael A. Nielsen and Guifr´ e Vidal, “Majorization and the interconversion of bipartite states,” Quant. Inf. Com- put. 1, 76–93 (2001)

2001
[65]

Mixed-state entanglement and quan- tum error correction,

C. H. Bennett, D. P. Di Vincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, “Mixed-state entanglement and quan- tum error correction,” Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9604024

1996 arXiv
[66]

Entanglement of Formation of an Arbitrary State of Two Qubits,

William K. Wootters, “Entanglement of Formation of an Arbitrary State of Two Qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9709029

1998 arXiv
[67]

The asymptotic entanglement cost of preparing a quantum state,

Patrick M. Hayden, Micha l Horodecki, and Barbara M. Terhal, “The asymptotic entanglement cost of preparing a quantum state,” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.34, 6891–6898 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0008134

2001 arXiv
[68]

Concentrating Partial Entanglement by Local Operations,

Charles H. Bennett, Herbert J. Bernstein, Sandu Popescu, and Benjamin Schumacher, “Concentrating Partial Entanglement by Local Operations,” Phys. Rev. A 53, 2046–2052 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9511030

arXiv
[69]

Puriﬁcation of Noisy Entanglement and Faith- ful Teleportation via Noisy Channels,

Charles H. Bennett, Gilles Brassard, Sandu Popescu, Benjamin Schumacher, John A. Smolin, and William K. Wooters, “Puriﬁcation of Noisy Entanglement and Faith- ful Teleportation via Noisy Channels,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722–725 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9511027

1996 arXiv
[70]

A Counterexample to Additivity of Minimum Output Entropy,

M. B. Hastings, “A Counterexample to Additivity of Minimum Output Entropy,” Nat. Phys. 5, 255–257 (2009), arXiv:0809.3972

2009 arXiv
[71]

Schmidt num- ber for density matrices,

Barbara M. Terhal and Pave l Horodecki, “Schmidt num- ber for density matrices,” Phys. Rev. A 61, 040301(R) (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/9911117

2000 arXiv
[72]

4 Qubit Quantum State Tomography,

Joseph B. Altepeter, Daniel F. V. James, and Paul G. Kwiat, “4 Qubit Quantum State Tomography,” inQuan- tum State Estimation , edited by Matteo Paris and Jaroslav ˇReh´ aˇ cek (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004) pp. 113–145

2004
[73]

Measurement of the entanglement of two superconducting qubits via state tomography,

M. Ansmann, Radoslaw C. Bialczak, N. Katz, Erik Lucero, R. McDermott, Matthew Neeley, E. M. Weig, A. N. Cleland, and John M. Martinis, “Measurement of the entanglement of two superconducting qubits via state tomography,” Science 313, 1423 (2006)

2006
[74]

Separability Criterion for Density Matri- ces,

Asher Peres, “Separability Criterion for Density Matri- ces,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996), arXiv:quant- ph/9604005

1996
[75]

Separability of mixed states: necessary and suﬃcient conditions,

Micha l Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, and Ryszard Horodecki, “Separability of mixed states: necessary and suﬃcient conditions,” Phys. Lett. A 223, 25 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9605038

1996 arXiv
[76]

Mixed-State Entanglement and Distillation: Is there a “Bound

Micha l Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, and Ryszard Horodecki, “Mixed-State Entanglement and Distillation: Is there a “Bound” Entanglement in Nature?” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5239 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9801069

1998 arXiv
[77]

A Few Steps More Towards NPT Bound Entanglement,

Lukasz Pankowski, Marco Piani, Micha l Horodecki, and Pawe l Horodecki, “A Few Steps More Towards NPT Bound Entanglement,” IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 56, 4085–4100 (2010), arXiv:0711.2613

2010 arXiv
[78]

Many Copies May Be Required for En- tanglement Distillation,

John Watrous, “Many Copies May Be Required for En- tanglement Distillation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 010502 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0312123

2004 arXiv
[79]

Logarithmic Negativity: A Full En- tanglement Monotone That is not Convex,

Martin B. Plenio, “Logarithmic Negativity: A Full En- tanglement Monotone That is not Convex,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 090503 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0505071

2005 arXiv
[80]

Entanglement monotones,

Guifr´ e Vidal, “Entanglement monotones,” J. Mod. Opt. 47, 355–376 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/9807077

2000 arXiv
[81]

Eisert, Entanglement in quantum information theory , Ph.D

J. Eisert, Entanglement in quantum information theory , Ph.D. thesis, University of Potsdam (2001), arXiv:quant- ph/0610253

2001
[82]

Computable measure of entanglement,

G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, “Computable measure of entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 65, 032314 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0102117

2002 arXiv
[83]

Bell inequalities and the separa- bility criterion,

Barbara M. Terhal, “Bell inequalities and the separa- bility criterion,” Phys. Lett. A 271, 319–326 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/9911057

2000 arXiv
[84]

Reed and B

M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathemati- cal Physics I: Functional Analysis (Academic Press, New York and London, 1972)

1972
[85]

Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden-Variable Theories,

J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, “Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden-Variable Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969)

1969
[86]

A Geometric Picture of Entanglement and Bell Inequal- ities,

R. A. Bertlmann, H. Narnhofer, and W. Thirring, “A Geometric Picture of Entanglement and Bell Inequal- ities,” Phys. Rev. A 66, 032319 (2002), arXiv:quant- ph/0111116

2002
[87]

Geom- etry of two-qubit states with negative conditional en- tropy,

N. Friis, S. Bulusu, and R. A. Bertlmann, “Geom- etry of two-qubit states with negative conditional en- tropy,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 125301 (2017), arXiv:1609.04144

2017 arXiv
[88]

Separability of Mixed Quantum States: Lin- ear Contractions and Permutation Criteria,

Micha l Horodecki, Pawe l Horodecki, and Ryszard Horodecki, “Separability of Mixed Quantum States: Lin- ear Contractions and Permutation Criteria,” Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 13, 103 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0206008

2006 arXiv
[89]

A new class of entanglement measures,

Oliver Rudolph, “A new class of entanglement measures,” J. Math. Phys. 42, 5306–5314 (2001), arXiv:math-ph/0005011

2001 arXiv
[90]

Some properties of the computable cross norm criterion for separability,

Oliver Rudolph, “Some properties of the computable cross norm criterion for separability,” Phys. Rev. A 67, 032312 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0212047

2003 arXiv
[91]

Further results on the cross norm crite- rion for separability,

Oliver Rudolph, “Further results on the cross norm crite- rion for separability,” Quantum Inf. Process. 4, 219–239 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0202121

2005 arXiv
[92]

A matrix realignment method for recognizing entanglement,

Kai Chen and Ling-An Wu, “A matrix realignment method for recognizing entanglement,” Quant. Inf. Com- put. 3, 193–202 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0205017

2003 arXiv
[93]

Entanglement Detec- tion by Violations of Noisy Uncertainty Relations: A Proof of Principle,

Yuan-Yuan Zhao, Guo-Yong Xiang, Xiao-Min Hu, Bi- Heng Liu, Chuan-Feng Li, Guang-Can Guo, Ren´ e Schwonnek, and Ramona Wolf, “Entanglement Detec- tion by Violations of Noisy Uncertainty Relations: A Proof of Principle,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 220401 (2019), arXiv:1810.05588

2019 arXiv
[94]

Violation of local uncertainty relations as a signature of entangle- ment,

Holger F. Hofmann and Shigeki Takeuchi, “Violation of local uncertainty relations as a signature of entangle- ment,” Phys. Rev. A 68, 032103 (2003), arXiv:quant- ph/0212090

2003
[95]

Entanglement criteria based on local uncer- tainty relations are strictly stronger than the computable 20 cross norm criterion,

Otfried G¨ uhne, Matyas Mechler, G´ eza T´ oth, and Pe- ter Adam, “Entanglement criteria based on local uncer- tainty relations are strictly stronger than the computable 20 cross norm criterion,” Phys. Rev. A 74, 010301 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0604050

2006 arXiv
[96]

Entanglement detection via tighter local uncertainty relations,

Cheng-Jie Zhang, Hyunchul Nha, Yong-Sheng Zhang, and Guang-Can Guo, “Entanglement detection via tighter local uncertainty relations,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 012324 (2010), arXiv:0908.4214

2010 arXiv
[97]

State-Independent Uncertainty Relations and Entanglement Detection in Noisy Systems,

Ren´ e Schwonnek, Lars Dammeier, and Reinhard F. Werner, “State-Independent Uncertainty Relations and Entanglement Detection in Noisy Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 170404 (2017), arXiv:1705.10679

2017 arXiv
[98]

Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states,

S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, “Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439–3443 (1994)

1994
[99]

Demonstration of the Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen paradox using nondegenerate parametric ampliﬁ- cation,

M. D. Reid, “Demonstration of the Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen paradox using nondegenerate parametric ampliﬁ- cation,” Phys. Rev. A 40, 913–923 (1989)

1989
[100]

Entanglement between two spatially separated atomic modes,

Karsten Lange, Jan Peise, Bernd L¨ ucke, Ilka Kruse, Giuseppe Vitagliano, Iagoba Apellaniz, Matthias Klein- mann, G´ eza T´ oth, and Carsten Klempt, “Entanglement between two spatially separated atomic modes,” Science 360, 416–418 (2018), arXiv:1708.02480

2018 arXiv
[101]

