CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 42Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture

Quantifying Quantumness of Channels Without Entanglement

Open access
Ku, Huan-Yu, Kadlec, Josef, Černoch, Antonín, Quintino, Marco Túlio, Zhou, Wenbin, Lemr, Karel, Lambert, Neill, Miranowicz, Adam +3 more·2022·PRX Quantum
DOI 10.1103/prxquantum.3.020338
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Quantum channels breaking entanglement, incompatibility, or nonlocality are defined as such because they are not useful for entanglement-based, one-sided device-independent, or device-independent quantum-information processing, respectively.Here, we show that such breaking channels are related to complementary tests of macrorealism, i.e., temporal separability, channel unsteerability, temporal unsteerability, and the temporal Bell inequality.To demonstrate this we first define a steerability-breaking channel, which is conceptually similar to entanglement and nonlocality-breaking channels and prove that it is identical to an incompatibility-breaking channel.A hierarchy of quantum nonbreaking channels is derived, akin to the existing hierarchy relations for temporal and spatial quantum correlations.We then introduce the concept of channels that break temporal correlations, explain how they are related to the standard breaking channels, and prove the following results.(1) A robustness-based measure for non-entanglementbreaking channels can be probed by temporal nonseparability.(2) A non-steerability-breaking channel can be quantified by channel steering.(3) Temporal steerability and nonmacrorealism can be used for, respectively, distinguishing unital steerability-breaking channels and nonlocality-breaking channels for a maximally entangled state.Finally, a two-dimensional depolarizing channel is experimentally implemented as a proof-of-principle example to demonstrate the hierarchy relation of nonbreaking channels using temporal quantum correlations.

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/prxquantum.3.020338

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Experimental QST-based hierarchies of quantum entanglement, steering, and Bell nonlocality for specific classes of two-qubit states were reported, including experiments with mixtures of partially entangled two-qubit pure states and GWSs based on full QST or full quantum process tomography.

    “Experimental QST-based hierarchies of quantum entanglement, steering, and Bell nonlocality for specific classes of two-qubit states in relation to the above-mentioned estimations were also reported, which include experiments with mixtures of partially entangled two-qubit pure states41 and GWSs based on full QST9 or full quantum process tomography24.”

    From Experimental hierarchy of two-qubit quantum correlations without state tomography (2023) · cites this paper as [24]

    Section IV reports a photonic experiment demonstrating a hierarchy of breaking channels, and states that the qubit-depolarizing channel was characterized by full process tomography. Appendix E confirms that a process matrix was calculated from 36 measurements. The paper does not describe this as an experiment with generalized Werner states or as a QST-based hierarchy of entanglement, steering, and Bell nonlocality for two-qubit states. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 107

  1. N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, and H. Zbinden, Quantum cryptography, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 145 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  2. M. Herrero-Collantes and J. C. Garcia-Escartin, Quantum random number generators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015004 (2017). · DOI
  3. B. Sanguinetti, A. Martin, H. Zbinden, and N. Gisin, Quantum Random Number Generation on a Mobile Phone, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031056 (2014). · DOI
  4. A. K. Ekert, Quantum Cryptography Based on Bell's Theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991). · DOI · Paper page
