Cited by 36

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Experimental Study of Hong–Ou–Mandel Interference Using Independent Phase Randomized Weak Coherent States

Moschandreou, Eleftherios, Garcia, Jeffrey I., Rollick, Brian J., Qi, Bing, Pooser, Raphael, Siopsis, George·2018·Journal of Lightwave Technology

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 · 10.1109/jlt.2018.2850282

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • A noncommon-path HOM interferometer can measure time shifts with resolutions on the order of a few femtoseconds.

    “In the works mentioned above, a noncommon-path HOM interferometer is employed to measure time shifts with resolutions on the order of a few femto-seconds (micrometers), where the time shifts are obtained by assessing the shift of the HOM dip.”

    From Two-photon interference: the Hong–Ou–Mandel effect (2021) · cites this paper as [16]

    The Introduction describes a HOM coincidence dip, but does not say it was used to measure time shifts. The Experimental Setup reports coincidence measurements and an 81-ps time-interval analyzer; a search for femtosecond resolution, noncommon-path time-shift measurement, and shifts of the HOM dip found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. 10.1364/JOSAB.32.000545 · DOI
  2. 10.1209/0295-5075/25/8/001 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.130503 · DOI
  4. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.130501 · DOI
  5. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.130502 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.190503 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1103/PhysRevX.6.011024 · DOI
  8. 10.1103/PhysRevA.93.042308 · DOI
  9. 10.1038/nphoton.2016.50 · DOI
  10. 10.1088/1367-2630/11/9/095001 · DOI
  11. 10.1109/JQE.2011.2163622 · DOI
  12. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.117902 · DOI
  13. 10.1088/1464-4266/7/7/007 · DOI
  14. 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.030303 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1364/OE.24.017849 · DOI
  16. 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.2.064006 · DOI
  17. branczyk, 2017, Hong-Ou-Mandel interference
  18. 10.1364/OE.22.003611 · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1103/PhysRevA.88.052303 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.230504 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.91.057901 · DOI
  22. 10.1109/JLT.2017.2764140 · DOI
  23. 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.012326 · DOI
  24. 10.1109/JLT.2015.2428053 · DOI
  25. 10.1038/nphoton.2009.230 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Moschandreou, E., Garcia, J. I., Rollick, B. J., Qi, B., Pooser, R., & Siopsis, G.
Venue
Journal of Lightwave Technology
Published
2018-09-01
Volume
36
Issue
17
Pages
3752-3759
ISSN
  • 0733-8724
  • 1558-2213
Cited by
36
References
3
Funders
Office of Naval Research (N00014-15-1-2646)

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