Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 92 references

Free-space model for a balloon-based quantum network

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read High-altitude balloons could carry national quantum communication networks more cheaply than satellites, with a crossover near 80 km where balloon links beat fiber links for QKD.

desk verdict Useful, well-documented simulation study of balloon-based QKD networks; the downlink analysis is convincing and the 80-km crossover is a real quantitative result, but the uplink model in Appendix D has a load-bearing flaw that undermines the MDI-QKD and repeater claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.03356 v1 pith:XLOSTMBW submitted 2024-12-04 quant-ph

Ilektra Karakosta-Amarantidou , Raja Yehia , Matteo Schiavon This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords quantumkeydistributionhigh-altitudeballoonsfree-spaceopticalchannelsatmosphericturbulenceadaptiveopticsnetworksimulationuplinkreciprocity1550nmcommunication
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that high-altitude balloons, hovering between 18 and 38 km, can serve as the free-space nodes of a national quantum key distribution (QKD) network, an alternative to satellites. To back this, the authors build a channel-loss model for balloon-to-ground, ground-to-balloon, and balloon-to-balloon links at 1550 nm, covering atmospheric transmittance, turbulent beam wandering, scintillation, pointing error, adaptive-optics correction, fiber coupling, and detector efficiency. Embedding the model in a discrete-event network simulator, they simulate QKD between two Italian 'quantum cities' and find a crossover near 80 km: beyond that city separation, a balloon link delivers higher secret-key rates than a fiber link for both entanglement-based QKD and measurement-device-independent QKD. The claimed consequence is that balloons are a realistic, cheaper, and more available alternative to satellites for connecting cities in a quantum internet.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the total free-space channel efficiency $\eta_{\mathrm{free-space}} = \eta_{\mathrm{atm}} \cdot \eta_{D_{\mathrm{Rx}}} \cdot \eta_{\mathrm{SMF}}$. The atmospheric transmittance $\eta_{\mathrm{atm}}$ comes from a standard absorption/scattering model at 1550 nm; the collection efficiency $\eta_{D_{\mathrm{Rx}}}$ is a probability distribution built through the law of total probability, mixing a Gaussian beam-wandering term with a truncated log-normal spot-distortion term so it interpolates between weak and strong scintillation regimes; and the single-mode-fiber coupling efficiency $\eta_{\mathrm{SMF}}$ factors into a diffraction-limited term, a scintillation term, and a wavefront-aberration term whose phase coefficients are expanded in annular Zernike polynomials and attenuated by the control loop of an adaptive-optics system. The uplink channel is not modeled directly: it is obtained by reciprocity from the downlink, with anisoplanatism re-expressed as a fixed loss coming from the downlink beacon's pointing error. This cascade of distributions and PDFs is what lets the simulator output per-photon loss probabilities rather than a single average efficiency.

What would settle it

A field experiment that measures ground-to-balloon uplink channel efficiency and compares it with the reciprocity prediction: if the measured efficiency is consistently lower than the downlink-derived value scaled by the SPAD detector efficiency, or if the efficiency drops when balloon drift exceeds a few meters in a way consistent with $\sigma_{\mathrm{aniso}} = (\theta_{\mathrm{pe}}/\theta_0)^{5/3}$, the model's weakest assumption is falsified; the cleanest version is a vertical uplink test at 20–35 km with the balloon's GPS position logged against received power.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that balloons are a realistic alternative to satellites for free-space quantum communication at the scale of a national network. Its signature quantitative result is that for inter-city distances above roughly 80 km, a balloon-based free-space link yields higher QKD rates than a fiber link between two metropolitan nodes; this crossover appears both in the number of shared Bell pairs per second and in the number of successful MDI-QKD rounds per second. In a benchmark Italian network (Venezia–Padova–Firenze–Siena), a trusted-node BB84 architecture with a balloon above each city achieves secret-key rates of tens of kilobits per second on the horizontal balloon-to-balloon leg and about 112 kbit/s on the vertical downlinks, while an untrusted entanglement-based architecture without balloon-to-balloon relay achieves tens of bits per second. The authors also report that an uplink channel, modeled by reciprocity with the downlink, reaches about half the efficiency of the downlink, which keeps ground-to-balloon protocols such as MDI-QKD feasible in principle.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise of the uplink and repeater scenarios is reciprocity: ground-to-balloon propagation is treated as a downlink with adaptive-optics pre-compensation, so the only significant anisoplanatism is the pointing error of the downlink beacon, because balloon motion is assumed to be Gaussian with a variance of a few meters and therefore negligible; if real stationkeeping or atmospheric conditions produce larger pointing offsets or uncorrected anisoplanatism, the uplink and MDI-QKD rates are overestimated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Past roughly 80 km of city separation, a balloon middle node outperforms a ground-based fiber middle node for both entanglement-based QKD and MDI-QKD, so national quantum backbones can be planned around aerial nodes.
  • Balloon-to-balloon horizontal links at 18–38 km altitude carry rates of tens of kbit/s with the baseline hardware, making a string of balloons the most efficient topology among those tested.
  • A receiving telescope of about 40 cm diameter with adaptive-optics correction up to radial order 6 is near-optimal for the downlink, so prototype ground stations can be specified from these values.
  • Ground-to-balloon uplinks are efficient enough (roughly half the downlink) to support trusted-node BB84 and, in principle, MDI-QKD with a balloon as the untrusted middle node.
  • If combined with quantum memories, the balloon-based Bell-state measurement node would act as a quantum repeater, extending entanglement over city-scale distances; the paper leaves that modeling to future work.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the reciprocity-based uplink model survives field data, the same machinery could support aerial entanglement swapping and delegated quantum computing, not only QKD; the paper does not pursue these protocols.
  • The 80 km crossover suggests an optimization problem the paper does not solve: a mixed fiber–balloon topology that assigns ground fiber links to short hops and balloon links to long hauls would likely minimize the cost per secure bit.
  • A testable prediction follows from the model: uplink efficiency should degrade with balloon GPS drift according to $\sigma_{\mathrm{aniso}} = (\theta_{\mathrm{pe}}/\theta_0)^{5/3}$; logging drift during a field trial would calibrate the weakest assumption.
  • The model also implies that pointing error, not raw detector efficiency, is the limiting specification for aerial nodes, since the beam-wandering PDF depends quadratically on $z\cdot\theta_{\mathrm{pe}}$; improving stationkeeping may matter more than faster single-photon detectors.
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 paper develops a free-space channel loss model for quantum communication between ground stations and high-altitude balloons, covering downlink, horizontal, and uplink channels. The model includes atmospheric transmittance, scintillation, beam wandering, receiver collection efficiency, single-mode fiber coupling with adaptive optics, tracking, and pointing errors. The model is embedded in the NetSquid simulator, validated against the paper's own theoretical formulas, and used to explore parameter trade-offs and to simulate BB84 trusted-node, entanglement-based untrusted-node, and MDI-QKD architectures in an Italian network. The central claim is that balloon-based links are a realistic alternative to satellites for national-scale quantum networks, with critical distances around 80 km beyond which balloon links outperform fiber links.