  5. A. Acín, N. Brunner, N. Gisin, S. Massar, S. Pironio, and V. Scarani, Device-Independent Security of Quantum Cryptography against Collective Attacks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 230501 (2007). · DOI
  6. Y. Liu, Q. Zhao, M.-H. Li, J.-Y. Guan, Y. Zhang, B. Bai, W. Zhang, W.-Z. Liu, C. Wu, X. Yuan, H. Li, W. J. Munro, Z. Wang, L. You, J. Zhang, X. Ma, J. Fan, Q. Zhang, and J.-W. Pan, Device-independent quantum random-number generation, Nature 562, 548 (2018). · DOI
  7. C. Branciard, E. G. Cavalcanti, S. P. Walborn, V. Scarani, and H. M. Wiseman, One-Sided Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution: Security, Feasibility, and the Connection With Steering, Phys. Rev. A 85, 010301 (R) (2012). · DOI
  8. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  9. O. Gühne and G. Tóth, Entanglement detection, Phys. Rep. 474, 1 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  10. S.-H. Chen, M.-L. Ng, and C.-M. Li, Quantifying Entan- glement Preservability of Experimental Processes, Phys. Rev. A 104, 032403 (2021). · DOI
  11. A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Can Quantum- Mechanical Description of Physical Reality be Considered Complete? Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935). · DOI · Paper page
  12. J. S. Bell, On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, Physics 1, 195 (1964). · DOI · Paper page
  13. N. Brunner, D. Cavalcanti, S. Pironio, V. Scarani, and S. Wehner, Bell nonlocality, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 419 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  14. S.-H. Chen, H. Lu, Q.-C. Sun, Q. Zhang, Y.-A. Chen, and C.-M. Li, Discriminating Quantum Correlations with Networking Quantum Teleportation, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013043 (2020). · DOI
  15. T. Kriváchy, Y. Cai, D. Cavalcanti, A. Tavakoli, N. Gisin, and N. Brunner, A neural network oracle for quantum non- locality problems in networks, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 70 (2020). · DOI
  16. E. Bäumer, N. Gisin, and A. Tavakoli, Demonstrating the power of quantum computers, certification of highly entangled measurements and scalable quantum nonlocal- ity, npj Quantum Inf. 7, (2021). · DOI
  17. R. Uola, A. C. S. Costa, H. C. Nguyen, and O. Gühne, Quantum steering, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 015001 (2020). · DOI
  18. H. M. Wiseman, S. J. Jones, and A. C. Doherty, Steering, Entanglement, Nonlocality, and the Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen Paradox, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 140402 (2007). · DOI
  19. E. Y.-Z. Tan, R. Schwonnek, K. T. Goh, I. W. Primaat- maja, and C. C.-W. Lim, Computing secure key rates for quantum cryptography with untrusted devices, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 158 (2021). · DOI
  20. S. Sarkar, D. Saha, J. Kaniewski, and R. Augusiak, Self- testing quantum systems of arbitrary local dimension with minimal number of measurements, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 151 (2021). · DOI
  21. Y. Wang, I. W. Primaatmaja, E. Lavie, A. Varvitsiotis, and C. C. W. Lim, Characterising the correlations of prepare- and-measure quantum networks, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 17 (2019). · DOI
  22. J. F. Dynes, A. Wonfor, W. W. S. Tam, A. W. Sharpe, R. Takahashi, M. Lucamarini, A. Plews, Z. L. Yuan, A. R. Dixon, J. Cho, Y. Tanizawa, J. P. Elbers, H. Greißer, I. H. White, R. V. Penty, and A. J. Shields, Cambridge quantum network, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 101 (2019). · DOI
  23. M. Pompili, S. L. N. Hermans, S. Baier, H. K. C. Beukers, P. C. Humphreys, R. N. Schouten, R. F. L. Vermeulen, M. J. Tiggelman, L. dos Santos Martins, B. Dirkse, S. Wehner, and R. Hanson, Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits, Science 372, 259 (2021). · DOI
  24. S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Quantum inter- net: A vision for the road ahead, Science 362, eaam9288 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  25. N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 33 (2011). · DOI
