Entanglement of qutrits and ququarts

May combine two claims.

For the state C1=cosφ, C4=sinφ, C3=C2=0, Eqs. (7.16) and (7.17) give K(φ)=4/(1+cos^2 2φ) and C_I(φ)=√(1+1/2 sin^2 2φ).

“For this state Eqs. (7.16) and (7.17) give K ( φ ) = 4 / (1 + cos 2 2 φ ) and C I ( φ ) = √ 1 + 1 2 sin 2 2 φ .”

May combine two claims.

The minimal values of the Schmidt entanglement parameter and I-concurrence are achieved when C1C4=C2C3, and in this case K=Kmin=2 and C_I=C_Imin=1.

“The minimal values of the Schmidt entanglement parameter and I -concurrence are achieved when C 1 C 4 = C 2 C 3 , and in this case K = K min = 2 and C I = C I min = 1 .”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

After the beam splitter, photons acquire new variables θ1 and θ2, which can take one of two values each, 0° and 90°.

“As discussed above in Section 6A , after BS photons acquire new variables, θ 1 and θ 2 , which can take one of two values each, 0 ◦ and 90 ◦ .”

May combine two claims.

The basis wave function Ψ_HV of qutrits is maximally entangled (K=2, C=1) and unseparable.

“As mentioned above, one of the basis wave functions of qutrits, Ψ HV (2.6), is maximally entangled ( K = 2 , C = 1 ) and, hence, unseparable.”

May combine two claims.

The maximal achievable values of K and C_I for ququarts are Kmax=4 and CImax=√3/2, in agreement with the general expectations for qudits Kmax=d and CImax=√(2(1-d^-1)).

“As it follows from Eqs. (7.16) and (7.17), the maximal achievable values of K and C I for ququarts are K max = 4 and C I max = √ 3 / 2 , in agreement with the general expectations for qudits K max = d and C I max = √ 2(1 -d -1 ) [23].”

• cites [23] P. Rungta and C.M. Caves, Phys. Rev. A, 67 012307 (2003)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The degree of entanglement of the state Ψφ is maximal when λ1=λ2=λ3=λ4=1/4, i.e., when all four Schmidt-mode products enter the Schmidt decomposition with equal weights, and this occurs at φ=45° and φ=135°.

“The degree of entanglement of the state Ψ φ is maximal when λ 1 = λ 2 = λ 3 = λ 4 = 1 / 4 , i.e., when all four Schmidt-mode products enter the Schmidt decomposition with equal weights, and this occurs at φ = 45 ◦ and φ = 135 ◦ .”

May combine two claims.

The polarization vector ξ coincides exactly with one half of the Stokes parameters vector S of Ref [8], and |ξ| coincides with the degree of polarization P.

“A direct comparison with the results obtained in 1999 by Burlakov and Klyshko [8] for polarization characteristics of qutrits shows that the polarization vector ξ ⃗ (4.16) coincides exactly with one half of the vector of Stokes parameters ⃗ S = { S 1 , S 2 , S 3 } of Ref. [8], and the absolute value of ξ ⃗ coincides with the degree of polarization P”

• cites [8]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

The quote only partly states this claim.

The family of non-entangled qutrit wave functions with real coefficients is given by Eq (4.11) with arbitrary φ.

“Consequently, the family of non-entangled qutrit wave functions with real coefficients is given by”

May combine two claims.

The reduced density matrix ρ(qqrt)_r of ququarts has dimensionality 4×4 and is given explicitly by Eq. (7.15).

“But the reduced density matrix ρ ( qqrt ) r is much more compact, its dimensionality is 4 × 4 and, explicitly, it is given by”

May combine two claims.

In the case C=0 (no entanglement), λ+=1 and λ-=0; one Schmidt product disappears, which is the reason for separability.

“In the case C = 0 (no entanglement) Eq. (5.3) gives λ + = 1 and λ -= 0 . In this case one of the products of Schmidt modes ( ψ -ψ -) in the Schmidt decomposition disappears because the coefficient √ λ -in front of it vanishes. This is the reason of separability of the wave function in the case of no-entanglement.”

May combine two claims.

In the case C=1 (maximal entanglement), λ+=λ-=1/2, the two Schmidt products have equal weights, and the wave function is nonseparable.

