pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.11861 · v3 · pith:WA4NGJSWnew · submitted 2025-09-15 · 🪐 quant-ph

Optimizing Quantum Photonic Integrated Circuits using Differentiable Tensor Networks

Mathias Van Regemortel , Thomas Van Vaerenbergh This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 16:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum photonic circuitsdifferentiable tensor networksgradient optimizationstate preparationquantum phase sensingintegrated photonicslow photon occupationGaAs devices
0
0 comments X

The pith

Differentiable tensor networks enable gradient-based optimization of quantum photonic integrated circuits for low photon numbers.

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

The paper presents a method to optimize the design of quantum photonic integrated circuits that contain nonlinear unitary gates and stochastic loss components. It uses differentiable tensor networks to compute gradients through the simulation of photonic evolution, which works well when photon occupation stays low and intermode entanglement remains modest. Gate parameters are first obtained from electromagnetic field simulations of GaAs samples before the optimization step begins. The approach is shown on two tasks: preparing desired quantum optical states and creating readout circuits for quantum phase sensing. A sympathetic reader would see this as a way to move from manual or brute-force design toward systematic, gradient-driven tailoring of photonic hardware for specific quantum operations.

Core claim

The central claim is that differentiable tensor networks serve as an accurate and tractable core for gradient-based optimization of quantum photonic integrated circuits built from nonlinear unitary coupling gates and stochastic nonunitary loss elements. After the circuit architecture is characterized via field simulations of GaAs-based samples, the same differentiable simulator can be used to adjust gate parameters so that the overall circuit better achieves target tasks such as quantum state preparation or optimal readout for phase sensing, all within the regime of low photonic occupation and modest entanglement.

What carries the argument

Differentiable tensor networks that propagate gradients through the approximate quantum state evolution of the photonic circuit, allowing parameter updates for both unitary gates and loss components.

If this is right

  • Gate parameters for nonlinear photonic couplers can be tuned automatically to produce specific target quantum states.
  • Readout circuits can be shaped to extract phase information more efficiently under realistic loss.
  • Physical material properties from GaAs simulations feed directly into the circuit-level optimizer without manual translation.
  • Stochastic loss elements are treated on equal footing with unitary gates during gradient updates.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same framework might allow joint optimization of circuit topology and gate parameters if the tensor-network contraction cost can be kept manageable.
  • Designs produced this way could serve as starting points for experimental calibration when fabrication variations are present.
  • The method offers a template for similar gradient-based design in other platforms that combine unitary gates with loss, such as superconducting or atomic circuits.

Load-bearing premise

The tensor-network representation stays accurate enough and computationally feasible once the gate parameters are taken from realistic field simulations of the GaAs devices.

What would settle it

Fabricate one of the optimized circuits and measure its output statistics or sensing performance; if the results deviate substantially from the tensor-network predictions when the average photon number is raised even modestly above the low-occupation regime, the central claim would be challenged.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.11861 by Mathias Van Regemortel, Thomas Van Vaerenbergh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The optical circuits used for quantum optimization. A pulsed coherent laser light is coupled into the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The qPIC setup. The circuit contains L waveg￾uides with unitary coupling gates Vl,d(∆t) 5, stacked in a bricked pattern of layer depth D, with unitary edge gates V (edge) (brown rectangles). Each layer of unitary gates, is followed by non-unitary stochastic sampling gates Q (Eq. (13)) for the losses (purple dots). 3.1 The tensor-network photonic circuit con￾traction The full circuit consists of L parallel … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The MPS representation of the MC ensemble [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Applying a two-mode unitary gate in layer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The results for cat state preparation. (a) The fidelity converges for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The results for noisy single-photon generation. (a)-(b) The obtained optimal density matrix (a) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Circuit optimization applied to optimal readout for phase sensing. (a) an illustration of the setup, one input [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Results of 2D LP field simulations of one nonlinear gate, with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The propagation of a pulse through a π/2 swap gate with a strong photonic nonlinearity. The pulse is injected in first waveguide (blue) and transfers to the second (brown) (a) different snapshots, ∆t = 2.93 ps apart from each other, of the pulse propagating through the coupled waveguides from left to right; the photon density (up), and the real (middle) and imaginary part (bottom) of ψ0,1(z, t). (b) The ma… view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The robustness analysis for cat-state generation with deep circuits, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The Gaussian comparison for sensing, for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Recent reports of large photonic nonlinearities in integrated photonic devices, using the strong excitonic light-matter coupling in semiconductors, necessitate a tailored design framework for quantum processing in the limit of low photon occupation. We present a gradient-based optimization method for quantum photonic integrated circuits, which are composed of nonlinear unitary coupling gates and stochastic, nonunitary components for sampling the photonic losses. As core of our method, differentiable tensor-networks are leveraged, which are accurate in the regime of low photonic occupation and modest intermode entanglement. After characterizing the circuit gate architecture with field simulations of GaAs-based samples, we demonstrate the applicability of our method by optimizing quantum photonic circuits for two key use cases: integrated designs for quantum optical state preparation and tailored optimal readout for quantum phase sensing.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a gradient-based optimization framework for quantum photonic integrated circuits (QPICs) composed of nonlinear unitary gates and stochastic loss components. The core technique employs differentiable tensor networks (TN) asserted to be accurate for low photonic occupation and modest intermode entanglement. Gate parameters are first extracted from electromagnetic simulations of GaAs samples; the method is then demonstrated on two applications: optimization of circuits for quantum optical state preparation and for tailored readout in quantum phase sensing.