Colloquium: The Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen paradox: From concepts to applications,

M. D. Reid, P. D. Drummond, W. P. Bowen, E. G. Cavalcanti, P. K. Lam, H. A. Bachor, U. L. Andersen, and G. Leuchs, “Colloquium: The Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen paradox: From concepts to applications,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1727–1751 (2009), arXiv:0806.0270

2009 arXiv
[102]

Covariance Matrices and the Separabil- ity Problem,

Otfried G¨ uhne, Philipp Hyllus, Oleg Gittsovich, and Jens Eisert, “Covariance Matrices and the Separabil- ity Problem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 130504 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0611282

2007 arXiv
[103]

Unifying several separability conditions us- ing the covariance matrix criterion,

Oleg Gittsovich, Otfried G¨ uhne, Philipp Hyllus, and Jens Eisert, “Unifying several separability conditions us- ing the covariance matrix criterion,” Phys. Rev. A 78, 052319 (2008), arXiv:0803.0757

2008 arXiv
[104]

Multiparticle covariance matrices and the impossibil- ity of detecting graph-state entanglement with two- particle correlations,

Oleg Gittsovich, Philipp Hyllus, and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Multiparticle covariance matrices and the impossibil- ity of detecting graph-state entanglement with two- particle correlations,” Phys. Rev. A 82, 032306 (2010), arXiv:1006.1594

2010 arXiv
[105]

Estimating Entanglement Measures in Experi- ments,

Otfried G¨ uhne, M. Reimpell, and Reinhard F. Werner, “Estimating Entanglement Measures in Experi- ments,” Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 110502 (2007), arXiv:quant- ph/0607163

2007
[106]

Quantitative entanglement witnesses,

Jens Eisert, Fernando G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, and Koen- raad M. R. Audenaert, “Quantitative entanglement witnesses,” New J. Phys. 9, 46 (2007), arXiv:quant- ph/0607167

2007
[107]

Entanglement and Extreme Spin Squeezing,

Anders Sørensen and Klaus Mølmer, “Entanglement and Extreme Spin Squeezing,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4431–4434 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0011035

2001 arXiv
[108]

Entanglement and extreme spin squeezing of unpolarized states,

Giuseppe Vitagliano, Iagoba Apellaniz, Matthias Klein- mann, Bernd L¨ ucke, Carsten Klempt, and G´ eza T´ oth, “Entanglement and extreme spin squeezing of unpolarized states,” New J. Phys. 19, 013027 (2017), arXiv:1605.07202

2017 arXiv
[109]

Entanglement and extreme planar spin squeezing,

Giuseppe Vitagliano, Giorgio Colangelo, Ferran Mar- tin Ciurana, Morgan W. Mitchell, Robert J. Sewell, and G´ eza T´ oth, “Entanglement and extreme planar spin squeezing,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 020301 (2018), arXiv:1705.09090

2018 arXiv
[110]

Multiparticle entan- glement criteria for nonsymmetric collective variances,

Oliver Marty, Marcus Cramer, Giuseppe Vitagliano, G´ eza T´ oth, and Martin B. Plenio, “Multiparticle entan- glement criteria for nonsymmetric collective variances,” (2017), arXiv:1708.06986

2017 arXiv
[111]

Mea- sure of genuine multipartite entanglement with com- putable lower bounds,

Zhi-Hao Ma, Zhi-Hua Chen, Jing-Ling Chen, Christoph Spengler, Andreas Gabriel, and Marcus Huber, “Mea- sure of genuine multipartite entanglement with com- putable lower bounds,” Phys. Rev. A 83, 062325 (2011), arXiv:1101.2001

2011 arXiv
[112]

Determining lower bounds on a measure of multipartite entanglement from few local observables,

J.-Y. Wu, Hermann Kampermann, Dagmar Brusß, C. Kl¨ ockl, and M. Huber, “Determining lower bounds on a measure of multipartite entanglement from few local observables,” Phys. Rev. A 86, 022319 (2012), arXiv:1205.3119

2012 arXiv
[113]

Structure of Multidi- mensional Entanglement in Multipartite Systems,

M. Huber and J. I. de Vicente, “Structure of Multidi- mensional Entanglement in Multipartite Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 030501 (2013), arXiv:1210.6876

2013 arXiv
[114]

Bloch vectors for qudits,

Reinhold A. Bertlmann and Philipp. Krammer, “Bloch vectors for qudits,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41, 235303 (2008), arXiv:0806.1174

2008 arXiv
[115]

Measurements in two bases are suﬃcient for certifying high-dimensional entanglement,

Jessica Bavaresco, Natalia Herrera Valencia, Claude Kl¨ ockl, Matej Pivoluska, Paul Erker, Nicolai Friis, Mehul Malik, and Marcus Huber, “Measurements in two bases are suﬃcient for certifying high-dimensional entanglement,” Nat. Phys. 14, 1032–1037 (2018), arXiv:1709.07344

2018 arXiv
[116]

Opti- mal state-determination by mutually unbiased measure- ments,

William K. Wootters and Brian D. Fields, “Opti- mal state-determination by mutually unbiased measure- ments,” Ann. Phys. 191, 363–381 (1989)

1989
[117]

Energy as an entanglement witness for quan- tum many-body systems,

Mark R. Dowling, Andrew C. Doherty, and Stephen D. Bartlett, “Energy as an entanglement witness for quan- tum many-body systems,” Phys. Rev. A 70, 062113 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0408086

2004 arXiv
[118]

Entanglement witnesses in spin mod- els,

G´ eza T´ oth, “Entanglement witnesses in spin mod- els,” Phys. Rev. A 71, 010301 (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0406061

2005
[119]

Heisenberg-Weyl Observables: Bloch vectors in phase space,

Ali Asadian, Paul Erker, Marcus Huber, and Claude Kl¨ ockl, “Heisenberg-Weyl Observables: Bloch vectors in phase space,” Phys. Rev. A 94, 010301(R) (2016), arXiv:1512.05640

2016 arXiv
[120]

Detecting Genuine Multipartite Entanglement with Two Local Measure- ments,

G´ eza T´ oth and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Detecting Genuine Multipartite Entanglement with Two Local Measure- ments,” Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 060501 (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0405165

2005
[121]

Correlation-tensor criteria for genuine multiqubit entanglement,

Wies law Laskowski, Marcin Markiewicz, Tomasz Pa- terek, and Marek ˙Zukowski, “Correlation-tensor criteria for genuine multiqubit entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 84, 062305 (2011), arXiv:1110.4108

2011 arXiv
[122]

Temporal Multimode Storage of Entan- gled Photon Pairs,

Alexey Tiranov, Peter C. Strassmann, Jonathan Lavoie, Nicolas Brunner, Marcus Huber, Varun B. Verma, Sae Woo Nam, Richard P. Mirin, Adriana E. Lita, Francesco Marsili, Mikael Afzelius, F´ elix Bussi` eres, and Nicolas Gisin, “Temporal Multimode Storage of Entan- gled Photon Pa...

2016 arXiv
[123]

Entanglement Veriﬁcation with Finite Data,

Robin Blume-Kohout, Jun O. S. Yin, and S. J. van Enk, “Entanglement Veriﬁcation with Finite Data,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 170501 (2010), arXiv:1005.0003

2010 arXiv
[124]

Direct Fidelity Estimation from Few Pauli Measurements,

Steven T. Flammia and Yi-Kai Liu, “Direct Fidelity Estimation from Few Pauli Measurements,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 230501 (2011), arXiv:1104.4695

2011 arXiv
[125]

Reliable quantum certiﬁcation for photonic quan- tum technologies,

L. Aolita, C. Gogolin, M. Kliesch, and J. Eis- ert, “Reliable quantum certiﬁcation for photonic quan- tum technologies,” Nat. Commun. 6, 8498 (2015), arXiv:1407.4817

2015 arXiv
[126]

Systematic Errors in Cur- rent Quantum State Tomography Tools,

Christian Schwemmer, Lukas Knips, Daniel Richart, Harald Weinfurter, Tobias Moroder, Matthias Klein- 21 mann, and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Systematic Errors in Cur- rent Quantum State Tomography Tools,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 080403 (2015), arXiv:1310.8465

2015 arXiv
[127]

Maxi- mum likelihood quantum state tomography is inadmissi- ble,

Christopher Ferrie and Robin Blume-Kohout, “Maxi- mum likelihood quantum state tomography is inadmissi- ble,” (2018), arXiv:1808.01072

2018 arXiv
[128]

Optimal Veriﬁcation of Entangled States with Local Measurements,

Sam Pallister, Noah Linden, and Ashley Montanaro, “Optimal Veriﬁcation of Entangled States with Local Measurements,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 170502 (2018), arXiv:1709.03353

2018 arXiv
[129]

High-dimensional quantum cryp- tography with twisted light,

Mohammad Mirhosseini, Omar S. Maga˜ na-Loaiza, Mal- colm N. O’Sullivan, Brandon Rodenburg, Mehul Malik, Martin P. J. Lavery, Miles J. Padgett, Daniel J. Gauthier, and Robert W. Boyd, “High-dimensional quantum cryp- tography with twisted light,” New J. Phys. 17, 033033 (2015), ...

