Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 92 references

Quantum Radar and Research Assessment

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that microwave quantum radar cannot produce long-range results because the energy of a single photon is so low that the transmitted power is minuscule.

desk verdict A useful, opinionated post-mortem of quantum radar whose categorical no-go claim rests on an undefined modeling assumption; the practical conclusion is probably right but the paper overreaches. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.13797 v1 pith:LVSGXAHT submitted 2025-06-12 physics.soc-ph eess.SP

Gaspare Galati , Gabriele Pavan , Frederick Daum This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.soc-pheess.SP
keywords quantumradarilluminationrangeequationphotonenergylimitresearchassessmentpeerreviewpublicationbiasfalsifiability
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that microwave quantum radar is physically incapable of long-range operation because a single photon carries so little energy that the transmitted power is orders of magnitude below what the radar equation requires for a moving target. It also argues that the fifteen-year quantum radar research program, having produced hundreds of publications but no working long-range system, is a case study in research-assessment failure: negative results were ignored, publication bias dominated, and reviewer and citation processes were sometimes controlled. If the range argument is right, no amount of engineering effort can turn quantum illumination into a practical radar, and the money and attention spent on it were largely wasted. The paper then uses this case to propose changes in how research is evaluated and funded.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the classical radar equation together with a photon-energy floor: transmitted power is the product of photon energy and photon flux, so the quantum signal power for a given number of photons per mode is minuscule. The named concept is Quantum Illumination, which entangles a signal photon sent toward the target with an ancilla photon kept at the transmitter, yielding a correlation advantage in principle; the paper folds that advantage into the radar equation as a factor at most equal to the reciprocal of the average number of photons per mode. That factor, combined with the tiny single-photon energy, is what converts a microscopic energetic argument into large range gaps between quantum and classical radar.

What would settle it

A laboratory demonstration of an X-band quantum illumination receiver detecting a moving target at a range or signal-to-noise ratio beyond the curves in Figure 1, using an independently measured quantum advantage larger than the reciprocal of the average number of photons per mode, would overturn the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the maximum range of a quantum radar is set by the energy of a single microwave photon, not by the potential information-theoretic advantage of entangled illumination. At X-band, a single photon carries about $6\times10^{-24}$ J, which for a 200 MHz bandwidth corresponds to a power of about $10^{-15}$ W; to build up enough signal-to-noise ratio, the integration time $T$ would have to be so long that a moving target leaves the range cell. The paper compares continuous-wave quantum and classical radar at L, X, and W bands over observation times allowed by target speeds, and the quantum radar curves fall orders of magnitude below the classical ones under the modeling assumption that the quantum advantage is equal to the reciprocal of the average number of photons per mode, a number less than unity. The paper treats this physical limitation as established in prior work and extends it to the most used radar frequency bands.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the quantum advantage of a quantum radar is at most the reciprocal of the average number of photons per mode; if a real receiver could achieve a larger advantage under realistic noise, the range gap between quantum and classical radar would shrink.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the photon-energy bound is correct, no long-range microwave quantum radar can be built, regardless of receiver sophistication.
  • Quantum radar cannot serve anti-stealth detection, because the ranges achievable within practical observation times are far below useful values.
  • The rise and fall of the quantum radar literature becomes a documented case of publication bias, showing that peer review did not filter out an unfalsifiable research program.
  • The paper's proposed assessment reforms would make negative evaluations visible to readers rather than hiding them in editorial decisions.
  • Research funds currently directed at long-range quantum radar would be better spent on classical radar improvements or on quantum technologies with demonstrated physical feasibility.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension is to recompute the range comparison for pulsed waveforms and for frequencies outside L, X, and W bands; the photon-energy argument should still hold, but the assumed quantum-advantage factor may vary with the receiver scheme.
  • The paper's diagnosis of a 'solution looking for a problem' could be applied prospectively to other quantum technology claims, using falsifiability, independent verification, and a concrete real-world task as an early screen.
  • If the proposed scoring system for published papers were adopted, one could test its effect by comparing replication rates and the survival of false-positive research programs across fields.
  • The paper's analysis implies that a single negative physical bound, once independently confirmed, should be enough to terminate a research line; building institutional mechanisms to act on such bounds would be the larger lesson.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper argues that the Quantum Radar (QR) research program has failed and that the scientific community has largely ignored the negative results established in the post-2020 literature. It presents a range analysis in Section 2 and Figure 1 intended to show that QR cannot achieve militarily relevant ranges because of the low power associated with a single microwave photon, reviews publication and funding trends for QR and other quantum technologies, draws parallels with cold fusion and quantum computing hype, and proposes reforms to research assessment. The paper concludes that QR cannot produce significant results or real-world applications and that the research assessment system needs a redesign.