“In the case C = 1 , when entanglement is maximal, λ + = λ -= 1 2 , i.e., two products in the Schmidt decomposition (5.2) are presented with equal weights and, clearly, the wave function is nonseparable.”

May combine two claims.

In general, the qutrit wave function Ψ is nonseparable; exceptions occur when one eigenvalue of the reduced density matrix becomes zero.

“This decomposition shows that in a general case the wave function Ψ is nonseparable. Exceptions occur when one of the eigenvalues of the reduced density matrix, λ + or λ -, becomes equal zero.”

May combine two claims.

At φ=0, when the entropy S_r(φ) is minimal, two eigenvalues turn zero, λ3=λ4=0, two Schmidt-mode products disappear, and the degree of entanglement is minimal.

“However, at φ = 0 , when the entropy S r ( φ ) is minimal, two of these eigenvalues turn zero, λ 3 = λ 4 = 0 , and two Schmidt-mode products in the Schmidt decomposition disappear. It is the reason why in this case the degree of entanglement is minimal.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The combined polarization-angular wave function after the beam splitter is given by Eq. (6.1).

“The combined polarization-angular wave function after BS is given by Eq. (6.1).”

May combine two claims.

The wave functions Ψ(qqrt)_HH and Ψ(qqrt)_VV are factorized for polarization and frequency parts, and only their frequency parts are entangled, i.e., they have only a purely frequency entanglement.

“The wave functions Ψ ( qqrt ) HH and Ψ ( qqrt ) V V are seen to be factorized for polarization and frequency parts, and only their frequency parts are entangled, i.e., the states Ψ ( qqrt ) HH and Ψ ( qqrt ) V V have only a purely frequency entanglement.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

All basis wave functions (7.9)-(7.12) and the general ququart wave function (7.14) are symmetric with respect to the particle permutations 1↔2.

“As it should be, both all basis wave functions (7.9)(7.12) and the general ququart wave function (7.14) are symmetric with respect to the particle permutations 1 ⇀ ↽ 2 .”

May combine two claims.

In the first case Ψ = ±Ψ+; in the second, the maximally entangled wave function is an arbitrary superposition of Ψ_HV and Ψ-, Ψ = sin φ Ψ_HV + cos φ Ψ-.

“In the first of these cases Ψ = ± Ψ + . In the second case the maximally entangled wave function has a form of an arbitrary superposition of Ψ HV and Ψ -, Ψ = sin φ Ψ HV + cos φ Ψ -.”

May combine two claims.

The subsystem entropy S_r^real(C+) has the same main features as C and K: minimal zero at C+=±1/√2, maximal 1 at C+=0 and C+=±1.

“Though different from both C ( C + ) and K ( C + ) , the subsystem entropy S r real ( C + ) has the same main features as two other entanglement quantifiers: S r real is minimal and equals zero at C + = ± 1 / √ 2 and S r real is maximal and equals 1 at C + = 0 and C + = ± 1 .”

May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

The general three-parametric family of maximally entangled qutrit wave functions is given by Eq (4.14) and corresponding state vectors by Eq (4.15).

“As a result we get the following three-parametric family of wave functions of maximally entangled qutrits”

May combine two claims.

The wave functions Ψ(qqrt)_HV and Ψ(qqrt)_VH are not factorized for polarization and frequency parts, and in these cases there is a nonseparable frequency-polarization entanglement.

“On the other hand, the wave functions Ψ ( qqrt ) HV and Ψ ( qqrt ) V H are not factorized for polarization and frequency parts, and in these cases we have a nonseparable frequencypolarization entanglement.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

By summing the squared first and last lines of Eqs. (7.28), one obtains Eq. (7.34).

“On the other hand, by summing the squared first and last lines of Eqs. (7.28) we get”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based).

In ququarts all basis biphoton states are of the type a†i a†j|0〉 with i≠j.

“As in ququarts all basis biphoton states are of the type a † i a † j | 0 〉 with i = j (where i and j numerate above indicated modes), distribution of photons of split pairs in channels I and II corresponds to the type, shown in Fig. 3 b .”

May combine two claims.

For two remote atoms, the integral on the right-hand side of Eq. (8.4) equals 1/2, which gives K=2 and means that the state of two remote atoms characterized by a pure two-electron wave function is always entangled.