Significance. If the central claims survive scrutiny, this is a valuable contribution: it provides an open-source simulation tool for a relatively underexplored platform, systematically treats realistic hardware parameters and statistical channel effects, and identifies concrete crossover distances between free-space balloon links and fiber links. Strengths include the public GitHub code, the validation of the NetSquid implementation against the theoretical model with small statistical errors, the parameter exploration (receiver aperture, beam waist, AO order, zenith angle), and the concrete network architectures. The paper is useful for experimentalists and network engineers planning aerial-platform quantum links.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix D, Eq. (D1)] As printed, Eq. (D1) is not dimensionally consistent: with the definitions in Eqs. (D2) and (D3), μ1u and μ2u have units of m^(1/3), so the bracket [2.91 k^2 (μ1u + 0.62 μ2u Λ^(11/6))] has units of m^(-5/3); raising it to the +3/5 power and dividing by (H - h0) gives m^(-2), which cannot be an angle. The standard isoplanatic-angle expression requires the -3/5 exponent (or, equivalently, a different weighting in the integrand). This error propagates through Eq. (D6) into ηaniso in Eq. (D7), which enters the uplink efficiencies of Fig. 12 and the MDI-QKD rates of Fig. 18. Please correct the formula and re-evaluate the affected numerical results, including the claimed 80-km crossover.
  2. [Appendix D, with Eqs. (B12) and (C25)] The uplink model assumes that reciprocity with the downlink allows the same beam-wandering and coherence-width formulas to be used. However, reciprocity for point-source channels does not directly extend to the statistics of a finite-aperture uplink Gaussian beam: for an uplink, turbulence near the ground transmitter is weighted by the remaining propagation distance and produces larger centroid wander at the balloon, whereas the downlink formulas in Eqs. (B12) and (C25) weight turbulence by the distance to the ground receiver. Reusing these downlink expressions is therefore likely to overestimate both ηDRx and ηSMF on the uplink. The authors should either derive uplink-specific expressions or provide a quantitative argument that the difference is negligible for the altitudes and zenith angles considered, and should state how Figs. 12 and 18 change under such a check.
  3. [Table 1 and Appendix D] The assumption of a 1 µrad pointing error is load-bearing for the uplink and MDI-QKD results, but it is not demonstrated for a balloon platform. The statement in Appendix D that a balloon position variance of 'a few meters' produces anisoplanatism of 'a very small fraction of a µrad' appears inconsistent: at H = 35 km, a few meters corresponds to an angular offset of order 100 µrad. Published aerial-platform QKD demonstrations (e.g., Ref. [48]) report larger pointing errors, and no stationkeeping data are provided. Because ηaniso = exp[-(θpe/θ0)^(5/3)] degrades quickly with θpe, Fig. 18 and the 80-km crossover for MDI-QKD are sensitive to this value. Please add a sensitivity analysis over θpe (at least the 1-20 µrad range) and clarify the relation between balloon motion, the beacon angle, and the model's θpe.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 2.1, Fig. 2 caption] The caption contains a typo: 'Amospheric transmittance' should be 'Atmospheric transmittance'.
  2. [Sec. 4.2.4, Fig. 18] The axis label 'Successful MDI round per second' should be 'Successful MDI rounds per second' for grammatical consistency.
  3. [Sec. 3] The paper states that noise is not simulated but fixed to a realistic value (QBER = 4%); the abstract and conclusion should qualify 'realistic' accordingly, since the channel noise model is an input rather than an output of the simulation.
  4. [Sec. 4.2.4 and Fig. 18] The 80-km crossover for MDI-QKD is presented in terms of successful MDI rounds per second, not final secret key rate including finite-size effects and the full QBER; the text should state this distinction more explicitly.
  5. [Appendix E, Table 5] The verification of model assumptions (aperture averaging, Rayleigh criterion, small wandering) is reported only for the vertical downlink geometry of the Italian network; the MDI-QKD simulation in Fig. 18 uses a different geometry (uplink, NAO = 10, distances up to 140 km), and the same conditions are not checked there.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the network-rate predictions are computed from external atmospheric models and fixed hardware parameters, not from fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The central outputs are channel efficiencies and QKD rates for balloon-based links. These are computed by evaluating published atmospheric-turbulence models (Andrews/Phillips [58]), LOWTRAN transmittance [64,65], the total-probability collection-efficiency PDF [60], and the AO-corrected fiber-coupling model [56,59], with hardware parameters (apertures, detector efficiencies, AO order, pointing error) stated as fixed inputs in Tables 1 and 2. The QBER used in Eq. (13) is taken as 4% from an external field trial [70], not fitted to produce the results. The 80-km crossover in Figs. 15 and 18 emerges from comparing these independently parameterized free-space losses with the fixed fiber loss of 0.18 dB/km; no parameter is adjusted to force the crossover. The self-citations ([49], [50], [51], [52], [55]) concern the NetSquid-based simulator and the 'quantum city' network architecture; they are code/infrastructure reuse, and the load-bearing physical formulas are not drawn from the authors' own prior results. The uplink model in Appendix D is an explicit assumption (reciprocity with the downlink, with anisoplanatism from pointing error) rather than a result derived from the claim it supports; whether that assumption is quantitatively accurate is a correctness/validation question, not a circularity. Internal checks comparing NetSquid output to the analytic formulas validate code implementation, not the physics claims. No step in the derivation chain reduces by construction to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 10 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on standard atmospheric, turbulence, and adaptive-optics models from published literature, plus a set of hardware parameters chosen by hand. No new physical entities are introduced; the balloons are existing platforms. The main burden is the domain assumptions about reciprocity, small residual wavefront error, and the fixed 4% QBER.

