pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.02428 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-02 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Localized Entanglement Purification

Katerina Stloukalova , Jorge Miguel-Ramiro , Wolfgang D\"ur , Julius Walln\"ofer
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 20:57 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords entanglement purificationquantum networksmultipartite entanglementlocalized protocolsnoise asymmetryquantum communicationresource efficiency
0
0 comments X

The pith

Localized entanglement purification protocols reduce resource use by operating on regional noise asymmetries rather than global states.

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

The paper introduces Localized Entanglement Purification, a set of protocols that focus purification efforts on specific parts of a quantum network instead of the entire system at once. This approach takes advantage of differences in noise levels across different locations to use fewer resources while still improving entanglement quality. For large multipartite entangled states, traditional methods become inefficient as size grows, but these localized methods aim to make purification scalable. A sympathetic reader would care because it could enable practical quantum communication networks by lowering the overhead needed to maintain high-quality entanglement over distance.

Core claim

The authors present Localized Entanglement Purification (LEP) as a family of protocols that purify entanglement at the level of network regions by exploiting spatial noise asymmetries, thereby reducing resource consumption compared to global purification schemes for large multipartite states.

What carries the argument

Localized Entanglement Purification (LEP) protocols, which apply purification operations to subsets of the network based on local noise characteristics rather than requiring coordinated global operations.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that meaningful spatial noise asymmetries exist in the target quantum systems and can be identified and exploited by the protocols without extra cost.

What would settle it

Applying the LEP protocols to a multipartite state with uniform noise across all regions and observing no reduction in required resources or purification efficiency compared to standard global methods.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.02428 by Jorge Miguel-Ramiro, Julius Walln\"ofer, Katerina Stloukalova, Wolfgang D\"ur.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustration of the TCP protocol. Multiple noisy copies of an N-linear graph state with an initial fidelity F0. The arrows denote the multilateral (MCNOT) directions as￾sociated with the sub-protocols P1 and P2, while the color shading distinguishes the two color sets. After measurement and post-selection, copies failing the purification step are dis￾carded, whereas successful copies with increased fidelit… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Illustration of the Localized Purification (LEP) protocol. Example for N-qubit linear cluster state, with panel (a) demonstrating the LEP approach, where a target qubit T is selected along with its neighboring qubits set TN , while all other qubits in set T0 remain inactive during MC￾NOT operation. The direction of the operation is determined by the target qubit µT , and the auxiliary state is constructed … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Fidelity vs Resources: Z-noise on qubit 1. An 8-qubit linear cluster state subjected to Pauli-Z noise on qubit 1 (leaf) with p (1) z = 0.7, with no additional initial noise or gate noise (pw = pg = 1.0), while showcasing the effect of different purification strategies like TCP and LEP (S − 0, S − 1, and S − 5). We limit the maximum number of resources to 109 ; any value exceeding this is declared unsuccess… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows numerical results for this case. The S − 0 strategy is insufficient to fully mitigate noise and reaches its maximum fidelity earlier than in less-noisy scenarios, because its pumping scheme repeatedly relies on very noisy auxiliary states. In particular, the application of the MCNOT operation propagates errors to neighboring qubits, as described in Eq. (17), effectively increasing the noise contribut… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fixed Target Fidelity (FT = 0.90) for an 8-node linear cluster state. We consider this case to be subjected to asymmetric noise, where Z noise with strength pz acts on qubits 1 and 6, while the white-noise parameter pw is varied simultaneously. The figure compares different LEP-based strategies, namely S-α and C-α, and TCP. The S-α applies the auxiliary protocol with α pre-purification rounds. The combined… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Fixed Total Resources (TR = 1000) for An 8-node linear cluster state. We consider an asymmetric noise scenario in which Z noise with strength pz acts on qubits 1 and 6, while the white-noise parameter pw is varied simultaneously. The figure compares LEP-based strategies, S-α and C-α, with TCP. Strategy S-α applies the auxiliary protocol with α pre￾purification rounds, while the combined strategy C-α select… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Illustration of 2D cluster state. Example of a 12-qubit two-dimensional cluster state illustrating the qubit labeling scheme. The dark blue numbered qubits represent the main graph state, which is affected by uniform local white noise, with additional Pauli-Z noise applied to selected qubits. The auxiliary qubits, which form the auxiliary graph state, implement the first four purification steps that target… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Fidelity vs resources for 2D cluster state. We consider a 12-qubit two-dimensional cluster state subjected to white noise with strength pw = 0.98, gate noise = 0.998, together with asymmetric Z-noise distributed to the corners, thus affecting qubits: p (1) z = 0.9, p (4) z = 0.85, p (9) z = 0.95, and p (12) z = 0.98. The figure compares the LEP strategy in its S-α variant, the TCP strategy, and a hybrid LE… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: TCP vs. LEP Resource Scaling (FT = 0.90). Resources difference between LEP and TCP strategy for the fixed target fidelity of FT = 0.90. With varying noise param￾eters pz and pw on qubits 1 and 6. The gate noise is fixed at pg = 0.998. Quantifying the difference in resource require￾ments between the two protocols as a function of the noise parameters. Appendix C: Fixed Target Fidelity - hybrid approach We p… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Hybrid strategy for the Fixed Total Re￾sources T R = 1000. For the case of an 8-qubit linear cluster state subjected to white noise with pg = 0.998, where we con￾sider an asymmetric noise scenario with strength pz acting on qubits 1 and 6, while the white-noise parameter pw is varied simultaneously. The simulation uses the following strategies: S-α, C-α, TCP, and LEP-TCP-α. Sub-figure (a) shows the winnin… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Entanglement purification protocols are fundamental primitives in quantum communication, enabling the distillation of high-quality entanglement using only local operations and classical communication. For large multipartite states, however, existing purification schemes typically require substantial resources and become progressively inefficient as system size increases. We introduce a new type of multipartite entanglement purification, Localized Entanglement Purification (LEP), a family of protocols that purify entanglement at the level of network regions rather than globally. By exploiting spatial noise asymmetries, LEP reduces resource consumption and enables scalable purification strategies for larger quantum systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces Localized Entanglement Purification (LEP), a family of multipartite entanglement purification protocols that operate regionally within quantum networks rather than globally. By exploiting spatial noise asymmetries, LEP is claimed to reduce resource consumption and improve scalability for large entangled states using only LOCC primitives.