2015 arXiv
[130]

Entanglement distribution beyond qubits or: How I stopped worrying and learned to love the noise,

Sebastian Ecker, Fr´ ed´ eric Bouchard, Lukas Bulla, Flo- rian Brandt, Oskar Kohout, Fabian Steinlechner, Robert Fickler, Mehul Malik, Yelena Guryanova, Rupert Ursin, and Marcus Huber, “Entanglement distribution beyond qubits or: How I stopped worrying and learned to love the ...

2019
[131]

Quantiﬁcation of multidimensional entanglement stored in a crystal,

Alexey Tiranov, S´ ebastien Designolle, Emmanuel Zam- brini Cruzeiro, Jonathan Lavoie, Nicolas Brunner, Mikael Afzelius, Marcus Huber, and Nicolas Gisin, “Quantiﬁcation of multidimensional entanglement stored in a crystal,” Phys. Rev. A 96, 040303 (2017), arXiv:1609.05033

2017 arXiv
[132]

Quantifying Pho- tonic High-Dimensional Entanglement,

Anthony Martin, Thiago Guerreiro, Alexey Tiranov, S´ ebastien Designolle, Florian Fr¨ owis, Nicolas Brunner, Marcus Huber, and Nicolas Gisin, “Quantifying Pho- tonic High-Dimensional Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 110501 (2017), arXiv:1701.03269

2017 arXiv
[133]

Distribution of high- dimensional entanglement via an intra-city free-space link,

Fabian Steinlechner, Sebastian Ecker, Matthias Fink, Bo Liu, Jessica Bavaresco, Marcus Huber, Thomas Scheidl, and Rupert Ursin, “Distribution of high- dimensional entanglement via an intra-city free-space link,” Nat. Commun. 8, 15971 (2017), arXiv:1612.00751

2017 arXiv
[134]

Quan- tifying high-dimensional entanglement with Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen correlations,

James Schneeloch and Gregory A. Howland, “Quan- tifying high-dimensional entanglement with Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen correlations,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 042338 (2018), arXiv:1709.03626

2018 arXiv
[135]

Quantifying high dimensional entanglement with two mutually unbiased bases,

Paul Erker, Mario Krenn, and Marcus Huber, “Quantifying high dimensional entanglement with two mutually unbiased bases,” Quantum 1, 22 (2017), arXiv:1512.05315

2017 arXiv
[136]

Mutual Unbiasedness in Coarse- Grained Continuous Variables,

Daniel S. Tasca, Piero S´ anchez, Stephen P. Walborn, and Lukasz Rudnicki, “Mutual Unbiasedness in Coarse- Grained Continuous Variables,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 040403 (2018), arXiv:1709.00137

2018 arXiv
[137]

Class of positive- partial-transpose bound entangled states associated with almost any set of pure entangled states,

Marco Piani and Caterina E. Mora, “Class of positive- partial-transpose bound entangled states associated with almost any set of pure entangled states,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 012305 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0607061

2007 arXiv
[138]

Family of concurrence monotones and its applications,

Gilad Gour, “Family of concurrence monotones and its applications,” Phys. Rev. A 71, 012318 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0410148

2005 arXiv
[139]

Quantifying Entangle- ment of Maximal Dimension in Bipartite Mixed States,

Gael Sent´ ıs, Christopher Eltschka, Otfried G¨ uhne, Mar- cus Huber, and Jens Siewert, “Quantifying Entangle- ment of Maximal Dimension in Bipartite Mixed States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 190502 (2016), arXiv:1605.09783

2016 arXiv
[140]

Characterizing Genuine Multilevel Entanglement,

Tristan Kraft, Christina Ritz, Nicolas Brunner, Mar- cus Huber, and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Characterizing Genuine Multilevel Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 060502 (2018), arXiv:1707.01050

2018 arXiv
[141]

Experimen- tal witness of genuine high-dimensional entanglement,

Yu Guo, Xiao-Min Hu, Bi-Heng Liu, Yun-Feng Huang, Chuan-Feng Li, and Guang-Can Guo, “Experimen- tal witness of genuine high-dimensional entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 062309 (2018)

2018
[142]

How often is a random quantum state k- entangled?

Stanis law J. Szarek, Elisabeth Werner, and Karol ˙Zyczkowski, “How often is a random quantum state k- entangled?” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.44, 045303 (2011), arXiv:1010.1485

2011 arXiv
[143]

High-Dimensional Entangle- ment in States with Positive Partial Transposition,

Marcus Huber, Ludovico Lami, C´ ecilia Lancien, and Alexander M¨ uller-Hermes, “High-Dimensional Entangle- ment in States with Positive Partial Transposition,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 200503 (2018), arXiv:1802.04975

2018 arXiv
[144]

Schmidt-number witnesses and bound entangle- ment,

Anna Sanpera, Dagmar Bruß, and Maciej Lewen- stein, “Schmidt-number witnesses and bound entangle- ment,” Phys. Rev. A 63, 050301(R) (2001), arXiv:quant- ph/0009109

2001
[145]

Multidimensional quantum entan- glement with large-scale integrated optics,

Jianwei Wang, Stefano Paesani, Yunhong Ding, Raﬀaele Santagati, Paul Skrzypczyk, Alexia Salavrakos, Jordi Tura, Remigiusz Augusiak, Laura Manˇ cinska, Davide Bacco, Damien Bonneau, Joshua W. Silverstone, Qi- huang Gong, Antonio Ac´ ın, Karsten Rottwitt, Leif K. Oxenløwe, Jerem...

2018 arXiv
[146]

Bounds and optimisation of orbital angular momentum bandwidths within parametric down-conversion systems,

F. M. Miatto, D. Giovannini, J. Romero, S. Franke- Arnold, S. M. Barnett, and M. J. Padgett, “Bounds and optimisation of orbital angular momentum bandwidths within parametric down-conversion systems,” Eur. Phys. J. D 66, 178 (2012), arXiv:1112.3910

2012 arXiv
[147]

Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,

L. Allen, M. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerdman, “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185–8189 (1992)

1992
[148]

Orbital angular momentum of pho- tons and the entanglement of Laguerre-Gaussian modes,

Mario Krenn, Mehul Malik, Manuel Erhard, and Anton Zeilinger, “Orbital angular momentum of pho- tons and the entanglement of Laguerre-Gaussian modes,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 375, 20150442 (2017), arXiv:1607.05114

2017 arXiv
[149]

Bell Inequalities for Arbitrarily High- Dimensional Systems,

D. Collins, N. Gisin, N. Linden, S. Massar, and S. Popescu, “Bell Inequalities for Arbitrarily High- Dimensional Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 040404 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0106024

2002 arXiv
[150]

Experimental Two-Photon, Three-Dimensional Entan- glement for Quantum Communication,

Alipasha Vaziri, Gregor Weihs, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental Two-Photon, Three-Dimensional Entan- glement for Quantum Communication,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 240401 (2002)

2002
[151]

Limitations to the determination of a La- guerre–Gauss spectrum via projective, phase-ﬂattening measurement,

Hammam Qassim, Filippo M. Miatto, Juan P. Torres, Miles J. Padgett, Ebrahim Karimi, and Robert W. Boyd, “Limitations to the determination of a La- guerre–Gauss spectrum via projective, phase-ﬂattening measurement,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 31, A20–A23 (2014), arXiv:1401.3512

2014 arXiv
[152]

Measuring azimuthal and radial modes of photons,

Fr´ ed´ eric Bouchard, Natalia Herrera Valencia, Florian Brandt, Robert Fickler, Marcus Huber, and Mehul Ma- lik, “Measuring azimuthal and radial modes of photons,” Opt. Express 26, 31925–31941 (2018), arXiv:1808.03533

2018 arXiv
[153]

Gen- eration and conﬁrmation of a (100×100)-dimensional en- tangled quantum system,

Mario Krenn, Marcus Huber, Robert Fickler, Radek Lapkiewicz, Sven Ramelow, and Anton Zeilinger, “Gen- eration and conﬁrmation of a (100×100)-dimensional en- tangled quantum system,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 6243–6247 (2014), arXiv:1306.0096. 22

2014 arXiv
[154]

Experimen- tal high-dimensional two-photon entanglement and vio- lations of generalized Bell inequalities,

Adetunmise C. Dada, Jonathan Leach, Gerald S. Buller, Miles J. Padgett, and Erika Andersson, “Experimen- tal high-dimensional two-photon entanglement and vio- lations of generalized Bell inequalities,” Nat. Phys. 7, 677–680 (2011), arXiv:1104.5087

2011 arXiv
[155]

Pixel Entanglement: Experimental Realization of Optically Entangled d= 3 and d= 6 Qu- dits,

Malcolm O’Sullivan, Irfan Ali Khan, Robert W. Boyd, and John Howell, “Pixel Entanglement: Experimental Realization of Optically Entangled d= 3 and d= 6 Qu- dits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 220501 (2005)

2005
[156]

Imaging high-dimensional spa- tial entanglement with a camera,

M. P. Edgar, D. S. Tasca, F. Izdebski, R. E. Warbur- ton, J. Leach, M. Agnew, G. S. Buller, R. W. Boyd, and Miles J. Padgett, “Imaging high-dimensional spa- tial entanglement with a camera,” Nat. Commun. 3, 984 (2012), arXiv:1204.1293

2012 arXiv
[157]

Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox in Twin Images,

Paul-Antoine Moreau, Fabrice Devaux, and Eric Lantz, “Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox in Twin Images,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 160401 (2014), arXiv:1404.3028

2014 arXiv
[158]