free parameters (10)
  • QBER Qx = Qz = 4%
    Fixed to 4% from a field trial [70]; not simulated, and the SKR results depend strongly on it.
  • Mean photon number per pulse mu = 0.01
    Chosen for weak coherent states; affects raw key rate linearly.
  • Source rate rsource = 80 MHz
    Assumed source repetition rate; scales all key rates.
  • Ground detector efficiency = 0.85 (SNSPD)
    Typical SNSPD value; affects all ground-received rates.
  • Balloon detector efficiency = 0.25 (SPAD)
    Chosen for compact SPADs on balloons; uplink and horizontal rates scale with it.
  • Refractive index structure constant at ground Cn2(0) = 9.6e-14 m^-2/3
    Standard HV model input; drives scintillation and beam wandering.
  • Pointing error theta_pe = 1 urad
    Assumed pointing accuracy; strongly affects collection efficiency PDF and uplink anisoplanatism.
  • Tracking efficiency eta_tr = 80%
    Active tracking quality parameter in Eq (7).
  • Balloon altitude H = 35 km
    Network simulations place balloons at 35 km; channel efficiencies depend strongly on altitude.
  • Telescope apertures and beam waists = DRx_ground=40 cm, DRx_balloon=30 cm, W0_ground=20 cm, W0_balloon=10 cm
    Selected from the parameter exploration as near-optimal; central results are for these values.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Kolmogorov spectrum and Hufnagel-Valley Cn2(h) profile describe atmospheric turbulence
    Used in Sec 2.2 Eqs (3)-(4); standard empirical models from [58].
  • domain assumption LOWTRAN atmospheric transmittance is accurate for 1550 nm slanted paths
    Used in Sec 2.1 to set eta_atm; based on empirical software [64,65].
  • domain assumption Reciprocity allows the uplink channel to be modeled as a pre-compensated downlink
    Appendix D; the main anisoplanatism source is assumed to be the downlink beacon pointing error, with balloon motion Gaussian and negligible.
  • domain assumption Small residual wavefront error after AO (Rayleigh criterion) and small beam wandering
    Sec 3 and App C.4, B.3; Table 5 verifies conditions for the Italian network, but they restrict model applicability.
  • domain assumption Aperture averaging applies for the chosen receiver diameters
    Appendix B.1; reduces scintillation so lognormal statistics hold.
  • domain assumption No noise in quantum channels; QBER fixed at 4%
    Sec 4.2.1; the paper states it does not simulate noise and fixes QBER to a realistic value.
  • standard math Spherical Earth geometry
    Appendix A Eqs (A1)-(A4); standard geometric approximation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Free-space model for a balloon-based quantum network." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XLOSTMBW

@misc{pith2026241203356,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Free-space model for a balloon-based quantum network},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XLOSTMBW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.03356}
}
read the original abstract

Long-distance communication is one of the main bottlenecks in the development of quantum communication networks. Free-space communication is a way to circumvent exponential fiber loss and to allow longer communication distances. Satellite nodes are the main devices currently studied for free-space communication, but they come with downsides such as high cost and low availability. In this work, we study an alternative to satellites, namely aerial platforms such as high-altitude balloons. We provide a loss model to simulate the channel efficiency of balloon-to-ground, ground-to-balloon, and balloon-to-balloon communication channels, considering a large set of hardware parameters. We perform a parameter exploration to exhibit important trade-offs in these channels, as well as simulations of different quantum key distribution network architectures including balloon nodes. We demonstrate that balloons are a realistic alternative to satellites for free-space communications in national network architectures.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.03356 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Example of network architecture simulated in this work: a free-space downlink of length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Amospheric transmittance generated by LOWTRAN for different zenith angles with ground [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Receiver collection efficiency PDF in a downlink channel with ground station at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (18 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Coupling efficiency PDF in a downlink channel with ground station at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Loss model for the creation and reception of a photon through an optical fiber. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Loss model for the creation and reception of a photon through a combination of free-space and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Schematic representation of (a) a vertical downlink channel and (b) a horizontal channel. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Theoretical (—) and simulated (⋆) mean channel efficiency of the vertical downlink channel for different values of (a) the aperture of the receiving telescope DRx with W0 = 10 cm and (b) the initial beam waist radius W0 with DRx = 40 cm. The maximum radial index of cor…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Theoretical (—) and simulated (⋆) mean channel efficiency of the vertical downlink channel for different values of the order of correction of the adaptive optics system. The aperture of the receiving telescope is DRx = 40 cm, and the initial beam waist is W0 = 10 cm. T…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Theoretical (—) and simulated (⋆) mean channel efficiency of the downlink channel as a function of the zenith angle for different heights of the balloon. The aperture of the receiving telescope is DRx = 40 cm, the initial beam waist is W0 = 10 cm and the maximum radia…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Theoretical (—) and simulated (⋆) mean channel efficiency of the horizontal channel for different values of (a) the height of the balloons for W0 = 10 cm and (b) the initial beam waist W0 at a fixed height of 25 km. The aperture of the receiving telescope in the ballo…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Theoretical (—) and simulated (⋆) mean channel efficiency of the vertical uplink channel as a function of the height of the balloon for different values of the maximal level of correction of the AO system NAO. The aperture of the receiving telescope at the balloon is …
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Trusted node scenarios to generate a key between Alice and Bob: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Entanglement-based QKD between two ground stations separated by a distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Comparison of the number of Bell pairs shared per second between the two Qonnectors (in log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Untrusted node scenarios to generate a key directly between Alice and Bob, using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: MDI-QKD between two ground stations separated by a distance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Comparison of the number of successful MDI-QKD rounds per second (in log scale) as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Annular Zernike coefficient variances in units of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Attenuation coefficients for a system with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Reciprocal modelling of uplink communication between a ground station and a balloon. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_21.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [48]