  26. G. Chiribella, G. M. D'Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Theoreti- cal Framework for Quantum Networks, Phys. Rev. A 80, 022339 (2009). · DOI
  27. C.-Y. Hsieh, Resource Preservability, Quantum 4, 244 (2020). · DOI
  28. S. Langenfeld, O. Morin, M. Körber, and G. Rempe, A network-ready random-access qubits memory, npj Quan- tum Inf. 6, 86 (2020). · DOI
  29. X. Yuan, Y. Liu, Q. Zhao, B. Regula, J. Thompson, and M. Gu, Universal and operational benchmarking of quantum memories, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 108 (2021). · DOI
  30. M. Horodecki, P. W. Shor, and M. B. Ruskai, Entan- glement breaking channels, Rev. Math. Phys. 15, 629 (2003). · DOI
  31. M. B. Ruskai, Qubit entanglement breaking channels, Rev. Math. Phys. 15, 643 (2003). · DOI
  32. D. Rosset, F. Buscemi, and Y.-C. Liang, Resource The- ory of Quantum Memories and Their Faithful Verifica- tion with Minimal Assumptions, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021033 (2018). · DOI
  33. F. Graffitti, A. Pickston, P. Barrow, M. Proietti, D. Kundys, D. Rosset, M. Ringbauer, and A. Fedrizzi, Measurement- Device-Independent Verification of Quantum Channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 010503 (2020). · DOI
  34. M. F. Pusey, Verifying the quantumness of a channel with an untrusted device, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 32, A56 (2015). · DOI
  35. M. Piani, Channel steering, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 32, A1 (2015). · DOI
  36. L. Guerini, M. T. Quintino, and L. Aolita, Distributed Sampling, Quantum Communication Witnesses, and Mea- surement Incompatibility, Phys. Rev. A 100, 042308 (2019). · DOI
  37. C. Budroni, G. Fagundes, and M. Kleinmann, Memory cost of temporal correlations, New J. Phys. 21, 093018 (2019). · DOI
  38. L. B. Vieira and C. Budroni, Temporal correlations in the simplest measurement sequences, Quantum 6, 623 (2022). · DOI
  39. C. Spee, C. Budroni, and O. Gühne, Simulating extremal temporal correlations, New J. Phys. 22, 103037 (2020). · DOI
  40. T. Simnacher, N. Wyderka, C. Spee, X.-D. Yu, and O. Gühne, Certifying Quantum Memories With Coherence, Phys. Rev. A 99, 062319 (2019). · DOI
  41. R. Pal and S. Ghosh, Non-locality breaking qubit chan- nels: The case for CHSH inequality, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 155302 (2015). · DOI
  42. K. Jiráková, A. Černoch, K. Lemr, K. Bartkiewicz, and A. Miranowicz, Experimental Hierarchy and Optimal Robustness of Quantum Correlations of Two-Qubit States With Controllable White Noise, Phys. Rev. A 104, 062436 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  43. T. Heinosaari, J. Kiukas, D. Reitzner, and J. Schultz, Incompatibility breaking quantum channels, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 435301 (2015). · DOI
  44. Y.-N. Chen, C.-M. Li, N. Lambert, S.-L. Chen, Y. Ota, G.-Y. Chen, and F. Nori, Temporal Steering Inequality, Phys. Rev. A 89, 032112 (2014). · DOI
  45. T. Fritz, Quantum correlations in the temporal Clauser- Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) scenario, New J. Phys. 12, 083055 (2010). · DOI
  46. C. Brukner, S. Taylor, S. Cheung, and V. Vedral, Quantum Entanglement in Time, (2004), ArXiv:quant-ph/0402127. · arXiv
  47. J. F. Fitzsimons, J. A. Jones, and V. Vedral, Quantum correlations which imply causation, Sci. Rep. 5, 18281 (2015). · DOI
  48. T. Zhang, O. Dahlsten, and V. Vedral, Quantum correla- tions in time, (2020), ArXiv:2002.10448. · arXiv
  49. R. Uola, F. Lever, O. Gühne, and J.-P. Pellonpää, Unified Picture for Spatial, Temporal, and Channel Steering, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032301 (2018). · DOI
  50. A. J. Leggett and A. Garg, Quantum Mechanics Versus Macroscopic Realism: Is the Flux There When Nobody Looks?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 857 (1985). · DOI
  51. C. Emary, N. Lambert, and F. Nori, Leggett-Garg inequal- ities, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 016001 (2014). · DOI
