The DOI matches its Crossref record; 257 of the 257 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 96 of the 187 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Two-photon interference: the Hong–Ou–Mandel effect
Open accessAbstract
Nearly 30 years ago, two-photon interference was observed, marking the beginning of a new quantum era. Indeed, two-photon interference has no classical analogue, giving it a distinct advantage for a range of applications. The peculiarities of quantum physics may now be used to our advantage to outperform classical computations, securely communicate information, simulate highly complex physical systems and increase the sensitivity of precise measurements. This separation from classical to quantum physics has motivated physicists to study two-particle interference for both fermionic and bosonic quantum objects. So far, two-particle interference has been observed with massive particles, among others, such as electrons and atoms, in addition to plasmons, demonstrating the extent of this effect to larger and more complex quantum systems. A wide array of novel applications to this quantum effect is to be expected in the future. This review will thus cover the progress and applications of two-photon (two-particle) interference over the last three decades.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review covers the Hong–Ou–Mandel (HOM) effect, or two-photon/two-particle interference, over roughly three decades since its observation. It surveys the underlying beam-splitter theory and applications in precision measurement, quantum state analysis and engineering, communication, computation, multipartite interference, and non-photonic systems.
Key findings
- The HOM effect produces destructive interference of two-photon states exiting opposite output ports of a 50:50 beam splitter, giving the hallmark coincidence dip; for indistinguishable photons the output is \((|2_c\rangle - |2_d\rangle)/\sqrt{2}\).
- Precision applications include HOM timing measurements with reported average accuracy of 6 attoseconds and average precision of 16 attoseconds, and quantum optical coherence tomography with an improvement in resolution by a factor of 5 compared to OCT and detection of 1 µm features.
- Linear-optics Bell-state discrimination is limited to 50% success with one beam splitter and two detectors, but can be raised to 75% with ancillary entanglement and generally to \(1 - 2^{-N}\) with \(N\) interferences; KLM-type CZ and CNOT gates have success probabilities of 2/27 and 1/16, respectively.
- Non-photonic HOM interference has been observed with plasmons (initial visibility \(0.43 \pm 0.02\), later up to 0.95), phonons (\(0.52 \pm 0.03\)), collective atomic excitations (\(0.89 \pm 0.06\)), atoms (Rb bunching exceeding distinguishable-atom probability by 6 standard deviations; He visibility \(0.65 \pm 0.07\)), and electrons via anti-bunching/Pauli dips.
Methods
- Design: narrative review article, not a primary experimental study; it aggregates “the most prevalent uses of two-photon interference over the past three decades” into a coherent text.
- Data/sample: cited theoretical and experimental literature on HOM interference, including photonic, plasmonic, phononic, atomic, and electronic systems.
- Main analysis: thematic synthesis beginning with beam-splitter and two-photon interference theory, then covering precision measurements, quantum state analysis, quantum communication, quantum state engineering, quantum computation, multipartite/multimode generalizations, and non-photonic implementations.
Limitations
- The paper does not state a formal limitations section.
- Text-evident limitation: as a broad review, it does not provide a systematic search or selection protocol for the literature covered.
- Text-evident limitations in cited experiments include the initial plasmonic HOM dip visibility being below the classical limit, phonon results having statistical significance too small to exclude classical explanations with certainty, and QOCT facing challenges such as low signal and signal artifacts.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
43 Own interpretation · 43 No basis given · 38 Not checked yet · 34 Couldn’t confirm · 21 No full text of the sources · 14 Partly supported · 6 Not supported · 3 Mixed support · 1 Sources not found · accuracy not yet measured
Some cited sources support this claim and some don’t — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In the works mentioned above, a noncommon-path HOM interferometer is employed to measure time shifts with resolutions on the order of a few femto-seconds (micrometers), where the time shifts are obtained by assessing the shift of the HOM dip.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Precise Timing Measurement
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [16] Moschandreou, 2018, Experimental study of Hong–Ou–Mandel interference using independent phase randomized weak coherent states, J. Lightwave Technol. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes a HOM coincidence dip, but does not say it was used to measure time shifts. The Experimental Setup reports coincidence measurements and an 81-ps time-interval analyzer; a search for femtosecond resolution, noncommon-path time-shift measurement, and shifts of the HOM dip found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Disputedcites [17] Kim, 2020, Hong–Ou–Mandel interference of two independent continuous-wave coherent photons, Photon. Res. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report that this paper’s time-resolved HOM interference is not affected by temporal delay between the input photons; adding optical delay lines did not shift or degrade the interference. Its reported detection-time bin is 0.5 ns, not a few femtoseconds. This experiment therefore does not measure input time shifts by tracking a HOM-dip shift as the citing sentence claims. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Partly supportedcites [18] Ferreira da Silva, 2013, Proof-of-principle demonstration of measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution using polarization qubits, Phys. Rev. A sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussions section reports scanning the relative pulse delay and recording a HOM dip, which supports the time-shift measurement aspect. It gives a dip width of 2.40 ns, but does not describe a noncommon-path HOM interferometer or report resolution of a few femtoseconds. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“The resulting probability of finding two indistinguishable atoms in one trap exceeded the probability for distinguishable atoms by 6 standard deviations”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > D. Atoms
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [190] Metcalf, 2013, Multiphoton quantum interference in a multiport integrated photonic device, Nat. Commun. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The section “Demonstrating genuinely quantum operation and circuit complexity” describes interference experiments with photons in an integrated circuit, not atoms in a trap. It reports that one measured visibility exceeded a classical limit by more than one standard deviation, not that a two-atom trap probability exceeded another by six standard deviations. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Recently, this deficiency was resolved by an improved experiment, using two separate sources of single electrons emitted from a triggered quantum dot [197,198].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > E. Electrons
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [197] Spring, 2012, Boson sampling on a photonic chip, Science source
- Disputedcites [198] Tillmann, 2013, Experimental boson sampling, Nat. Photon. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Experiment section (p. 2) says the input was generated by spontaneous parametric down-conversion, and Methods (pp. 4–5) describes photon pairs produced in a BBO crystal. The cited experiment used photons, not single electrons emitted from two triggered quantum-dot sources. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“bunching was confirmed through a dip with a visibility up to 0.89±0.06 in the correlation measurements of the two photons (see Fig. 8f) by varying the distinguishability and splitting ratio.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Collective atomic excitations
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [182] Defienne, 2016, Two-photon quantum walk in a multimode fiber, Sci. Adv. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In Results, “Control of photon-pair propagation” (Fig. 4; page unavailable), the paper associates photon bunching with constructive interference and a peak, while the dip occurs under a destructive-interference phase setting. Our copy does not report a visibility of 0.89±0.06 or describe varying a splitting ratio for this result. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Recently, such a two-phonon interference effect has been observed involving two trapped ions [181].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Phonons
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [181] Poem, 2012, Two-photon path-entangled states in multimode waveguides, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page unavailable) describes an experiment on two-photon interference in multimode optical waveguides, not two-phonon interference involving trapped ions. The experimental-system passage describes laser light and photon-pair generation, rather than an ion-trap experiment. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“two recent experiments, both using very different approaches, have shown exactly this: a two-atom HOM interference.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > D. Atoms
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [190] Metcalf, 2013, Multiphoton quantum interference in a multiport integrated photonic device, Nat. Commun. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper describes Hong–Ou–Mandel-type interference with three input photons, not atoms (Abstract; page unavailable). Figure 3 also reports two-photon interference measurements. It therefore does not describe either of the claimed two-atom experiments. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Disputedcites [192] Luo, 2019, Quantum teleportation in high dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In the section labeled Abstract (page unavailable), the paper describes Hong–Ou–Mandel interference among photons, including verified two-photon combinations, not two-atom interference. It describes its own high-dimensional teleportation experiment rather than reporting two experiments that demonstrate the claimed effect. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Disputed
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Several realizations of the RRDPS protocol have recently been demonstrated experimentally using time-bin phase encoding [103][104][105][106] and using transverse spatial modes [107].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Passive round-robin differential phase shift QKD
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [103] Pirandola, 2019, Advances in quantum cryptography sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The copy’s section C, “Differential phase shift QKD,” describes experimental implementations of differential phase-shift QKD, but does not identify them as RRDPS. Searches for “RRDPS,” “round-robin differential phase shift,” and “transverse spatial modes” found no passage establishing the claimed RRDPS demonstrations. The copy is truncated, so relevant text may be missing. (LLM, conf=0.72)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [104] Wootters, 1982, A single quantum cannot be cloned, Nature source
- Could not verifycites [105] Shor, 2000, Simple proof of security of the bb84 quantum key distribution protocol, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Protocol 3: BB84 discussion (p. 4) concerns BB84 security and mentions experimental quantum key distribution systems only in general. Searches for RRDPS, time-bin phase encoding, transverse spatial modes, and experimental demonstrations found no passage addressing the claimed realizations. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites [106] Zukowski, 1993, ‘Event-ready-detectors’ Bell experiment via entanglement swapping, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract describes a proposed event-ready Bell experiment using entanglement swapping, not an experimental realization of RRDPS. Searches for RRDPS, time-bin phase encoding, and transverse spatial modes found no passage addressing the claimed demonstrations. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Could not verifycites [107] Bennett, 1993, Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The passages labeled Abstract discuss quantum teleportation using EPR pairs and classical communication, not experimental RRDPS implementations. Searches for RRDPS, time-bin phase encoding, and transverse spatial modes found no passage addressing the claim; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Optimal 1 → 2 cloning (i.e. two clones of one original state) of a qudit can be achieved with a fidelity of F cloning = 1 2 + 1 d+1 [114][115][116][117].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Universal optimal quantum cloning and NOT gate
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [114] Narla, 2016, Robust concurrent remote entanglement between two superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. X sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Appendix F (page unavailable) discusses fidelity for a two-qubit entanglement experiment, not optimal qudit cloning. Searches for the cloning formula and for universal qudit cloning found no passage addressing the claimed fidelity. (LLM, conf=0.75)