Com- pressively Characterizing High-Dimensional Entangled States with Complementary, Random Filtering,

Gregory A. Howland, Samuel H. Knarr, James Schnee- loch, Daniel J. Lum, and John C. Howell, “Com- pressively Characterizing High-Dimensional Entangled States with Complementary, Random Filtering,” Phys. Rev. X 6, 021018 (2016), arXiv:1605.04792

2016 arXiv
[159]

Testing for entanglement with periodic coarse graining,

D. S. Tasca, Lukasz Rudnicki, R. S. Aspden, M. J. Pad- gett, P. H. Souto Ribeiro, and S. P. Walborn, “Testing for entanglement with periodic coarse graining,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 042312 (2018), arXiv:1506.01095

2018 arXiv
[160]

Analysis and Interpreta- tion of High Transverse Entanglement in Optical Para- metric Down Conversion,

C. K. Law and J. H. Eberly, “Analysis and Interpreta- tion of High Transverse Entanglement in Optical Para- metric Down Conversion,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 127903 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0312088

2004 arXiv
[161]

Manipulation of mul- tiphoton entanglement in waveguide quantum circuits,

Jonathan C. F. Matthews, Alberto Politi, Andr´ e Ste- fanov, and Jeremy L. O’Brien, “Manipulation of mul- tiphoton entanglement in waveguide quantum circuits,” Nat. Photonics 3, 346–350 (2009), arXiv:0911.1257

2009 arXiv
[162]

Polarization Entangled State Mea- surement on a Chip,

Linda Sansoni, Fabio Sciarrino, Giuseppe Vallone, Paolo Mataloni, Andrea Crespi, Roberta Ramponi, and Roberto Osellame, “Polarization Entangled State Mea- surement on a Chip,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 200503 (2010), arXiv:1009.2426

2010 arXiv
[163]

Experimental ac- cess to higher-dimensional entangled quantum systems using integrated optics,

Christoph Schaeﬀ, Robert Polster, Marcus Huber, Sven Ramelow, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental ac- cess to higher-dimensional entangled quantum systems using integrated optics,” Optica 2, 523–529 (2015), arXiv:1502.06504

2015 arXiv
[164]

Bell Inequalities Tailored to Maximally Entangled States,

Alexia Salavrakos, Remigiusz Augusiak, Jordi Tura, Pe- ter Wittek, Antonio Ac´ ın, and Stefano Pironio, “Bell Inequalities Tailored to Maximally Entangled States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 040402 (2017), arXiv:1607.04578

2017 arXiv
[165]

Creating high dimensional time-bin entangle- ment using mode-locked lasers,

H. de Riedmatten, I. Marcikic, H. Zbinden, and Nico- las Gisin, “Creating high dimensional time-bin entangle- ment using mode-locked lasers,” Quantum Inf. Comput. 2, 425–433 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0204165

2002 arXiv
[166]

Bell- Type Test of Energy-Time Entangled Qutrits,

R. T. Thew, A. Ac´ ın, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin, “Bell- Type Test of Energy-Time Entangled Qutrits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 010503 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0402048

2004 arXiv
[167]

Versatile shaper-assisted discretization of energy–time entangled photons,

B. Bessire, C. Bernhard, T. Feurer, and A. Stefanov, “Versatile shaper-assisted discretization of energy–time entangled photons,” New J. Phys. 16, 033017 (2014), arXiv:1310.4610

2014 arXiv
[168]

On-chip generation of high-dimensional entangled quantum states and their coherent control,

M. Kues, C. Reimer, P. Roztocki, L. R. Cortes, S. Sciara, B. Wetzel, Y. Zhang, A. Cino, S. T. Chu, B. E. Little, D. J. Moss, L. Caspani, J. Azana, and R. Moran- dotti, “On-chip generation of high-dimensional entangled quantum states and their coherent control,” Nature 546, 622...

2017
[169]

Quantum optical micro- combs,

Michael Kues, Christian Reimer, Joseph M. Lukens, William J. Munro, Andrew M. Weiner, David J. Moss, and Roberto Morandotti, “Quantum optical micro- combs,” Nat. Photonics 13, 170–179 (2019)

2019
[170]

Generation of Hyperentangled Photon Pairs,

Julio Barreiro, Nathan Langford, Nicholas Peters, and Paul Kwiat, “Generation of Hyperentangled Photon Pairs,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 260501 (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0507128

2005
[171]

Accurate and Robust Unitary Transformations of a High-Dimensional Quantum System,

B. E. Anderson, H. Sosa-Martinez, C. A. Riofr´ ıo, Ivan H. Deutsch, and Poul. S. Jessen, “Accurate and Robust Unitary Transformations of a High-Dimensional Quantum System,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 240401 (2015), arXiv:1410.3891

2015 arXiv
[172]

Stimulated Raman adiabatic passage in a three-level superconducting circuit,

K. S. Kumar, A. Veps¨ al¨ ainen, S. Danilin, and G. S. Paraoanu, “Stimulated Raman adiabatic passage in a three-level superconducting circuit,” Nat. Commun. 7, 10628 (2016), arXiv:1508.02981

2016 arXiv
[173]

Quantum Simulation of Helium Hy- dride Cation in a Solid-State Spin Register,

Ya Wang, Florian Dolde, Jacob Biamonte, Ryan Bab- bush, Ville Bergholm, Sen Yang, Ingmar Jakobi, Philipp Neumann, Al´ an Aspuru-Guzik, James D Whitﬁeld, and J¨ org Wrachtrup, “Quantum Simulation of Helium Hy- dride Cation in a Solid-State Spin Register,” ACS Nano 9, 7769–7774 ...

2015 arXiv
[174]

Remote quantum entan- glement between two micromechanical oscillators,

Ralf Riedinger, Andreas Wallucks, Igor Marinkovic, Clemens L¨ oschnauer, Markus Aspelmeyer, Sungkun Hong, and Simon Gr¨ oblacher, “Remote quantum entan- glement between two micromechanical oscillators,” Na- ture 556, 473–477 (2018), arXiv:1710.11147

2018 arXiv
[175]

Multi-partite en- tanglement can speed up quantum key distribu- tion in networks,

Michael Epping, Hermann Kampermann, Chiara Mac- chiavello, and Dagmar Bruß, “Multi-partite en- tanglement can speed up quantum key distribu- tion in networks,” New J. Phys. 19, 093012 (2017), arXiv:1612.05585

2017 arXiv
[176]

Layered quantum key distribution,

Matej Pivoluska, Marcus Huber, and Mehul Malik, “Layered quantum key distribution,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 032312 (2018), arXiv:1709.00377

2018 arXiv
[177]

Fully device-independent conference key agreement,

J´ er´ emy Ribeiro, Gl´ aucia Murta, and Stephanie Wehner, “Fully device-independent conference key agreement,” Phys. Rev. A 97, 022307 (2018), arXiv:1708.00798

2018
[178]

Fundamental limita- tion on quantum broadcast networks,

Stefan B¨ auml and Koji Azuma, “Fundamental limita- tion on quantum broadcast networks,” Quantum Sci. Technol. 2, 024004 (2017), arXiv:1609.03994

2017 arXiv
[179]

Multipartite entanglement and high- precision metrology,

G´ eza T´ oth, “Multipartite entanglement and high- precision metrology,” Phys. Rev. A 85, 022322 (2012), arXiv:1006.4368

2012 arXiv
[180]

Multipartite entanglement, quantum- error-correcting codes, and entangling power of quan- tum evolutions,

A. J. Scott, “Multipartite entanglement, quantum- error-correcting codes, and entangling power of quan- tum evolutions,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 052330 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0310137

2004 arXiv
[181]

Multipartite entanglement in quantum algorithms,

Dagmar Bruß and Chiara Macchiavello, “Multipartite entanglement in quantum algorithms,” Phys. Rev. A 83, 052313 (2011), arXiv:1007.4179

2011 arXiv
[182]

A One-Way Quantum Computer,

Robert Raussendorf and Hans J. Briegel, “A One-Way Quantum Computer,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5188–5191 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0010033

2001 arXiv
[183]

Persistent Entanglement in Arrays of Interacting Particles,

Hans J. Briegel and Robert Raussendorf, “Persistent Entanglement in Arrays of Interacting Particles,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 910–913 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0004051

2001 arXiv
[184]

Multiparty entanglement in graph states,

M. Hein, Jens Eisert, and Hans J. Briegel, “Multiparty entanglement in graph states,” Phys. Rev. A 69, 062311 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0307130

2004 arXiv
[185]

Quantum hypergraph states,

M. Rossi, Marcus Huber, Dagmar Bruß, and Chiara Macchiavello, “Quantum hypergraph states,” New J. 23 Phys. 15, 113022 (2013), arXiv:1211.5554

2013 arXiv
[186]

Entanglement detec- tion in the stabilizer formalism,

G´ eza T´ oth and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Entanglement detec- tion in the stabilizer formalism,” Phys. Rev. A 72, 022340 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0501020

2005 arXiv
[187]

En- tanglement on mixed stabilizer states: normal forms and reduction procedures,

Koenraad M. R. Audenaert and Martin B. Plenio, “En- tanglement on mixed stabilizer states: normal forms and reduction procedures,” New J. Phys. 7, 170 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0505036

2005 arXiv
[188]