  52. M. Ringbauer, F. Costa, M. E. Goggin, A. G. White, and A. Fedrizzi, Multi-time quantum correlations with no spatial analog, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 37 (2018). · DOI
  53. R. Uola, G. Vitagliano, and C. Budroni, Leggett-Garg Macrorealism and the Quantum Nondisturbance Condi- tions, Phys. Rev. A 100, 042117 (2019). · DOI
  54. A. G. Maity, S. Mal, C. Jebarathinam, and A. S. Majum- dar, Self-Testing of Binary Pauli Measurements Requiring Neither Entanglement Nor Any Dimensional Restriction, Phys. Rev. A 103, 062604 (2021). · DOI
  55. R. Y. Teh, L. Rosales-Zarate, P. D. Drummond, and M. D. Reid, Mesoscopic and macroscopic quantum correlations in photonic, atomic and optomechanical systems, (2021), ArXiv:2112.06496. · arXiv
  56. J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden-Variable Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969). · DOI · Paper page
  57. Y. Zhang, R. A. Bravo, V. O. Lorenz, and E. Chitambar, Channel activation of CHSH nonlocality, New J. Phys. 22, 043003 (2020). · DOI
  58. E. Schrödinger, Discussion of probability relations between separated systems, Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 31, 555 (1935). · DOI · Paper page
  59. O. Gühne, E. Haapasalo, T. Kraft, J.-P. Pellonpää, and R. Uola, Incompatible measurements in quantum informa- tion science, (2021), arXiv e-prints, ArXiv:2112.06784. · arXiv
  60. R. Uola, T. Moroder, and O. Gühne, Joint Measurability of Generalized Measurements Implies Classicality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 160403 (2014). · DOI
  61. R. Uola, C. Budroni, O. Gühne, and J.-P. Pellonpää, One-To-One Mapping between Steering and Joint Mea- surability Problems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 230402 (2015). · DOI
  62. M. T. Quintino, T. Vértesi, and N. Brunner, Joint Mea- surability, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Steering, and Bell Nonlocality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 160402 (2014). · DOI
  63. B. Yadin, M. Fadel, and M. Gessner, Metrological comple- mentarity reveals the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, Nat. Commun. 12, (2021). · DOI
  64. M. Piani and J. Watrous, Necessary and Sufficient Quan- tum Information Characterization of Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen Steering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 060404 (2015). · DOI
  65. K. Sun, X.-J. Ye, Y. Xiao, X.-Y. Xu, Y.-C. Wu, J.-S. Xu, J.-L. Chen, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Demonstra- tion of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering with enhanced subchannel discrimination, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 12 (2018). · DOI
  66. E. Passaro, D. Cavalcanti, P. Skrzypczyk, and A. Acín, Optimal randomness certification in the quantum steer- ing and prepare-and-measure scenarios, New J. Phys. 17, 113010 (2015). · DOI
  67. P. Skrzypczyk and D. Cavalcanti, Maximal Randomness Generation from Steering Inequality Violations Using Qudits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 260401 (2018). · DOI
  68. Y. Guo, S. Cheng, X. Hu, B.-H. Liu, E.-M. Huang, Y.-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and E. G. Cav- alcanti, Experimental Measurement-Device-Independent Quantum Steering and Randomness Generation Beyond Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 170402 (2019). · DOI
  69. J. Kiukas, C. Budroni, R. Uola, and J.-P. Pellon- pää, Continuous-Variable Steering and Incompatibility via State-Channel Duality, Phys. Rev. A 96, 042331 (2017). · DOI
  70. A. Jamiołkowski, Linear transformations which preserve trace and positive semidefiniteness of operators, Rep. Math. Phys. 3, 275 (1972). · DOI · Paper page
  71. A. S. Holevo, Entanglement-breaking channels in infinite dimensions, Prob. Inf. Trans. 44, 171 (2008). · DOI
  72. R. Pisarczyk, Z. Zhao, Y. Ouyang, V. Vedral, and J. F. Fitzsimons, Causal Limit on Quantum Communication, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 150502 (2019). · DOI