- Could not verifycites [115] Sangouard, 2011, Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics, Rev. Mod. Phys. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s discussion of the no-cloning theorem (Abstract; page unavailable) concerns the impossibility of noiseless amplification, not the fidelity of optimal approximate cloning. Searches for qudit cloning and the formula 1/2 + 1/(d+1) found no passage in our copy addressing the claimed result. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [116] Briegel, 1998, Quantum repeaters: the role of imperfect local operations in quantum communication, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
- Could not verifycites [117] Fung, 2007, Phase-remapping attack in practical quantum-key-distribution systems, Phys. Rev. A sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s section V discusses a phase-remapping intercept-and-resend attack, and Appendix A minimizes quantum bit error rate, not cloning fidelity. Searches for optimal 1→2 qudit cloning and the stated formula found no passage addressing either; the claim cannot be verified from our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In this scheme, the two-photon interference is exploited to achieve extremely large dimensions such as 10 5 .”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Passive round-robin differential phase shift QKD
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [85] Yuan, 2007, Synchronized independent narrow-band single photons and efficient generation of photonic entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper reports two-photon interference through Hong–Ou–Mandel dips (pp. 2–3). It does not describe a passive RRDPS scheme or say that interference achieves dimensions of 10^5; its conclusion (p. 4) instead reports a 136-fold enhancement in entangled-photon-pair generation. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Moreover, for the same bandwidth, QOCT benefits from an extra factor of 2 in resolution compared to classical OCT.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Quantum Optical Coherence Tomography
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [24] Dowling, 2008, Quantum optical metrology—the lowdown on high-N00N states, Contemp. Phys. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 6, “Quantum Imaging and Sensing” (page not provided), reports a factor-of-two improvement in resolving power for quantum coherence tomography. It does not specify that the comparison with classical OCT is at the same bandwidth, so that qualifier is not established by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
- It may state two separate claims as one. 59
- Probably not a substantial claim. 54
Some cited sources support this claim and some don’t — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“different experiments using different plasmonic configurations, and off-chip photon detection schemes achieved visibilities far beyond the classical limit up to 0.95 [183][184][185][186], thus fully certifying the quantumness of the two plasmon interferences.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Plasmons
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [183] Politi, 2009, Integrated quantum photonics, IEEE J. Select. Top. Quantum Electron. source
- Partly supportedcites [184] Peruzzo, 2010, Quantum walks of correlated photons, Science sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The 'Quantum walks of correlated particles' section (pp. 2, 5) describes off-chip photon detection and two-photon correlations that violate a classical limit by up to 76 standard deviations. It studies photons in a waveguide chip, not plasmons in plasmonic configurations, and does not report interference visibility of 0.95. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [185] Poulios, 2014, Quantum walks of correlated photon pairs in two-dimensional waveguide arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Fig. 4 passage (indexed under Abstract; page unavailable) reports 96.8 ± 2.5% visibility, and the discussion of Fig. 3 reports violations of a classical limit. But this is an experiment with photon pairs in fused-silica waveguides, not two-plasmon interference in plasmonic configurations; it also does not report a maximum visibility of 0.95. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Disputedcites [186] Owens, 2011, Two-photon quantum walks in an elliptical direct-write waveguide array, New J. Phys. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 4, “Two-photon walks” (page not provided), reports photon interference visibility of 38 ± 2%, not 0.95, in a waveguide array rather than a plasmonic configuration. Section 5, “Discussion” (page not provided), explicitly says the resulting probability distributions did not exhibit a conclusively quantum signature, contrary to the claim of full certification. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Some cited sources support this claim and some don’t — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Although tritters have been used to demonstrate quantum features in the two-photon regime [138,142,143], only recently have three photon HOM coalescences been observed [141,144].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [138] Zhang, 2016, Engineering two-photon high-dimensional states through quantum interference, Sci. Adv. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Results report two-photon HOM interference and quantum-state measurements, supporting the two-photon aspect of the cited clause. But Materials and Methods identify the device as a 50:50 beamsplitter, not a tritter; this paper therefore does not support the claim that tritters were used. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Could not verifycites [142] Nagali, 2010, Experimental optimal cloning of four-dimensional quantum states of photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The experimental-layout passage reports HOM interference between two photons at a balanced beam splitter, and the Fig. 2 and Fig. 3 captions likewise identify two-photon coalescence. Searches for tritters and three-photon HOM coalescence found no passage in our copy addressing either attributed claim; the paper's two-photon result does not establish a tritter experiment. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Disputedcites [143] Bouchard, 2017, High-dimensional quantum cloning and applications to quantum hacking, Sci. Adv. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation is attached to the claim about observed three-photon HOM coalescence. The Results (Fig. 1) describe HOM coalescence curves for two photons, and Materials and Methods specifies a two-photon interference experiment at a 50:50 beam splitter; this paper reports a two-photon observation, not a three-photon one. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Could not verifycites [141] Navez, 2003, Cloning a real d-dimensional quantum state on the edge of the no-signaling condition, Phys. Rev. A sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Discussion and Conclusion discuss quantum cloning and no-signaling, not tritters or photon interference. Searches for tritters, two-photon experiments, and three-photon Hong–Ou–Mandel coalescence found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [144] De Martini, 2002, Experimental realization of the quantum universal not gate, Nature source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“They have also been experimentally realized with fused optical fibers [138] and more recently with passive [141] and active integrated waveguide circuits [142].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Disputedcites [138] Zhang, 2016, Engineering two-photon high-dimensional states through quantum interference, Sci. Adv. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation [142] is attached to the claim about active integrated waveguide circuits. Materials and Methods (page unavailable) describes this paper’s experimental apparatus as a beamsplitter-and-mirrors filter with Dove prisms and spatial light modulators, rather than an integrated waveguide circuit. The paper therefore does not describe the realization attributed to it. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
- Could not verifycites [141] Navez, 2003, Cloning a real d-dimensional quantum state on the edge of the no-signaling condition, Phys. Rev. A sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Discussion and Conclusion address quantum cloning fidelity and no-signaling, not experimental Bell-port implementations. Searches for Bell-ports, fused optical fibers, and integrated waveguide circuits found no relevant passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites [142] Nagali, 2010, Experimental optimal cloning of four-dimensional quantum states of photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The experimental-layout section describes single-mode fibers used to deliver and detect photons, and beam splitters used in a ququart-cloning experiment. It does not describe Bell-ports realized with fused optical fibers. Searches for “Bell-ports” and “fused optical fibers” found no passage addressing the realization attributed to this source; the waveguide-circuit claims carry separate citations. (LLM, conf=0.74)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Disputed
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“The Heisenberg uncertainty principle and the no-cloning theorem [79] are the basis of security when encoding information on single photons, since any type of eavesdropping results in disturbances of the photonic quantum states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IV. QUANTUM COMMUNICATION
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [79] Flagg, 2010, Interference of single photons from two separate semiconductor quantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The supplied passages and searches for the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, no-cloning, and eavesdropping discuss single-photon interference and quantum-information applications, but not security from eavesdropping. Our copy therefore does not address the claim attributed to this paper (passages labeled Abstract; page unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.77)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Higher success rates can be achieved with nonlinear optics [73], entanglement in auxiliary modes [74,75], or feed-forward techniques [76].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Bell state measurements
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [73] Nagata, 2007, Beating the standard quantum limit with four-entangled photons, Science sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s discussion of the four-photon interferometer and its results (main text, Fig. 3; page not provided) concerns phase sensitivity, not Bell-state discrimination. Its discussion of distinguishing two four-photon input states (main text, Fig. 2, and Additional information; pages not provided) does not address whether auxiliary-mode entanglement improves Bell-state discrimination success rates. Searches for Bell-state discrimination, auxiliary modes, nonlinear optics, and feed-forward found no passage supporting the attributed point. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [74] Afek, 2010, High-N00N states by mixing quantum and classical light, Science source
- Could not verifycites [75] Zhou, 2017, Superresolving phase measurement with short-wavelength noon states by quantum frequency up-conversion, Phys. Rev. Appl. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Only the nonlinear-optics portion of the citing sentence is attributed to this source [73]. The paper’s experimental passages describe sum-frequency up-conversion and NOON-state phase measurements, but do not address whether nonlinear optics increases Bell-state discrimination success rates. A Bell-state measurement appears in the References, not as a finding of this paper. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites [76] Kaltenbaek, 2006, Experimental interference of independent photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract reports interference between photons from independent sources, and the experimental description reports interference visibility, not Bell-state discrimination success rates. Searches for nonlinear optics, auxiliary-mode entanglement, and feed-forward techniques found no passage in our copy linking them to higher discrimination success rates. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Upon exiting the beam splitter, the symmetric component, Ψ + i j , of the input state will reseult in two photons being detected in one of the output ports, while the antisymmetric component, Ψ - i j , will result in one photon being detected in each output port.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Entanglement engineering
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [111] Guan, 2015, Experimental passive round-robin differential phase-shift quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The passage following Eq. (3) (indexed under Abstract; page unavailable) says that equal pulse phases produce two clicks at the same detector, while different phases produce clicks at different detectors. The copy does not identify those cases as the symmetric Ψ+ and antisymmetric Ψ− components of the input state, so that identification is not established by this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Suppose we created the maximally mixed polarization state by using one of the photons from a maximally entangled singlet state.Then 2/3 of the time, the other photon in the singlet state will have the orthogonal polarization of the cloned states, and 1/3 of the time the same polarization.This effectively implements an optimal universal NOT gate [118,119]-itself a non-unitary operation.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Universal optimal quantum cloning and NOT gate