Significance. If the TN approximation remains controlled throughout optimization, the approach could enable efficient, gradient-driven design of integrated photonic devices exploiting strong excitonic nonlinearities, addressing a practical need in quantum photonic hardware. The combination of field-simulation characterization with differentiable TN optimization is a concrete step toward scalable circuit design in this regime.

major comments (1)
  1. [Method description and optimization results sections] The central claim that differentiable tensor networks remain accurate rests on the circuits staying inside the low-occupation, modest-entanglement regime. However, the optimization procedure (gradient updates on gate parameters obtained from GaAs simulations) contains no a-posteriori diagnostic—such as bond-dimension convergence, truncation-error bounds, or entanglement-entropy monitoring—to confirm that the final optimized circuits do not exit this regime. This verification is load-bearing for the validity of all reported results.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the stochastic nonunitary loss components and their differentiation through the TN should be clarified, including how sampling is made differentiable.
  2. Figure captions and axis labels for the GaAs field-simulation results and the final optimized circuit performance metrics could be expanded for standalone readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting an important point about verification of the tensor-network approximation. We respond to the major comment below and describe the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Method description and optimization results sections] The central claim that differentiable tensor networks remain accurate rests on the circuits staying inside the low-occupation, modest-entanglement regime. However, the optimization procedure (gradient updates on gate parameters obtained from GaAs simulations) contains no a-posteriori diagnostic—such as bond-dimension convergence, truncation-error bounds, or entanglement-entropy monitoring—to confirm that the final optimized circuits do not exit this regime. This verification is load-bearing for the validity of all reported results.

    Authors: We agree that explicit a-posteriori verification is necessary to substantiate that the optimized circuits remain within the low-occupation and modest-entanglement regime where the differentiable tensor-network representation is controlled. In the revised manuscript we will add such diagnostics to the Method description and optimization results sections. Specifically, we will report entanglement-entropy values and bond-dimension convergence checks (including truncation-error estimates) evaluated on the final optimized circuits for both the quantum-state-preparation and phase-sensing examples. These additions will confirm that the reported results stay inside the asserted regime. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper describes a gradient-based optimization framework for quantum photonic circuits that employs differentiable tensor networks, with the accuracy of those networks asserted for the low-occupation and modest-entanglement regime. The abstract and method outline treat this regime as a precondition for the approach rather than deriving it from any fitted parameter or self-referential definition. Gate parameters are obtained from external electromagnetic simulations of GaAs samples and supplied as inputs; no equation or step is shown that renames a fitted quantity as a prediction or reduces the central result to a self-citation chain. Because the provided text contains no explicit equations, uniqueness theorems, or ansatz smuggling that collapse the claimed derivation onto its own inputs, the method remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated; the accuracy of tensor networks in the low-occupation regime is presented as a working assumption rather than a derived result.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5652 in / 1159 out tokens · 28308 ms · 2026-05-18T16:58:07.575843+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    As core of our method, differentiable tensor-networks are leveraged, which are accurate in the regime of low photonic occupation and modest intermode entanglement. ... We use the matrix product state (MPS) representation of the multimode bosonic photon state, where each mode is modeled by a truncated local Fock space

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/BranchSelection.lean branch_selection unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    The figure of merit ... Lρ = weighted trace distance ... LS = Von Neumann entropy regularizer ... Ltot = λρ Lρ + λS LS

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 85 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Elec- trical tuning of nonlinearities in exciton- polariton condensates.Physical Review Let- ters, 121(3):037401, 2018