Typical entangle- ment of stabilizer states,

Graeme Smith and Debbie Leung, “Typical entangle- ment of stabilizer states,” Phys. Rev. A 74, 062314 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0510232

2006 arXiv
[189]

Quantum many-body systems out of equilibrium,

Jens Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and Christian Gogolin, “Quantum many-body systems out of equilibrium,” Nat. Phys. 11, 124 (2015), arXiv:1408.5148

2015 arXiv
[190]

Equilibration, ther- malisation, and the emergence of statistical mechanics in closed quantum systems,

Christian Gogolin and Jens Eisert, “Equilibration, ther- malisation, and the emergence of statistical mechanics in closed quantum systems,” Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 056001 (2016), arXiv:1503.07538

2016 arXiv
[191]

Quantum entanglement in con- densed matter systems,

Nicolas Laﬂorencie, “Quantum entanglement in con- densed matter systems,” Phys. Rep. 646, 1–59 (2016), arXiv:1512.03388

2016 arXiv
[192]

The Large-N Limit of Superconfor- mal Field Theories and Supergravity,

Juan Maldacena, “The Large-N Limit of Superconfor- mal Field Theories and Supergravity,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 1113–1133 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9711200

1999 arXiv
[193]

Quantum spin squeezing,

Jian Ma, Xiaoguang Wang, C. P. Sun, and Franco Nori, “Quantum spin squeezing,” Phys. Rep. 509, 89– 165 (2011), arXiv:1011.2978

2011 arXiv
[194]

State preservation by repetitive error detec- tion in a superconducting quantum circuit,

J. Kelly, R. Barends, A. G. Fowler, A. Megrant, E. Jef- frey, T. C. White, D. Sank, J. Y. Mutus, B. Campbell, Yu Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, I.-C. Hoi, C. Neill, P. J. J. O’Malley, C. Quintana, P. Roushan, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, A. N. Cleland, and John M. Marti...

2015 arXiv
[195]

10-Qubit Entangle- ment and Parallel Logic Operations with a Supercon- ducting Circuit,

Chao Song, Kai Xu, Wuxin Liu, Chuiping Yang, Shi- Biao Zheng, Hui Deng, Qiwei Xie, Keqiang Huang, Qiu- jiang Guo, Libo Zhang, Pengfei Zhang, Da Xu, Dongn- ing Zheng, Xiaobo Zhu, H. Wang, Y.-A. Chen, C.-Y. Lu, Siyuan Han, and J.-W. Pan, “10-Qubit Entangle- ment and Parallel Log...

2017 arXiv
[196]

Genuine 12-Qubit Entanglement on a Superconduct- ing Quantum Processor,

Ming Gong, Ming-Cheng Chen, Yarui Zheng, Shiyu Wang, Chen Zha, Hui Deng, Zhiguang Yan, Hao Rong, Yulin Wu, Shaowei Li, Fusheng Chen, Youwei Zhao, Futian Liang, Jin Lin, Yu Xu, Cheng Guo, Lihua Sun, Anthony D. Castellano, Haohua Wang, Chengzhi Peng, Chao-Yang Lu, Xiaobo Zhu, an...

2019 arXiv
[197]

Three-photon en- ergy–time entanglement,

L. K. Shalm, D. R. Hamel, Z. Yan, C. Simon, K. J. Resch, and T. Jennewein, “Three-photon en- ergy–time entanglement,” Nat. Phys. 9, 19–22 (2013), arXiv:1203.6315

2013 arXiv
[198]

Entangling Photons Radiated by Indepen- dent Pulsed Sources,

Marek ˙Zukowski, Anton Zeilinger, and Harald We- infurter, “Entangling Photons Radiated by Indepen- dent Pulsed Sources,” Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 755, 91–102 (1995)

1995
[199]

Observa- tion of Three-Photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger En- tanglement,

Dik Bouwmeester, Jian-Wei Pan, Matthew Daniell, Harald Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Observa- tion of Three-Photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger En- tanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1345–1349 (1999), arXiv:quant-ph/9810035

1999 arXiv
[200]

Ex- perimental test of quantum nonlocality in three- photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger entanglement,

Jian-Wei Pan, Dik Bouwmeester, Matthew Daniell, Harald Weinfurter, and Anton Zeilinger, “Ex- perimental test of quantum nonlocality in three- photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger entanglement,” Na- ture 403, 515–519 (2000)

2000
[201]

Experimental Demon- stration of Four-Photon Entanglement and High-Fidelity Teleportation,

Jian-Wei Pan, Matthew Daniell, Sara Gasparoni, Gre- gor Weihs, and Anton Zeilinger, “Experimental Demon- stration of Four-Photon Entanglement and High-Fidelity Teleportation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4435–4438 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0104047

2001 arXiv
[202]

Experimental entangle- ment of six photons in graph states,

Chao-Yang Lu, Xiao-Qi Zhou, Otfried G¨ uhne, Wei-Bo Gao, Jin Zhang, Zhen-Sheng Yuan, Alexander Goebel, Tao Yang, and Jian-Wei Pan, “Experimental entangle- ment of six photons in graph states,” Nat. Phys. 3, 91 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0609130

2007 arXiv
[203]

Observa- tion of eight-photon entanglement,

Xing-Can Yao, Tian-Xiong Wang, Ping Xu, He Lu, Ge-Sheng Pan, Xiao-Hui Bao, Cheng-Zhi Peng, Chao- Yang Lu, Yu-Ao Chen, and Jian-Wei Pan, “Observa- tion of eight-photon entanglement,” Nat. Photonics 6, 225 (2012), arXiv:1105.6318

2012 arXiv
[204]

Experimental Ten-Photon Entanglement,

Xi-Lin Wang, Luo-Kan Chen, W. Li, H.-L. Huang, C. Liu, C. Chen, Y.-H. Luo, Z.-E. Su, D. Wu, Z.-D. Li, H. Lu, Y. Hu, X. Jiang, C.-Z. Peng, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, Yu-Ao Chen, Chao-Yang Lu, and Jian-Wei Pan, “Experimental Ten-Photon Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 210502 (2016), ...

2016 arXiv
[205]

12-Photon En- tanglement and Scalable Scattershot Boson Sampling with Optimal Entangled-Photon Pairs from Parametric Down-Conversion,

Han-Sen Zhong, Yuan Li, Wei Li, Li-Chao Peng, Zu- En Su, Yi Hu, Yu-Ming He, Xing Ding, Weijun Zhang, Hao Li, Lu Zhang, Zhen Wang, Lixing You, Xi-Lin Wang, Xiao Jiang, Li Li, Yu-Ao Chen, Nai-Le Liu, Chao-Yang Lu, and Jian-Wei Pan, “12-Photon En- tanglement and Scalable Scatters...

2018 arXiv
[206]

Independent high-purity photons created in domain- engineered crystals,

Francesco Graﬃtti, Peter Barrow, Massimiliano Proietti, Dmytro Kundys, and Alessandro Fedrizzi, “Independent high-purity photons created in domain- engineered crystals,” Optica 5, 514–517 (2018), arXiv:1712.07140

2018 arXiv
[207]

Multi- photon entanglement in high dimensions,

Mehul Malik, Manuel Erhard, Marcus Huber, Mario Krenn, Robert Fickler, and Anton Zeilinger, “Multi- photon entanglement in high dimensions,” Nat. Photon. 10, 248–252 (2016), arXiv:1509.02561

2016 arXiv
[208]

Measur- ing the Orbital Angular Momentum of a Single Photon,

Jonathan Leach, Miles J. Padgett, Stephen M. Barnett, Sonja Franke-Arnold, and Johannes Courtial, “Measur- ing the Orbital Angular Momentum of a Single Photon,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 257901 (2002)

2002
[209]

Experimental GHZ Entanglement beyond Qubits,

Manuel Erhard, Mehul Malik, Mario Krenn, and An- ton Zeilinger, “Experimental GHZ Entanglement beyond Qubits,” Nat. Photonics 12, 759–764 (2018)

2018
[210]

Automated Search for new Quantum Experiments,

Mario Krenn, Mehul Malik, Robert Fickler, Radek Lapkiewicz, and Anton Zeilinger, “Automated Search for new Quantum Experiments,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 090405 (2016), arXiv:1509.02749

2016 arXiv
[211]

Active learning machine learns to create new quantum experiments,

Alexey A. Melnikov, Hendrik Poulsen Nautrup, Mario Krenn, Vedran Dunjko, Markus Tiersch, An- ton Zeilinger, and Hans J. Briegel, “Active learning machine learns to create new quantum experiments,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115, 1221–1226 (2018), arXiv:1706.00868

2018 arXiv
[212]

Mul- tipartite entanglement in spin chains,

Otfried G¨ uhne, G´ eza T´ oth, and Hans J. Briegel, “Mul- tipartite entanglement in spin chains,” New J. Phys. 7, 24 229 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0502160

2005 arXiv
[213]

Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles,

Luca Pezz` e, Augusto Smerzi, Markus K. Oberthaler, Roman Schmied, and Philipp Treutlein, “Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018), arXiv:1609.01609

2018 arXiv
[214]

Tensor rank is NP-complete,

Johan H˚ astad, “Tensor rank is NP-complete,” J. Algo- rithm 11, 644–654 (1990)

1990
[215]

Tensor rank is not multiplicative un- der the tensor product,

Matthias Christandl, Asger Kjærulﬀ Jensen, and Jeroen Zuiddam, “Tensor rank is not multiplicative un- der the tensor product,” Lin. Alg. Appl. 543, 125–139 (2018), arXiv:1705.09379