    Experimental Demonstration of Drone-Based Quantum Key Distribution

    Xiao-Hui Tian et al. “Experimental Demonstration of Drone-Based Quantum Key Distribution”. In: Physical Review Letters 133.20 (Nov. 13, 2024), p. 200801. issn: 0031-9007, 1079-7114. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.200801 . url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 133.200801 (visited on 11/24/2024)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.133.200801 2024

  2. [1]

    The security of practical quantum key distribution

    Valerio Scarani et al. “The security of practical quantum key distribution”. In: Rev. Mod. Phys.81 (Sept. 2009), pp. 1301–1350. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.81.1301 . url: https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.81.1301

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.1301 2009

  3. [2]

    Quantum Leader Election

    Maor Ganz. “Quantum Leader Election”. In: Quantum Information Processing16 (Oct. 2009). doi: 10.1007/s11128-017-1528-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-017-1528-8 2009

  4. [3]

    Quantum secret sharing

    Mark Hillery, Vladim ´ ır Buˇ zek, and Andr´ e Berthiaume. “Quantum secret sharing”. In: Physical Review A 59.3 (Mar. 1999), pp. 1829–1834. issn: 1094-1622. doi: 10.1103/physreva.59.1829 . url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.59.1829

    doi:10.1103/physreva.59.1829 1999

  5. [4]

    Quantum Communication Complexity

    Gilles Brassard. “Quantum Communication Complexity”. In: Foundations of Physics33.11 (Nov. 2003), pp. 1593–1616. doi: 10.1023/A:1026009100467 . url: https://doi.org/10.1023/A: 1026009100467

    doi:10.1023/a:1026009100467 2003

  6. [5]

    Private quantum computation: An introduction to blind quantum computing and related protocols

    Joseph Fitzsimons. “Private quantum computation: An introduction to blind quantum computing and related protocols”. In: npj Quantum Information 3 (Nov. 2016). doi: 10.1038/s41534-017- 0025-3

    doi:10.1038/s41534-017- 2016

  7. [6]

    Composable Security of Delegated Quantum Computation

    Vedran Dunjko et al. “Composable Security of Delegated Quantum Computation”. In: Advances in Cryptology – ASIACRYPT 2014. Ed. by Palash Sarkar and Tetsu Iwata. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2014, pp. 406–425. isbn: 978-3-662-45608-8

    2014

  8. [7]

    Practical quantum electronic voting

    Federico Centrone, Eleni Diamanti, and Iordanis Kerenidis. “Practical quantum electronic voting”. In: Phys. Rev. Applied18 (2022), p. 014005

    2022

Show all 92 references
  1. [8]

    Anonymity for practical quantum networks

    Anupama Unnikrishnan et al. “Anonymity for practical quantum networks”. In: Physical Review Letters 122 (Nov. 2018)

    2018

  2. [9]

    Distributed Measurement-based Quantum Computation

    Vincent Danos et al. “Distributed Measurement-based Quantum Computation”. In: Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science170 (2007). Proceedings of the 3rd International Work- shop on Quantum Programming Languages (QPL 2005), pp. 73–94. issn: 1571-0661. doi: https: //doi....

    2007 doi

  3. [10]

    Private network parameter estimation with quantum sensors

    Nathan Shettell, Majid Hassani, and Damian Markham. Private network parameter estimation with quantum sensors. 2022. arXiv: 2207.14450 [quant-ph]. 21

    2022 arXiv

  4. [11]

    A trusted node–free eight-user metropolitan quantum communica- tion network

    Siddarth Koduru Joshi et al. “A trusted node–free eight-user metropolitan quantum communica- tion network”. In: Science Advances 6.36 (Sept. 2020), eaba0959. issn: 2375-2548. doi: 10.1126/ sciadv.aba0959. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aba0959

    2020 doi

  5. [12]

    An integrated space-to-ground quantum communication network over 4,600 kilometres

    Yu-Ao Chen et al. “An integrated space-to-ground quantum communication network over 4,600 kilometres”. In: Nature 589.7841 (2021), pp. 214–219. issn: 0028-0836. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020- 03093-8

    2021 doi

  6. [13]

    Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead

    Stephanie Wehner, David Elkouss, and Ronald Hanson. “Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead”. In: Science 362.6412 (2018). issn: 0036-8075. doi: 10 . 1126 / science . aam9288. eprint: https : / / science . sciencemag . org / content / 362 / 6412 / eaam9288 . full . pdf....