“For two remote atoms the integral on the right-hand side equals 1 2 , which gives K = 2 and which means that the state of two remote atoms characterized by a pure two-electron wave function is always entangled.”

• cites [35] M.V. Fedorov, M.A. Efremov, P.A. Volkov, and J.H. Eberly, J. Phys. B, 39 , S467 (2006); P.A. Volkov,Yu.M. Mikhailova, M.V. Fedorov, Adv. Sc. Lett., 2 , 511-516 (2009)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The two atoms are located far enough for the wave functions φ0(x−a) and φ0(x−b) to not overlap.
• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: The two-electron state is pure and the spin state of the two electrons is symmetric and non-entangled, |↑↑〉.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). The quote only partly states this claim.

For real C_i, the key element |C1C4-C2C3|^2 of Eqs. (7.16) and (7.17) can be written as Eq. (7.33).

“In this case the key element of Eqs. (7.16) and (7.17) for the Schmidt entanglement parameter and I -concurrence, | C 1 C 4 -C 2 C 3 | 2 can be written as”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Biphoton qutrits are two-qubit states with single-photon Hilbert space dimensionality d=2 and two-photon Hilbert space D=4.

“Each of these basis states is a direct product of two one-qubit single-photon states, and biphoton qutrits are two-qubit states.”

• Also stated in: § 1. INTRODUCTION · p. 1 · plain

  “This makes ququarts significantly different from qutrits (where d = 2 and D = d 2 = 4 )”

• cites [8]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Owing to symmetry, basis states of qutrits and ququarts are entangled; at least one basis state in qutrits and all basis states of ququarts.

“But in reality, owing to symmetry, basis states of qutrits and ququarts are entangled (at least one basis states in the case of qutrits and all basis states of ququarts).”

May combine two claims.

Biphoton ququarts are two-qudit states with single-photon Hilbert space dimensionality d=4 and two-photon Hilbert space D=16, differing from the two-qubit model d=2.

“Biphoton ququarts are shown to be two-qudits with the single-photon Hilbert space dimensionality d = 4 , which differs them significantly from the often used two-qubit model ( d = 2 ).”

• Also stated in: § 1. INTRODUCTION · p. 1 · boosted

  “As we show, biphoton ququarts are two-qudit states with the dimensionality of the one-photon Hilbert space d = 4 and dimensionality of the two-photon Hilbert space D = d 2 = 16 .”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The dimensionality of the biphoton Hilbert space is D=d^2=16.

“The dimensionality of the biphoton Hilbert space is D = d 2 = 16 .”

May combine two claims.

Each photon in a non-degenerate SPDC pair has two degrees of freedom, polarization and frequency, making four combined polarization-frequency modes Hh, Hl, Vh, and Vl.

“In other words, each photon has now two degrees of freedom, polarization and frequency [31]. Together, they make four states which can be occupied by each photon, or four combined polarization-frequency modes, Hh, Hl, V h, and V l”

• cites [31] A.V. Burlakov, Yu.O. Rytikov, M.V. Chechova, and S.P. Kulik, JETP 95 , 639 (2002)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Biphoton ququarts are two-qudit states.

“Then, as well as qutrits are two-qubit states, the biphoton ququarts are two-qudit states.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The dimensionality of the one-photon Hilbert space for non-degenerate photons is d=4.

“Once again, dimensionality of the one-photon Hilbert for non-degenerate photons is d = 4 .”

May combine two claims.

The degrees of polarization and entanglement of qutrits anti-correlate: maximally entangled qutrits are non-polarized, and maximally polarized states are non-entangled.

“Thus, the degrees of polarization and entanglement anti-correlate with each other: the maximally entangled qutrits are non-polarized, and maximally polarized states are non-entangled.”

May combine two claims.

In ququarts all 12 excluded basis wave functions either are missing in all possible superpositions or can be made present symbolically but with obligatory zero coefficients.

“Thus, in ququarts all 12 excluded basis wave functions either are missing in all possible superpositions or can be made present symbolically but with obligatory zero coefficients, like the only antisymmetric wave function in the qutrit wave function (2.16).”

May combine two claims.

At φ=0, the remaining two terms in the Schmidt decomposition indicate that the state Ψφ is entangled and non-factorable.

