The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phase-remapping attack in practical quantum-key-distribution systems
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?
An arbitrary polarization qubit can be optimally cloned using the HOM effect by interfering it on a beam splitter with an ancilla in a maximally mixed polarization state.
“For example, an arbitrary polarization qubit |1 s = α |1 H + β |1 V , where |α| 2 + |β| 2 = 1, can be optimally cloned using the HOM effect by interfering it on a beam splitter with an ancilla that is in a maximally mixed polarization state”
From Two-photon interference: the Hong–Ou–Mandel effect (2021) · cites this paper as [117]
The section on intercept-and-resend attacks discusses quantum-state discrimination, while Appendix A addresses QBER minimization; neither describes polarization-qubit cloning. Searches for HOM interference, a beam splitter, and a maximally mixed ancilla found no passage addressing the claimed procedure. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.74)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredOptimal 1→2 cloning of a qudit can be achieved with a fidelity F_cloning = 1/2 + 1/(d+1).
“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].”
From Two-photon interference: the Hong–Ou–Mandel effect (2021) · cites this paper as [117]
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
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
Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing
Bennett, C. H., & Brassard, G. (2014) · Theoretical Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.05.025 · Cited by 8,299
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 33
- C. H. Bennett, 1984, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems, and Signal Processing
- 10.1145/382780.382781 · DOI
- 1996, Advances in Crytology-Proc. Crypto ’96
- E. Biham, 2000, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing
- 10.1126/science.283.5410.2050 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.441 · DOI · Paper page
- D. Gottesman, 2004, Quantum Inf. Comput., 5, 325, 10.26421/QIC4.5-1 · DOI
- 10.1063/1.118224 · DOI
- 10.1109/68.992616 · DOI
- B. Qi, 2006, Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) 2006
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.022320 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.022313 · DOI
- B. Qi, 2007, Quantum Inf. Comput., 7, 73, 10.26421/QIC7.1-2-3 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.67.042115 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.217903 · DOI
- 10.1109/TIT.2002.807289 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.66.060302 · DOI
- 10.1088/0305-4470/39/7/014 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.012337 · DOI
- 10.1080/00107510010002599 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0375-9601(98)00064-4 · DOI
- 10.1063/1.1738173 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.057901 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.032330 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.230504 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.012326 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.057901 · DOI
- H.-K. Lo, 2004, Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT) 2004
- X.-B. Wang, 2005, Phys. Rev. Lett., 94, 230503, 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.230503 · DOI
- X.-B. Wang, 2005, Phys. Rev. A, 72, 012322, 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.012322 · DOI
- 10.1364/OE.14.009522 · DOI
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.61.052304 · DOI
- 10.1140/epjd/e2006-00167-2 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quantum computing for healthcare: a review
Ur Rasool, R., Ahmad, H. F., Rafique, W., Qayyum, A., Qadir, J., & Anwar, Z. (2023) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi15030094 · Cited by 242
Two-photon interference: the Hong–Ou–Mandel effect
Bouchard, F., Sit, A., Zhang, Y., Fickler, R., Miatto, F. M., Yao, Y., Sciarrino, F., & Karimi, E. (2021) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/abcd7a · Cited by 232
Metadata
- Authors
- Fung, C.-H. F., Qi, B., Tamaki, K., & Lo, H.-K.
- Venue
- Physical Review A
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2007-03-12
- Volume
- 75
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 1050-2947
- 1094-1622
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
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