    2018

  7. [14]

    The Link Layer service in a Quantum Internet

    Axel Dahlberg, Matthew Skrzypczyk, and Stephanie Wehner. The Link Layer service in a Quantum Internet. Internet-Draft draft-dahlberg-ll-quantum-03. Work in Progress. Internet Engineering Task Force, Oct. 2019. 14 pp. url: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dahlberg-ll...

    2019

  8. [15]

    Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications

    Stefano Pirandola et al. “Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications”. In: Nature Communications 8.1 (Apr. 2017). doi: 10.1038/ncomms15043. url: https://doi.org/10.1038% 5C%2Fncomms15043

    2017 doi

  9. [16]

    Fundamental rate-loss tradeoff for optical quantum key distribution

    Masahiro Takeoka, Saikat Guha, and Mark M. Wilde. “Fundamental rate-loss tradeoff for optical quantum key distribution”. In:Nature Communications5.1 (Oct. 2014). doi: 10.1038/ncomms6235. url: https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fncomms6235

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    Inside Quantum Repeaters

    William J. Munro et al. “Inside Quantum Repeaters”. In: IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics 21.3 (2015), pp. 78–90. doi: 10.1109/JSTQE.2015.2392076

    2015

  11. [19]

    Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics

    Nicolas Sangouard et al. “Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics”. In: Rev. Mod. Phys. 83 (1 Mar. 2011), pp. 33–80. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.83.33 . url: https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.83.33

    2011 doi

  12. [20]

    Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet

    Koji Azuma et al. “Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10820(2022)

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Experimental demonstration of memory-enhanced quantum communication

    M. K. Bhaskar et al. “Experimental demonstration of memory-enhanced quantum communication”. In: Nature 580.7801 (Mar. 2020), pp. 60–64. doi: 10.1038/s41586- 020- 2103- 5. url: https: //doi.org/10.1038%5C%2Fs41586-020-2103-5

    2020 doi

  14. [23]

    Telecom-heralded entanglement between multimode solid-state quantum memories

    Dario Lago-Rivera et al. “Telecom-heralded entanglement between multimode solid-state quantum memories”. In: Nature 594.7861 (June 2021), pp. 37–40. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03481-8 . url: https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41586-021-03481-8

    2021 doi

  15. [24]

    Near-term quantum-repeater experiments with nitrogen-vacancy centers: Overcoming the limitations of direct transmission

    Filip Rozpedek et al. “Near-term quantum-repeater experiments with nitrogen-vacancy centers: Overcoming the limitations of direct transmission”. In: Phys. Rev. A99 (5 May 2019), p. 052330. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.99.052330 . url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.99. 052330

    2019 doi

  16. [25]

    Quantum networks based on color centers in diamond

    Maximilian Ruf et al. “Quantum networks based on color centers in diamond”. In: Journal of Applied Physics 130.7 (Aug. 2021), p. 070901. doi: 10.1063/5.0056534. url: https://doi.org/ 10.1063%5C%2F5.0056534. 22

    2021 doi

  17. [26]

    Requirements for a processing-node quantum repeater on a real-world fiber grid

    Guus Avis et al. “Requirements for a processing-node quantum repeater on a real-world fiber grid”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.10579(2022)

    2022 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Feasibility of satellite quantum key distribution

    C Bonato et al. “Feasibility of satellite quantum key distribution”. In: New Journal of Physics11.4 (Apr. 2009), p. 045017. doi: 10.1088/1367- 2630/11/4/045017 . url: https://doi.org/10. 1088/1367-2630/11/4/045017

    2009 doi

  19. [28]

    A comprehensive design and performance analysis of low Earth orbit satellite quantum communication

    J-P Bourgoin et al. “A comprehensive design and performance analysis of low Earth orbit satellite quantum communication”. In: New Journal of Physics15.2 (Feb. 2013), p. 023006. doi: 10.1088/ 1367-2630/15/2/023006. url: https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/15/2/023006

    2013 doi

  20. [29]

    Experimental Demonstration of Free-Space Decoy-State Quan- tum Key Distribution over 144 km

    Tobias Schmitt-Manderbach et al. “Experimental Demonstration of Free-Space Decoy-State Quan- tum Key Distribution over 144 km”. In: Physical Review Letters98.1 (Jan. 2007). doi: 10.1103/ physrevlett.98.010504. url: https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.98.010504

    2007 doi

  21. [30]

    Air-to-ground quantum communication

    Sebastian Nauerth et al. “Air-to-ground quantum communication”. In: Nature Photonics 7.5 (Mar. 2013), pp. 382–386. doi: 10.1038/nphoton.2013.46. url: https://doi.org/10.1038/nphoton. 2013.46

    2013 doi

  22. [31]

    Experimental Satellite Quantum Communications

    Giuseppe Vallone et al. “Experimental Satellite Quantum Communications”. In: Physical Review Letters 115.4 (July 2015). doi: 10.1103/physrevlett.115.040502 . url: https://doi.org/10. 1103/physrevlett.115.040502

    2015 doi

  23. [32]

    Quantum-limited measurements of optical signals from a geostationary satellite

    Kevin G¨ unthner et al. “Quantum-limited measurements of optical signals from a geostationary satellite”. In: Optica 4.6 (June 2017), p. 611. doi: 10 . 1364 / optica . 4 . 000611. url: https : //doi.org/10.1364/optica.4.000611

    2017 doi

  24. [33]

    Micius quantum experiments in space

    Chao-Yang Lu et al. “Micius quantum experiments in space”. In: Reviews of Modern Physics 94.3 (July 2022). doi: 10 . 1103 / revmodphys . 94 . 035001. url: https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1103 / revmodphys.94.035001

    2022

  25. [34]

    Satellite-to-ground quantum key distribution

    Sheng-Kai Liao et al. “Satellite-to-ground quantum key distribution”. In: Nature 549.7670 (Aug. 2017), pp. 43–47. doi: 10.1038/nature23655. url: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23655

