CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 76

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optimal photons for quantum-information processing

Rohde, Peter P., Ralph, Timothy C., Nielsen, Michael A.·2005·Physical Review A
DOI 10.1103/physreva.72.052332
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physreva.72.052332

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Claims other papers make about this one

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

  • Single-photon sources that create Gaussian wave packets are much more robust to mode mismatching than sources that create Lorentzian wave packets.

    “As demonstrated by Rohde, Ralph, and Nielsen (2005) , single-photon sources that create Gaussian wave packets are much more robust to mode mismatching than sources that create Lorentzian wave packets.”

    From Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits (2007) · cites this paper as Rohde, Ralph, and Nielsen (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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. 10.1103/PhysRevA.71.032320 · DOI
  2. A. B. U’Ren, 2003, Quantum Inf. Comput., 3, 480, 10.26421/QIC3.s-3 · DOI
  3. 10.1103/PhysRevA.69.032305 · DOI
  4. 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.032306 · DOI
  5. 10.1063/1.1415346 · DOI
  6. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.2722 · DOI
  7. 10.1038/35035032 · DOI
  8. J. J. Sakurai, 1994, Modern Quantum Mechanics
  9. 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.052306 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1103/PhysRevA.65.012314 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Z. Y. Ou, 1997, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B, 9, 599
  12. 10.1103/PhysRevA.64.063815 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1098/rsta.2003.1216 · DOI
  14. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.2556 · DOI
  15. 10.1103/PhysRevA.58.2446 · DOI
  16. T. Aichele, 2002, Eur. Phys. J. D, 18, 237
  17. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.043602 · DOI
  18. 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.062302 · DOI
  19. 10.1038/nature02961 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Rohde, P. P., Ralph, T. C., & Nielsen, M. A.
Venue
Physical Review A
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2005-11-28
Volume
72
Issue
5
ISSN
  • 1050-2947
  • 1094-1622
DOI
10.1103/physreva.72.052332
Cited by
76
References
4
Language
en
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)

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