2018
[216]

Tensor Rank and Stochastic Entanglement Catalysis for Multipartite Pure States,

Lin Chen, Eric Chitambar, Runyao Duan, Zhengfeng Ji, and Andreas Winter, “Tensor Rank and Stochastic Entanglement Catalysis for Multipartite Pure States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 200501 (2010), arXiv:1003.3059

2010 arXiv
[217]

Inequalities for the ranks of multipartite quantum states,

Josh Cadney, Marcus Huber, Noah Linden, and An- dreas Winter, “Inequalities for the ranks of multipartite quantum states,” Lin. Alg. Appl. 452, 153–171 (2014), arXiv:1308.0539

2014 arXiv
[218]

Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways,

Wolfgang D¨ ur, Guifr´ e Vidal, and Juan Ignacio Cirac, “Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways,” Phys. Rev. A 62, 062314 (2000), arXiv:quant- ph/0005115

2000
[219]

Classiﬁcation of Mixed Three- Qubit States,

Antonio Ac´ ın, Dagmar Bruß, Maciej Lewenstein, and Anna Sanpera, “Classiﬁcation of Mixed Three- Qubit States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 040401 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0103025

2001 arXiv
[220]

Resource Theory of Entanglement with a Unique Multipartite Maximally Entangled State,

Patricia Contreras-Tejada, Carlos Palazuelos, and Julio I. de Vicente, “Resource Theory of Entanglement with a Unique Multipartite Maximally Entangled State,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 120503 (2019), arXiv:1807.11395

2019 arXiv
[221]

Almost all multipartite qubit quantum states have trivial stabilizer,

Gilad Gour, Barbara Kraus, and Nolan R. Wallach, “Almost all multipartite qubit quantum states have trivial stabilizer,” J. Math. Phys. 58, 092204 (2017), arXiv:1609.01327

2017 arXiv
[222]

Transformations among Pure Multi- partite Entangled States via Local Operations are Al- most Never Possible,

David Sauerwein, Nolan R. Wallach, Gilad Gour, and Barbara Kraus, “Transformations among Pure Multi- partite Entangled States via Local Operations are Al- most Never Possible,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 031020 (2018), arXiv:1711.11056

2018 arXiv
[223]

Entangled Pure State Transformations via Local Op- erations Assisted by Finitely Many Rounds of Classical Communication,

C. Spee, J. I. de Vicente, D. Sauerwein, and B. Kraus, “Entangled Pure State Transformations via Local Op- erations Assisted by Finitely Many Rounds of Classical Communication,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 040503 (2017), arXiv:1606.04418

2017 arXiv
[224]

Entanglement manipulation of multipartite pure states with ﬁnite rounds of classical communication,

J. I. de Vicente, C. Spee, D. Sauerwein, and B. Kraus, “Entanglement manipulation of multipartite pure states with ﬁnite rounds of classical communication,” Phys. Rev. A 95, 012323 (2017), arXiv:1607.05145

2017 arXiv
[225]

Maximally Entangled Set of Multipartite Quan- tum States,

Julio I. de Vicente, Cornelia Spee, and Barbara Kraus, “Maximally Entangled Set of Multipartite Quan- tum States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 110502 (2013), arXiv:1305.7398

2013 arXiv
[226]

Operational Multipartite Entanglement Measures,

Katharina Schwaiger, David Sauerwein, Mart´ ı Cuquet, Julio I. de Vicente, and Barbara Kraus, “Operational Multipartite Entanglement Measures,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 150502 (2015), arXiv:1503.00615

2015 arXiv
[227]

Four qubits can be entangled in nine diﬀerent ways,

F. Verstraete, J. Dehaene, B. De Moor, and H. Ver- schelde, “Four qubits can be entangled in nine diﬀerent ways,” Phys. Rev. A 65, 052112 (2002), arXiv:quant- ph/0109033

2002
[228]

Normal forms and entanglement measures for multipar- tite quantum states,

Frank Verstraete, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor, “Normal forms and entanglement measures for multipar- tite quantum states,” Phys. Rev. A 68, 012103 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0105090

2003 arXiv
[229]

Absolute maximal entan- glement and quantum secret sharing,

Wolfram Helwig, Wei Cui, Jos´ e Ignacio Latorre, Arnau Riera, and Hoi-Kwong Lo, “Absolute maximal entan- glement and quantum secret sharing,” Phys. Rev. A 86, 052335 (2012), arXiv:1204.2289

2012 arXiv
[230]

Ab- solutely Maximally Entangled States of Seven Qubits Do Not Exist,

Felix Huber, Otfried G¨ uhne, and Jens Siewert, “Ab- solutely Maximally Entangled States of Seven Qubits Do Not Exist,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 200502 (2017), arXiv:1608.06228

2017 arXiv
[231]

Monogamy of entangle- ment without inequalities,

Gilad Gour and Yu Guo, “Monogamy of entangle- ment without inequalities,” Quantum 2, 81 (2018), arXiv:1710.03295

2018 arXiv
[232]

Monogamy of the entangle- ment of formation,

Yu Guo and Gilad Gour, “Monogamy of the entangle- ment of formation,” Phys. Rev. A 99, 042305 (2019), arXiv:1809.08532

2019 arXiv
[233]

Distributed entanglement,

Valerie Coﬀman, Joydip Kundu, and William K. Woot- ters, “Distributed entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 61, 052306 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/9907047

2000 arXiv
[234]

General Monogamy Inequality for Bipartite Qubit Entangle- ment,

Tobias J. Osborne and Frank Verstraete, “General Monogamy Inequality for Bipartite Qubit Entangle- ment,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 220503 (2006), arXiv:quant- ph/0502176

2006
[235]

Violation of monogamy inequality for higher-dimensional objects,

Yong-Cheng Ou, “Violation of monogamy inequality for higher-dimensional objects,” Phys. Rev. A 75, 034305 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0612127

2007 arXiv
[236]

Are General Quantum Correlations Monogamous?

Alexander Streltsov, Gerardo Adesso, Marco Piani, and Dagmar Bruß, “Are General Quantum Correlations Monogamous?” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 050503 (2012), arXiv:1112.3967

2012 arXiv
[237]

Should Entanglement Measures be Monogamous or Faithful?

C´ ecilia Lancien, Sara Di Martino, Marcus Huber, Marco Piani, Gerardo Adesso, and Andreas Winter, “Should Entanglement Measures be Monogamous or Faithful?” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 060501 (2016), arXiv:1604.02189

2016 arXiv
[238]

“squashed entanglement

Matthias Christandl and Andreas Winter, ““squashed entanglement”: An additive entanglement measure,” J. Math. Phys. 45, 829–840 (2004), arXiv:quant- ph/0308088

2004
[239]

Constructing n- qubit entanglement monotones from antilinear opera- tors,

Andreas Osterloh and Jens Siewert, “Constructing n- qubit entanglement monotones from antilinear opera- tors,” Phys. Rev. A 72, 012337 (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0410102

2005
[240]

Classiﬁcation of Multipartite Entanglement of All Finite Dimensionality,

Gilad Gour and Nolan R. Wallach, “Classiﬁcation of Multipartite Entanglement of All Finite Dimensionality,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 060502 (2013), arXiv:1304.7259

2013 arXiv
[241]

Assessing the Progress of Trapped-Ion Processors Towards Fault- Tolerant Quantum Computation,

A. Bermudez, X. Xu, R. Nigmatullin, J. O’Gorman, V. Negnevitsky, P. Schindler, T. Monz, U. G. Poschinger, C. Hempel, J. Home, F. Schmidt-Kaler, M. Biercuk, R. Blatt, S. Benjamin, and M. M¨ uller, “Assessing the Progress of Trapped-Ion Processors Towards Fault- Tolerant Quantum...

2017 arXiv
[242]

Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges,

Colin D. Bruzewicz, John Chiaverini, Robert Mc- Connell, and Jeremy M. Sage, “Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges,” Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021314 (2019), arXiv:1904.04178

2019
[243]

Quantum simulations with trapped ions,

R. Blatt and C. F. Roos, “Quantum simulations with trapped ions,” Nat. Phys. 8, 277–284 (2012)

2012
[244]

Entangled states of trapped atomic ions,

Rainer Blatt and David Wineland, “Entangled states of trapped atomic ions,” Nature 453, 1008–1015 (2008)

2008
[245]

High-Fidelity Uni- versal Gate Set for 9Be + Ion Qubits,

J. P. Gaebler, T. R. Tan, Y. Lin, Y. Wan, R. Bowler, A. C. Keith, S. Glancy, K. Coakley, E. Knill, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, “High-Fidelity Uni- versal Gate Set for 9Be + Ion Qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 25 117, 060505 (2016), arXiv:1604.00032

2016 arXiv
[246]

High-Fidelity Quantum Logic Gates Using Trapped-Ion Hyperﬁne Qubits,

C. J. Ballance, T. P. Harty, N. M. Linke, M. A. Sepiol, and D. M. Lucas, “High-Fidelity Quantum Logic Gates Using Trapped-Ion Hyperﬁne Qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 060504 (2016), arXiv:1512.04600

2016 arXiv
[247]

Quasiparti- cle engineering and entanglement propagation in a quan- tum many-body system,