    SI Tsintzos, A Tzimis, G Stavrinidis, A Trifonov, Z Hatzopoulos, JJ Baum- berg, H Ohadi, and PG Savvidis. Elec- trical tuning of nonlinearities in exciton- polariton condensates.Physical Review Let- ters, 121(3):037401, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Enhancement of paramet- ric effects in polariton waveguides induced by dipolar interactions.Physical review let- ters, 126(13):137401, 2021

    DG Su´ arez-Forero, F Riminucci, V Ardiz- zone, N Karpowicz, E Maggiolini, G Ma- corini, G Lerario, F Todisco, M De Giorgi, L Dominici, et al. Enhancement of paramet- ric effects in polariton waveguides induced by dipolar interactions.Physical review let- ters, 126(13):137401, 2021

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Electrically controlled photonic circuits of field-induced dipolaritons with huge nonlinearities.Physical Review X, 14(3):031022, 2024

    Dror Liran, Ronen Rapaport, Jiaqi Hu, Nathanial Lydick, Hui Deng, and Loren Pfeiffer. Electrically controlled photonic circuits of field-induced dipolaritons with huge nonlinearities.Physical Review X, 14(3):031022, 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Collective coherence in planar semiconductor microcavities.Semi- conductor science and technology, 22(5):R1, 2007

    J Keeling, FM Marchetti, MH Szyma´ nska, and PB Littlewood. Collective coherence in planar semiconductor microcavities.Semi- conductor science and technology, 22(5):R1, 2007

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Quan- tum fluids of light.Reviews of Modern Physics, 85(1):299–366, 2013

    Iacopo Carusotto and Cristiano Ciuti. Quan- tum fluids of light.Reviews of Modern Physics, 85(1):299–366, 2013

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Quantum computational advantage us- ing photons.Science, 370(6523):1460–1463, 2020

    Han-Sen Zhong, Hui Wang, Yu-Hao Deng, Ming-Cheng Chen, Li-Chao Peng, Yi-Han Luo, Jian Qin, Dian Wu, Xing Ding, Yi Hu, et al. Quantum computational advantage us- ing photons.Science, 370(6523):1460–1463, 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Variational quantum algorithm for experimental photonic multi- parameter estimation.npj Quantum Infor- mation, 10(1):26, 2024

    Valeria Cimini, Mauro Valeri, Simone Pia- centini, Francesco Ceccarelli, Giacomo Cor- rielli, Roberto Osellame, Nicol` o Spagnolo, and Fabio Sciarrino. Variational quantum algorithm for experimental photonic multi- parameter estimation.npj Quantum Infor- mation, 10(1):26, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Parallel quantum-enhanced sensing

    Mohammadjavad Dowran, Aye L Win, Umang Jain, Ashok Kumar, Benjamin J Lawrie, Raphael C Pooser, and Alberto M Marino. Parallel quantum-enhanced sensing. ACS Photonics, 11(8):3037–3045, 2024

    work page 2024

  9. [9]

    Experimental ad- vances in phase estimation with photonic quantum states.Entropy, 27(7):712, 2025

    Laura T Knoll, Agustina G Magnoni, and Miguel A Larotonda. Experimental ad- vances in phase estimation with photonic quantum states.Entropy, 27(7):712, 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    Tunable coherent parametric oscilla- tion in linb o 3 at optical frequencies.Phys- ical Review Letters, 14(24):973, 1965

    Joseph Anthony Giordmaine and Robert C Miller. Tunable coherent parametric oscilla- tion in linb o 3 at optical frequencies.Phys- ical Review Letters, 14(24):973, 1965

    work page 1965

  11. [11]

    Paschotta

    R. Paschotta. Optical parametric oscillators. RP Photonics Encyclopedia, 2008. Available 25 online athttps://www.rp-photonics.com/ optical_parametric_oscillators.html

    work page 2008

  12. [12]

    Exciton–polariton light–semiconductor coupling effects.Na- ture Photonics, 5(5):273–273, 2011

    HM Gibbs, Galina Khitrova, and Stephan W Koch. Exciton–polariton light–semiconductor coupling effects.Na- ture Photonics, 5(5):273–273, 2011

    work page 2011

  13. [13]

    Towards polariton blockade of confined exciton–polaritons.Na- ture materials, 18(3):219–222, 2019

    Aymeric Delteil, Thomas Fink, Anne Schade, Sven H¨ ofling, Christian Schneider, and Ata¸ c ˙Imamo˘ glu. Towards polariton blockade of confined exciton–polaritons.Na- ture materials, 18(3):219–222, 2019