Significance. If the technical premise is correct, the paper is a useful documented case study of overhype in a niche quantum technology and provides a plausible policy argument for reforming research assessment. Its strengths include the collection of independent corroborating statements (the RAND/DSB report, Karsa et al. [24]) and the quantitative publication statistics from IEEEXplore. However, the central negative claim about QR is not independently derived in this manuscript: it rests on an unexposed assumption in Figure 1 and on the authors' own prior papers [7,8]. The policy discussion is credible, but the technical derivation requires substantial strengthening before the categorical conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Figure 1] The range comparison in Figure 1 depends on the caption's assumption that 'the quantum advantage is assumed equal to the reciprocal of the average number of photons per mode (less than the unity).' The manuscript never defines whether this number is the signal or noise photon number and does not derive this bound from quantum illumination theory. Standard Gaussian quantum illumination (refs [13] and [24]) gives an error-exponent advantage of roughly a constant factor (about 3-6 dB) over a coherent-state transmitter of the same brightness, not a factor 1/N_B. At X-band with a 290 K noise temperature, N_B ~ 600, so the assumed factor would make QR hundreds of times worse than classical, which contradicts the cited QI literature. Because this assumption directly sets the QR range curves, the abstract's categorical conclusion ('cannot produce neither significant results nor real-world applications') is not established by the derivation presented in this manuscript.
  2. [Section 2, first paragraph] The single-photon power calculation (6e-24 J per photon, 1e-15 W for a 200 MHz band) implicitly assumes the QR transmitter operates at no more than one photon per mode. This is indeed the operating point where quantum illumination provides an advantage (N_S << 1), but the paper does not say this. The reader is left with the impression that the low power is a simple consequence of photon energy rather than a design constraint of the protocol. The derivation should explicitly state that the signal brightness per mode must stay small for any quantum advantage to exist, and then compute the resulting range. As written, the low-power premise is an assumption, not a derived consequence, which is a load-bearing gap.
  3. [Section 3.6 and Section 4.1] The paper makes serious allegations of research misconduct and improper peer-review control (e.g., 'preventing other groups to publish contrasting results,' 'improper rejection' and 'improper denial of the effect of correct peer reviews'), referring for details to a 'Supplementary Information' at a website [23]. This is not acceptable as evidence in a journal submission: the cited material is not accessible as a published, peer-reviewed document, and the allegations are central to the paper's claim of an 'assessment failure.' The authors should either substantiate these claims in the manuscript or remove them and confine the discussion to the published record.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'cannot produce neither significant results nor real-world applications' is a double negative; it should read 'can produce neither significant results nor real-world applications' or 'cannot produce either significant results or real-world applications.'
  2. [Section 2] The phrase 'some hundred publications' should be 'some hundreds of publications'.
  3. [Figure 1 caption] The caption's term 'average number of photons per mode' is ambiguous; the authors should specify whether it is the signal photon number N_S or the noise photon number N_B, and should provide a citation for the assumed advantage relation.
  4. [Section 3.4] There is a typo 'LERN' that should be 'LENR' (Low Energy Nuclear Reactions).
  5. [Section 4.3] Use 'evidenced' or 'highlighted' instead of 'evidentiated' in the sentence about the limits of Performance-Based Research Evaluation.
  6. [References] Several references are to arXiv preprints or web pages accessed on specific dates; for a journal submission, the authors should provide stable citations (DOI, journal name) where available, especially for the peer-reviewed sources used to support the technical claims.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Figure 1's quantitative no-go conclusion is inherited from the authors' own prior papers via an assumed quantum-advantage relation, rather than derived here.

  1. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Section 2, Figure 1 caption and surrounding text]
    "The results shown in [7] and [8] are extended here to the most used radar frequency bands. Figure 1 shows the limited Range of a Quantum Radar (QR) versus the illumination time T, as compared to a Classical Radar (CR). ... The quantum advantage is assumed equal to the reciprocal of the average number of photons per mode (less than the unity)."

    The paper's headline conclusion that Quantum Radar cannot produce significant results is quantitatively supported only by Figure 1. The QR range curves are generated by assuming the quantum advantage equals 1/N_ph with N_ph < 1, and N_ph is never defined in the text. This is explicitly an assumption, not a result derived from the cited Gaussian quantum-illumination theory (refs [13], [24]), where the advantage is a constant error-exponent factor rather than a 1/N_ph penalty. The same range-limitation model is attributed to the authors' own refs [7] and [8], so the central 'exceedingly low transmitted power' conclusion is an inherited modeling input, not an independent derivation in this paper. The range curves therefore reduce, by construction, to the assumed mean photon number per mode.

