Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 43 references

On-chip generation of multi-qubit graph states with high-dimensional encoded single photons

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Multi-qubit graph states can be prepared on-chip by encoding several qubits per photon in path modes, with a 4-photon 16-qubit GHZ state and a single-photon 4-qubit cluster state demonstrated.

desk verdict On-chip layered measurement for high-dimensional single-photon encoding is a real idea, but the printed unitary makes the verification impossible as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.03012 v1 pith:TY2A2Z3M submitted 2026-08-04 quant-ph

Lan-Tian Feng , Bo-Hao Zhang , Di Liu , Pan Gong , Yu-Yang Ding , Guo-Ping Guo , Guang-Can Guo , Xi-Feng Ren This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords multi-qubitentanglementhigh-dimensionalencodingphotonicintegratedcircuitsgraphstatesGHZclustersingle-photonGroversearch
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

The paper proposes a route to multi-qubit photonic entanglement that does not require many photons: each photon carries several qubits by encoding them in its path degree of freedom, and a layered measurement network reads the qubits out one by one. The authors argue that this replaces the difficult task of generating multi-photon entanglement with single-photon operations—high-dimensional expansion, routing, and layer-wise single-qubit measurements. They demonstrate the idea in programmable silicon photonic circuits, reporting a four-photon 16-qubit GHZ state with genuine multipartite entanglement witnessed for the 10-qubit version, and a single-photon four-qubit cluster state reconstructed with fidelity 0.991 and used to run a Grover search. If correct, the method is a resource-efficient way to build larger entangled graph states and to move photonic quantum information processing toward chip-scale deployment.

What carries the argument

The central object is the layer-by-layer qubit measurement scheme built from measurement nodes $T(\theta,\varphi)$. For an $n$-qubit target state, with qubits numbered from right to left, layer $m$ contains $2^{n-m}$ nodes, and each node is a two-mode single-qubit measurement whose two dimensions represent $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$; setting every node in layer $m$ to the same operation $T(\theta_m,\varphi_m)$ is claimed to give a complete measurement of qubit $m$. The companion machinery is the high-dimensional expansion and routing network, which relabels or redistributes the path modes of each photon according to the difference between the resource state and the target state, so that the whole preparation reduces to single-photon operations rather than multi-qubit gates. The paper ties the resource cost of the measurement structure to the minimal number of product terms $r$ of the target state: $O(n)$ nodes for separable and GHZ states, $O(n^2)$ for W states, and $O(2^n)$ for cluster states.