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [118] Zhao, 2008, Quantum hacking: experimental demonstration of time-shift attack against practical quantum-key-distribution systems, Phys. Rev. A sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Could not verifycites [119] Lydersen, 2010, Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored bright illumination, Nat. Photon. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 2 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Universal quantum computation can be achieved with linear optics, post-selection, single photon sources and detectors, and feed-forward, as was proposed by the KLM protocol [76].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Linear quantum computing
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [76] Kaltenbaek, 2006, Experimental interference of independent photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The passage on KLM-type schemes (section labeled Abstract; page unavailable) identifies them as linear-optics quantum computing schemes involving independent optical qubits. Our copy does not state that they enable universal computation or specify post-selection, detectors, and feed-forward as components of the protocol. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Another particularity of the two-photon interference is its inherent dispersion cancellation, which does not occur in the case of the one-photon interference, or the interference of classical light.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Quantum Optical Coherence Tomography
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [22] Einstein, 1935, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?, Phys. Rev. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2 discusses measurements and wave functions of two systems, not photon interference. Searches for two-photon interference and dispersion cancellation found no passage addressing either the claimed effect or its comparison with one-photon and classical-light interference. (LLM, conf=0.78)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“One such solution is known as the full device independent QKD [95,96], where the security can be proven without any knowledge of the devices used in the implementation.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [95] Lettow, 2010, Quantum interference of tunably indistinguishable photons from remote organic molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s Abstract describes an experiment on two-photon interference from remote organic molecules, not device-independent QKD. Searches for device-independent quantum key distribution, security without knowledge of devices, and related QKD terms found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Could not verifycites [96] Calsamiglia, 2001, Maximum efficiency of a linear-optical Bell-state analyzer, Appl. Phys. B sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Conclusions discuss photonic Bell-state measurements and the efficiency of a linear-optical analyzer, not QKD security. Searches for device-independent QKD and security without knowledge of implementation devices found no passage addressing that claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Beyond quantum cryptography, many quantum communication schemes-such as entanglement swapping [81], quantum teleportation [82], and dense-coding [83]-are also based on the concept of entanglement.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IV. QUANTUM COMMUNICATION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [81] Wei, 2014, Deterministic and robust generation of single photons from a single quantum dot with 99.5% indistinguishability using adiabatic rapid passage, Nano Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The introduction (p. 1) identifies quantum teleportation as an example of photonic quantum information processing, and the conclusion (p. 4) discusses generating entangled photons. Our copy does not say that teleportation depends on entanglement or address entanglement swapping or dense-coding, so it supports only part of the attributed statement. (LLM, conf=0.77)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [82] Senellart, 2017, High-performance semiconductor quantum-dot single-photon sources, Nat. Nanotechnol. source
- Supportedcites [83] Felinto, 2006, Conditional control of the quantum states of remote atomic memories for quantum networking, Nat. Phys. source
The citation [81] is attached specifically to entanglement swapping, not to teleportation or dense coding. The paper’s opening discussion states that quantum repeaters distribute entanglement by swapping across a chain of entangled pairs (page not supplied). (LLM, conf=0.93)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Interestingly, bunching and anti-bunching are typical bosonic and fermionic behaviours, respectively.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Entangled States
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [14] Kim, 2014, Two-photon interference with continuous-wave multi-mode coherent light, Opt. Express sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes photons tending to leave a beam splitter through the same output, supporting the bunching part of the claim. Our copy does not discuss fermions or identify anti-bunching as typical fermionic behaviour, so it does not support that part. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Not long after its proposal, QOCT was experimentally demonstrated, achieving an improvement in resolution by a factor of 5 compared to OCT [25].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Quantum Optical Coherence Tomography
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [25] Kok, 2007, Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits, Rev. Mod. Phys. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and VI. OUTLOOK: BEYOND LINEAR OPTICS discuss experiments in linear optical quantum computing, not QOCT. Searches for QOCT, quantum optical coherence tomography, and the claimed fivefold resolution improvement found no passage in our copy addressing the claim; page numbers were unavailable. (LLM, conf=0.76)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“can be used to perform quantum simulations [159,160]”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [159] O’brien, 2009, Photonic quantum technologies, Nat. Photon. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Quantum information processing section (p. 2) discusses photonic quantum computing and optical networks, but not bipartite quantum walks or their use in quantum simulation. Searches for “quantum walks,” “bipartite quantum walk simulation,” and “quantum simulation” found no passage in our copy addressing that use. (LLM, conf=0.74)
- Supportedcites [160] Wang, 2020, Integrated photonic quantum technologies, Nat. Photon. source
The section “On-chip sampling of photons and quantum simulation” (p. 6) says quantum walks can serve as a resource for quantum simulations and describes two-particle quantum walks used to study physical phenomena. The Fig. 5 caption (p. 12) likewise identifies two-particle quantum walks as simulations of physical quantum phenomena. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“that gives rise to interesting quantum correlation patterns [157,158]”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [157] Weimann, 2016, Implementation of quantum and classical discrete fractional fourier transforms, Nat. Commun. source
The Results section (Quantum experiments; page not available in our copy) describes pairs of photons propagating through waveguide arrays and reports distinct two-photon correlation patterns, including a rotated correlation map for path-entangled states. This supports the cited statement about correlation patterns arising from two-particle quantum propagation. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Could not verifycites [158] Humphreys, 2013, Linear optical quantum computing in a single spatial mode, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The passage labeled Abstract mentions a classical simulation of a quantum random walk, but says nothing about bipartite walks producing quantum correlation patterns. The gate-operation and two-photon passages concern a CPhase gate, not walk-generated correlations. Searches for bipartite quantum walks and two-photon walk correlations found no passage addressing the claim; page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Importantly, the complex features of three-partite interference experiments were also discussed in terms of quantum metrology and phase sensing to enhance precision [145].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [145] Ricci, 2004, Teleportation scheme implementing the universal optical quantum cloning machine and the universal not gate, Phys. Rev. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The experimental discussion (section labeled Abstract; page unavailable) describes three-detector coincidences used to test quantum cloning and the universal NOT gate. The Figure Captions discuss interference visibility, but no passage found by searching for quantum metrology, phase sensing, or three-partite interference discusses using them to enhance measurement precision. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Waveguides in photonics chips allow for higher portability, higher cost efficiency, and higher robustness [133,134].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Linear quantum computing
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [133] Yin, 2018, Improved security bound for the round-robin-differential-phase-shift quantum key distribution, Nat. Commun. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section (Proof-of-principle experiment; page unavailable) discusses beam splitters, Faraday–Michelson interferometers, and detector performance. Although it describes the interferometers as stable against polarization variations, our copy does not address whether waveguides in photonic chips improve portability, cost efficiency, or robustness. Searches for photonic-chip waveguides and related terms found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.78)
- Could not verifycites [134] Bouchard, 2018, Round-robin differential-phase-shift quantum key distribution with twisted photons, Phys. Rev. A sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper’s body text, indexed under Abstract (page unavailable), discusses orbital-angular-momentum QKD and says its generation and detection techniques do not require active stabilization. It does not address whether waveguides in photonic chips improve portability, cost efficiency, or robustness; searches for waveguides, integrated photonics, and those claimed benefits found no relevant passage. (LLM, conf=0.75)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“There are several examples of specific quantum optical implementations that rely on the HOM effect, to list a few: solving systems of linear equations [128,129], computation on encrypted data [130], computing discrete and fractional Fourier transform [131], and computations on a single spatial mode (using temporal modes) [132].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Linear quantum computing
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [128] Pirandola, 2015, High-rate measurement-device-independent quantum cryptography, Nat. Photon. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (p. 5) describes a continuous-variable quantum cryptography protocol, and the experimental setup (p. 16) describes optical modes combined for a Bell measurement. Searches for single-spatial-mode computation and temporal modes found no passage addressing that cited part of the sentence or its claimed reliance on the HOM effect. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites [129] Sasaki, 2014, Practical quantum key distribution protocol without monitoring signal disturbance, Nature sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract describes a quantum key distribution protocol using laser pulse trains, and the practical-implementation description in Additional information describes interference between delayed pulses. Neither passage addresses the HOM effect or computations on a single spatial mode using temporal modes. Searches for HOM-based computation, linear equations, encrypted data, and Fourier transforms found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites [130] Takesue, 2015, Experimental quantum key distribution without monitoring signal disturbance, Nat. Photon. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Citation [132] is attached to the example of computations on a single spatial mode using temporal modes. The experimental-setup passage describes temporally delayed interferometers for quantum key distribution, but does not address that computational implementation or its reliance on the HOM effect. Searches for single-spatial-mode computation and HOM-based temporal-mode computation found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)
- Could not verifycites [131] Wang, 2015, Experimental demonstration of a quantum key distribution without signal disturbance monitoring, Nat. Photon. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The citation is attached to the claim about solving systems of linear equations. The paper’s discussion of its variable-delay interferometer for quantum key distribution does not address that computation or connect it to the HOM effect. Searches for linear equations and HOM interference found no supporting passage in our copy (page numbers unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.77)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“they have been observed and even brought to twofermionic quantum interference only recently [201].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > E. Electrons