P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, Philipp Hauke, C. Hempel, Peter Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, “Quasiparti- cle engineering and entanglement propagation in a quan- tum many-body system,” Nature 511, 202–205 (2014), arXiv:1401.5387

2014 arXiv
[248]

Scalable Cre- ation of Long-Lived Multipartite Entanglement,

H. Kaufmann, T. Ruster, C. T. Schmiegelow, M. A. Luda, V. Kaushal, J. Schulz, D. von Lindenfels, F. Schmidt-Kaler, and U. G. Poschinger, “Scalable Cre- ation of Long-Lived Multipartite Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 150503 (2017), arXiv:1707.03695

2017 arXiv
[249]

Mi- crowave quantum logic gates for trapped ions,

C. Ospelkaus, U. Warring, Y. Colombe, K. R. Brown, J. M. Amini, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, “Mi- crowave quantum logic gates for trapped ions,” Nature 476, 181–184 (2011), arXiv:1104.3573

2011 arXiv
[250]

High- Fidelity Trapped-Ion Quantum Logic Using Near-Field Microwaves,

T. P. Harty, M. A. Sepiol, D. T. C. Allcock, C. J. Ballance, J. E. Tarlton, and D. M. Lucas, “High- Fidelity Trapped-Ion Quantum Logic Using Near-Field Microwaves,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 140501 (2016), arXiv:1606.08409

2016 arXiv
[251]

Quantum gates and memory using microwave-dressed states,

N. Timoney, I. Baumgart, M. Johanning, A. F. Var´ on, Martin B. Plenio, A. Retzker, and C. Wunderlich, “Quantum gates and memory using microwave-dressed states,” Nature 476, 185–188 (2011), arXiv:1105.1146

2011 arXiv
[252]

A trapped-ion-based quantum byte with 10 −5 next-neighbour cross-talk,

C. Piltz, T. Sriarunothai, A. F. Var´ on, and C. Wun- derlich, “A trapped-ion-based quantum byte with 10 −5 next-neighbour cross-talk,” Nat. Commun. 5, 4679 (2014), arXiv:1403.8043

2014 arXiv
[253]

Trapped-Ion Quantum Logic with Global Radiation Fields,

S. Weidt, J. Randall, S. C. Webster, K. Lake, A. E. Webb, I. Cohen, T. Navickas, B. Lekitsch, A. Retzker, and W. K. Hensinger, “Trapped-Ion Quantum Logic with Global Radiation Fields,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 220501 (2016), arXiv:1603.03384

2016 arXiv
[254]

Observation of Entangled States of a Fully Controlled 20-Qubit System,

Nicolai Friis, Oliver Marty, Christine Maier, Cornelius Hempel, Milan Holz¨ apfel, Petar Jurcevic, Martin B. Ple- nio, Marcus Huber, Christian Roos, Rainer Blatt, and Ben Lanyon, “Observation of Entangled States of a Fully Controlled 20-Qubit System,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 021012 (2...

2018 arXiv
[255]

Eﬃcient detection of multipartite entanglement struc- ture,

You Zhou, Qi Zhao, Xiao Yuan, and Xiongfeng Ma, “Eﬃcient detection of multipartite entanglement struc- ture,” (2019), arXiv:1904.05001

2019
[256]

Bench- marks of Nonclassicality for Qubit Arrays,

Mordecai Waegell and Justin Dressel, “Bench- marks of Nonclassicality for Qubit Arrays,” (2018), arXiv:1812.07821

2018
[257]

Creation of a six-atom ‘Schr¨ odinger cat’ state,

D. Leibfried, E. Knill, S. Seidelin, J. Britton, R. B. Blakestad, J. Chiaverini, D. B. Hume, W. M. Itano, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, R. Reichle, and D. J. Wineland, “Creation of a six-atom ‘Schr¨ odinger cat’ state,” Nature 438, 639–642 (2005)

2005
[258]

Scalable multiparticle entanglement of trapped ions,

H. H¨ aﬀner, W. H¨ ansel, C. F. Roos, J. Benhelm, D. Chek-al kar, M. Chwalla, T. K¨ orber, U. D. Rapol, M. Riebe, P. O. Schmidt, C. Becher, O. G¨ uhne, W. D¨ ur, and R. Blatt, “Scalable multiparticle entanglement of trapped ions,” Nature 438, 643–646 (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0603217

2005
[259]

14-Qubit Entanglement: Creation and Coherence,

Thomas Monz, Philipp Schindler, Julio T. Barreiro, Michael Chwalla, Daniel Nigg, William A. Coish, Maxi- milian Harlander, Wolfgang H¨ ansel, Markus Hennrich, and Rainer Blatt, “14-Qubit Entanglement: Creation and Coherence,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 130506 (2011), arXiv:1009.6126

2011 arXiv
[260]

Reconstructing quantum states eﬃciently,

M. Cramer and Martin B. Plenio, “Reconstructing quantum states eﬃciently,” (2010), arXiv:1002.3780

2010 arXiv
[261]

Eﬃcient quan- tum state tomography,

M. Cramer, Martin B. Plenio, S. T. Flammia, R. Somma, D. Gross, S. D. Bartlett, O. Landon- Cardinal, D. Poulin, and Y.-K. Liu, “Eﬃcient quan- tum state tomography,” Nat. Commun. 1, 149 (2010), arXiv:1101.4366

2010 arXiv
[262]

Heralded Polynomial-Time Quan- tum State Tomography,

Steven T. Flammia, David Gross, Stephen D. Bartlett, and Rolando Somma, “Heralded Polynomial-Time Quan- tum State Tomography,” (2010), arXiv:1002.3839

2010 arXiv
[263]

Eﬃcient tomography of a quantum many-body system,

B. P. Lanyon, C. Maier, M. Holz¨ apfel, T. Baumgratz, C. Hempel, P. Jurcevic, I. Dhand, A. S. Buyskikh, A. J. Daley, M. Cramer, Martin B. Plenio, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, “Eﬃcient tomography of a quantum many-body system,” Nat. Phys. 13, 1158–1162 (2017), arXiv:1612.08000

2017 arXiv
[264]

Taming Multiparticle Entanglement,

Bastian Jungnitsch, Tobias Moroder, and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Taming Multiparticle Entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 190502 (2011), arXiv:1010.6049

2011 arXiv
[265]

Entanglement witnesses for graph states: Gen- eral theory and examples,

Bastian Jungnitsch, Tobias Moroder, and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Entanglement witnesses for graph states: Gen- eral theory and examples,” Phys. Rev. A 84, 032310 (2011), arXiv:1106.1114

2011 arXiv
[266]

Witness- ing Genuine Multipartite Entanglement with Posi- tive Maps,

Marcus Huber and Ritabrata Sengupta, “Witness- ing Genuine Multipartite Entanglement with Posi- tive Maps,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 100501 (2014), arXiv:1404.7449

2014 arXiv
[267]

Relaxations of separability in mul- tipartite systems: Semideﬁnite programs, witnesses and volumes,

C´ ecilia Lancien, Otfried G¨ uhne, Ritabrata Sengupta, and Marcus Huber, “Relaxations of separability in mul- tipartite systems: Semideﬁnite programs, witnesses and volumes,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 505302 (2015), arXiv:1504.01029

2015 arXiv
[268]

Genuine-multipartite entanglement cri- teria based on positive maps,

Fabien Clivaz, Marcus Huber, Ludovico Lami, and Gl´ aucia Murta, “Genuine-multipartite entanglement cri- teria based on positive maps,” J. Math. Phys.58, 082201 (2017), arXiv:1609.08126

2017 arXiv
[269]

Experimental Detection of Multipartite Entanglement using Witness Opera- tors,

Mohamed Bourennane, Manfred Eibl, Christian Kurt- siefer, Sascha Gaertner, Harald Weinfurter, Otfried G¨ uhne, Philipp Hyllus, Dagmar Bruß, Maciej Lewen- stein, and Anna Sanpera, “Experimental Detection of Multipartite Entanglement using Witness Opera- tors,” Phys. Rev. Lett. ...