What would settle it

Program the same chip to prepare a six-qubit linear cluster state and check whether identical settings $T(\theta_m,\varphi_m)$ across each layer reproduce the full set of single-qubit measurement bases required for tomography; if node-specific operations are needed for non-GHZ graphs, the claimed generality of the layered measurement rule collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that an arbitrary multi-qubit state can be prepared from a resource multi-photon state by expanding each photon's path dimension, routing the resulting modes, and then performing measurements in layers—one layer per logical qubit—where each node in a layer implements the same single-qubit measurement $T(\theta_m,\varphi_m)$ and the two modes of the node encode $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$ of that qubit. On this basis the authors report the on-chip preparation of a 4-photon 16-qubit GHZ state and a single-photon 4-qubit cluster state $|C_4\rangle=\frac{1}{2}(|0000\rangle+|0011\rangle+|1100\rangle-|1111\rangle)$. They witness genuine multipartite entanglement of the 10-qubit GHZ state with expectation value $-0.166(0.014)$ for the witness operator ($>11\sigma$), reconstruct the cluster state with fidelity $0.991(0.004)$, measure a Bell parameter $S=3.921(0.005)$ against the local-hidden-variable bound $S=2$, and demonstrate Grover search with average identification probability $0.987(0.003)$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that configuring all measurement nodes in the same layer with the same operation $T(\theta_m,\varphi_m)$ gives a complete measurement of the corresponding logical qubit in the target state after expansion and routing; the paper states this rule without a proof that it holds for arbitrary graph states.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Multi-qubit entangled states become accessible from single-photon inputs, so the low emission efficiency of multi-photon sources no longer sets the qubit-count ceiling; the demonstrated 10-qubit GHZ witness is a direct example.
  • Because every photon of a resource multi-photon state can encode several qubits, combining high-dimensional encoding with multi-photon entanglement yields larger states than either approach alone.
  • Cluster states generated this way can run measurement-based quantum algorithms; the paper's Grover search on the 4-qubit cluster state is the concrete demonstration.
  • The resource cost of the layered measurement structure scales with the minimal product-term count of the target state, so the method's advantage is largest for states with few product terms, such as GHZ states.
  • Extending each measurement node to qudit measurements would allow multipartite high-dimensional entangled states, which the paper notes are currently hard to generate with multiple particles.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper's demonstrations, the same architecture should be able to prepare other graph states—for example ring or two-dimensional cluster states—by changing only routing phases; this is a testable extension the authors do not run.
  • An implication of the authors' resource-count comparison is that the method does not uniformly beat multi-photon approaches: for states whose product-term count grows exponentially, the measurement network itself grows exponentially, so the practical advantage is concentrated in low-product-term families.
  • Because single-photon entanglement cannot provide spacelike separation, the Bell-operator violation on the cluster state certifies the encoded correlations but not nonlocality; whether measurement-based quantum computing with such states requires only these correlations is left open.
  • The layered measurement principle is specified abstractly, so it should transfer to other high-dimensional photon degrees of freedom such as time-frequency or transverse spatial modes, potentially giving more qubits per photon than the four demonstrated.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a method for preparing multi-qubit graph states using single photons with high-dimensional path encoding. Photons from a small number of sources are expanded into many path modes, routed, and then measured by a layer-by-layer node structure, where each layer is claimed to implement a complete single-qubit measurement of one logical qubit. Two silicon photonic circuits are reported: one for a 4-photon multi-qubit GHZ state with entanglement witness values for 4-, 7-, and 10-qubit versions, and one for a single-photon 4-qubit cluster state with full tomography, a Bell-inequality test, and a Grover-search demonstration. The central claims are that this approach avoids complex multi-qubit gates and reduces the multi-photon resource overhead.

Significance. If the central construction is correct, the work is significant: it offers a route to many-qubit photonic states from high-dimensional single photons and reports concrete, error-bounded experimental results, including a 10-qubit GHZ witness with >11 sigma significance and a 0.991 fidelity for a single-photon 4-qubit cluster state. The paper is also careful to give absolute count-rate comparisons and to state the resource scaling for different target states. However, the significance is conditional on two load-bearing points that are currently not established: the measurement node described in Eq. (1) does not, as written, provide the measurement axes used in the verification, and the layered measurement rule is asserted rather than proved.