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Photon blockade in an optical cavity with one trapped atom.Na- ture, 436(7047):87–90, 2005

    Kevin M Birnbaum, Andreea Boca, Russell Miller, Allen D Boozer, Tracy E Northup, and H Jeff Kimble. Photon blockade in an optical cavity with one trapped atom.Na- ture, 436(7047):87–90, 2005

    work page 2005

  15. [15]

    Highly parallel simulation and optimization of photonic circuits in time and frequency domain based on the deep- learning framework PyTorch.Sci

    Floris Laporte, Joni Dambre, and Peter Bi- enstman. Highly parallel simulation and optimization of photonic circuits in time and frequency domain based on the deep- learning framework PyTorch.Sci. Rep., 9(1):5918, April 2019

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Chen, and David Z

    Jiaqi Gu, Hanqing Zhu, Chenghao Feng, Zixuan Jiang, Mingjie Liu, Shuhan Zhang, Ray T. Chen, and David Z. Pan. Adept: automatic differentiable design of photonic tensor cores. InProceedings of the 59th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, DAC ’22, page 937–942, New York, NY, USA, 2022. Association for Computing Ma- chinery

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Adept-z: Zero- shot automated circuit topology search for pareto-optimal photonic tensor cores, 2024

    Ziyang Jiang, Pingchuan Ma, Meng Zhang, Rena Huang, and Jiaqi Gu. Adept-z: Zero- shot automated circuit topology search for pareto-optimal photonic tensor cores, 2024

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Physics for neuromorphic computing.Nature Reviews Physics, 2(9):499–510, 2020

    Danijela Markovi´ c, Alice Mizrahi, Damien Querlioz, and Julie Grollier. Physics for neuromorphic computing.Nature Reviews Physics, 2(9):499–510, 2020

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Optical comput- ing: Status and perspectives.Nanomateri- als, 12(13):2171, 2022

    Nikolay L Kazanskiy, Muhammad A Butt, and Svetlana N Khonina. Optical comput- ing: Status and perspectives.Nanomateri- als, 12(13):2171, 2022

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    The physics of opti- cal computing.Nature Reviews Physics, 5(12):717–734, 2023

    Peter L McMahon. The physics of opti- cal computing.Nature Reviews Physics, 5(12):717–734, 2023

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Ana- log photonics computing for information pro- cessing, inference, and optimization.Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies, 6(9):2300055, 2023

    Nikita Stroev and Natalia G Berloff. Ana- log photonics computing for information pro- cessing, inference, and optimization.Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies, 6(9):2300055, 2023

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    An overview on application of machine learning techniques in optical networks

    Francesco Musumeci, Cristina Rottondi, Avishek Nag, Irene Macaluso, Darko Zibar, Marco Ruffini, and Massimo Tornatore. An overview on application of machine learning techniques in optical networks. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 21(2):1383–1408, 2018

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Springer Sci- ence & Business Media, 2004

    Crispin Gardiner and Peter Zoller.Quantum noise: a handbook of Markovian and non- Markovian quantum stochastic methods with applications to quantum optics. Springer Sci- ence & Business Media, 2004

    work page 2004

  24. [24]

    Andreas M L¨ auchli and Corinna Kol- lath. Spreading of correlations and en- tanglement after a quench in the one- dimensionalbose–hubbard model.Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Exper- iment, 2008(05):P05018, 2008

    work page 2008

  25. [25]

    Tensor network states in time-bin quantum optics

    Michael Lubasch, Antonio A Valido, Jelmer J Renema, W Steven Kolthammer, Dieter Jaksch, Myungshik S Kim, Ian Walmsley, and Ra´ ul Garc´ ıa-Patr´ on. Tensor network states in time-bin quantum optics. Physical Review A, 97(6):062304, 2018

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Classical simu- lation of lossy boson sampling using ma- trix product operators.Physical Review A, 104(2):022407, 2021

    Changhun Oh, Kyungjoo Noh, Bill Feffer- man, and Liang Jiang. Classical simu- lation of lossy boson sampling using ma- trix product operators.Physical Review A, 104(2):022407, 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Differentiable program- ming tensor networks.Physical Review X, 9(3):031041, 2019

    Hai-Jun Liao, Jin-Guo Liu, Lei Wang, and Tao Xiang. Differentiable program- ming tensor networks.Physical Review X, 9(3):031041, 2019

    work page 2019

  28. [28]