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [201] Bentivegna, 2015, Experimental scattershot boson sampling, Sci. Adv. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction discusses interference of indistinguishable photons in boson sampling, not levitons. Searches of our copy for levitons and two-fermion interference found no passage addressing their observation or interference; the returned References also concern photons. Page numbers were not available. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When the two photons exit through the same port, 2/3 of the time they will have the same polarization state; while 1/3 of the time, they will have orthogonal polarization states, |1 s |1 s ⊥ .”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Universal optimal quantum cloning and NOT gate
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of fermionic particles, say electrons, the creation operators will anti-commute, implying that ĉ † d † = -d † ĉ † . Therefore, |1 a |1 b BS -→ |1 c |1 d and the fermions will exit through different output ports.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Two-Photon Interference
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this case, we observe destructive interference of the two-photon states corresponding to photons exiting opposite output ports, and constructive interference of the two-photon states corresponding to photons exiting through the same output ports.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Two-Photon Interference
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in the last case they also reach the same detector, but they have the same polarizations”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Bell state measurements
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From Eq. ( 17), we can find the probability for passing the test is 1 + | φ| ψ | 2 /2, and consequently the probability of failing the test is 1 -| φ| ψ | 2 /2.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“two-photon interference has no classical analogue”
- Also stated in: § I. INTRODUCTION · boosted
“with absolutely no analogue in classical physics”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § I. INTRODUCTION · boosted
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As will be discussed in the upcoming sections, the two-photon interference is fundamental to a plethora of quantum information tasks.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > II. PRECISION MEASUREMENTS
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The MDI QKD protocol has been experimentally demonstrated using time-bin phaseencoding [97], and polarization encoding [98].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
What the sources say
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We thus require a particle to have enough degrees of freedom to accommodate the information of both incoming states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum state joining
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This process is probabilistic and requires an ancilla state, with a success probability of 1/32, or 1/8 if a suitable feed-forward is used.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum state joining
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [120] Gerhardt, 2011, Full-field implementation of a perfect eavesdropper on a quantum cryptography system, Nat. Commun. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, such a configuration typically yields larger security, better stability, and faster communications.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Passive round-robin differential phase shift QKD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The experimental realization of indistinguishable single photon sources with high purity is a crucial component for engineering large-scale entangled quantum states from independent sources, as will be seen in forthcoming sections.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Mode distinguishability
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This scheme relies on the interaction of two photons, which would require nonlinear optics.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum state joining
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The inverse process to joining states, known as quantum state splitting, is such that the information on a ququart state (for the above experiment) is split onto two photonic qubits [121].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum state joining
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [121] Mayers, 1998
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast to the full device independent scheme, MDI QKD protocol still necessitates the assumptions of Alice's and Bob's states generation to be perfect, which is still reasonable for current implementations.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular, the measurement of the HOM visibility is an invaluable diagnostic tool to characterize single photon sources and states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > III. QUANTUM STATE ANALYSIS
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, although QOCT offers potential advantages in terms of resolution, new challenges appear, such as low signal and signal artifacts.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Quantum Optical Coherence Tomography
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“At the heart of quantum information is the notion of quantum entanglement [10]-the fundamental resource in quantum communication [11], quantum metrology [12], and quantum computing [13].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Entangled States
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] Hamilton, 2000, Phase shifts in multilayer dielectric beam splitters, Am. J. Phys. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Paul, 1986, Interference between independent photons, Rev. Mod. Phys. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Ou, 1989, Fourth-order interference technique for determining the coherence time of a light beam, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In order to achieve an optimal HOM interference, the attenuated lasers are phase randomized, achieving a maximum HOM visibility of 1/2.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two such gates are the control-Z (CZ) and control-NOT (CNOT) gates, which are main components for universal quantum computation.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Linear quantum computing
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition to being one of the most peculiar phenomenon in quantum optics, two-photon interference is one of the primary tools used in quantum information processing.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Entangled States
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We cannot distinguish the last two states, |Φ ± , from each other with a simple pair of photon detectors; hence, the success rate of 50%.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Bell state measurements
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Another key physical principle that is at the heart of quantum communications is entanglement [10].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IV. QUANTUM COMMUNICATION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] Hamilton, 2000, Phase shifts in multilayer dielectric beam splitters, Am. J. Phys. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Formally, it can be represented by a unitary transformation, thus conserving energy and preserving orthogonality between input states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Action of the Beam Splitter
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of course, the HOM effect is not limited to photons, and thus we close the review with implementations in non-photonic systems, such as plasmons, phonons, atoms and electrons.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > I. INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two-photon interference and Bell state analysis are central concepts in MDI-QKD.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead of measuring the interference of a train of pulses at Bob's stage, Bob generates a reference pulse train, and sends Alice's and his state to a beam splitter.By using such a configuration, Bob takes advantage of the phase stability of the twophoton interference effect.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Passive round-robin differential phase shift QKD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As outlined in [77], an example can be to arrange four beam splitters so that we interfere the original state with another entangled ancillary pair of modes first, and then each of the two pairs of output modes goes through a simple Bell state analyzer.In this way, we can distinguish one of the two states that we could not distinguish before, raising the success rate to 75%.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Bell state measurements
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [77] Mosley, 2008, Heralded generation of ultrafast single photons in pure quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A heralded single photon source achieving a unity HOM visibility would lead to a higher secret key rate per transmitted photon.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Thus, new techniques are being investigated in order to exploit the full potential of QOCT [29][30][31][32].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Quantum Optical Coherence Tomography
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] Slussarenko, 2017, Unconditional violation of the shot-noise limit in photonic quantum metrology, Nat. Photon. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked yetcites [30] D’Ambrosio, 2019, Tunable two-photon quantum interference of structured light, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [31] Hiekkamäki, 2020, Single-path two-photon interference effects between spatial modes source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not checked yet
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is precisely this separation from classical to quantum physics that gives two-photon interference a distinct advantage to outperform classical computations, securely communicate information, simulate highly complex physical systems and increase the sensitivity of precise measurements.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > I. INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The RRDPS protocol removes the requirement for signal disturbance monitoring by bounding the amount of information leaked to the eavesdropper, where the bound depends entirely on Alice's generation stage.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Passive round-robin differential phase shift QKD
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [102] Gisin, 2002, Quantum cryptography, Rev. Mod. Phys. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, this scheme yields very low secret key rates, and is highly impractical due to several stringent requirements such as near unity detection efficiencies.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Quantum entanglement inherently deals with the interference of two-photon states, thus hinting to the fact that the HOM effect might play an important role in the engineering and analysis of entangled states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Entangled States
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the so-called “two-way architecture” works by having quantum memories evenly distributed along a communication channel, each memory hosting two atoms that emit photons as described above, one forwards and one backwards along the channel.Mid-way between two memories M 1 M 2 sits a Bell state analyzer that measures the two photons coming from M 1 and M 2 in the Bell basis.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Teleportation and entanglement swapping
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89] Sipahigil, 2012, Quantum interference of single photons from remote nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
In the paper
“We have thus created an entangled state of two atoms, which will display non-local correlations as one can verify for example by violating Bell's inequalities [87].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Teleportation and entanglement swapping
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [87] Chen, 2008, Memory-built-in quantum teleportation with photonic and atomic qubits, Nat. Phys. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, one can solve this issue either by postselecting on only the measurements that fall within a very narrow time window (but this reduces the total number of successful measurements), or by recording the time difference and feed-forward a phase correction so that every single photon pair will have the same phase.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Entanglement engineering
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The frequency difference ∆ω generates a phase of exp(i∆ω∆t) between the components, which will render the state mixed if unaccounted for because the detection time difference ∆t is random.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Entanglement engineering