major comments (3)
  1. [Eq. (1) and verification measurements] The node transformation T(θ,φ) in Eq. (1) is unitary, but its positive measurement basis is independent of φ. Up to the global phase, the first column of T is (cos(θ/2), -i sin(θ/2)), and the corresponding projector is (I + sin(θ) σ_y + cos(θ) σ_z)/2; the second column lies in the same Y-Z plane up to a relative phase. Thus the parameter φ does not expand the set of measurable axes. The stated verification, however, requires X-basis measurements: the witness operator in Eq. (2) includes M_0 = σ_x^{⊗m}, and the cluster-state tomography and Bell operator in Eq. (4) contain σ_x terms. These measurements cannot be implemented by the device as described. Please replace Eq. (1) with the actual programmable node unitary, or add the missing phase-shifter configuration, and explicitly list the phase settings that realize X-, Y-, and Z-basis measurements.
  2. [Layered measurement scheme] The statement that configuring all nodes in layer m with the same T(θ_m, φ_m) achieves a complete measurement of the corresponding qubit in the target state is load-bearing but is not proved or even sketched. The correctness of this rule depends on how the high-dimensional expansion and routing map each logical qubit to pairs of path modes, and on the fact that the same operation can act simultaneously on all terms of the state. Without a proof or a constructive derivation for the GHZ and cluster-state circuits, the reported fidelities and witness values do not certify the claimed logical-qubit structure. Please supply a general derivation, state any restrictions on the target states for which the rule holds, and apply it explicitly to the two circuit layouts.
  3. [Abstract/Conclusion] The abstract and conclusion state that the circuit prepares a 4-photon 16-qubit GHZ state, but the presented experimental evidence witnesses genuine entanglement only for the 4-, 7-, and 10-qubit versions. The paper should either report a 16-qubit witness or qualify the claim as a capability of the chip rather than a measured state.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] The word 'Foots' should be 'Ports' throughout; for example, 'Foots I-IV' appears in the GHZ-state sections.
  2. [Page 3, experimental setup] The wavelength '15662.23 nm' is presumably a typo for '1562.23 nm'; please correct it.
  3. [Page 3, fidelity definition] The fidelity is defined as F=Tr(ρ_mea ρ_ideal). For a pure target state this is the population overlap, not the standard Uhlmann fidelity; please clarify the definition or use the standard formula.
  4. [Page 5, Eq. (4)] The Bell operator in Eq. (4) has inconsistent notation (e.g., σ_z1 σ_x σx and σ_z1 σ_y σy); please use consistent qubit labels and verify the operator against the given cluster-state form.
  5. [Page 2, Eq. (1)] The role of φ in Eq. (1) should be clarified: as written, varying φ only changes the relative phase between the second basis vector and does not change the measurement projector. This should be reconciled with the claim that each node can achieve arbitrary single-qubit measurements.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the state-preparation claims are supported by direct experimental fidelities and witnesses against standard ideal-state targets, with no fitted parameters renamed as predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are experimental demonstrations rather than derivations that reduce to their inputs. The target states (GHZ and cluster) are standard reference states, and the reported quantities—GHZ fidelities, entanglement witness values for 4-, 7-, and 10-qubit states, cluster-state fidelity of 0.991(0.004), and Bell parameter 3.921(0.005)—are measured against those fixed targets. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then presented as a prediction; programming the chip to produce the target state is the standard protocol in state-preparation experiments, not a circular fit. The load-bearing assertion that configuring nodes in the same layer with the same operation T(theta_m, phi_m) achieves a complete measurement of the corresponding qubit is stated without proof, and potential issues with the measurement axes available from Eq. (1) are correctness or misprint concerns, not circularity. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. [12], [25], [30], [31], [35]) are used as background for established silicon-photonics techniques and are not invoked as the evidence for the new approach. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. Therefore no circular step satisfying the required reduction criteria is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the unproved layered measurement assertion, the treatment of intra-photon qubits as independent parties, and standard integrated photonics assumptions. No free parameters are fitted; the chip phases implement intended rotations.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Single-photon path-encoded qubits can be treated as independent subsystems for multipartite entanglement verification.
    The 10-qubit GHZ witness treats the eight qubits spread across two photons as separate parties; the paper cites refs 3 and 4 for single-particle entanglement but does not establish LOCC independence.
  • ad hoc to paper Applying the same T(θ_m, φ_m) to all nodes in layer m yields a complete measurement of qubit m.
    Asserted without proof in the layer-by-layer scheme; underpins all tomographic and witness results.
  • domain assumption Passive linear optics with photon-number-resolving detection can implement the required expansion and routing unitaries without postselection.
    Standard for integrated photonics but not stated explicitly; the state generation relies on this.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On-chip generation of multi-qubit graph states with high-dimensional encoded single photons." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TY2A2Z3M

@misc{pith2026260803012,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On-chip generation of multi-qubit graph states with high-dimensional encoded single photons},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TY2A2Z3M}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.03012}
}
read the original abstract