  73. J.-D. Lin, W.-Y. Lin, H.-Y. Ku, N. Lambert, Y.-N. Chen, and F. Nori, Quantum Steering as a Witness of Quantum Scrambling, Phys. Rev. A 104, 022614 (2021). · DOI
  74. Z. Zhao, R. Pisarczyk, J. Thompson, M. Gu, V. Vedral, and J. F. Fitzsimons, Geometry of Quantum Correlations in Space-Time, Phys. Rev. A 98, 052312 (2018). · DOI
  75. H.-Y. Ku, S.-L. Chen, N. Lambert, Y.-N. Chen, and F. Nori, Hierarchy in Temporal Quantum Correlations, Phys. Rev. A 98, 022104 (2018). · DOI
  76. S.-L. Chen, N. Lambert, C.-M. Li, A. Miranowicz, Y.-N. Chen, and F. Nori, Quantifying Non-Markovianity with Temporal Steering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 020503 (2016). · DOI
  77. K. Bartkiewicz, A. Černoch, K. Lemr, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Experimental temporal quantum steering, Sci. Rep. 6, 38076 (2016). · DOI
  78. S.-J. Xiong, Y. Zhang, Z. Sun, L. Yu, Q. Su, X.-Q. Xu, J.-S. Jin, Q. Xu, J.-M. Liu, K. Chen, and C.-P. Yang, Experimental simulation of a quantum channel without the rotating-wave approximation: Testing quantum temporal steering, Optica 4, 1065 (2017). · DOI
  79. K. Bartkiewicz, A. Černoch, K. Lemr, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Temporal Steering and Security of Quan- tum Key Distribution With Mutually Unbiased Bases Against Individual Attacks, Phys. Rev. A 93, 062345 (2016). · DOI
  80. H.-Y. Ku, S.-L. Chen, H.-B. Chen, N. Lambert, Y.-N. Chen, and F. Nori, Temporal Steering in Four Dimensions With Applications to Coupled Qubits and Magnetorecep- tion, Phys. Rev. A 94, 062126 (2016). · DOI
  81. D. Maskalaniec and K. Bartkiewicz, Hierarchy and robust- ness of multilevel two-time temporal quantum correla- tions, (2021), ArXiv:2106.02844. · arXiv
  82. H.-Y. Ku, S.-L. Chen, C. Budroni, A. Miranowicz, Y.-N. Chen, and F. Nori, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Steering: Its Geometric Quantification and Witness, Phys. Rev. A 97, 022338 (2018). · DOI
  83. S.-L. Chen, H.-Y. Ku, W. Zhou, J. Tura, and Y.-N. Chen, Robust self-testing of steerable quantum assemblages and its applications on device-independent quantum certifica- tion, Quantum 5, 552 (2021). · DOI
  84. I. U Jeon and H. Jeong, Measurement-Device-Independent Verification of Channel Steering, Phys. Rev. A 101, 012333 (2020). · DOI
  85. K. Joarder, D. Saha, D. Home, and U. Sinha, Loophole- Free Interferometric Test of Macrorealism Using Heralded Single Photons, PRX Quantum 3, 010307 (2022). · DOI
  86. E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Quantum resource theories, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025001 (2019). · DOI
  87. R. Takagi and B. Regula, General Resource Theories in Quantum Mechanics and Beyond: Operational Character- ization via Discrimination Tasks, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031053 (2019). · DOI
  88. K. C. Tan, V. Narasimhachar, and B. Regula, Fisher Infor- mation Universally Identifies Quantum Resources, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 200402 (2021). · DOI
  89. R. Takagi, K. Wang, and M. Hayashi, Application of the Resource Theory of Channels to Communication Scenar- ios, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120502 (2020). · DOI
  90. F. Buscemi, E. Chitambar, and W. Zhou, Complete Resource Theory of Quantum Incompatibility as Quantum Programmability, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120401 (2020). · DOI
  91. P. Skrzypczyk and N. Linden, Robustness of Measure- ment, Discrimination Games, and Accessible Information, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 140403 (2019). · DOI
  92. H.-Y. Ku, C.-Y. Hsieh, S.-L. Chen, Y.-N. Chen, and C. Budroni, Complete classification of steerability under local filters and its relation with measurement incompati- bility, (2022), arXiv e-prints, ArXiv:2201.07691. · arXiv
  93. M. T. Quintino, T. Vértesi, D. Cavalcanti, R. Augusiak, M. Demianowicz, A. Acín, and N. Brunner, Inequivalence of Entanglement, Steering, and Bell Nonlocality for General Measurements, Phys. Rev. A 92, 032107 (2015). · DOI
