The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scaling of success probabilities for linear optics gates
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The NS_N gate defined by Eq. 28 can be implemented with probability 1/N^2.
“can be implemented with probability 1/N 2 [see also Scheel and Audenaert (2005)].”
From Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits (2007) · cites this paper as Scheel and Audenaert (2005)
Numerical evidence strongly suggests an upper bound of one third for infinite feed-forward without entangled ancillae.
“Indeed, numerical evidence strongly suggests an upper bound of one third for infinite feed-forward without entangled ancillæ (Scheel et al. 2005).”
From Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits (2007) · cites this paper as Scheel et al. 2005
The Conclusions and Discussion state that the paper is limited to single-shot gates without conditional feed-forward. The Introduction reports a 1/4 bound without feed-forward, but neither passage addresses numerical evidence for a one-third bound with infinite feed-forward. Searches for that bound and for repeated feed-forward attempts found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPhysical beam splitters have a lower bound on absorption amplitude.
“Scheel (2005) showed that there is a lower bound on the absorption amplitude in physical beam splitters.”
From Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits (2007) · cites this paper as Scheel 2005
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Demonstration of an all-optical quantum controlled-NOT gate
O'Brien, J. L., Pryde, G. J., White, A. G., Ralph, T. C., & Branning, D. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02054 · Cited by 992
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.64.062311 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.49.5078 · DOI
- Clausen J, 1999, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt., 1, 332, 10.1088/1464-4266/1/3/306 · DOI
- 10.1038/35051009 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.65.012314 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.032310 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.042314 · DOI · Paper page
- Scheel S, 2004, New J. Phys., 6, 51, 10.1088/1367-2630/6/1/051 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.064303 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.58 · DOI · Paper page
- Vein R, 1999, Determinants and Their Applications in Mathematical Physics AMS, 134
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.052306 · DOI · Paper page
- Favard J, 1935, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, 200, 2052
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits
Kok, P., Munro, W. J., Nemoto, K., Ralph, T. C., Dowling, J. P., & Milburn, G. J. (2007) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.79.135 · Cited by 2,904
Metadata
- Authors
- Scheel, S., & Audenaert, K. M. R.
- Venue
- New Journal of Physics
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2005-06-22
- Volume
- 7
- Pages
- 149-149
- ISSN
- 1367-2630
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 1
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