Photonic multi-qubit entanglement is key to optical quantum information processing, particularly universal quantum computing. Yet multi-photon sources suffer from low emission efficiency, making single-photon high-dimensional encoding an appealing alternative. Here we propose an explicit and resource-efficient high-dimensional encoding approach to achieve the target multi-qubit quantum state. The technically challenging preparation of multi-photon quantum states is replaced by single-photon operations involving high-dimensional expansion, routing, and multi-layered quantum measurement. Besides, each photon in the resource multi-photon quantum state can be used to encode multiple qubits in a distributed manner, and a larger entangled state will be constructed. We demonstrate this approach using programmable photonic integrated circuits, where multi-qubit graph states--including the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state and the cluster state--are generated and characterized. We additionally demonstrate the Grover search algorithm using the single-photon cluster state. Our findings unlock a novel route towards diverse entangled state generation with photons and advance large-scale and universal photonic quantum information processing.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.03012 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: With a total of n + 1 measurement operators, we ob￾tain ⟨WGm=4,7,10 ⟩ values of -0.225(0.015), -0.189(0.011) and - 0.166(0.014), respectively. With high statistical significance (> 11σ), the result confirms the genuine 10-qubit entangle￾ment, which is the largest entan…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bartolucci, P

    S. Bartolucci, P. Birchall, H. Bomb´ın, H. Cable, C. Dawson, M. Gimeno-Segovia, E. Johnston, K. Kieling, N. Nickerson, M. Pant, F. Pastawski, T. Rudolph, and C. Sparrow, Fusion-based quantum computation. Nat. Commun.14,912 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Aghaee Rad, T

    H. Aghaee Rad, T. Ainsworth, R. N. Alexander, et al, Scaling and networking a modular photonic quantum computer. Nature 638,912–919 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Azzini, S

    S. Azzini, S. Mazzucchi, V . Moretti, D. Pastorello, and L. Pavesi, Single-particle entanglement. Adv. Quantum Technol. 3,2000014 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Woot- ters, Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction. Phys. Rev. A54,3824 (1996)

    work page 1996

  5. [5]

    W. B. Gao, C. Y . Lu, X. C. Yao, P. Xu, O. G¨uhne, A. Goebel, Y . A. Chen, C. Z. Peng, Z. B. Chen, and J. W. Pan, Experimental demonstration of a hyper-entangled ten-qubit Schr ¨odinger cat state. Nature Phys.6,331–335 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    X. L. Wang, Y . H. Luo, H. L. Huang, M. C. Chen, Z. E. Su, C. Liu, C. Chen, W. Li, Y . Q. Fang, X. Jiang, J. Zhang, L. Li, N. L. Liu, C. Y . Lu, and J. W. Pan, 18-qubit entanglement with six photons’ three degrees of freedom. Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 260502 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Y . F. Huang, X. F. Ren, Y . S. Zhang, L. M. Duan, and G. C. Guo, Experimental teleportation of a quantum controlled-NOT gate. Phys. Rev. Lett.93,240501 (2004)

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    K. Chen, C. M. Li, Q. Zhang, Y . A. Chen, A. Goebel, S. Chen, A. Mair, and J. W. Pan, Experimental realization of one-way quantum computing with two-photon four-qubit cluster states. Phys. Rev. Lett.99,120503 (2007)

    work page 2007

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    M. S. Tame, B. A. Bell, C. Di Franco, W. J. Wadsworth, and J. G. Rarity, Experimental realization of a one-way quantum computer algorithm solving Simon’s problem. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113,200501 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    B. A. Bell, D. A. Herrera-Mart ´ı, M. S. Tame, D. Markham, W. J. Wadsworth, and J. G. Rarity, Experimental demonstration of a graph state quantum error-correction code. Nat Commun.5, 3658 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    K. H. Kagalwala, G. D. Giuseppe, A. F. Abouraddy, and B. E. A. Saleh, Single-photon three-qubit quantum logic using spatial light modulators. Nat. Commun.8,739 (2017)

    2017

  4. [12]

    L. T. Feng, M. Zhang, Z. Y . Zhou, M. Li, X. Xiong, L. Yu, B. S. Shi, G. P. Guo, D. X. Dai, X. F. Ren, and G. C. Guo, On-chip co- herent conversion of photonic quantum entanglement between different degrees of freedom. Nat. Commun.7,11985 (2016)

    2016

  5. [13]