    Tensorcircuit: a quan- tum software framework for the nisq era

    Shi-Xin Zhang, Jonathan Allcock, Zhou- Quan Wan, Shuo Liu, Jiace Sun, Hao Yu, Xing-Han Yang, Jiezhong Qiu, Zhaofeng Ye, Yu-Qin Chen, et al. Tensorcircuit: a quan- tum software framework for the nisq era. Quantum, 7:912, 2023

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Quantum circuit optimization using differentiable pro- gramming of tensor network states.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12583, 2024

    David Rogerson and Ananda Roy. Quantum circuit optimization using differentiable pro- gramming of tensor network states.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12583, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations

    Guifr´ e Vidal. Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations. Physical review letters, 91(14):147902, 2003. 26

    work page 2003

  31. [31]

    Monte carlo simulation of master equations in quantum optics for vacuum, thermal, and squeezed reservoirs.Physical Review A, 46(7):4382, 1992

    R Dum, AS Parkins, P Zoller, and CW Gar- diner. Monte carlo simulation of master equations in quantum optics for vacuum, thermal, and squeezed reservoirs.Physical Review A, 46(7):4382, 1992

    work page 1992

  32. [32]

    Monte carlo wave-function method in quantum optics.JOSA B, 10(3):524–538, 1993

    Klaus Mølmer, Yvan Castin, and Jean Dal- ibard. Monte carlo wave-function method in quantum optics.JOSA B, 10(3):524–538, 1993

    work page 1993

  33. [33]

    Quantum trajectory theory for cascaded open systems.Physical review letters, 70(15):2273, 1993

    Howard J Carmichael. Quantum trajectory theory for cascaded open systems.Physical review letters, 70(15):2273, 1993

    work page 1993

  34. [34]

    Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems.Ad- vances in Physics, 63(2):77–149, 2014

    Andrew J Daley. Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems.Ad- vances in Physics, 63(2):77–149, 2014

    work page 2014

  35. [35]

    Entanglement entropy scaling transition under competing moni- toring protocols.Physical Review Letters, 126(12):123604, 2021

    Mathias Van Regemortel, Ze-Pei Cian, Alireza Seif, Hossein Dehghani, and Mo- hammad Hafezi. Entanglement entropy scaling transition under competing moni- toring protocols.Physical Review Letters, 126(12):123604, 2021

    work page 2021

  36. [36]

    Entanglement-optimal trajectories of many-body quantum markov processes

    Tatiana Vovk and Hannes Pichler. Entanglement-optimal trajectories of many-body quantum markov processes. Physical Review Letters, 128(24):243601, 2022

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    Monitoring- induced entanglement entropy and sam- pling complexity.Physical Review Research, 4(3):L032021, 2022

    Mathias Van Regemortel, Oles Shtanko, Luis Pedro Garc´ ıa-Pintos, Abhinav Desh- pande, Hossein Dehghani, Alexey V Gor- shkov, and Mohammad Hafezi. Monitoring- induced entanglement entropy and sam- pling complexity.Physical Review Research, 4(3):L032021, 2022

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Coupled-mode theory.Proceedings of the IEEE, 79(10):1505–1518, 2002

    Hermann A Haus and Weiping Huang. Coupled-mode theory.Proceedings of the IEEE, 79(10):1505–1518, 2002

    work page 2002

  39. [39]

    Behavior model for di- rectional coupler

    Yufei Xing, Umar Khan, AR Alves J´ unior, and Wim Bogaerts. Behavior model for di- rectional coupler. InProceedings Symposium IEEE Photonics Society Benelux, pages 128– 131, 2017

    work page 2017

  40. [40]

    Nanostructured ga as/(al, ga) as waveguide for low-density polari- ton condensation from a bound state in the continuum.Physical Review Applied, 18(2):024039, 2022

    F Riminucci, V Ardizzone, L Francav- iglia, M Lorenzon, C Stavrakas, S Dhuey, A Schwartzberg, S Zanotti, D Gerace, K Baldwin, et al. Nanostructured ga as/(al, ga) as waveguide for low-density polari- ton condensation from a bound state in the continuum.Physical Review Applied, 18(2):024039, 2022

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Polariton-polariton interac- tion constants in microcavities.Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 82(7):075301, 2010

    Masha Vladimirova, Steeve Cronenberger, Denis Scalbert, KV Kavokin, Audrey Miard, Aristide Lemaˆ ıtre, Jacqueline Bloch, Dim- itri Solnyshkov, Guillaume Malpuech, and AV Kavokin. Polariton-polariton interac- tion constants in microcavities.Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 82(7):075301, 2010

    work page 2010

  42. [42]

