Cited by 617Quantum optics and atomic interactionsQuantum Information and CryptographyPhotorefractive and Nonlinear Optics

Efficient quantum memory for light

Hedges, Morgan P., Longdell, Jevon J., Li, Yongmin, Sellars, Matthew J.·2010·Nature

Abstract

Storing and retrieving a quantum state of light on demand, without corrupting the information it carries, is an important challenge in the field of quantum information processing. Classical measurement and reconstruction strategies for storing light must necessarily destroy quantum information as a consequence of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. There has been significant effort directed towards the development of devices-so-called quantum memories-capable of avoiding this penalty. So far, successful demonstrations of non-classical storage and on-demand recall have used atomic vapours and have been limited to low efficiencies, of less than 17 per cent, using weak quantum states with an average photon number of around one. Here we report a low-noise, highly efficient (up to 69 per cent) quantum memory for light that uses a solid-state medium. The device allows the storage and recall of light more faithfully than is possible using a classical memory, for weak coherent states at the single-photon level through to bright states of up to 500 photons. For input coherent states containing on average 30 photons or fewer, the performance exceeded the no-cloning limit. This guaranteed that more information about the inputs was retrieved from the memory than was left behind or destroyed, a feature that will provide security in communications applications.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature09081

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The only quantum power required from the client is preparation of each qubit in state |θj〉 and transmission to the server; no quantum memory or ability to perform quantum gates is needed.

    “The only quantum power that is required from the client is the preparation of each qubit j in a state | θ j 〉 and the transmission of the qubits to the server - in particular, there is no need for any quantum memory [40] or ability to perform quantum gates.”

    From Demonstration of Blind Quantum Computing (2012) · cites this paper as [40]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hedges, M. P., Longdell, J. J., Li, Y., & Sellars, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • University of Otago (NZ)
  • Shanxi University (CN)
Corresponding author
Hedges, Morgan P.
Venue
Nature
Published
2010-06
Volume
465
Issue
7301
Pages
1052-1056
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2091624980
Cited by
617
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 40 · 2015: 44 · 2014: 41 · 2013: 65 · 2012: 36
FWCI
27.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Photorefractive and Nonlinear Optics
Keywords
quantum memory, solid-state quantum memory, praseodymium ions, quantum state storage, quantum information processing, quantum communication security

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review