CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 294

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Classical command of quantum systems

Reichardt, Ben W., Unger, Falk, Vazirani, Umesh·2013·Nature
DOI 10.1038/nature12035
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature12035

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Multiparticle quantum walks with interactions allow for universal quantum computation.

    “which gained increasing attention after the discovery that multiparticle quantum walks with interactions allow for universal quantum computation [514,558]”

    From Photonic quantum information processing: a review (2019) · cites this paper as [514]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Aharonov, D., Ben-Or, M. & Eban, E. in Proc. Innovations in Computer Science (ICS) (ed. Yao, A.) 453–469 (Tsinghua Univ. Press, 2010)
  2. Broadbent, A., Fitzsimons, J. F. & Kashefi, E. in Proc. IEEE Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) 517–526 (IEEE Computer Society, 2009)
  3. Bennett, C. H. & Brassard, G. in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing 175–179 (IEEE Computer Society, 1984)
  4. Lo, H.-K. & Chau, H. F. Unconditional security of quantum key distribution over arbitrarily long distances. Science 283, 2050–2056 (1999) · DOI
  5. Shor, P. W. & Preskill, J. Simple proof of security of the BB84 quantum key distribution protocol. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 441–444 (2000) · DOI · Paper page
  6. Zhao, Y., Fung, C.-H. F., Qi, B., Chen, C. & Lo, H.-K. Quantum hacking: experimental demonstration of time-shift attack against practical quantum key distribution systems. Phys. Rev. A 78, 042333 (2008) · DOI · Paper page
  7. Lydersen, L. et al. Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored bright illumination. Nature Photon. 4, 686–689 (2010) · DOI · Paper page
  8. Gerhardt, I. et al. Full-field implementation of a perfect eavesdropper on a quantum cryptography system. Nature Commun. 2, 349 (2011) · DOI · Paper page
  9. Mayers, D. & Yao, A. in Proc. IEEE Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) 503–509 (IEEE Computer Society, 1998)
  10. Barrett, J., Hardy, L. & Kent, A. No signalling and quantum key distribution. Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 010503 (2005) · DOI
  11. Masanes, L., Renner, R., Christandl, M., Winter, A. & Barrett, J. Unconditional security of key distribution from causality constraints. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0606049 (2006) · arXiv
  12. Acín, A., Massar, S. & Pironio, S. Efficient quantum key distribution secure against no-signalling eavesdroppers. N. J. Phys. 8, 126 (2006) · DOI
  13. Masanes, L. Universally composable privacy amplification from causality constraints. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 140501 (2009) · DOI
  14. Hänggi, E., Renner, R. & Wolf, S. in Proc. EUROCRYPT (ed. Gilbert, H.) 216–234 (LNCS 6110, Springer, 2010)
  15. Acín, A. et al. Device-independent security of quantum cryptography against collective attacks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 230501 (2007) · DOI · Paper page
  16. Pironio, S. et al. Device-independent quantum key distribution secure against collective attacks. N. J. Phys. 11, 045021 (2009) · DOI
  17. McKague, M. Device independent quantum key distribution secure against coherent attacks with memoryless measurement devices. N. J. Phys. 11, 103037 (2009) · DOI
  18. Hänggi, E. & Renner, R. Device-independent quantum key distribution with commuting measurements. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/1009.1833 (2010) · DOI
  19. Masanes, L., Pironio, S. & Acín, A. Secure device-independent quantum key distribution with causally independent measurement devices. Nature Commun. 2, 238 (2011) · DOI
  20. Holevo, A. S. Bounds for the quantity of information transmitted by a quantum communication channel. Probl. Inf. Transm. 9, 177–183 (1973)
  21. Cirel’son, B. S. Quantum generalizations of Bell’s inequality. Lett. Math. Phys. 4, 93–100 (1980) · DOI · Paper page
  22. Braunstein, S. L., Mann, A. & Revzen, M. Maximal violation of Bell inequalities for mixed states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3259–3261 (1992) · DOI
  23. Popescu, S. & Rohrlich, D. Which states violate Bell’s inequality maximally? Phys. Lett. A 169, 411–414 (1992) · DOI
  24. Magniez, F., Mayers, D., Mosca, M. & Ollivier, H. in Proc. Int. Coll. on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP) (eds Bugliesi, M. et al.) 72–83 (LNCS 4051, Springer, 2006) · DOI · Paper page
  25. McKague, M., Yang, T. H. & Scarani, V. Robust self-testing of the singlet. J. Phys. A 45, 455304 (2012) · DOI
  26. Miller, C. & Shi, Y. Robust self-testing quantum states and binary nonlocal XOR games. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/1207.1819 (2012) · arXiv
  27. Watrous, J. PSPACE has constant-round quantum interactive proof systems. Theor. Comput. Sci. 292, 575–588 (2003) · DOI
  28. Fitzsimons, J. F. & Kashefi, E. Unconditionally verifiable blind computation. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/1203.5217 (2012) · arXiv
  29. Broadbent, A., Fitzsimons, J. F. & Kashefi, E. QMIP = MIP*. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/1004.1130 (2010) · arXiv
  30. Jordan, C. Essai sur la géométrie à n dimensions. Bull. Soc. Math. Fr. 3, 103–174 (1875) · DOI
  31. Reichardt, B. W., Unger, F. & Vazirani, U. A classical leash for a quantum system: command of quantum systems via rigidity of CHSH games. Preprint at http://arXiv.org/abs/1209.0448 (2012) · DOI
  32. Mossel, E., O'Donnell, R. & Oleszkiewicz, K. Noise stability of functions with low influences: invariance and optimality. Ann. Math. 171, 295–341 (2010) · DOI
  33. McKague, M. Quantum Information Processing with Adversarial Devices. PhD thesis, Univ. Waterloo. (2010)
  34. Gottesman, D. Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction. PhD thesis, California Inst. Technol. (1997)
  35. Kempe, J., Kobayashi, H., Matsumoto, K. & Vidick, T. Using entanglement in quantum multi-prover interactive proofs. Comput. Complex. 18, 273–307 (2009) · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Reichardt, B. W., Unger, F., & Vazirani, U.
Venue
Nature
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-04
Volume
496
Issue
7446
Pages
456-460
ISSN
  • 0028-0836
  • 1476-4687
DOI
10.1038/nature12035
Cited by
294
References
5
Language
en
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)

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