    Direct measurement of polariton–polariton interac- tion strength.Nature Physics, 13(9):870– 875, 2017

    Yongbao Sun, Yoseob Yoon, Mark Steger, Gangqiang Liu, Loren N Pfeiffer, Ken West, David W Snoke, and Keith A Nelson. Direct measurement of polariton–polariton interac- tion strength.Nature Physics, 13(9):870– 875, 2017

    work page 2017

  43. [43]

    Exciton polaritons in semiconductor waveguides.Applied Physics Letters, 102(1), 2013

    PM Walker, L Tinkler, M Durska, DM Whittaker, IJ Luxmoore, B Royall, DN Krizhanovskii, MS Skolnick, I Farrer, and DA Ritchie. Exciton polaritons in semiconductor waveguides.Applied Physics Letters, 102(1), 2013

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    Polarization-resolved strong light–matter coupling in planar gaas/algaas waveguides

    Pavel Yu Shapochkin, Maksim S Lozhkin, Ivan A Solovev, Olga A Lozhkina, Yury P Efimov, Sergey A Eliseev, Vyacheslav A Lovcjus, Gleb G Kozlov, Anastasia A Per- vishko, Dmitry N Krizhanovskii, et al. Polarization-resolved strong light–matter coupling in planar gaas/algaas waveguides. Optics Letters, 43(18):4526–4529, 2018

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    Slow light bimodal interferometry in one-dimensional photonic crystal waveguides.Light: Science & Appli- cations, 10(1):16, 2021

    Luis Torrijos-Mor´ an, Amadeu Griol, and Jaime Garc´ ıa-Rup´ erez. Slow light bimodal interferometry in one-dimensional photonic crystal waveguides.Light: Science & Appli- cations, 10(1):16, 2021

    work page 2021

  46. [46]

    Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states: Concepts, symmetries, theorems

    J Ignacio Cirac, David Perez-Garcia, Nor- bert Schuch, and Frank Verstraete. Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states: Concepts, symmetries, theorems. Reviews of Modern Physics, 93(4):045003, 2021

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    Matrix Product State Representations

    David Perez-Garcia, Frank Verstraete, Michael M Wolf, and J Ignacio Cirac. Matrix product state representations.arXiv preprint quant-ph/0608197, 2006

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  48. [48]

    Johannes Hauschild, Jakob Unfried, Sa- jant Anand, Bartholomew Andrews, Mar- cus Bintz, Umberto Borla, Stefan Divic, Markus Drescher, Jan Geiger, Martin Hefel, 27 K´ evin H´ emery, Wilhelm Kadow, Jack Kemp, Nico Kirchner, Vincent S. Liu, Gunnar M¨ oller, Daniel Parker, Michael Rader, An- ton Romen, Samuel Scalet, Leon Schoonder- woerd, Maximilian Schulz, ...

    work page 2024

  49. [49]

    Auto- matic differentiation for complex valued svd

    Zhou-Quan Wan and Shi-Xin Zhang. Auto- matic differentiation for complex valued svd. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.02659, 2019

    work page arXiv 1909

  50. [50]

    Nontrivial relax- ation dynamics of excitons in high-quality ingaas/gaas quantum wells.Physical Review B, 91(11):115307, 2015

    AV Trifonov, SN Korotan, AS Kurdyubov, I Ya Gerlovin, IV Ignatiev, Yu P Efimov, SA Eliseev, VV Petrov, Yu K Dolgikh, VV Ovsyankin, et al. Nontrivial relax- ation dynamics of excitons in high-quality ingaas/gaas quantum wells.Physical Review B, 91(11):115307, 2015

    work page 2015

  51. [51]

    PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library

    A Paszke. Pytorch: An imperative style, high-performance deep learning li- brary.arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.01703, 2019

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1912

  52. [52]

    Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization

    Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization.arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  53. [53]

    Quantum neuromorphic plat- form for quantum state preparation.Physi- cal review letters, 123(26):260404, 2019

    Sanjib Ghosh, Tomasz Paterek, and Timo- thy CH Liew. Quantum neuromorphic plat- form for quantum state preparation.Physi- cal review letters, 123(26):260404, 2019

    work page 2019

  54. [54]

    Reconstructing quantum states with quantum reservoir networks

    Sanjib Ghosh, Andrzej Opala, Micha l Ma- tuszewski, Tomasz Paterek, and Timo- thy CH Liew. Reconstructing quantum states with quantum reservoir networks. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 32(7):3148–3155, 2020

