Cited by 85Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureCryptography and Residue ArithmeticAnalytic Number Theory Research

NMR Experiment Factors Numbers with Gauss Sums

Open access
Mehring, Michael, Müller, Klaus, Averbukh, Ilya Sh., Merkel, Wolfgang, Schleich, Wolfgang P.·2007·Physical Review Letters

Abstract

We factor the number 157573 using an NMR implementation of Gauss sums. Although the current implementation is classical and scales exponentially, we believe that an extension to the quantum regime using entangled states is possible.

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/physrevlett.98.120502

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Since current experimental estimates of the line width are of the order of 5 meV for B=10 T, observation of revivals of the electric current in graphene would require either stronger magnetic fields, which lead to lower T_R and line width, or the use of high quality graphene samples.

    “Since current experimental estimates of the line width are of the order of 5 meV for B = 10 T, the observation of revivals of the electric current in graphene would require either stronger magnetic fields, which lead to lower T R and line width 27 , or the use of high quality graphene samples.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mehring, M., Müller, K., Averbukh, I. S., Merkel, W., & Schleich, W. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Stuttgart (DE)
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
  • Universität Ulm (DE)
Venue
Physical Review Letters
Published
2007-03-22
Volume
98
Issue
12
Pages
120502-120502
ISSN
  • 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1079-7114
OpenAlex
W2001040405
Cited by
85
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 5
FWCI
14.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Trento) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • Iris (University of Trento) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cryptography and Residue Arithmetic
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Algebra and Number Theory › Analytic Number Theory Research
Keywords
Gauss sums, NMR quantum computing, integer factorization, Shor's algorithm, entangled states, quantum computing

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