“However, the remaining two terms in the Schmidt decomposition indicate that in the case φ = 0 the state Ψ φ is entangled and non-factorable.”

May combine two claims.

A simple symmetrization of the wave function (7.2) is insufficient and reduces it to the qutrit's wave function (2.11), with C2+C3 playing the role of C2 and with all peculiarities of ququarts lost.

“A simple symmetrization of the wave function (7.2) is insufficient and, actually, it does not help much, because it reduces the wave function (7.2) to the qutrit's wave function (2.11), with C 2 + C 3 playing the role of C 2 in Eq.(2.11) and with all peculiarities of ququarts completely lost.”

May combine two claims.

The key reasons of the differences between this paper and [5] and others are the symmetry of wave functions and a higher dimensionality of ququarts compared to qutrits properly taken into account.

“As explained above, the key reasons of this and other differences between this paper and [5] and others are in the symmetry of wave functions and in a higher dimensionality of ququarts compared to qutrits properly taken into account in Eqs. (7.9)-(7.12) and (7.14).”

• cites [5]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

Polarization-frequency and polarization-angular ququarts are equivalent.

“As mentioned earlier, polarization-frequency and polarization-angular ququarts are equivalent.”

May combine two claims.

A full set of coincidence measurements in two bases (xy) and (x'y') permits complete reconstruction of all qutrit parameters and determination of the degree of entanglement from experimental data.

“Thus, by getting a full set of measurements of coincidence counts in two bases ( xy ) and ( x ′ y ′ ) (Fig. 2 b ) one can find all conditional probabilities w ( c ) σ ∣ ∣ ∣ σ ′ (6.7) and w ( c ) σ 45 ∣ ∣ ∣ σ ′ 45 (6.19). Then, from Eqs. (6.9) and (6.18) one finds all absolute values of parameters C i and and C i (45 ◦ ) . And, finally, with known values of | C i | and | C i (45 ◦ ) | , one solves”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: In a nonselective beam splitter, each photon has equal probabilities of transmitting or being reflected.

May combine two claims.

Coincidence measurements after a nonselective beam splitter can determine qutrit parameters before the beam splitter and the degree of entanglement of the original biphoton state.

“Coincidence measurements in the state arising after BS are suggested here as a tool for determining qutrit parameters in front of BS and the degree of entanglement of the original biphoton state.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: In a nonselective beam splitter, each photon has equal probabilities of transmitting or being reflected.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Earlier [5], in a two-qubit model, it was assumed that at C1C4=C2C3 ququarts are factorable.

“in contrast to this, earlier [5], in a two-qubit model, it was assumed that at C 1 C 4 = C 2 C 3 ququarts are factorable”

• cites [5]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The wave function (7.2) is asymmetric with respect to the permutation of particle variables 1↔2, and this is strictly forbidden for any biphoton wave functions.

“The wave function (7.2) is asymmetric with respect to the permutation of particle variables 1 ⇀ ↽ 2 , and this is strictly forbidden for any biphoton wave functions.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

In the generally accepted treatment, ququarts are considered as two-qubit states.

“As mentioned in the Introduction, in the generally accepted treatment, ququarts are considered as two-qubit states.”

• cites [28] Wang An-Min, Chinese Phys. Lett., 17 , 243 (2000); An Min Wang, arXiv:quant-ph/0208036 (2002)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

The six remaining excluded wave functions are antisymmetric and cannot be realized with photons at all.

“The second, deeply fundamental restriction is symmetry. Six remaining and excluded wave functions are antisymmetric, and they cannot be realized with photons at all.”

May combine two claims.

All biphoton ququarts are entangled and nonfactorable.

“This means that all biphoton ququarts are entangled and nonfactorable (in contrast to this, earlier [5], in a two-qubit model, it was assumed that at C 1 C 4 = C 2 C 3 ququarts are factorable).”

• cites [5]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

If two photons in each non-degenerate SPDC pair definitely have different frequencies, products of two creation operators corresponding to coinciding frequencies are excluded, giving only four two-photon basis state vectors.

“But, if we assume that two photons in each non-degenerate SPDC pair definitely have different frequencies, the products of two creation operators corresponding to coinciding frequencies have to be excluded to give finally only four two-photon basis state vectors”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Two photons in each non-degenerate SPDC pair definitely have different frequencies; equivalently, frequencies of photons are always different.