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    Quantum neuromorphic computing with reservoir computing networks.Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies, 4(9):2100053, 2021

    Sanjib Ghosh, Kohei Nakajima, Tanjung Krisnanda, Keisuke Fujii, and Timothy CH Liew. Quantum neuromorphic computing with reservoir computing networks.Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies, 4(9):2100053, 2021

    work page 2021

  56. [56]

    Quantum- enhanced sensing of photonic modes with cat states.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.23531, 2025

    Xiao-Wei Zheng, Jun-Cong Zheng, Xue- Feng Pan, and Pengbo Li. Quantum- enhanced sensing of photonic modes with cat states.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.23531, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Dynamically protected cat-qubits: a new paradigm for universal quantum computation.New Journal of Physics, 16(4):045014, 2014

    Mazyar Mirrahimi, Zaki Leghtas, Vic- tor V Albert, Steven Touzard, Robert J Schoelkopf, Liang Jiang, and Michel H De- voret. Dynamically protected cat-qubits: a new paradigm for universal quantum computation.New Journal of Physics, 16(4):045014, 2014

    work page 2014

  58. [58]

    Generation of optical ‘schr¨ odinger cats’ from photon number states.Nature, 448(7155):784–786, 2007

    Alexei Ourjoumtsev, Hyunseok Jeong, Rosa Tualle-Brouri, and Philippe Grang- ier. Generation of optical ‘schr¨ odinger cats’ from photon number states.Nature, 448(7155):784–786, 2007

    work page 2007

  59. [59]

    Noise-resilient designs and analysis for optical neural networks

    Gianluca Kosmella, Ripalta Stabile, and Jaron Sanders. Noise-resilient designs and analysis for optical neural networks. Neuromorphic Computing and Engineering, 4(4):044002, 2024

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Quantum nonlinear op- tics—photon by photon.Nature Photonics, 8(9):685–694, 2014

    Darrick E Chang, Vladan Vuleti´ c, and Mikhail D Lukin. Quantum nonlinear op- tics—photon by photon.Nature Photonics, 8(9):685–694, 2014

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    Ultrafast second-order nonlinear photon- ics—from classical physics to non-gaussian quantum dynamics: a tutorial.Advances in Optics and Photonics, 16(2):347–538, 2024

    Marc Jankowski, Ryotatsu Yanagimoto, Edwin Ng, Ryan Hamerly, Timothy P McKenna, Hideo Mabuchi, and MM Fe- jer. Ultrafast second-order nonlinear photon- ics—from classical physics to non-gaussian quantum dynamics: a tutorial.Advances in Optics and Photonics, 16(2):347–538, 2024

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    Single-photon generation and manipulation in quantum nanophotonics.Applied Physics Reviews, 12(1), 2025

    Guangxin Liu, Wenjie Zhou, Dmitrii Gromyko, Ding Huang, Zhaogang Dong, Renming Liu, Juanfeng Zhu, Jingfeng Liu, Cheng-Wei Qiu, and Lin Wu. Single-photon generation and manipulation in quantum nanophotonics.Applied Physics Reviews, 12(1), 2025

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    Antibunching and un- conventional photon blockade with gaus- sian squeezed states.Physical Review A, 90(6):063824, 2014

    Marc-Antoine Lemonde, Nicolas Didier, and Aashish A Clerk. Antibunching and un- conventional photon blockade with gaus- sian squeezed states.Physical Review A, 90(6):063824, 2014

    work page 2014

  64. [64]

    Unconven- tional photon blockade.Physical Review A, 96(5):053810, 2017

    H Flayac and V Savona. Unconven- tional photon blockade.Physical Review A, 96(5):053810, 2017

    work page 2017

  65. [65]

    Advances in quantum metrology.Nature photonics, 5(4):222–229, 2011

    Vittorio Giovannetti, Seth Lloyd, and Lorenzo Maccone. Advances in quantum metrology.Nature photonics, 5(4):222–229, 2011

    work page 2011

  66. [66]

    Quantum sensing

    Christian L Degen, Friedemann Reinhard, and Paola Cappellaro. Quantum sensing. 28 Reviews of modern physics, 89(3):035002, 2017

    work page 2017

  67. [67]

    Advances in photonic quantum sensing.Nature Photonics, 12(12):724–733, 2018

    Stefano Pirandola, B Roy Bardhan, To- bias Gehring, Christian Weedbrook, and Seth Lloyd. Advances in photonic quantum sensing.Nature Photonics, 12(12):724–733, 2018

    work page 2018

  68. [68]