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [112] Hofmann, 2012, Heralded entanglement between widely separated atoms, Science source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Moreover, the MDI scheme has also been demonstrated over long distances through optical fibres [99,100], showing the feasibility of the protocol and its potential for unconditional security.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Measurement device independent QKD
What the sources say
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, Bell state measurements are the gold standard for experimentally measuring maximally entangled states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > III. QUANTUM STATE ANALYSIS
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in all boson sampling tasks, multi-photon as well as multimodal interferences, i.e. generalizations of the original HOM idea, play a crucial role.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“which is useful to probe indistinguishability or to predict the complex device's quantum behaviour [163].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [163] Reck, 1994, Experimental realization of any discrete unitary operator, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the two-dimensional case, we can implement a Bell state measurement with a single beamsplitter followed by a detector in each output port, which is equivalent to a destructive SWAP test in the sense that the states get measured and are not available afterwards.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the results show a clear dip in the cross-correlation measurements with a visibility of 0.65±0.07,which is above the classical limit of 0.5”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > D. Atoms
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [193] Tichy, 2013, Limits to multipartite entanglement generation with bosons and fermions, Phys. Rev. A source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
In the paper
“it was shown that the usually deleterious losses associated with plasmonic systems might be turned into a advantageous feature when the nanostructures are carefully tuned.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Plasmons
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [187] Crespi, 2013, Anderson localization of entangled photons in an integrated quantum walk, Nat. Photon. source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“because these initial findings used a continuous stream of electrons, the interference might not exclusively be interpreted as a result from the overlap between two single-electron wave packets.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > E. Electrons
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Due to anti-bunching, a reduction in the noise properties of the output ports was observed; thus, an indirect verification of two-electron antibunching was achieved.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > E. Electrons
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [196] Broome, 2013, Photonic boson sampling in a tunable circuit, Science source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Fermions obey Fermi statistics, which leads to anti-bunching at a beam splitter.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Hong-Ou-Mandel effect is colloquially referred to as a test for the distinguishability between two photons: if we witness a coincidence, the two photons had different states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, we see that the CZ gate heavily relies on the HOM effect, the output depending on whether the control and target photons bunched or not.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Linear quantum computing
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the experiment opens the path to phonon quantum information experiments, such as boson sampling or entanglement generation in larger ion crystals, relying on a phononic HOM interference.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Phonons
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Although the observed dip had only a visibility of 0.43±0.02(see Fig. 8b) and thus below the classical limit of 0.5”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Plasmons
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [180] Lahini, 2012, Quantum walk of two interacting bosons, Phys. Rev. A source
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“By making the photons pairwise distinguishable, e.g. by delaying independently two photons, one can map a probability surface with non-trivial features (see Fig. 7b).This surface can be seen as the three-dimensional extension to the 2-dimensional HOM interference dip [141].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [141] Navez, 2003, Cloning a real d-dimensional quantum state on the edge of the no-signaling condition, Phys. Rev. A source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
In the paper
“At the plasmonics beam splitter, anti-coalescence or non-linear absorption can be observed [187].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Plasmons
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [187] Crespi, 2013, Anderson localization of entangled photons in an integrated quantum walk, Nat. Photon. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“or can probe the statistics in quantum walks [161].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [161] Garcia-Escartin, 2013, Swap test and Hong–Ou–Mandel effect are equivalent, Phys. Rev. A source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not checked yet
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For two maximally distinguishable (orthogonal) states, the overlap is 0 and P = 1/2, while for maximally indistinguishable states the overlap is 1 and the probability to pass the test is also 1.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since two plasmon HOM interference is now well-established, it can be considered one of the building blocks of future quantum plasmonic circuits”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Plasmons
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This so-called triad phase is the sum of the three relative phases between pairwise inputs (see Fig. 7c) and only effects the outcome if the photons are partially distinguishable.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [144] De Martini, 2002, Experimental realization of the quantum universal not gate, Nature source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In higher dimensions, one needs the equivalent circuit for projecting onto the symmetric/antisymmetric subspaces.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similarly, the SWAP test is a quantum computing primitive operation that tests for the inequality between two quantum states.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Bell-ports have been discussed theoretically since many years in connection to multipartite and high-dimensional quantum information [137,139,140].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [137] Jamiolkowski, 1972, Linear transformations which preserve trace and positive semidefiniteness of operators, Rep. Math. Phys. source
- Not checked yetcites [139] Zhao, 2014, Entangling different-color photons via time-resolved measurement and active feed forward, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked yetcites [140] Peres, 2003, How the no-cloning theorem got its name, Fortschr. Phys. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In terms of the measurement outcome, if |'1' is measured, we can confirm that the two input states are different; however, if the outcome is the state |'0' , they may or may not be equal.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Variations of the NS gate have been reported: one proposal shows the possibility to implement it using only two BS but with slightly lower success probability of (3 -√ 2)/7 [123]; other schemes with again two ancillary photons with success probabilities 1/5 [124] and 1/4 [125].”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Linear quantum computing
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [123] Liu, 2013, Experimental measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked yetcites [124] Tang, 2014, Experimental demonstration of polarization encoding measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
- Not checked yetcites [125] Tang, 2014, Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution over 200 km, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not checked yet
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“In addition, it is also suggested that this challenges a fundamental principle of computer science, namely the extended Church-Turing thesis.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [166] Żukowski, 1997, Realizable higher-dimensional two-particle entanglements via multiport beam splitters, Phys. Rev. A source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [167] Campos, 2000, Three-photon Hong–Ou–Mandel interference at a multiport mixer, Phys. Rev. A source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“if more than two photons are interfered, a probability surface or coincidence landscape can be investigated [162]”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [162] Zeilinger, 1993, Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen correlations in higher dimensions
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“and as such it is considered to be a promising candidate to show quantum supremacy.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [166] Żukowski, 1997, Realizable higher-dimensional two-particle entanglements via multiport beam splitters, Phys. Rev. A source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [167] Campos, 2000, Three-photon Hong–Ou–Mandel interference at a multiport mixer, Phys. Rev. A source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“When two particles for example are sent into a multiport, e.g.multimode waveguide [153,154], multimode fiber [155] or integrated waveguide structures [156], the transmission can be described as a complex bi-partite quantum walk”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. Mulitphotons in general multiports
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [153] Okamoto, 2011, Realization of a Knill–Laflamme–Milburn controlled-not photonic quantum circuit combining effective optical nonlinearities, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. source
- Not checked yetcites [154] Harrow, 2009, Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
- Not checked yetcites [155] Cai, 2013, Experimental quantum computing to solve systems of linear equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. source
- Not checked yetcites [156] Fisher, 2014, Quantum computing on encrypted data, Nat. Commun. source
Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The eigenstates of the SWAP operator are the Bell states: three Bell states correspond to the eigenvalue +1 (the symmetric subspace), and one corresponds to the eigenvalue -1 (the singlet state, i.e. the antisymmetric subspace).”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > B. The SWAP test
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It leads to a change in the detection probabilities when all three photons are detected in separate output ports and does not affect the bi-photon transmission probabilities.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > A. Three-photon interferences in a Bell-tritter
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [144] De Martini, 2002, Experimental realization of the quantum universal not gate, Nature source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In quantum computation, the interaction between two photons is often required to create the building blocks of certain quantum gates, for example CNOT and CZ gates.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“two-photon interference enables the measurement of maximally entangled states through Bell states measurements, or equivalently, the projection onto the Bell basis.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two-photon interference is fundamentally interesting because it has no classical counterpart”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In quantum communication, it can be used to circumvent the problem of untrusted measurement devices, and build novel protocols.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In quantum state analysis, it gives the possibility to distinguish between modes, since only indistinguishable states will bunch.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with many applications ranging from precision measurement and state determination to quantum computations and quantum communication.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In metrology, two photon interference allows for femtosecond and even attosecond time-resolution, state determination (quantum state analysis), and generating non-classical light for resolution enhancement with linear optics.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two-photon interference acts as the linear optical solution to this challenge, and thus provides a scalable technique to build photonic quantum computers.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two particle interferences is not only the basis for most of optical quantum information science and a powerful tool for metrology and other fields”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bell state measurements are central to the concepts of teleportation and entanglement swapping.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > IX. CONCLUSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Fermions obey Fermi statistics, which leads to anti-bunching at a beam splitter.
“The major difference between indistinguishable bosons and fermions is that the latter obey Fermi statistics, which leads to anti-bunching at a beam splitter.”
The paper relies on this without support.