May combine two claims.

The trace of the squared reduced density matrix determines the purity of the reduced state and equals the inverse Schmidt entanglement parameter K^-1.

“As known [21, 22], the trace of the squared reduced density matrix ρ 2 r determines purity of the reduced state coinciding with the inverse value of the Schmidt entanglement parameter K -1 .”

• cites [21] R. Grobe, K. Rzazewski, and J. H. Eberly, J. Phys. B, 27 L503 (1994)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [22] A. Ekert and P. L. Knight, Am. J. Phys. 63 , 415 (1995)Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

One restriction excluding states |h,σ;h,σ′〉 and |l,σ;l,σ′〉 is that frequencies of photons are always different, which gives rise to 6 symmetric wave functions.

“One of these restrictions was mentioned above: we assume that frequencies of photons are always different. This excludes states | h, σ ; h, σ ′ 〉 and | l, σ ; l, σ ′ 〉 , which give rise to 6 symmetric wave functions.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Two photons in each non-degenerate SPDC pair definitely have different frequencies; equivalently, frequencies of photons are always different.

May combine two claims.

The exclusion of states with coinciding frequencies does not have fundamental reasons and is related rather to the most often met experimental conditions.

“Their exclusion does not have fundamental reasons and is related rather with the most often met experimental conditions.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The degree of entanglement is evaluated by the Schmidt entanglement parameter, concurrence, and subsystem von Neumann entropy.

“In our analysis the degree of entanglement is evaluated by such entanglement quantifiers as the Schmidt entanglement parameter, concurrence, and subsystem von Neumann entropy.”

May combine two claims.

For remote objects arising from different sources, they are non-entangled, and symmetrization or antisymmetrization of their wave functions has no sense because their common state cannot be characterized by a bipartite wave function.

“For such atoms the quoted above formulation of Ref. [18] is absolutely correct: remote objects arising from different sources are non-entangled, and symmetrization or antisymmetrization of their wave functions has no sense because their common state cannot be characterized by a bipartite wave function.”

• cites [18]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

All of these quantifiers are good for pure bipartite states, they characterize the degree of entanglement in different metrics, and their predictions must be and are compatible with each other.

“All of them are good for pure bipartite states, they characterize the degree of entanglement in different metrics but, of course, their predictions must be and they are compatible with each other.”

May combine two claims.

Both qutrits and ququarts are two-boson formations, their wave functions are obliged to be symmetric with respect to permutations of photon variables, and this condition is important for correct evaluation of the degree of entanglement.

“As both qutrits and ququarts are two-bozon formations, their wave functions are obliged to be symmetric with respect to permutations of photon variables, and this condition is important for correct evaluation of the degree of entanglement.”

May combine two claims.

The result K_qqrt = 2 K_qtr and the factorization of the Schmidt entanglement parameter described by Eq. (7.24) are specific features of the ququart of the form (7.23).

“Though interesting enough, this last result and factorization of the Schmidt entanglement parameter described by Eq. (7.24) are specific features of the ququart of the form (7.23).”

May combine two claims.

The procedure described above provides a full reconstruction of the ququart wave function Ψ(qqrt) (7.14) and can be used for determining the degree of entanglement.

“Thus the procedure described above provides a full reconstruction of the ququart wave function Ψ ( qqrt ) (7.14) and, in particular, can be used for determining the degree of entanglement.”

May combine two claims.

In the case of ququarts, to get four basis wave functions instead of sixteen, twelve wave functions are excluded: six because only SPDC processes with noncoinciding frequencies of photons are considered, and the remaining six because of symmetry restrictions as antisymmetric ones forbidden by Bose statistics.

“To get four basis wave functions instead of sixteen we have to exclude twelve wave functions. Six of them are excluded because we consider here only SPDC processes with noncoinciding frequencies of photons, and the remaining six basis wave functions are excluded because of symmetry restrictions as antisymmetric ones and, hence, forbidden by the Boze statistics.”

• AssumptionThe authors state this as an assumption: Two photons in each non-degenerate SPDC pair definitely have different frequencies; equivalently, frequencies of photons are always different.