full rationale

The paper is primarily a research-assessment and sociology commentary, and its qualitative conclusion that long-range quantum radar is impractical is independently echoed by external sources cited in the paper, including the RAND/Defense Science Board statement and refs [24], [17], and [22]. I therefore do not score the paper as wholly circular. However, the specific quantitative range/no-go derivation is not self-contained: Figure 1 is the only new quantitative evidence, and its central parameter is an assumed quantum-advantage relation imported from the authors' own prior papers, refs [7] and [8]. Because the abstract states a categorical impossibility ('cannot produce neither significant results nor real world applications') while the underlying calculation is conditional on an assumed and undefined mean photon number per mode, the derivation partially reduces to its own input. The self-citation is load-bearing for the numerical range claim, though not for the broader qualitative assessment. Score 6 reflects this partial circularity: one or more predictions (the QR range curves) reduce by construction to the assumed model input, while independent external reviews still support the general conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The infeasibility argument rests on a small number of physical assumptions (single-photon power, quantum advantage bound) and on the authors' own prior range-limit papers. The START teams are an organizational proposal, not an invented scientific entity.

free parameters (1)
  • quantum advantage factor for QR = 1/<N> (average photon number per mode, assumed less than unity)
    Assumed in Figure 1 caption; sets the QR range curves. It is not derived in this paper and is a key input to the negative conclusion.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Radar maximum range is governed by the standard radar equation with the echo energy proportional to transmitted energy.
    Used in Section 2 and Figure 1 to compute QR versus CR ranges.
  • domain assumption A quantum radar transmits one photon per mode on average, so the transmitted power is the single-photon energy times the bandwidth.
    Justifies the 1e-15 W power estimate for X-band 200 MHz; this is the physical premise for the QR infeasibility argument.
  • ad hoc to paper The quantum advantage of QR over classical radar is at most the reciprocal of the mean photon number per mode.
    Stated in the Figure 1 caption; this critical modelling assumption directly determines the range comparison.
  • domain assumption Popperian falsifiability is the appropriate criterion to distinguish research from non-research.
    Used in Section 4.2 to classify QR and other fields as non-research; this is a philosophical stance, not a mathematical fact.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Radar and Research Assessment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LVSGXAHT

@misc{pith2026250613797,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Radar and Research Assessment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LVSGXAHT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.13797}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum Radar was studied in many Nations for about fifteen years with the production of some hundred publications. In the post 2020 literature, it is shown that, due to the exceedingly low transmitted power, Quantum Radar cannot produce neither significant results nor real world applications. Regrettably, most of the scientific community ignored this negative outcome: a fact worth of exam. A detailed study of such an assessment failure depicts the main shortcomings of the present situation, calling for a redesign of the research assessment at the international level, with proposals shown in the ending section of this paper.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [24]

    Quantum Illumination and Quantum Radar: A Brief Overview

    Karsa A, Fletcher A, Spedalieri G, Pirandola S. Quantum illumination and quantum radar: a brief overview. Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 87, N. 9, 2024. DOI: 10.1088/1361- 6633/ad6279.Also : arXiv:2310.06049v2 [quant-ph] 09 May 2024, https://arxiv.org/html/2310.06049v2#bib.bib37

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [4]

    Quantum Information Processing, Sensin g, and Communications: Their Myths, Realities, and Futures

    Hanzo L, Babar Z, Cai Z, Chandra D, Djordjevic IB, Koczor B, Soon Xin NG, Razavi M, Simeone O. Quantum Information Processing, Sensin g, and Communications: Their Myths, Realities, and Futures. Proceedings of the IEEE January, 2025 pp.1-51, DOI: 10.1109/JPROC.2024.3510394

    arXiv 2025

  3. [13]

    Quantum illumination with Gaussian states

    Tan SH, Erkmen BI, Giovannetti V, Guha S, L loyd S, Maccone L, Pirandola S, Shapiro JH. Quantum illumination with Gaussian states. Phys. Rev. Lett, 2008, 101 (25), 253601

    2008

  4. [23]

    Available online at https://uniradarlab.com/supplementary-information/

    Supplementary Information. Available online at https://uniradarlab.com/supplementary-information/

  5. [1]

    Quantum -enhanced measurements: Beating the standard quantum limit

    Giovannetti V, Lloyd S, Maccone L. Quantum -enhanced measurements: Beating the standard quantum limit. Science 306, 1330–1336, 2004. DOI: 10.1126/science.1104149

    doi:10.1126/science.1104149 2004

  6. [2]

    A conceptual framework for describing the future impacts of quantum sensors to national security Academia Quantum 2025, ISSN 3064 -979X, https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadQuant7590

    Brooksby A, Smith A, Hickam A, Manda M, Rogers A, LaDuke M. A conceptual framework for describing the future impacts of quantum sensors to national security Academia Quantum 2025, ISSN 3064 -979X, https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadQuant7590

    work page doi:10.20935/acadquant7590 2025

  7. [3]

    Fundamentals of Measurement: Giovanni Giorgi and the International System of Units