SPPs, being bosonic quasiparticles, are expected to bunch in a HOM-type experiment.
“Because SPPs are described as quasiparticles with a bosonic nature, they were also expected to bunch in a HOM-type experiment.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Phonons follow Bose-Einstein statistics and are expected to bunch in a HOM-like arrangement.
“Phonons also follow Bose-Einstein statistics, and as such they are expected to bunch in a HOM-like arrangement.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Even massive particles should be able to exhibit two-particle interferences following quantum mechanics.
“following quantum mechanics, even massive particles should be able to exhibit two-particle interferences.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum state joining
“|φ I ⊗ |ψ II = (α |1 I,H + β |1 I,V ) ⊗ (γ |1 II,H + δ |1 II,V )”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum state joining
“= αγ |1 H , 1 H + βγ |1 H , 1 V +αδ |1 V , 1 H + βδ |1 V , 1 V ,”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Quantum metrology
“For the case of N = 2 [36,37], we recognize the state from Eq. ( 5) where two indistinguishable photons are made incident onto both input ports of a 50:50 BS, resulting in HOM interference.”
§ Two-photon interference: the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect > C. Entangled States
“|Ψ ± ab = 1 √ 2 (|H a |V b ± |V a |H b ) (5”
Citations
Cites
Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?
Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., & Rosen, N. (1935) · Physical Review · doi:10.1103/physrev.47.777 · Cited by 16,654
Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen channels
Bennett, C. H., Brassard, G., Crépeau, C., Jozsa, R., Peres, A., & Wootters, W. K. (1993) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.70.1895 · Cited by 13,703 · cited 1×
“Beyond quantum cryptography, many quantum communication schemes—such as entanglement swapping [106], quantum teleportation [107], and dense-coding [108]—are also based on the concept of entanglement.”
BackgroundOn the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox
Bell, J. S. (1964) · Physics Physique Fizika · doi:10.1103/physicsphysiquefizika.1.195 · Cited by 12,252
Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem
Ekert, A. K. (1991) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.67.661 · Cited by 10,777
Gisin, N., Ribordy, G., Tittel, W., & Zbinden, H. (2002) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.74.145 · Cited by 8,515
A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics
Knill, E., Laflamme, R., & Milburn, G. J. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35051009 · Cited by 5,880
Communication via one- and two-particle operators on Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen states
Bennett, C. H., & Wiesner, S. J. (1992) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.69.2881 · Cited by 5,470
A single quantum cannot be cloned
Wootters, W. K., & Zurek, W. H. (1982) · Nature · doi:10.1038/299802a0 · Cited by 5,406 · cited 2×
“Considering the well-known fact that quantum mechanics does not allow the possibility to clone an unknown state [104, 140], the ability to perform quantum cloning may seem counterintuitive.”
BackgroundMeasurement of subpicosecond time intervals between two photons by interference
Hong, C. K., Ou, Z. Y., & Mandel, L. (1987) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.59.2044 · Cited by 4,369
Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S., & Maccone, L. (2011) · Nature Photonics · doi:10.1038/nphoton.2011.35 · Cited by 3,894
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Barbieri, M. (2022) · PRX Quantum · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.010202 · Cited by 125
Quantum structured light in high dimensions
Nape, I. M., Sephton, B., Ornelas, P., Moodley, C., & Forbes, A. (2023) · APL Photonics · doi:10.1063/5.0138224 · Cited by 109
Two-Photon Interference from a Quantum Emitter in Hexagonal Boron Nitride
Fournier, C., Roux, S., Watanabe, K., Taniguchi, T., Buil, S., Barjon, J., Hermier, J., & Delteil, A. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.19.l041003 · Cited by 74
High-Dimensional Two-Photon Interference Effects in Spatial Modes
Hiekkamäki, M., & Fickler, R. (2021) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.126.123601 · Cited by 70
Self-citationPolarization-entangled Bell state generation from an epsilon-near-zero metasurface
Jia, W., Saerens, G., Talts, Ü., Weigand, H., Chapman, R. J., Li, L., Grange, R., & Yang, Y. (2025) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.ads3576 · Cited by 56
Quantum interferometers: Principles and applications
Jin, R., Zeng, Z.-Q., You, C., & Yuan, C. (2024) · Progress in Quantum Electronics · doi:10.1016/j.pquantelec.2024.100519 · Cited by 46
Artificial Intelligence in Classical and Quantum Photonics
Vernuccio, F., Bresci, A., Cimini, V., Giuseppi, A., Cerullo, G., Polli, D., & Valensise, C. M. (2022) · Laser & Photonics Review · doi:10.1002/lpor.202100399 · Cited by 43
Triggered emission of indistinguishable photons from an organic dye molecule
Lombardi, P., Colautti, M., Duquennoy, R., Murtaza, G., Majumder, P., & Toninelli, C. (2021) · Applied Physics Letters · doi:10.1063/5.0048567 · Cited by 40
Telecom-Band Quantum Interference of Frequency-Converted Photons from Remote Detuned NV Centers
Stolk, A., van der Enden, K. L., Roehsner, M.-C., Teepe, A., Faes, S. O. J., Bradley, C. E., Cadot, S., van Rantwijk, J., Raa, I. T., Hagen, R., et al. (2022) · PRX Quantum · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.020359 · Cited by 38
Requirements for a processing-node quantum repeater on a real-world fiber grid
Avis, G., da Silva, F. F., Coopmans, T. J., Dahlberg, A., Jirovská, H., Maier, D., Rabbie, J., Torres‐Knoop, A., & Wehner, S. (2023) · npj Quantum Information · doi:10.1038/s41534-023-00765-x · Cited by 39
High speed imaging of spectral-temporal correlations in Hong-Ou-Mandel interference
Zhang, Y., England, D. G., NOMEROTSKI, A., & Sussman, B. (2021) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.432191 · Cited by 37
Self-citationDigital Discovery of 100 diverse Quantum Experiments with PyTheus
Ruiz-Gonzalez, C., Arlt, S., Petermann, J., Sayyad, S., Jaouni, T., Karimi, E., Tischler, N., Gu, X., & Krenn, M. (2023) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2023-12-12-1204 · Cited by 39
Self-citationTwo electrons interacting at a mesoscopic beam splitter
Ubbelohde, N., Freise, L., Pavlovska, E., Silvestrov, P. G., Recher, P., Kokainis, M., Barinovs, Ğ., Hohls, F., Weimann, T., Pierz, K., et al. (2023) · Nature Nanotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41565-023-01370-x · Cited by 35
Suprano, A., Zia, D., Pont, M., Giordani, T., Rodari, G., Valeri, M., Piccirillo, B., Carvacho, G., Spagnolo, N., Senellart, P., et al. (2023) · Advanced Photonics · doi:10.1117/1.ap.5.4.046008 · Cited by 32
Self-citationDistinguishability and mixedness in quantum interference
Jones, A. E., Kumar, S., D’Aurelio, S. E., Bayerbach, M. J., Menssen, A. J., & Barz, S. (2023) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.108.053701 · Cited by 30
Quantum metaphotonics: Recent advances and perspective
Zhang, J., & Kivshar, Y. S. (2024) · APL Quantum · doi:10.1063/5.0201107 · Cited by 30
Metasurface quantum graphs for generalized Hong-Ou-Mandel interference
Yousef, K. M. A., D’Alessandro, M., Yeh, M., Sinclair, N. E., Lončar, M., & Capasso, F. (2025) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adw8404 · Cited by 28
Triggiani, D., Psaroudis, G., & Tamma, V. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.19.044068 · Cited by 27
Real-time two-photon interference from distinct molecules on the same chip
Duquennoy, R., Colautti, M., Emadi, R., Majumder, P., Lombardi, P., & Toninelli, C. (2022) · Optica · doi:10.1364/optica.452317 · Cited by 26
Liu, Z.-F., Chen, C., Xu, J.-M., Cheng, Z.-M., Ren, Z., Dong, B.-W., Lou, Y.-C., Yang, Y.-X., Xue, S.-T., Liu, Z.-H., et al. (2022) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.263602 · Cited by 26
Jordan, K. M., Abrahão, R. A., & Lundeen, J. S. (2022) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.106.063715 · Cited by 25
Fundamentals to emerging concepts and applications of metasurfaces for flat optics: a tutorial
Gao, Y., & Ma, Y. (2025) · Advances in Optics and Photonics · doi:10.1364/aop.541854 · Cited by 24
Multiple Tin-Vacancy Centers in Diamond with Nearly Identical Photon Frequency and Linewidth
Narita, Y., Wang, P., Ikeda, K., Oba, K., Miyamoto, Y., Taniguchi, T., Onoda, S., Hatano, M., & Iwasaki, T. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.19.024061 · Cited by 24