    Cheng, K

    X. Cheng, K. C. Chang, Z. Xie, M. C. Sarihan, Y . S. Lee, Y . Li, X. Xu, A. K. Vinod, S. Kocaman, M. Yu, P. G. Q. Lo, D. L. Kwong, J. H. Shapiro, F. N. C. Wong, and C. W. Wong, A chip- scale polarization-spatial-momentum quantum SW AP gate in silicon nanophotonics. Nat. Photon...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Babazadeh, M

    A. Babazadeh, M. Erhard, F. Wang, M, Malik, R. Nouroozi, M. Krenn, and A. Zeilinger, High-dimensional single-photon quantum gates: concepts and experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 180510 (2017)

    2017

  7. [15]

    X. M. Hu, Y . Guo, B. H. Liu, Y . F. Huang, C. F. Li, and G. C. Guo, Beating the channel capacity limit for superdense coding with entangled ququarts. Sci. Adv.4,eaat9304 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Cozzolino, B

    D. Cozzolino, B. Da Lio, D. Bacco, and L. K. Oxenløwe, High- dimensional quantum communication: benefits, progress, and future challenges. Adv. Quantum Technol.2,1900038 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Erhard, M

    M. Erhard, M. Krenn, and A. Zeilinger, Advances in high- dimensional quantum entanglement. Nat. Rev. Phys.2,365– 381 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Y . Chi, Y . Yu, Q. Gong, and J. Wang, High-dimensional quan- tum information processing on programmable integrated pho- tonic chips. Sci. China Inf. Sci.66,180501 (2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    J. Wang, S. Paesani, Y . Ding, R. Santagati, P. Skrzypczyk, A. Salavrakos, J. Tura, R. Augusiak, L. Man ˇcinska, D. Bacco, D. Bonneau, J. W. Silverstone, Q. Gong, A. Ac ´ın, K. Rottwitt, L. K. Oxenløwe, J. L. O’Brien, A. Laing, and M. G. Thompson, 6 Multidimensional quantum en...

    2018

  12. [20]

    X. M. Hu, W. B. Xing, B. H. Liu, Y . F. Huang, C. F. Li, G. C. Guo, P. Erker and M. Huber, Efficient generation of high- dimensional entanglement through multipath down-conversion. Phys. Rev. Lett.125,090503 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    J. Bao, Z. Fu, T. Pramanik, et al, Very-large-scale integrated quantum graph photonics, Nat. Photon.17,573–581 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    H. Yu, S. Sciara, M. Chemnitz, N. Montaut, B. Crockett, B. Fis- cher, R. Helsten, B. Wetzel, T. A. Goebel, R. G. Kr ¨amer, B. E. Little, S. T. Chu, S. Nolte, Z. Wang, J. Aza˜na, W. J. Munro, D. J. Moss, and R. Morandotti, Quantum key distribution imple- mented with d-level tim...

    2025

  15. [23]

    O. Lib, Y . Bromberg, Resource-efficient photonic quantum computation with high-dimensional cluster states. Nat. Photon. 18,1218–1224 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Vigliar, S

    C. Vigliar, S. Paesani, Y . Ding, J. C. Adcock, J. Wang, S. Morley-Short, D. Bacco, L. K. Oxenløwe, M. G. Thompson, J. G. Rarity, and A. Laing, Error-protected qubits in a silicon photonic chip, Nat. Phys.17,1137–1143 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    L. T. Feng, M. Zhang, D. Liu, Y . J. Cheng, X. Y . Song, Y . Y . Ding, D. X. Dai, G. P. Guo, G. C. Guo and X. F. Ren, Chip- to-chip quantum photonic controlled-NOT gate teleportation. Phys. Rev. Lett.135,020802 (2025)

    2025

  18. [26]

    N. C. Harris, D. Bunandar, M. Pant, G. R. Steinbrecher, J. Mower, M. Prabhu, T. Baehr-Jones, M. Hochberg, and D. Englund, Large-scale quantum photonic circuits in silicon. Nanophotonics5,456–468 (2016)

    2016

  19. [27]