    2017 doi

  26. [35]

    Entanglement-based secure quantum cryptography over 1, 120 kilometres

    Juan Yin et al. “Entanglement-based secure quantum cryptography over 1, 120 kilometres”. In: Nature 582.7813 (June 2020), pp. 501–505. doi: 10 . 1038 / s41586 - 020 - 2401 - y. url: https : //doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2401-y

    2020 doi

  27. [36]

    Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation

    Ji-Gang Ren et al. “Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation”. In: Nature 549.7670 (Aug. 2017), pp. 70–73. doi: 10.1038/nature23675. url: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23675

    2017 doi

  28. [37]

    Adaptive-Optics-Enabled Quantum Communication: A Technique for Daytime Space-To-Earth Links

    Mark T. Gruneisen et al. “Adaptive-Optics-Enabled Quantum Communication: A Technique for Daytime Space-To-Earth Links”. In: Physical Review Applied16.1 (July 29, 2021), p. 014067. issn: 2331-7019. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.16.014067 . url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/P...

    2021 doi

  29. [38]

    Performance of the Adaptive Optics System for Laser Communications Relay Demonstration’s Ground Station 1

    Lewis C. Roberts et al. “Performance of the Adaptive Optics System for Laser Communications Relay Demonstration’s Ground Station 1”. In: Applied Optics62.23 (Aug. 10, 2023), G26– G36. issn: 2155-3165. doi: 10.1364/AO.486752 . url: https://opg.optica.org/ao/abstract. cfm...

    2023 doi

  30. [39]

    CubeSat quantum communications mission

    Daniel KL Oi et al. “CubeSat quantum communications mission”. In: EPJ Quantum Technology 4.1 (Apr. 2017). issn: 2196-0763. doi: 10.1140/epjqt/s40507- 017- 0060- 1. url: http://dx. doi.org/10.1140/epjqt/s40507-017-0060-1

    2017 doi

  31. [40]

    A CubeSat platform for space based quantum key distribution

    Srihari Sivasankaran et al. “A CubeSat platform for space based quantum key distribution”. In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Space Optical Systems and Applications (ICSOS). 2022, pp. 51–56. doi: 10.1109/ICSOS53063.2022.9749724

    2022

  32. [41]

    Spooky action at a global distance: analysis of space-based entanglement distribution for the quantum internet

    Sumeet Khatri et al. “Spooky action at a global distance: analysis of space-based entanglement distribution for the quantum internet”. In: npj Quantum Information 7.1 (Jan. 2021). doi: 10. 1038/s41534-020-00327-5 . url: https://doi.org/10.1038%5C%2Fs41534-020-00327-5

    2021

  33. [42]

    Global observer hydrogen UA V begins flight tests

    G. Warwick. “Global observer hydrogen UA V begins flight tests”. In: 172 (Aug. 2010). 23

    2010

  34. [43]

    Direct and full-scale experimental verifications towards ground–satellite quan- tum key distribution

    Jian-Yu Wang et al. “Direct and full-scale experimental verifications towards ground–satellite quan- tum key distribution”. In: Nature Photonics 7.5 (Apr. 2013), pp. 387–393. doi: 10.1038/nphoton. 2013.89. url: https://doi.org/10.1038/nphoton.2013.89

    2013 doi

  35. [44]

    Feasibility of quantum key distribution from high altitude platforms

    Yi Chu et al. “Feasibility of quantum key distribution from high altitude platforms”. In: Quantum Science and Technology 6.3 (June 2021), p. 035009. doi: 10 . 1088 / 2058 - 9565 / abf9ae. url: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/abf9ae

    2021 doi

  36. [45]

    A review on practical challenges of aerial quantum communication

    Umang Dubey et al. “A review on practical challenges of aerial quantum communication”. In: Physics Open 19 (2024), p. 100210. issn: 2666-0326. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physo. 2024.100210. url: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666032624000085

    2024

  37. [46]

    Drone-Based Quantum Communication Links

    Andrew Conrad et al. “Drone-Based Quantum Communication Links”. In: Quantum Computing, Communication, and Simulation III. Quantum Computing, Communication, and Simulation III. Ed. by Philip R. Hemmer and Alan L. Migdall. San Francisco, United States: SPIE, Mar. 8, 2023, p. 42....

    2023 doi

  38. [47]

    Majumdar

    Arun K. Majumdar. Laser Communication with Constellation Satellites, UA Vs, HAPs and Bal- loons. Springer Cham, 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-03972-0

    2022 doi

  39. [49]

    Quantum City: simulation of a practical near-term metropolitan quantum net- work

    Raja Yehia et al. “Quantum City: simulation of a practical near-term metropolitan quantum net- work”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.01190 (2022). doi: 10 . 48550 / ARXIV . 2211 . 01190. url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.01190

    2022 doi arXiv

  40. [50]

    Connecting Quantum Cities: Simulation of a Satellite-Based Quantum Network

    Raja Yehia et al. “Connecting Quantum Cities: Simulation of a Satellite-Based Quantum Network”. In: New Journal of Physics26 (2023). doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/ad5b13

    2023 doi

  41. [51]

    QuantumCity

    Raja Yehia. QuantumCity. GitHub repository. 2023. url: https : / / github . com / RajaYehia / QuantumCity (visited on 09/26/2024)

    2023

  42. [52]

    netsquid-freespace

    Matteo Schiavon and Tim Coopmans. netsquid-freespace. GitHub repository. 2023. url: https: //github.com/matteoschiav/netsquid-freespace (visited on 09/26/2024)

    2023

  43. [53]

    url: https://netsquid.org/

    Netsquid website, https://netsquid.org/. url: https://netsquid.org/

  44. [54]