May combine two claims.

To return to true qutrits and ququarts, the amount of basis wave functions must be restricted by excluding some of them, and the exclusion must result from some physics rather than being made artificially.

“To return to true qutrits and ququarts, we have to restrict the amount of basis wave functions by excluding some of them, and the exclusion has to result from some physics rather than being made artificially.”

May combine two claims.

For remote indistinguishable particles in a pure bipartite state, their entanglement arising owing to symmetry can occur, can be important and measurable, and is unseparable from the configurational entanglement related to superposition of basis states.

“But for remote indistinguishable particles in a pure bipartite state their entanglement arising owing to symmetry can occur, can be important and measurable, and is unseparable from the configurational entanglement related to superposition of basis states.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Measurements of the degree of entanglement assume coincidence measurements carried out in both laboratory and remote systems, and they assume a possibility of communication between systems for selecting only coinciding signals.

“For local laboratory measurements it's not a matter of concern, but measurements of the degree of entanglement assume coincidence measurements carried out in both laboratory and remote systems, and they assume a possibility of communication between systems for selecting only coinciding signals.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

This procedure serves as an alternative protocol of quantum state tomography of ququarts described in the work [5].

“This procedure serves as an alternative protocol of quantum state tomography of ququarts described in the work [5].”

• cites [5]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

In this context, 'always' means as long as the state ψ0(x1,x2) remains pure, i.e., as long as its purity is not hurt by external factors.

“'Always ' means in this case as long as the state ψ 0 ( x 1 , x 2 ) remains pure, i.e., as long as its purity is not hurt by external factors.”

May combine two claims.

The symmetry restrictions on biphoton states imposed by Bose statistics are important not only for correct calculations of the entanglement quantifiers but also for the existence of biphoton qutrits and ququarts as classes of states with only three and four basis states.

“The conclusion is that the symmetry restrictions on biphoton states imposed by the Boze statistics are found to be important not only for correct calculations of the entanglement quantifiers but also for existence of biphoton qutrits and ququarts as classes of states with, correspondingly, only three and four basis states.”

May combine two claims.

Ququarts are produced by biphoton beams with nondegenerate photons (either in frequencies or in directions of propagation), and they have more degrees of freedom than qutrits, e.g., polarization and frequency.

“As ququarts are produced by biphoton beams with nondegenerate photons (either in frequencies or in directions of propagation), they have more degrees of freedom than qutrits, e.g., polarization and frequency.”

May combine two claims.

Biphoton ququarts are two-qudit rather than two-qubit states, with the dimensionality of the one-photon Hilbert space d=4 and the two-photon Hilbert space D=d^2=16, in contrast with d=2 and D=d^2=4 in the case of qutrits.

“Thus, biphoton ququarts are shown to be two-qudit rather than twoqubit states, with the dimensionality of the one-photon Hilbert space d = 4 and dimensionality of the twophoton Hilbert space D = d 2 = 16 (in contrast with d = 2 and D = d 2 = 4 in the case of qutrits).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Determination of entanglement quantifiers of ququarts from experimental data is simplified if the parameters C1,2,3,4 are known in advance to be real.

“Note that, in analogy with the case of qutrits, determination of entanglement quantifiers of ququarts from experimental data is simplified if the parameters C 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 are known in advance to be real.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

If particles are indistinguishable and their common state is pure, the entanglement related to symmetry can be a matter of concern for correctly determining the total degree of entanglement of a bipartite system.

“Then, if particles are indistinguishable and if their common state is pure, the entanglement related to symmetry can be a matter of concern for correct determining the total degree of entanglement of a bipartite system.”

May combine two claims.

The symmetry and configurational entanglement are unseparable from each other and together they determine the degree of entanglement of ququarts and qutrits.

“I.e., the symmetry and configurational entanglement are unseparable from each other and together they determine the degree of entanglement of ququarts and qutrits.”

May combine two claims.

When atoms are obtained from different sources, the two-electron state hardly is pure and hardly can be described by a wave function.

“An opposite example, when the state of electrons in two remote atoms is hardly pure, is when the atoms are obtained from different sources. In particular, the two-electron state hardly is pure and hardly can be described by a wave function when one of them is produced in the Earth laboratory and another somewhere in a remote Universe.”