  94. P. Diviánszky, E. Bene, and T. Vértesi, Qutrit Witness from the Grothendieck Constant of Order Four, Phys. Rev. A 96, 012113 (2017). · DOI
  95. M. T. Quintino, J. Bowles, F. Hirsch, and N. Brun- ner, Incompatible Quantum Measurements Admitting a Local-Hidden-Variable Model, Phys. Rev. A 93, 052115 (2016). · DOI
  96. F. Hirsch, M. T. Quintino, and N. Brunner, Quantum Measurement Incompatibility Does Not Imply Bell Non- locality, Phys. Rev. A 97, 012129 (2018). · DOI
  97. J. Fiurášek and Z. Hradil, Maximum-Likelihood Estima- tion of Quantum Processes, Phys. Rev. A 63, 020101 (2001). · DOI
  98. Z. Hradil, Quantum-State Estimation, Phys. Rev. A 55, R1561 (1997). · DOI · Paper page
  99. A. S. Holevo and R. F. Werner, Evaluating Capacities of Bosonic Gaussian Channels, Phys. Rev. A 63, 032312 (2001). · DOI
  100. A. M. Childs, J. Preskill, and J. Renes, Quantum infor- mation and precision measurement, J. Mod. Opt. 47, 155 (2000). · DOI
  101. A. Acín, Statistical Distinguishability Between Unitary Operations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 177901 (2001). · DOI
  102. M. F. Sacchi, Entanglement Can Enhance the Distin- guishability of Entanglement-Breaking Channels, Phys. Rev. A 72, 014305 (2005). · DOI
  103. R. Duan, Y. Feng, and M. Ying, Perfect Distinguishabil- ity of Quantum Operations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 210501 (2009). · DOI
  104. M. Piani and J. Watrous, All Entangled States are Useful for Channel Discrimination, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 250501 (2009). · DOI
  105. S. Pirandola and C. Lupo, Ultimate Precision of Adap- tive Noise Estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 100502 (2017). · DOI
  106. S. Pirandola, B. R. Bardhan, T. Gehring, C. Weedbrook, and S. Lloyd, Advances in photonic quantum sensing, Nat. Photonics 12, 724 (2018). · DOI
  107. S. Pirandola, U. L. Andersen, L. Banchi, M. Berta, D. Bunandar, R. Colbeck, D. Englund, T. Gehring, C. Lupo, C. Ottaviani, J. Pereira, M. Razavi, J. S. Shaari, M. Tomamichel, V. C. Usenko, G. Vallone, P. Vil- loresi, and P. Wallden, Adv. Opt. Photon. 12, 1012 (2020). · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ku, H.-Y., Kadlec, J., Černoch, A., Quintino, M. T., Zhou, W., Lemr, K., Lambert, N., Miranowicz, A., Chen, S.-L., Nori, F., & Chen, Y.-N.
Affiliations
  • RIKEN (JP)
  • Palacký University Olomouc (CZ)
  • FZU - Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences (CZ)
  • University of Vienna (AT)
  • Nagoya University (JP)
  • National Chung Hsing University (TW)
  • University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Venue
PRX Quantum
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2022-05-19
Volume
3
Issue
2
ISSN
2691-3399 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1103/prxquantum.3.020338
OpenAlex
W4280628395
Cited by
42
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4
FWCI
2.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PRX Quantum (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Refubium (Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Universitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver (cc-by)
Funders
  • Army Research Office (W911NF-19-1-0081, W911NF-18-1-0358)
  • Ministry of Science and Technology Taiwan (MOST 110-2811-M-006-539)
  • Japan Science and Technology Agency
  • Czech Science Foundation (20-17765S)
  • Palacký University (IGA_PrF_2021_004)
  • National Center for Theoretical Sciences and Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST 110-2123-M-006-001, MOST 109-2627-E-006-004, MOST 110-2811-M-006-546)
  • Polish National Science Centre (DEC-2019/34/A/ST2/00081)
  • Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT) Research
  • Asian Office of Aerospace Research and Development (FA2386-20-1-4069)
  • Foundational Questions Institute Fund (FQXi-IAF19-06)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Keywords
quantum channels, entanglement-breaking channels, macrorealism, temporal Bell inequalities, depolarizing channel

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