    NetSquid, a discrete-event simulation platform for quantum networks

    Tim Coopmans et al. NetSquid, a discrete-event simulation platform for quantum networks. 2021. arXiv: 2010.12535 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [55]

    ballon qnet

    Ilektra Karakosta-Amarantidou and Raja Yehia. ballon qnet. GitHub repository. 2024. url: https: //github.com/RajaYehia/balloon_qnet

    2024

  46. [56]

    Optimal design and performance evaluation of free-space Quantum Key Distribution systems

    Alessia Scriminich et al. “Optimal design and performance evaluation of free-space Quantum Key Distribution systems”. In: Quantum Science and Technology7.4 (2022), p. 045029

    2022

  47. [57]

    Impact of turbulence on high-precision ground- satellite frequency transfer with two-way coherent optical links

    Cl´ elia Robert, Jean-Marc Conan, and Peter Wolf. “Impact of turbulence on high-precision ground- satellite frequency transfer with two-way coherent optical links”. In: Physical Review A93.3 (2016), p. 033860

    2016

  48. [58]

    Laser beam propagation through random media

    Larry C Andrews and Ronald L Phillips. “Laser beam propagation through random media”. In: Laser Beam Propagation Through Random Media: Second Edition(2005)

    2005

  49. [59]

    Statistical properties of single-mode fiber coupling of satellite-to-ground laser links partially corrected by adaptive optics

    Lucien Canuet et al. “Statistical properties of single-mode fiber coupling of satellite-to-ground laser links partially corrected by adaptive optics”. In: JOSA A 35.1 (2018), pp. 148–162

    2018

  50. [60]

    Theory of atmospheric quantum channels based on the law of total probability

    D Vasylyev, W Vogel, and AA Semenov. “Theory of atmospheric quantum channels based on the law of total probability”. In: Physical Review A97.6 (2018), p. 063852. 24

    2018

  51. [61]

    Reciprocity-enhanced optical communication through atmospheric turbulence—Part I: Reciprocity proofs and far-field power transfer optimization

    Jeffrey H Shapiro and Andrew L Puryear. “Reciprocity-enhanced optical communication through atmospheric turbulence—Part I: Reciprocity proofs and far-field power transfer optimization”. In: Journal of Optical Communications and Networking4.12 (2012), pp. 947–954

    2012

  52. [62]

    Reciprocity-enhanced optical commu- nication through atmospheric turbulence—Part II: Communication architectures and performance

    Andrew L Puryear, Jeffrey H Shapiro, and Ronald R Parenti. “Reciprocity-enhanced optical commu- nication through atmospheric turbulence—Part II: Communication architectures and performance”. In: Journal of Optical Communications and Networking5.8 (2013), pp. 888–900

    2013

  53. [63]

    Phase Estimation at the Point-Ahead Angle for AO Pre-Compensated Ground to GEO Satellite Telecoms

    Perrine Lognon´ e et al. “Phase Estimation at the Point-Ahead Angle for AO Pre-Compensated Ground to GEO Satellite Telecoms”. In: Optics Express 31.3 (Jan. 30, 2023), pp. 3441–3458. issn: 1094-4087. doi: 10.1364/OE.476328. url: https://opg.optica.org/oe/abstract.cfm?uri=oe- 31...

    2023 doi

  54. [64]

    Users guide to LOWTRAN 7

    Francis X Kneizys. Users guide to LOWTRAN 7. Vol. 88. 177. Air Force Geophysics Laboratory, 1988

    1988

  55. [65]

    lowtran-piccia

    Francesco Picciariello. lowtran-piccia. GitHub repository. 2023. url: https : / / github . com / francescopiccia/lowtran-piccia (visited on 09/29/2024)

    2023

  56. [66]

    Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing

    Charles H. Bennett and Gilles Brassard. “Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing”. In: Theoretical Computer Science560 (2014). Theoretical Aspects of Quantum Cryptog- raphy – celebrating 30 years of BB84, pp. 7–11. issn: 0304-3975. doi: https : / / doi ....

    2014

  57. [67]

    Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem

    Artur K. Ekert. “Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.67.6 (Aug. 1991), pp. 661–663. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.661 . url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.67.661

    1991 doi

  58. [68]

    Quantum cryptography without Bell’s theorem

    Charles H. Bennett, Gilles Brassard, and N. David Mermin. “Quantum cryptography without Bell’s theorem”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.68 (5 Feb. 1992), pp. 557–559. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.557. url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.557

    1992 doi

  59. [69]

    Simple Proof of Security of the BB84 Quantum Key Distribution Protocol

    Peter W. Shor and John Preskill. “Simple Proof of Security of the BB84 Quantum Key Distribution Protocol”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.85 (2 July 2000), pp. 441–444. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.441. url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.441

    doi

  60. [70]

    Intermodal quantum key distribution field trial with active switching between fiber and free-space channels

    Francesco Picciariello et al. “Intermodal quantum key distribution field trial with active switching between fiber and free-space channels”. In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.17441(2023)

    2023 arXiv

  61. [71]

    Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution

    Hoi-Kwong Lo, Marcos Curty, and Bing Qi. “Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution”. In: Physical Review Letters 108.13 (Mar. 2012). issn: 1079-7114. doi: 10 . 1103 / physrevlett.108.130503. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.130503

    2012 doi

  62. [72]

    Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution over Untrustful Metropolitan Network

    Yan-Lin Tang et al. “Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution over Untrustful Metropolitan Network”. In: Phys. Rev. X6 (1 Mar. 2016), p. 011024. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevX.6. 011024. url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevX.6.011024

    2016 doi

  63. [73]

    Long-Distance Free-Space Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distri- bution

    Yuan Cao et al. “Long-Distance Free-Space Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Key Distri- bution”. In: Physical Review Letters125.26 (Dec. 2020). issn: 1079-7114. doi: 10.1103/physrevlett. 125.260503. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.260503