    Callegaro L. Fundamentals of Measurement: Giovanni Giorgi and the International System of Units. IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine, 2023, Vol. 26, n. 7, pp. 7 -11, DOI: 10.1109/MIM.2023.10238365

    arXiv 2023

  8. [5]

    Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge

    Popper K. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Basic Books, London and New York, 1962

    1962

Show all 92 references
  1. [6]

    The logic of Scientific Discovery

    Popper K. The logic of Scientific Discovery. Published by Basic Books, New York, 1959

    1959

  2. [7]

    Range Limitations in Microwave Quantum Radar

    Pavan G, Galati G. Range Limitations in Microwave Quantum Radar. MDPI Remote Sensing, 2024; 16(14):2543. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16142543

    2024 doi

  3. [8]

    Lessons Learnt from the Rise and Fall of Quantum Radar Research

    Galati G, Pavan G, Daum F. Lessons Learnt from the Rise and Fall of Quantum Radar Research. Academia Quantum. Academia.edu Journals, 2(1). doi: 10.20935/AcadQuant7586

    doi

  4. [9]

    Introduction to Radar Systems

    Skolnik MI. Introduction to Radar Systems. McGraw -Hill Education, Third Ed. (16 August 2000)

    2000

  5. [10]

    An introduction to matched filters

    Turin G. An introduction to matched filters. IRE Trans. Inf. Theory, 1960, 6, 311–329

    1960

  6. [11]

    Radar in the quantum limit

    Steinhardt A, McCrae J. Radar in the quantum limit. In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Phased Array Systems and Technology, 20 03. 14-17 October 2003, Boston MA, USA. DOI: 10.1109/PAST.2003.1256952

    2003 arXiv

  7. [12]

    Enhanced sensitivity of photodetection via quantum illumination, Science, 2008, 321(5895), 1463 -1465, DOI: 10.1126/science.1160627

    Lloyd S. Enhanced sensitivity of photodetection via quantum illumination, Science, 2008, 321(5895), 1463 -1465, DOI: 10.1126/science.1160627

    2008 doi

  8. [14]

    USA Patent N. 7.375.802 B2 dated May 20th, 2008, Radar systems and methods using entangled quantum particles, assignee: Lockheed Martin Corporation, Bethesda, MD (US), Available in https://www.uspto.gov/

    2008

  9. [15]

    Quantum Radar

    Lanzagorta M. Quantum Radar. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2011, ISBN 978-3-031-01387-4

    2011

  10. [16]

    Not Even Trying: The Corruption of Real Science

    Charlton BG. Not Even Trying: The Corruption of Real Science. University of Buckingham Press, ISBN 978 - 1908684189

  11. [17]

    Entanglement -Based Quantum Radar: From Myth to Reality

    Luong D, Rajan S, Balaji B. Entanglement -Based Quantum Radar: From Myth to Reality. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 2020, Volume 35, Issue 4, pp. 22 -35, DOI: 10.1109/MAES.2020.2970261

    2020

  12. [18]

    Biomedical Sensing Using Quantum Radars Based on Josephson Parametric Amplifiers

    Luong D, Balaji B, Rajan S. Biomedical Sensing Using Quantum Radars Based on Josephson Parametric Amplifiers. In Proc . of International Applied Computational Electromagnetics Society Symposium, Hamilton, Canada, 1- 5 August 2021, 1 -4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/ 9528545

    2021

  13. [19]

    Quantum radar and cognition: looking for a potential cross fertilization

    Farina A, Frasca M, Balaji B. Quantum radar and cognition: looking for a potential cross fertilization. Chapter 18 of Next- Generation Cognitive Radar Systems, Editors: Kumar Vijay Mishra; Bhavani Shankar; Muralidhar Rangaswamy, IET,

  14. [20]

    Quantum Radar: Theory, Limits, and Practical Applications

    Karakoç MC, Kıraç AC, Ersoy Ö, Şahin AB. Quantum Radar: Theory, Limits, and Practical Applications. Usak University Journal of Engineering Sciences, 7(2), 148-165

  15. [21]

    Advancements in Quantum Radar Technology An Overview of Experimental 11 Methods and Quantum Electrodynamics Considerations

    Yu-Cheng Lin, Tsung -Wei Huang, Pin -Ju Tsai, Yen -Hung Chen, Yuan-Liang Zhong, Ching-Ray Chang. Advancements in Quantum Radar Technology An Overview of Experimental 11 Methods and Quantum Electrodynamics Considerations. IEEE Nanotechnology Magazine, 2024, vol. 18, n. 3, pp. 4...