2004
[270]

Entanglement in graph states and its applications,

M. Hein, W. D¨ ur, Jens Eisert, Robert Raussendorf, M. Van den Nest, and Hans. J. Briegel, “Entanglement in graph states and its applications,” Proceedings of the International School of Physics ”Enrico Fermi”162, 115– 218 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0602096

2005 arXiv
[271]

Entanglement criteria for Dicke states,

Marcel Bergmann and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Entanglement criteria for Dicke states,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 46, 385304 (2013), arXiv:1305.2818

2013 arXiv
[272]

Entanglement and Per- mutational Symmetry,

G´ eza T´ oth and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Entanglement and Per- mutational Symmetry,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 170503 (2009), arXiv:0812.4453

2009 arXiv
[273]

Separability cri- teria for genuine multiparticle entanglement,

Otfried G¨ uhne and Michael Seevinck, “Separability cri- teria for genuine multiparticle entanglement,” New J. Phys. 12, 053002 (2010), arXiv:0905.1349

2010 arXiv
[274]

Detection of High-Dimensional Genuine Multipartite Entanglement of Mixed States,

Marcus Huber, Florian Mintert, Andreas Gabriel, and Beatrix C. Hiesmayr, “Detection of High-Dimensional Genuine Multipartite Entanglement of Mixed States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 210501 (2010), arXiv:0912.1870

2010 arXiv
[275]

Eval- 26 uating Convex Roof Entanglement Measures,

G´ eza T´ oth, Tobias Moroder, and Otfried G¨ uhne, “Eval- 26 uating Convex Roof Entanglement Measures,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 160501 (2015), arXiv:1409.3806

2015 arXiv
[276]

Multipartite Entangle- ment Witnesses,

Jan Sperling and Werner Vogel, “Multipartite Entangle- ment Witnesses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 110503 (2013), arXiv:1303.6403

2013 arXiv
[277]

Squeezed spin states,

Masahiro Kitagawa and Masahito Ueda, “Squeezed spin states,” Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138–5143 (1993)

1993
[278]

Squeezed atomic states and projection noise in spectroscopy,

D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, and D. J. Heinzen, “Squeezed atomic states and projection noise in spectroscopy,” Phys. Rev. A 50, 67–88 (1994)

1994
[279]

Many-particle entanglement with Bose-Einstein condensates,

Anders Sørensen, Lu-Ming Duan, Juan Ignacio Cirac, and Peter Zoller, “Many-particle entanglement with Bose-Einstein condensates,” Nature 409, 63–66 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0006111

2001 arXiv
[280]

Optimal Spin Squeezing Inequalities Detect Bound Entanglement in Spin Models,

G´ eza T´ oth, Christian Knapp, Otfried G¨ uhne, and Hans J. Briegel, “Optimal Spin Squeezing Inequalities Detect Bound Entanglement in Spin Models,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 250405 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0702219

2007 arXiv
[281]

Spin squeezing and entanglement,

G´ eza T´ oth, Christian Knapp, Otfried G¨ uhne, and Hans J. Briegel, “Spin squeezing and entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 042334 (2009), arXiv:0806.1048

2009 arXiv
[282]

Spin Squeezing In- equalities for Arbitrary Spin,

Giuseppe Vitagliano, Philipp Hyllus, Inigo L. Egusquiza, and G´ eza T´ oth, “Spin Squeezing In- equalities for Arbitrary Spin,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 240502 (2011), arXiv:1104.3147

2011 arXiv
[283]

Spin squeezing and entan- glement for an arbitrary spin,

Giuseppe Vitagliano, Iagoba Apellaniz, Inigo L. Egusquiza, and G´ eza T´ oth, “Spin squeezing and entan- glement for an arbitrary spin,” Phys. Rev. A 89, 032307 (2014), arXiv:1310.2269

2014 arXiv
[284]

Detecting nonlocality in many- body quantum states,

J. Tura, R. Augusiak, A. B. Sainz, T. V´ ertesi, M. Lewen- stein, and A. Ac´ ın, “Detecting nonlocality in many- body quantum states,” Science 344, 1256–1258 (2014), arXiv:1306.6860

2014 arXiv
[285]

Detect- ing Multiparticle Entanglement of Dicke States,

Bernd L¨ ucke, Jan Peise, Giuseppe Vitagliano, Jan Arlt, Luis Santos, G´ eza T´ oth, and Carsten Klempt, “Detect- ing Multiparticle Entanglement of Dicke States,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 155304 (2014), arXiv:1403.4542

2014 arXiv
[286]

Planar quantum squeezing and atom interferom- etry,

Q. Y. He, Shi-Guo Peng, P. D. Drummond, and M. D. Reid, “Planar quantum squeezing and atom interferom- etry,” Phys. Rev. A 84, 022107 (2011), arXiv:1101.0448

2011 arXiv
[287]

Entanglement, Non- linear Dynamics, and the Heisenberg Limit,

Luca Pezz` e and Augusto Smerzi, “Entanglement, Non- linear Dynamics, and the Heisenberg Limit,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 100401 (2009), arXiv:0711.4840

2009 arXiv
[288]

Fisher infor- mation and multiparticle entanglement,

Philipp Hyllus, Wies law Laskowski, Roland Krischek, Christian Schwemmer, Witlef Wieczorek, Harald Wein- furter, Luca Pezz` e, and Augusto Smerzi, “Fisher infor- mation and multiparticle entanglement,” Phys. Rev. A 85, 022321 (2012), arXiv:1006.4366

2012 arXiv
[289]

Eﬃcient entanglement criteria for discrete, continuous, and hybrid variables,

Manuel Gessner, Luca Pezz` e, and Augusto Smerzi, “Eﬃcient entanglement criteria for discrete, continuous, and hybrid variables,” Phys. Rev. A 94, 020101 (2016), arXiv:1608.02421

2016 arXiv
[290]

Resolution-enhanced entanglement detection,

Manuel Gessner, Luca Pezz` e, and Augusto Smerzi, “Resolution-enhanced entanglement detection,” Phys. Rev. A 95, 032326 (2017), arXiv:1612.06320

2017 arXiv
[291]

Delocalized Entan- glement of Atoms in Optical Lattices,

K. G. H. Vollbrecht and J. I. Cirac, “Delocalized Entan- glement of Atoms in Optical Lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 190502 (2007), arXiv:quant-ph/0611132

2007 arXiv
[292]

Measuring Entanglement in Condensed Mat- ter Systems,

M. Cramer, Martin B. Plenio, and H. Wunder- lich, “Measuring Entanglement in Condensed Mat- ter Systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 020401 (2011), arXiv:1009.2956

2011 arXiv
[293]

Magnetic susceptibility as a macroscopic entanglement witness,

M. Wie´ sniak, Vlatko Vedral, and ˇCaslav Brukner, “Magnetic susceptibility as a macroscopic entanglement witness,” New J. Phys. 7, 258 (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0503037

2005
[294]

Crucial role of quantum entanglement in bulk properties of solids,

ˇCaslav Brukner, Vlatko Vedral, and Anton Zeilinger, “Crucial role of quantum entanglement in bulk properties of solids,” Phys. Rev. A 73, 012110 (2006), arXiv:quant- ph/0410138

2006
[295]

Measuring multipartite entanglement through dynamic susceptibilities,

Philipp Hauke, Markus Heyl, Luca Tagliacozzo, and Peter Zoller, “Measuring multipartite entanglement through dynamic susceptibilities,” Nat. Phys. 12, 778 (2016), arXiv:1509.01739

2016 arXiv
[296]

Spatial entanglement of bosons in optical lattices,

M. Cramer, A. Bernard, N. Fabbri, L. Fallani, C. Fort, S. Rosi, F. Caruso, M. Inguscio, and Martin B. Plenio, “Spatial entanglement of bosons in optical lattices,” Nat. Commun. 4, 2161 (2013), arXiv:1302.4897

2013 arXiv
[297]

Quantifying entanglement with scatter- ing experiments,

Oliver Marty, Michael Epping, Hermann Kamper- mann, Dagmar Bruß, Martin B. Plenio, and M. Cramer, “Quantifying entanglement with scatter- ing experiments,” Phys. Rev. B 89, 125117 (2014), arXiv:1310.0929

2014 arXiv
[298]

Spatially Resolved Detection of a Spin- Entanglement Wave in a Bose-Hubbard Chain,

Takeshi Fukuhara, Sebastian Hild, Johannes Zeiher, Pe- ter Schauß, Immanuel Bloch, Manuel Endres, and Chris- tian Gross, “Spatially Resolved Detection of a Spin- Entanglement Wave in a Bose-Hubbard Chain,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 035302 (2015), arXiv:1504.02582

2015 arXiv
[299]

Generation and detection of atomic spin entanglement in optical lattices,

Han-Ning Dai, Bing Yang, Andreas Reingruber, Xiao- Fan Xu, Xiao Jiang, Yu-Ao Chen, Zhen-Sheng Yuan, and Jian-Wei Pan, “Generation and detection of atomic spin entanglement in optical lattices,” Nat. Phys. 12, 783–787 (2016), arXiv:1507.05937

2016 arXiv
[300]

Measuring entanglement entropy in a quan- tum many-body system,

Rajibul Islam, Ruichao Ma, Philipp M. Preiss, M. Eric Tai, Alexander Lukin, Matthew Rispoli, and Markus Greiner, “Measuring entanglement entropy in a quan- tum many-body system,” Nature 528, 77 (2015), arXiv:1509.01160

2015

Pith tools

Reviewed May 25, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?

Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?” Phys. Rev.47, 777–780 (1935)

work page 1935

[2] [2]

On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox,

John Stewart Bell, “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen Paradox,” Physics 1, 195–200 (1964)

work page 1964

[3] [3]

Experimen- tal Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,

Stuart J. Freedman and John F. Clauser, “Experimen- tal Test of Local Hidden-Variable Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 938 (1972)

work page 1972

[4] [4]

Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem,

Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Tests of Realistic Local Theories via Bell’s Theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 460–463 (1981)

work page 1981

[5] [5]

Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen- Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities,

Alain Aspect, Philippe Grangier, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen- Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bell’s Inequalities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91–94 (1982)

work page 1982

[6] [6]

Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers,

Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and G´ erard Roger, “Experimental Test of Bell’s Inequalities Using Time- Varying Analyzers,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982)

work page 1982

[7] [7]

Teleporting an Un- known Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen Channels,

C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Cr´ epeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, “Teleporting an Un- known Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen Channels,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895– 1899 (1993)

work page 1993

[8] [8]

Quantum cryp- tography: public key distribution and coin tossing,

Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard, “Quantum cryp- tography: public key distribution and coin tossing,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing (1984) pp. 175–179

work page 1984