    2020 doi

  64. [74]

    Ancilla-assisted linear optical Bell measurements and their optimality

    Andrea Olivo and Fr´ ed´ eric Grosshans. “Ancilla-assisted linear optical Bell measurements and their optimality”. In: Phys. Rev. A98 (4 Sept. 2018), p. 042323. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.98.042323 . url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.98.042323

    2018 doi

  65. [75]

    Bell-state measurement exceeding 50% success probability with linear optics

    Matthias J. Bayerbach et al. “Bell-state measurement exceeding 50% success probability with linear optics”. In: Science Advances 9.32 (Aug. 2023). issn: 2375-2548. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adf4080 . url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adf4080

    2023 doi

  66. [76]

    Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits

    M. Pompili et al. “Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits”. In: Science 372.6539 (2021), pp. 259–264. doi: 10.1126/science.abg1919 . eprint: https://www. science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abg1919 . url: https://www.science.org/doi/abs/ 10.112...

    2021 doi

  67. [77]

    Delegating private quantum computations

    Anne Broadbent. “Delegating private quantum computations”. In: Canadian Journal of Physics 93.9 (Sept. 2015), pp. 941–946. issn: 1208-6045. doi: 10 . 1139 / cjp - 2015 - 0030. url: http : //dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjp-2015-0030

    2015 doi

  68. [78]

    Optimization of High Data Rate Ground to Satellite Links Pre-compensated by Adaptive Optics

    Perrine Lognon´ e. “Optimization of High Data Rate Ground to Satellite Links Pre-compensated by Adaptive Optics”. PhD thesis. Institut Polytechnique de Paris, Dec. 13, 2023. url: https : //theses.hal.science/tel-04465340 (visited on 04/02/2024)

    2023

  69. [79]

    Fundamentals of photonics

    Bahaa EA Saleh and Malvin Carl Teich. Fundamentals of photonics. john Wiley & sons, 2019

    2019

  70. [80]

    Electromagnetic beam propagation in turbulent media

    Ronald L Fante. “Electromagnetic beam propagation in turbulent media”. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 63.12 (1975), pp. 1669–1692

    1975

  71. [81]

    Fade statistics and aperture aver- aging for Gaussian beam waves in moderate-to-strong turbulence

    Frida Str¨ omqvist Vetelino, Cynthia Young, and Larry Andrews. “Fade statistics and aperture aver- aging for Gaussian beam waves in moderate-to-strong turbulence”. In: Applied optics 46.18 (2007), pp. 3780–3789

    2007

  72. [82]

    Turbulence-induced fading probability in coherent optical communication through the atmosphere

    Nicolas Perlot. “Turbulence-induced fading probability in coherent optical communication through the atmosphere”. In: Applied optics 46.29 (2007), pp. 7218–7226

    2007

  73. [83]

    Coupling of large telescopes and single-mode waveguides: application to stellar interferometry

    Cyril Ruilier and Fr´ ed´ eric Cassaing. “Coupling of large telescopes and single-mode waveguides: application to stellar interferometry”. In: JOSA A 18.1 (2001), pp. 143–149

    2001

  74. [84]

    Aperture averaging of scintillation

    David L Fried. “Aperture averaging of scintillation”. In: JOSA 57.2 (1967), pp. 169–175

    1967

  75. [85]

    Zernike polynomials and atmospheric turbulence

    Robert J Noll. “Zernike polynomials and atmospheric turbulence”. In: JOsA 66.3 (1976), pp. 207– 211

    1976

  76. [86]

    Zernike annular polynomials and atmospheric turbu- lence

    Guang-ming Dai and Virendra N Mahajan. “Zernike annular polynomials and atmospheric turbu- lence”. In: Journal of the Optical Society of America A24.1 (2006), pp. 139–155

    2006

  77. [87]

    Standards for reporting the optical aberrations of eyes

    Larry N Thibos et al. Standards for reporting the optical aberrations of eyes. 2002

    2002

  78. [88]

    Optical resolution through a randomly inhomogeneous medium for very long and very short exposures

    David L Fried. “Optical resolution through a randomly inhomogeneous medium for very long and very short exposures”. In: JOSA 56.10 (1966), pp. 1372–1379

    1966

  79. [89]

    Nonrecursive determination of orthonormal polyno- mials with matrix formulation

    Guang-ming Dai and Virendra N Mahajan. “Nonrecursive determination of orthonormal polyno- mials with matrix formulation”. In: Optics letters 32.1 (2007), pp. 74–76

    2007

  80. [90]

    Orthonormal polynomials in wavefront analysis: error analysis

    Guang-ming Dai and Virendra N Mahajan. “Orthonormal polynomials in wavefront analysis: error analysis”. In: Applied optics 47.19 (2008), pp. 3433–3445

    2008

  81. [91]

    Adaptive optics in astronomy

    Fran¸ cois Roddier. “Adaptive optics in astronomy”. In: (1999)

    1999

  82. [92]

    Wave-front temporal spectra in high- resolution imaging through turbulence

    Jean-Marc Conan, G´ erard Rousset, and Pierre-Yves Madec. “Wave-front temporal spectra in high- resolution imaging through turbulence”. In: JOSA A 12.7 (1995), pp. 1559–1570

    1995

  83. [93]

    Optical shop testing

    Daniel Malacara. Optical shop testing. Vol. 59. John Wiley & Sons, 2007

    2007

  84. [94]

    Anisoplanatism in adaptive optics

    David L Fried. “Anisoplanatism in adaptive optics”. In: JOSA 72.1 (1982), pp. 52–61. 26 Appendices A Geometrical considerations We give a brief description of the geometrical considerations relevant for the definition of the free-space models developed in this work. In particu...

    1982

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.