    2024

  16. [22]

    The short, strange life of quant um radar - In spite of military interest, quantum mechanics won't defeat stealth technologies

    Cho A. The short, strange life of quant um radar - In spite of military interest, quantum mechanics won't defeat stealth technologies. Science, 2020, Vol. 369, Issue 6511, pp. 1556 – 1557. DOI: 10.1126/science.369.6511.1556

    2020

  17. [25]

    An Assessment of the U.S

    Parker E, Gonzales D, Kochhar AK, Litterer S, O'Connor K, Schmid J, Scholl K, Silberglitt R, Chang J, Eusebi CA, Harold SW. An Assessment of the U.S. and Chinese Industrial Bases in Quantum Technology”, RAND Corporation RESEARCH RR-A869-1, 2022, 140 pp., ISBN/EAN: 978-1-9774-0...

    2022 doi

  18. [26]

    On Target Detection by Quantum Radar (Preprint), arXiv: [quant -ph], 29 February 2024, [Online]: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.00047

    Galati G, Pavan G. On Target Detection by Quantum Radar (Preprint), arXiv: [quant -ph], 29 February 2024, [Online]: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.00047

    2024 doi arXiv

  19. [27]

    Quantum technology for military applications

    Krelina M. Quantum technology for military applications. EPJ Quantum Technology volume 8, Article number: 24 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjqt/s40507-021-00113-y

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    Detecting a Target with Quantum Entanglement

    Sorelli G, Treps N, Grosshans F, Boust F. Detecting a Target with Quantum Entanglement. IEEE AES System Magazine, 2022, 37 (5) 68-90. DOI: 10.1109./MAES.2021. 3116323

    2022

  21. [29]

    Bibliometric Analysis in the Field of Quantum Technology

    Scheidsteger T, Haunschild R, Bornmann L, Ettl C. Bibliometric Analysis in the Field of Quantum Technology. Quantum Reports 2021, 3, 549 –575. 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/quantum3030036

    2021 doi

  22. [30]

    Academia Quantum: Advances and Innovation in Quantum Science and Technology

    Lamoreaux SK. Academia Quantum: Advances and Innovation in Quantum Science and Technology. Academia Quantum, vol. 1, no. 1, Academia.edu Journals, 2024, doi:10.20935/AcadQuant6261

    2024 doi

  23. [31]

    (in Italian) Il boom dei computer quantistici

    Parlangeli A. (in Italian) Il boom dei computer quantistici. Focus, 391, May 2025, pp. 82-87, www.focus.it

    2025

  24. [32]

    Thirty years later, the cold fusion dream is still alive

    Cookson C. Thirty years later, the cold fusion dream is still alive. 2019, Financial Times, Energy Sector, June 4th. https://www.ft.com/content/4233196a-82cb-11e9-b592- 5fe435b57a3b

    2019

  25. [33]

    Electrically induced anomalous thermal phenomena in nanostructured wires

    Celani F, Lorenzetti C. Electrically induced anomalous thermal phenomena in nanostructured wires. Chapter 7 In Book Cold Fusion; Advances in Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. Editor J. P. Biberian, Elsevier, 2020, pp. 101-113

    2020

  26. [34]

    Anomalous Heat Generation Phenomena in Nano -Structured Multilayer Metal Composites Preloaded with Hydrogen Gas

    Iwamura Y, Itoh Y, Yamauchi S, Takahashi T. Anomalous Heat Generation Phenomena in Nano -Structured Multilayer Metal Composites Preloaded with Hydrogen Gas. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, 2024, Volume 63, Number 3, March 4, 2024. DOI: 10.35848/1347-4065/ad2622

    2024 doi

  27. [35]

    Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing

    Bennett H, Brassard G. Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, Bangalore, India, 10-12 December 1984

    1984

  28. [36]

    The Second Quantum Re volution: From Entanglement to Quantum Computing and Other Super - Technologies, Springer International Publishing, Germany,

    Jaeger L. The Second Quantum Re volution: From Entanglement to Quantum Computing and Other Super - Technologies, Springer International Publishing, Germany,

  29. [37]

    Irreduc ible: Consciousness, Life, Computers, and Human Nature

    Faggin F. Irreduc ible: Consciousness, Life, Computers, and Human Nature. Essentia Books, 31 May 2024, ISBN: 978- 1803415093

    2024

  30. [38]

    Es werde Licht - Die Einheit von Geist und Materie in der Quantenphysik

    Mann F, Mann C. Es werde Licht - Die Einheit von Geist und Materie in der Quantenphysik. S. Fischer Verlag, 2017, ISBN 9783104902821, 9783103972450

    2017

  31. [39]

    Quantum physics in neuroscience and psychology: a neurophysical model of mind-brain interaction

    Schwartz JM, Stapp HP, Beauregard M. Quantum physics in neuroscience and psychology: a neurophysical model of mind-brain interaction. Philosophical Trans. of the Royal Society B, 360:1309 –1327, 2005. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.q-bio/0401019