Ru, S., An, M., Yang, Y., Qu, R., Wang, F., Wang, Y., Zhang, P., & Li, F. (2021) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.103.052404 · Cited by 24
Anti-Hong–Ou–Mandel interference by coherent perfect absorption of entangled photons
Vetlugin, A. N., Guo, R., Soci, C., & Zheludev, N. I. (2022) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ac9fe9 · Cited by 23
Cavity-enhanced photon indistinguishability at room temperature and telecom wavelengths
Husel, L., Trapp, J., Scherzer, J., Wu, X., Wang, P., Fortner, J., Nutz, M., Hümmer, T., Polovnikov, B., Förg, M., et al. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48119-1 · Cited by 23
A framework for curriculum transformation in quantum information science and technology education
Goorney, S., Bley, J., Heusler, S., & Sherson, J. F. (2024) · European Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6404/ad7e60 · Cited by 25
Tunable single‐photon emitters in 2D materials
Yu, Y., Seo, I. C., Luo, M., Lu, K., Son, B., Tan, J. K., & Nam, D. (2024) · Nanophotonics · doi:10.1515/nanoph-2024-0050 · Cited by 22
Triggiani, D., & Tamma, V. (2024) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.132.180802 · Cited by 21
Semi-Device-Independent Characterization of Multiphoton Indistinguishability
Rodari, G., Novo, L., Albiero, R., Suprano, A., Tavares, C., Caruccio, E., Hoch, F., Giordani, T., Carvacho, G., Gardina, M., et al. (2025) · PRX Quantum · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.6.020340 · Cited by 20
Self-citationNonlinear Interferometry: A New Approach for Imaging and Sensing
Fuenzalida, J., Giese, E., & Gräfe, M. (2024) · Advanced Quantum Technologies · doi:10.1002/qute.202300353 · Cited by 18
Two-photon interferences of weak coherent lights
Kim, H., Kwon, O., & Moon, H. S. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-99804-w · Cited by 18
High-speed imaging of spatiotemporal correlations in Hong-Ou-Mandel interference
Gao, X., Zhang, Y., D’Errico, A., Heshami, K., & Karimi, E. (2022) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.456433 · Cited by 17
Self-citationZhan, X.-H., Zhong, Z.-Q., Wang, S., Yin, Z., Chen, W., He, D., Guo, G., & Han, Z. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.20.034069 · Cited by 17
Massively parallel Hong-Ou-Mandel interference based on independent soliton microcombs
Huang, L., Wang, W., Wang, F., Wang, Y., Zou, C., Tang, L., Little, B. E., Zhao, W., Han, Z.-F., Yang, J. Y., et al. (2025) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adq8982 · Cited by 17
Noise limits on two-photon interferometric sensing
Scott, H., Branford, D., Westerberg, N., Leach, J., & Gauger, E. M. (2021) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.104.053704 · Cited by 17
Experimental observation of counter-intuitive features of photonic bunching
Rodari, G., Fernandes, C., Caruccio, E., Suprano, A., Hoch, F., Giordani, T., Carvacho, G., Albiero, R., Giano, N. D., Corrielli, G., et al. (2026) · Light Science & Applications · doi:10.1038/s41377-026-02250-4 · Cited by 16
Self-citationExtending the Hong-Ou-Mandel effect: The power of nonclassicality
Alsing, P. M., Birrittella, R. J., Gerry, C. C., Mimih, J., & Knight, P. L. (2022) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.105.013712 · Cited by 16
Towards quantum telescopes: demonstration of a two-photon interferometer for precision astrometry
Crawford, J., Dolzhenko, D., Keach, M., Mueninghoff, A., Abrahão, R. A., Martínez-Rincón, J., Stankus, P., Vintskevich, S., & NOMEROTSKI, A. (2023) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.486342 · Cited by 16
Quantum circuit mapping for universal and scalable computing in MZI-based integrated photonics
Kwon, Y. S., Baldazzi, A., Pavesi, L., & Choi, B.-S. (2024) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.520492 · Cited by 15
Physical-Layer Aspects of Quantum Communications: A Survey
Koudia, S., Oleynik, L., Bayraktar, M., Rehman, J. U., & Chatzinotas, S. (2025) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2025.3647980 · Cited by 15
Robust Approach for Time-Bin-Encoded Photonic Quantum Information Protocols
White, S., Polino, E., Ghafari, F., Joch, D. J., Villegas-Aguilar, L., Shalm, L. K., Verma, V. B., Huber, M., & Tischler, N. (2025) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.134.180802 · Cited by 14
Photonic quantum information with time-bins: Principles and applications
Singh, A., Sethia, A., Esmaeilifar, L., Valivarthi, R., Sinclair, N., Spiropulu, M., & Oblak, D. (2026) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2026.06.005 · Cited by 13
Gravitational Redshift Induces Quantum Interference
Bruschi, D. E., & Schell, A. W. (2022) · Annalen der Physik · doi:10.1002/andp.202200468 · Cited by 13
Spectrally resolved two-photon interference in a modified Hong–Ou–Mandel interferometer
Li, B., Yuan, B., Chen, C., Xiang, X., Quan, R., Dong, R., Zhang, S., & Jin, R. (2022) · Optics & Laser Technology · doi:10.1016/j.optlastec.2022.109039 · Cited by 13
Hernández, O., & Liberal, I. (2022) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.456495 · Cited by 13
Ramesh, A., Reilly, D. R., Lee, K. F., Moraw, P. M., Chung, J., Islam, M. S., Peña, C., Han, X., Kettimuthu, R., Kumar, P., et al. (2024) · Optics Communications · doi:10.1016/j.optcom.2024.131305 · Cited by 12
Engineering Quantum Emitters in 2D Materials
Hou, S., Hu, H., Xu, M., Zhang, J., Xiao, H., Liu, Z., Xing, W., Liu, X., You, S., Liu, B., et al. (2025) · Advanced Optical Materials · doi:10.1002/adom.202500693 · Cited by 12
Self-citationLee, J.-M., Baldazzi, A., Sanna, M., Azzini, S., Ahn, J. T., Lee, M., Sohn, Y.-I., & Pavesi, L. (2023) · Photonics Research · doi:10.1364/prj.489869 · Cited by 12
Spectral characterization of an SPDC source with a fast broadband spectrometer
Farella, B., Medwig, G., Abrahão, R. A., & NOMEROTSKI, A. (2024) · AIP Advances · doi:10.1063/5.0168423 · Cited by 12
Coherent Two-Photon Atmospheric Lidar Based on Up-Conversion Quantum Erasure
Wang, C., Yang, K., Qu, L., Li, Y., Zhao, R., Xue, X., Chen, T., & Dou, X. (2024) · ACS Photonics · doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.4c00302 · Cited by 11
Enhanced Control of Single-Molecule Emission Frequency and Spectral Diffusion
Duquennoy, R., Landrieux, S., Bernardis, D. D., Mony, J., Colautti, M., Jin, L., Pernice, W. H. P., & Toninelli, C. (2024) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/acsnano.4c08382 · Cited by 11
Interferometry and higher-dimensional phase measurements using directionally unbiased linear optics
Simon, D. S., Schwarze, C. R., & Sergienko, A. V. (2022) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.106.033706 · Cited by 11
Fabre, N., Amanti, M. I., Baboux, F., Keller, A., Ducci, S., & Milman, P. (2022) · The European Physical Journal D · doi:10.1140/epjd/s10053-022-00525-0 · Cited by 11
Sgobba, F., Pallotti, D. K., Elefante, A., Russo, S. D., Dequal, D., de Cumis, M. S., & Amato, L. S. (2023) · Photonics · doi:10.3390/photonics10010072 · Cited by 11
Quantum enhanced probing of multilayered samples
Li-Gómez, M. Y., Yepiz-Graciano, P., Hrushevskyi, T., Calderón-Losada, O., Sağlamyürek, E., Lopez-Mago, D., Salari, V., Ngo, T. H.-B., U’Ren, A. B., & Barzanjeh, S. (2023) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.5.023170 · Cited by 11
Abrahão, R. A., Morin, H. P. N., Pagé, J. T. R., Safari, A., Boyd, R. W., & Lundeen, J. S. (2024) · Optica · doi:10.1364/optica.534596 · Cited by 11
Time-Resolved Line Shapes of Single Quantum Emitters via Machine Learned Photon Correlations
Proppe, A. H., Lee, K. L. K., Kaplan, A. E. K., Ginterseder, M., Krajewska, C. J., & Bawendi, M. G. (2023) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.053603 · Cited by 10
Labay-Mora, A., da Silva, F. F., & Wehner, S. (2024) · Quantum Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ad57e9 · Cited by 10
Xu, A., Duan, L., Wang, L., & Zhang, Y. (2023) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.479535 · Cited by 10
Self-citationMultiparameter estimation for qubit states with collective measurements: a case study
Len, Y. L. (2022) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ac599d · Cited by 10
Entanglement-induced collective many-body interference
Faleo, T., Brunner, E., Webb, J. W., Pickston, A., Ho, J., Weihs, G., Buchleitner, A., Dittel, C., Dufour, G., Fedrizzi, A., et al. (2024) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adp9030 · Cited by 9
Universal Multiport Interferometers for Post‐Selected Multi‐Photon Gates
Baldazzi, A., & Pavesi, L. (2024) · Advanced Quantum Technologies · doi:10.1002/qute.202400418 · Cited by 9