    Photonic quantum metrology.A VS Quantum Science, 2(2), 2020

    Emanuele Polino, Mauro Valeri, Nicol` o Spagnolo, and Fabio Sciarrino. Photonic quantum metrology.A VS Quantum Science, 2(2), 2020

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    Quantum computational-sensing advantage.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.16918, 2025

    Saeed A Khan, Sridhar Prabhu, Logan G Wright, and Peter L McMahon. Quantum computational-sensing advantage.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.16918, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    Exploring quantum sensing potential for systems ap- plications.IEEE Access, 11:31569–31582, 2023

    Boris Kantsepolsky, Itzhak Aviv, Roye Weitzfeld, and Eliyahu Bordo. Exploring quantum sensing potential for systems ap- plications.IEEE Access, 11:31569–31582, 2023

    work page 2023

  71. [71]

    Quantum-enhanced advanced ligo detectors in the era of gravitational- wave astronomy.Physical Review Letters, 123(23):231107, 2019

    Maggie Tse, Haocun Yu, Nutsinee Kijbun- choo, A Fernandez-Galiana, P Dupej, L Bar- sotti, CD Blair, DD Brown, SE ea Dwyer, A Effler, et al. Quantum-enhanced advanced ligo detectors in the era of gravitational- wave astronomy.Physical Review Letters, 123(23):231107, 2019

    work page 2019

  72. [72]

    Quantum sensors for biomedical appli- cations.Nature Reviews Physics, 5(3):157– 169, 2023

    Nabeel Aslam, Hengyun Zhou, Elana K Urbach, Matthew J Turner, Ronald L Walsworth, Mikhail D Lukin, and Hongkun Park. Quantum sensors for biomedical appli- cations.Nature Reviews Physics, 5(3):157– 169, 2023

    work page 2023

  73. [73]

    Chemical sensors based on quantum cascade lasers.IEEE journal of quantum electronics, 38(6):582–591, 2002

    Anatoliy A Kosterev and Frank K Tittel. Chemical sensors based on quantum cascade lasers.IEEE journal of quantum electronics, 38(6):582–591, 2002

    work page 2002

  74. [74]

    Quantum fisher information measurement and verification of the quantum cram´ er–rao bound in a solid-state qubit.npj Quantum Information, 8(1):56, 2022

    Min Yu, Yu Liu, Pengcheng Yang, Mu- sang Gong, Qingyun Cao, Shaoliang Zhang, Haibin Liu, Markus Heyl, Tomoki Ozawa, Nathan Goldman, et al. Quantum fisher information measurement and verification of the quantum cram´ er–rao bound in a solid-state qubit.npj Quantum Information, 8(1):56, 2022

    work page 2022

  75. [75]

    Optimal scheme for quantum metrology.Advanced Quantum Technologies, 5(1):2100080, 2022

    Jing Liu, Mao Zhang, Hongzhen Chen, Lingna Wang, and Haidong Yuan. Optimal scheme for quantum metrology.Advanced Quantum Technologies, 5(1):2100080, 2022

    work page 2022

  76. [76]

    Fiderer, Jonas Schuff, and Daniel Braun

    Lukas J. Fiderer, Jonas Schuff, and Daniel Braun. Neural-network heuristics for adap- tive bayesian quantum estimation.PRX Quantum, 2:020303, Apr 2021

    work page 2021

  77. [77]

    Alessio Fallani, Matteo A. C. Rossi, Dario Tamascelli, and Marco G. Genoni. Learn- ing feedback control strategies for quantum metrology.PRX Quantum, 3:020310, Apr 2022

    work page 2022

  78. [78]

    Machine learning for optical quantum metrology.Advanced Photonics, 5(2):020501, 2023

    Luca Pezz` e. Machine learning for optical quantum metrology.Advanced Photonics, 5(2):020501, 2023

    work page 2023

  79. [79]

    Photonic quantum metrology with variational quan- tum optical nonlinearities.Physical Review Research, 6(1):013299, 2024

    A Mu˜ noz de las Heras, Cristian Tabares, Jan T Schneider, Luca Tagliacozzo, Diego Porras, and A Gonz´ alez-Tudela. Photonic quantum metrology with variational quan- tum optical nonlinearities.Physical Review Research, 6(1):013299, 2024

    work page 2024

  80. [80]

    Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1993

    Steven M Kay.Fundamentals of statis- tical signal processing: estimation theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1993

    work page 1993

Showing first 80 references.