    2005 doi arXiv

  32. [40]

    Importance of quantum decoherence in br ain processes, Phys

    Tegmark M. Importance of quantum decoherence in br ain processes, Phys. Rev. E 61, 4194 – Published 1 April 2000, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.61.4194

    2000 doi

  33. [41]

    Testing the Conjecture That Quantum Processes Create Conscious Experience

    Neven H, Zalcman A, Read P, Kosik KS, Van der Molen T, Bouwmeester D, Bodnia E, Turin L, Koch CH, Zalcman A. Testing the Conjecture That Quantum Processes Create Conscious Experience. MDPI Entropy, 2024, 26(6), 460; https://doi.org/10.3390/e26060460

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    Quantum effects in t he brain: A review

    Adams B, Petruccione F. Quantum effects in t he brain: A review. AVS Quantum Science, 2(2):022901, 2020. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1910.0842

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    Quantum cognition: The possibility of processing with nuclear spins in the brain

    Fisher MPA. Quantum cognition: The possibility of processing with nuclear spins in the brain. Annals of Physics, 362:593–602, 2015. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1508. 05929

    2015 doi

  36. [44]

    Quantum Mechanics and Avant -Garde Music-Shadows of the Void, Springer, 2024, DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63161-0, ISBN 978 -3- 031-63160-3

    Abdyssagin R -Bi. Quantum Mechanics and Avant -Garde Music-Shadows of the Void, Springer, 2024, DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63161-0, ISBN 978 -3- 031-63160-3

    2024 doi

  37. [45]

    Is Consciousness Research The Next Big Quantum Use Case? Quantum Insider, January 11, 2025

    Swayne M. Is Consciousness Research The Next Big Quantum Use Case? Quantum Insider, January 11, 2025. https://thequantuminsider.com/2025/01/11/is-consciousness- research-the-next-big-quantum-use-case/

    2025

  38. [46]

    Two Centuries -Two Crises in Theoretical Research

    Accardi L. Two Centuries -Two Crises in Theoretical Research. DIALOGOI N. 10, 2023. https://www.mimesisjournals.com/ojs/index.php/dialogoi/art icle/view/3432/2732

    2023

  39. [47]

    When will useful quantum computers be constructed? Not in the foreseeable future, this physicist argues

    Dyakonov MI. When will useful quantum computers be constructed? Not in the foreseeable future, this physicist argues. Here's why: The case against: Quantum computing. IEEE Spectrum, 2019, Volume 56, Issue 3, pp. 24 – 29. DOI: 10.1109/MSPEC.2019.8651931

    2019

  40. [48]

    Will We Ever Have a Quantum Computer?’ Springer Briefs in Physics, 2020, ISBN 978 -3-030-42018-5, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42019-2

    Dyakonov MI. Will We Ever Have a Quantum Computer?’ Springer Briefs in Physics, 2020, ISBN 978 -3-030-42018-5, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42019-2

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    The Argument against Quantum Com puters, the Quantum Laws of Nature, and Google's Supremacy Claims

    Kalai G. The Argument against Quantum Com puters, the Quantum Laws of Nature, and Google's Supremacy Claims. arXiv:2008.05188 [quant -ph]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.05188

    2008 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Certified randomness using a trapped-ion quantum processor

    Liu M, Shaydulin R, Niroula P et al. Certified randomness using a trapped-ion quantum processor. Nature 640, 343–348 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-08737-1

    2025 doi

  43. [51]

    Nature Rev

    Editorial - 40 years of quantum computing. Nature Rev. Phys., 2022, 4, 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-021-00410- 6

    2022 doi

  44. [52]

    The computer as a physical system: A microscopic quantum mechanical Hamiltonian model of c omputers as represented by Turing machines

    Benioff P. The computer as a physical system: A microscopic quantum mechanical Hamiltonian model of c omputers as represented by Turing machines. J. Stat. Phys. 22, 1980, pp. 563–591

    1980

  45. [53]

    Simulating physics with computers

    Feynman R. Simulating physics with computers. International Journal of Theoretical Physics, 1982, 21, pp. 467–488

    1982

  46. [54]

    Quantum computers, quantum computing, and quantum thermodynamics, Front

    Cleri F. Quantum computers, quantum computing, and quantum thermodynamics, Front. Quantum Sci. Technol., 12 August 2024, Volume 3 - 2024. https://doi.org/10.3389/frqst.2024.1422257

    2024

  47. [55]

    Investment landscape: are we in a quantum winter or has it just got a bit colder? State of Quantum 2024 Report, IQM OpenOcean

    Galda A. Investment landscape: are we in a quantum winter or has it just got a bit colder? State of Quantum 2024 Report, IQM OpenOcean. https://assets-global.website- files.com/6523f13a748909d3e1bbb657/65e6d35be62d08db2 e7b3b71_State-of-Quantum-2024-report.pdf. 12