Bajar, K., Chatterjee, R., Bhat, V. S., & Mujumdar, S. A. (2025) · APL Quantum · doi:10.1063/5.0238937 · Cited by 9
Comparison of multi-mode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference and multi-slit interference
Guo, Y., Yang, Z.-X., Zeng, Z.-Q., Ding, C., Shimizu, R., & Jin, R. (2023) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.501645 · Cited by 9
Quantum-enhanced microscopic imaging technology [Invited]
Liu, J., & Su, X. (2024) · Chinese Optics Letters · doi:10.3788/col202422.060010 · Cited by 9
Entanglement engineering of optomechanical systems by reinforcement learning
Ye, L., Arenz, C., Lukens, J. M., & Lai, Y. (2025) · APL Machine Learning · doi:10.1063/5.0233470 · Cited by 9
Space-time propagation of photon pulses in dielectric media, illustrations with beam splitters
Federico, M., Dorier, V., Guérin, S., & Jauslin, H. R. (2022) · Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6455/ac7e0e · Cited by 9
Probing ultra-fast dephasing via entangled photon pairs
Liu, X., Li, T., Wang, J., Kamble, M., Zheltikov, A. M., & Agarwal, G. S. (2022) · Optics Express · doi:10.1364/oe.480300 · Cited by 8
Li, Y., Yu, Y., Lai, K., Han, Y., Gao, F., Zhang, B., & Shvets, G. B. (2022) · Applied Physics Letters · doi:10.1063/5.0083989 · Cited by 8
Li, G., Cheng, W.-C., Wang, Q., & Liu, J. (2023) · Quantum Information Processing · doi:10.1007/s11128-023-04205-9 · Cited by 8
Advantages of the frequency-conversion technique in quantum interference
Yang, C., Niu, S., Zhou, Z., Li, Y., Li, Y., Ge, Z., Gao, M., Han, Z.-Q.-Z., Chen, R., Guo, G., et al. (2022) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.105.063715 · Cited by 8
An easier-to-align Hong–Ou–Mandel interference demonstration
DiBrita, N. S., & Galvez, E. J. (2023) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/5.0119906 · Cited by 8
Chen, S., Peng, C., Fan, Y., Qiu, X., & Tsai, D. P. (2025) · Light Advanced Manufacturing · doi:10.37188/lam.2025.059 · Cited by 7
Li, B., Li, Y.-H., Cao, Y. W., Yin, J., & Peng, C.-Z. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.19.064083 · Cited by 7
Theory of the monochromatic advanced-wave picture and applications in biphoton optics
Zheng, Y., Xu, J., Li, C., & Guo, G.-C. (2024) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.110.063710 · Cited by 7
Generation of the complete Bell basis via Hong-Ou-Mandel interference of vector modes
Gao, X., Paneru, D., Colandrea, F. D., Zhang, Y., & Karimi, E. (2025) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/dcxb-ql1r · Cited by 7
Self-citationSlepyan, G. Y., Mogilevtsev, D. S., Levie, I., & Boag, A. (2022) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.18.014024 · Cited by 7
Liu, Z., Shiu, J., Cheng, C.-Y., & Chen, Y. (2023) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.108.013702 · Cited by 7
Kashi, A. K., Caspani, L., & Kues, M. (2023) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.233601 · Cited by 7
Multi-parameter estimation of the state of two interfering photonic qubits
Maggio, L., Triggiani, D., Paolo Facchi, A., & Tamma, V. (2025) · Physica Scripta · doi:10.1088/1402-4896/adaf7b · Cited by 7
Broadband Biphoton Generation and Polarization Splitting in a Monolithic AlGaAs Chip
Appas, F., Meskine, O., Lemaître, A., Palomo, J. M., Baboux, F., Amanti, M. I., & Ducci, S. (2023) · ACS Photonics · doi:10.1021/acsphotonics.2c01900 · Cited by 7
Quantum Interference between Nonidentical Single Particles
Su, K., Zhong, Y., Zhang, S., Li, J., Zou, C., Wang, Y., Yan, H., & Zhu, S.-L. (2022) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.093604 · Cited by 7
Inter-pixel cross-talk as background to two-photon interference effects in SPAD arrays
Kulkov, S., Potuckova, T., Bernasconi, E., Bruschini, C. E., Milanese, T., Edoardo Charbon, A., Shawkat, M. S. A., NOMEROTSKI, A., & Švihra, P. (2024) · Journal of Instrumentation · doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/12/p12015 · Cited by 6
Characterization of two-particle interference by complementarity
Pathania, N., & Qureshi, T. (2022) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.106.012213 · Cited by 6
Li, B., Chen, C., Xiang, X., Quan, R., Dong, R., Zhang, S., Hao, X., & Jin, R. (2023) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.108.023713 · Cited by 6
Attosecond-Level Delay Sensing via Temporal Quantum Erasing
Sgobba, F., Andrisani, A., Russo, S. D., de Cumis, M. S., & Amato, L. S. (2023) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s23187758 · Cited by 6
Quantum kernel evaluation via Hong–Ou–Mandel interference
Bowie, C., Shrapnel, S., & Kewming, M. J. (2023) · Quantum Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2058-9565/acfba9 · Cited by 6
Dispersion broadening of the two-photon quantum interference width due to temporal filtering
Xia, Z., Xiang, X., Quan, R., Dong, R., Liu, T., & Zhang, S. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.20.044080 · Cited by 6
Momentum-entangled two-photon interference for quantum-limited transverse-displacement estimation
Triggiani, D., & Tamma, V. (2025) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.111.032605 · Cited by 6
Dual views of plasmonics: from near-field optics to electron nanoscopy
Chen, Y., Zhang, H., Zhang, Z., Zhu, X. L., & Fang, Z. (2025) · Photonics Insights · doi:10.3788/pi.2025.r04 · Cited by 6
Semiparametric estimation of the Hong-Ou-Mandel profile
Cimini, V., Albarelli, F., Gianani, I., & Barbieri, M. (2021) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.104.l061701 · Cited by 6
Li, Y., Sun, Z., Li, P., Li, Z., Wang, J., Zhou, L. H., & Ma, H. (2023) · Quantum Information Processing · doi:10.1007/s11128-023-03886-6 · Cited by 6
Singular spectrum analysis of two-photon interference from distinct quantum emitters
Duquennoy, R., Colautti, M., Lombardi, P., Berardi, V., Gianani, I., Toninelli, C., & Barbieri, M. (2023) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.5.023191 · Cited by 6
Interference of single photons with ultralong coherence time
Wang, M., Li, Y., Liu, H., Ni, H., Niu, Z., Wei, X. F., Yang, R., & Hu, C. (2024) · Applied Physics Letters · doi:10.1063/5.0217815 · Cited by 5
Pan, F., Bordoloi, P., Chen, C., & Dionne, J. A. (2025) · Nanophotonics · doi:10.1515/nanoph-2025-0196 · Cited by 5
Quantum spectroscopy with biphotons: Lyapunov-based input-output dynamics
Dambal, S., Kandada, A. R. S., & Bittner, E. R. (2025) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/wgnx-l7qx · Cited by 5
Hong-Ou-Mandel interference with a diode-pumped 1-GHz Ti:sapphire laser
Morland, I., Ostapenko, H., Zhu, F., Reid, D. T., & Leach, J. (2023) · Optics Continuum · doi:10.1364/optcon.496583 · Cited by 5
Quantum entanglement between signal and frequency-up-converted idler photons
Wang, J., Sokolov, A. V., & Agarwal, G. S. (2023) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.108.063706 · Cited by 5
Ogunyemi, O. J., Rani, C., Varnavski, O. P., Wajahath, R., Norscia, M., Malaikal, B., Qiu, Y., Sun, S., Gu, Y., Mukamel, S., et al. (2024) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry C · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.4c05907 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Bouchard, F., Sit, A., Zhang, Y., Fickler, R., Miatto, F. M., Yao, Y., Sciarrino, F., & Karimi, E.
- Affiliations
- University of Ottawa (CA)
- National Research Council Canada (CA)
- Télécom Paris (FR)
- Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Karimi, Ebrahim
- ORCID
- Venue
- Reports on Progress in Physics
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2020-12-24
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 012402
- ISSN
- 0034-4885 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6633
- OpenAlex
- W3034980548
- Semantic Scholar
- 93d14a8357b5c60331f7ab0d5939307953fa1e08
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 257
- Citations by year
- 2026: 48 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 12
- FWCI
- 9.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Reports on Progress in Physics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- NPARC (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Ontario Early Researcher Award
- Canada Research Chairs
- Canada First Research Excellence Fund
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
- Keywords
- two-photon interference, Hong-Ou-Mandel interference, two-particle interference, quantum optics, massive particles, electrons, atoms, plasmons, quantum computing, quantum communication, quantum simulation, precision measurement
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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