    A manufacturable platform for photonic quantum computing

    PsiQuantum team. A manufacturable platform for photonic quantum computing. Nature641,876–883 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    J. W. Silverstone, D. Bonneau, J. L. O’Brien, and M. G. Thomp- son, Silicon quantum photonics.IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quant.22, 390-402 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    J. Wang, F. Sciarrino, A. Laing, and M. G. Thompson, Inte- grated photonic quantum technologies. Nature Photon.14,273- 284 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    L. Feng, M. Zhang, J. Wang, X. Zhou, X. Qiang, G. Guo, and X. Ren, Silicon photonic devices for scalable quantum information applications. Photon. Res.10,A135–A153 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    L. T. Feng, M. Zhang, X. Xiong, Y . Chen, H. Wu, M. Li, G. P. Guo, G. C. Guo, D. X. Dai, and X. F. Ren, On-chip transverse- mode entangled photon pair source. npj Quantum Inf.5,2 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    J. C. Adcock, C. Vigliar, R. Santagati, J. W. Silverstone, and M. G. Thompson, Programmable four-photon graph states on a silicon chip. Nat. Commun.10,3528 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    Llewellyn, Y

    D. Llewellyn, Y . Ding, I. I. Faruque, S. Paesani, D. Bacco, R. Santagati, Y .-J. Qian, Y . Li, Y .-F. Xiao, M. Huber, M. Malik, G. F. Sinclair, X. Zhou, K. Rottwitt, J. L. O’Brien, J. G. Rarity, Q. Gong, L. K. Oxenlowe, J. Wang, and M. G. Thompson, Chip- to-chip quantum telep...

    2020

  26. [34]

    J. M. Lee, J. Park, J. Bang, Y . I. Sohn, A. Baldazzi, M. Sanna, S. Azzini, and L. Pavesi, Quantum states generation and manip- ulation in a programmable silicon-photonic four-qubit system with high-fidelity and purity. APL Photon.9,076110 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Zhang, L

    M. Zhang, L. T. Feng, Z. Y . Zhou, Y . Chen, H. Wu, M. Li, S. M. Gao, G. P. Guo, G. C. Guo, D. X. Dai, and X. F. Ren, Generation of multiphoton quantum states on silicon. Light Sci. Appl.8,41 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    G ¨uhne, C.-Y

    O. G ¨uhne, C.-Y . Lu, W.-B. Gao, and J.-W. Pan, Toolbox for entanglement detection and fidelity estimation. Phys. Rev. A 76,030305 (2007)

    2007

  29. [37]

    Raussendorf and H

    R. Raussendorf and H. J. Briegel, A one-way quantum com- puter. Phys. Rev. Lett.86,5188–5191 (2001)

    2001

  30. [38]

    Walther, K

    P. Walther, K. J. Resch, T. Rudolph, E. Schenck, H. Weinfurter, V . Vedral, M. Aspelmeyer, and A. Zeilinger, Experimental one- way quantum computing. Nature434,169–176 (2005)

    2005

  31. [39]

    Prevedel, P

    R. Prevedel, P. Walther, F. Tiefenbacher, P. B¨ohi, R. Kaltenbaek, T. Jennewein, and A. Zeilinger, High-speed linear optics quan- tum computing using active feed-forward. Nature445,65–69 (2007)

    2007

  32. [40]

    Vallone, E

    G. Vallone, E. Pomarico, F. D. Martini, and P. Mataloni, Ac- tive one-way quantum computation with two-photon four-qubit cluster states. Phys. Rev. Lett.100,160502 (2008)

    2008

  33. [41]

    Scarani, A

    V . Scarani, A. Ac´ın, E. Schenck, and M. Aspelmeyer, Nonlocal- ity of cluster states of qubits, Phys. Rev. A71,042325 (2005)

    2005

  34. [42]

    L. K. Grover, Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a nee- dle in a haystack. Phys. Rev. Lett.79,325–328 (1997)

    1997

  35. [43]

    Eisert and H

    J. Eisert and H. J. Briegel, Schmidt measure as a tool for quan- tifying multiparticle entanglement. Phys. Rev. A64,022306 (2001)

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.