    2024

  48. [56]

    Understanding Quantum Technologies 2024

    Ezratty O. Understanding Quantum Technologies 2024. Seventh Ed., September 2024. arXiv:2111.15352 [quant-ph]. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.15352

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    Multiverse Computing: Quantum Software for Extreme Ideas

    Dargan J. Multiverse Computing: Quantum Software for Extreme Ideas. Quantum Insider, January 2025, https://thequantuminsider.com/2020/03/13/multiverse- computing-quantum-software-for-extreme-ideas/

    2025

  50. [58]

    Mitigating the quantum hype

    Ezratty O. Mitigating the quantum hype. 2022, arXiv: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.01925

    2022 doi arXiv

  51. [59]

    Quantum Technologies and Society: Towards a Different Spin

    Coenen C, Grinbaum A, Grunwald A, Milburn C, Vermaas P. Quantum Technologies and Society: Towards a Different Spin. Nano Ethics, 2022, Volume 16, 1 –6, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-021-00409-4 , Also in: https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12442,

    2022 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Cargo Cult Science - Some remarks on science, pseudoscience, and learning how to not fool yourself

    Feynman R. Cargo Cult Science - Some remarks on science, pseudoscience, and learning how to not fool yourself. Caltech, 1974. http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/51/2/CargoCult.HTM

    1974

  53. [61]

    Quantum Hype Goes Crazy, But Why?” Video available on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOYwGttVRDQ&lc=U gyE_-fy7cNS5TaL-Z94AaABAg

    Hossenfelder S. Quantum Hype Goes Crazy, But Why?” Video available on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOYwGttVRDQ&lc=U gyE_-fy7cNS5TaL-Z94AaABAg

  54. [62]

    Torsten W. Scientific freedom: its grounds and their limitations, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, Volume 41, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 174 -181, ISSN 0039 - 3681, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.03.003

    2010 doi

  55. [63]

    What constitutional protection for freedom of scientific research? J Med Ethics

    Santosuosso A, Sellaroli V, Fabio E. What constitutional protection for freedom of scientific research? J Med Ethics. 2007 Jun; 33(6):342 -4. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.020594. PMID: 17526684; PMCID: PMC2598288

    2007 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Science of Life After Death

    Moreira-Almeida A, De Abreu Costa M, Schubert Coelho H. Science of Life After Death. Springer International Publishing, January 2022, DOI 10.1007/978 -3-031-06056-4, ISBNs 978-3-03-106055-7, 978-3-03-106056-4

    2022 doi

  57. [65]

    Trilogia della Coscienza (in Italian)

    Malanga C. Trilogia della Coscienza (in Italian) . Ed. Spazio Interiore, ISBN-13 979-1280002310

  58. [66]

    Bibliometrics and Research Evaluation: Uses and Abuses, MIT Press Publisher (October 7, 2016) ISBN -13: 978-0262035125

    Gingras Y. Bibliometrics and Research Evaluation: Uses and Abuses, MIT Press Publisher (October 7, 2016) ISBN -13: 978-0262035125

    2016

  59. [67]

    Bibliometrics and University Research Rankings Demystified for Librarians

    Pagell R. Bibliometrics and University Research Rankings Demystified for Librarians. In: Chen, C., Larsen, R. (eds) Library and Information Sciences. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54812-3_10

    doi

  60. [68]

    Meaningful metrics: A 21st - century librarian’s guide to bibliometrics, altmet rics, and research impact

    Roemer RC, Borchardt R. Meaningful metrics: A 21st - century librarian’s guide to bibliometrics, altmet rics, and research impact. Publisher: Assoc. of College & Research Libraries; 1st Ed. ISBN-13: 978-0838987551

  61. [69]

    Peer usage versus peer review

    Charlton BG. Peer usage versus peer review. BMJ. 2007 Sep 1; 335(7617):451. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39304.581574.94

    2007

  62. [70]

    Understanding the social and political dimensions of research(er) assessment: evaluative flexibility and hidden criteria in promotion processes at research institutes

    Ross-Hellauer T, Aubert Bonn N, H orbach SPJM. Understanding the social and political dimensions of research(er) assessment: evaluative flexibility and hidden criteria in promotion processes at research institutes. Journal Research Evaluation, Volume 33. Publisher Oxford Unive...

    2025

  63. [71]

    Peer review: concepts, variants and controversies

    Peh WC. Peer review: concepts, variants and controversies. Singapore Med J. 2022 Feb; 63(2):55 -60. doi: 10.11622/smedj.2021139. Epub 2021 Oct 4. PMID: 34602311; PMCID: PMC9251232

    2022 doi

  64. [72]

    Waltman, et al

    L. Waltman, et al. Towards a new crown indicator: Some theoretical co nsiderations. arXiv:1003.2167v2, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1003.2167

    doi arXiv

  65. [73]

    Brito, R

    Rodríguez-Navarro, A. Brito, R. Rank analysis of most cited publications, a new approach for research assessments. arXiv:2307.02927v2, https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.0297

    arXiv

  66. [74]

    Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., & Reale, E. (2019). Peer review vs Bibliometrics: which method better predicts the scholarly impact of publications? Scientometrics, 121(1), 537-554

    2019

  67. [75]

    Chemical and Engineering News, ISSN 0009-2347, Vol.101, Issue 12, April 5, 2023

    2023

  68. [76]

    Philipps A. Research funding randomly allocated? A survey of scientists’ views on peer review and lottery Science and Public Policy, Volume 49, Issue 3, June 2022, Pages 365 – 377, https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scab084

    2022 doi

  69. [77]

    Fun and less fun funding: the experiential affordances of research grant conditions

    Kjær Stage A, Ea Høg Utoft. Fun and less fun funding: the experiential affordances of research grant conditions. Science and Public Policy. Volume 50, Issue 6, December 2023, Pages 1091–1102, https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad047

    2023 doi

  70. [78]

    Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda

    Duncan AT, Nedeva M, Tirado MM, Merle J. Changing research on research evaluation: A critical literature review to revisit the agenda. Research Evaluation, vol. 29, Issue 3, July 2020, 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa008

    2020 doi

  71. [79]

    The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy

    Abramo G, D'Angelo CA. The relationship between the number of authors of a publication, its citations and the impact factor of the publishing journal: Evidence from Italy. Journal of Informetrics, 9(4), 746 -761. DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2015.07.003 - https://www.sciencedirect.com/j...

    doi

  72. [80]

    Quantum computing 40 years later

    Preskill J . Quantum computing 40 years later. arXiv:2106.10522, 25 June 2021, https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.10522

    2021 arXiv

  73. [81]

    The forced battle between pee r-review and scientometric research assessment: Why the CoARA initiative is unsound

    Abramo G. The forced battle between pee r-review and scientometric research assessment: Why the CoARA initiative is unsound. Research Evaluation, rvae021, https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvae021

    doi

  74. [82]

    Is big team research fair in national research assessments? The case of the UK Research Excellence Framework 2021

    Thelwall M , et al. Is big team research fair in national research assessments? The case of the UK Research Excellence Framework 2021. arXiv:2212.06572v1 [cs.DL], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.06572

    2021 doi arXiv

  75. [83]

    Research assessment under debate: disentangling the interest around the DORA declaration on Twitter

    Orduna-Malea E, Bautista-Pui N. Research assessment under debate: disentangling the interest around the DORA declaration on Twitter. arXiv:2311.11609v2 [cs.DL], https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.11609

    doi arXiv

  76. [84]

    A solid case for Maj orana fermions

    Reich SE. A solid case for Maj orana fermions. Nature 483, 132 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/483132a

    2012 doi

  77. [85]

    Theory of Majorana zero modes in unconventional superconductors, arXiv:2402.00643 [cond -mat.supr-con] (or arXiv:2402.00643v3), https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.00643

    Tanaka Y, Tamura S, Cayao J. Theory of Majorana zero modes in unconventional superconductors, arXiv:2402.00643 [cond -mat.supr-con] (or arXiv:2402.00643v3), https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.00643

    doi arXiv

  78. [86]

    Interferometric single-shot parity measurement in InAs – Al hybrid devices

    Microsoft Azure Quantum, Aghaee M, Alcaraz Ramirez A, et al. Interferometric single-shot parity measurement in InAs – Al hybrid devices. Nature 638, 651 –655 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-08445-2

    2025 doi

  79. [87]

    Michio Kaku Quantum Supremacy: How the Quantum Computer Revolution Will Change Everything, Doubleday, 2023

    2023

  80. [88]

    Il computer impossibile - Come il calcolatore quantistico cambierà il mondo

    Benenti G, Casati G, Montangero S. Il computer impossibile - Come il calcolatore quantistico cambierà il mondo. Published on 02/2025 by Raffaello Cortina, ISBN 9788832857191

    2025

  81. [89]

    Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation

    Sarma S, Freedman M, Nayak C. Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation. npj Quantum Inf 1, 15001 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/npjqi.2015.1

    2015 doi

  82. [90]

    InAs -Al hybrid devices passing the topological gap protocol

    Legg HF. Comment on "InAs -Al hybrid devices passing the topological gap protocol". Microsoft Quantum, Phys. Rev. B 107, 245423 (20 23). https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2502.19560. 1

    doi arXiv

  83. [2019]

    DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-319-98824-5

    doi

  84. [2023]

    https://doi.org/10.1049/SBRA552E_ch18

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.