Significance. If the protocols and resource analysis are provided and verified, LEP could represent a meaningful advance in quantum communication by enabling more efficient purification tailored to inhomogeneous noise environments, potentially lowering overhead in distributed quantum systems compared to standard global recurrence or hashing methods.

major comments (1)
  1. Abstract: The central claim that LEP achieves reduced resource consumption without additional overhead or global coordination is unsupported, as the manuscript supplies no explicit LOCC operations, position-dependent noise model (e.g., spatially varying depolarizing rates), resource counting (e.g., copies or gates per region), or proof that regional maps preserve multipartite entanglement while outperforming global protocols.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We appreciate the identification of areas where the central claims require stronger explicit support. We address the major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [—] Abstract: The central claim that LEP achieves reduced resource consumption without additional overhead or global coordination is unsupported, as the manuscript supplies no explicit LOCC operations, position-dependent noise model (e.g., spatially varying depolarizing rates), resource counting (e.g., copies or gates per region), or proof that regional maps preserve multipartite entanglement while outperforming global protocols.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract's claims would benefit from more explicit backing. In the revised manuscript we have added: (i) explicit LOCC circuits for the regional purification maps, (ii) a position-dependent noise model with concrete examples of spatially varying depolarizing rates across network regions, (iii) detailed resource counts (number of copies and elementary gates per region), and (iv) a formal argument showing that the regional maps preserve multipartite entanglement while consuming fewer resources than global recurrence or hashing protocols when noise is inhomogeneous. These elements appear in the new Section 3 and Appendix A; the abstract has been lightly rephrased to align with the added content without changing its scope. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: LEP protocols introduced via standard LOCC without self-referential reductions

full rationale

The manuscript defines LEP as a family of regional purification protocols that exploit spatial noise asymmetries to reduce resources relative to global methods. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations are shown that reduce by construction to their own inputs. Claims rest on standard LOCC primitives and the existence of spatial asymmetries (an external modeling assumption), with no self-citation load-bearing the central result, no ansatz smuggled via prior work, and no renaming of known patterns as new derivations. The protocol family is presented as a conceptual extension rather than a closed mathematical reduction, rendering the derivation self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard quantum information assumptions and the postulated effectiveness of the new LEP family; no free parameters or invented physical entities are specified in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Local operations and classical communication (LOCC) suffice as the operational primitives for entanglement purification.
    The abstract states that purification uses only local operations and classical communication, a standard assumption in quantum communication theory.
invented entities (1)
  • Localized Entanglement Purification (LEP) protocols no independent evidence
    purpose: Purify entanglement at the level of network regions by exploiting spatial noise asymmetries
    Newly introduced family of protocols described in the abstract without specific construction or validation details.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5381 in / 1186 out tokens · 50343 ms · 2026-05-13T20:57:46.916388+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 84 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Noise channels A frequently considered type of noise is local white (or fully depolarizing) noiseEw, which is described acting on qubitiwith an error parameterp w by E (i) w (pw)ρ=p w ρ+ 1−p w 4 3X i=0 σ(i) a ρ σ(i) a ,(5) whereσ (i) a ∈ {1, X, Y, Z}are the Pauli operators. Similarly, a local Pauli-Z noise model (dephasing), which contributes to the loss ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    This distribution requires transmitting qubits through quantum channels, which introduces noise affecting each qubit individually

    Noise sources We consider a setting in which a multipartite graph state is generated and distributed among spatially sep- arated parties. This distribution requires transmitting qubits through quantum channels, which introduces noise affecting each qubit individually. One of the main sources of noise acting on a multipar- tite graph state, therefore, aris...

    work page

  3. [3]

    TCP protocol details A graph state is two-colorable if the vertices of the as- sociated GraphG= (V, E), can be partitioned in two dis- joint color setsVA andV B, withV=V A ∪V B, VA ∩V B = ∅, such that no vertices from qubits from the same color- set can’t be connected∀a∈V A :N(i)⊆V B and∀b∈ VB :N(b)⊆V A [47, 48]. We define the graph state basis by splitti...

    work page

  4. [4]

    TCP resource evaluation We define channel uses as a metric to evaluate the re- source requirements of the EPP. Distributing anN-qubit graph state among distinct parties requires either send- ingN−1qubits from a central source through quantum channels or distributing Bell pairs over channels and con- necting them locally via gate operations. The TCP protoc...

    work page

  5. [5]

    The coefficientsλ µT ,µTN ,µT0 denote the cor- responding classical probability distribution

    LEP protocol details Consider an initial mixed state of the main graph state, whose diagonal form in the graph state basis is given by ρµ = X µT ,µTN ,µT0 λµT ,µTN ,µT0 µT ,µ TN ,µ T0 µT ,µ TN ,µ T0 , (16) where the bit stringsµ T,µ TN, andµ T0 label the sta- bilizer eigenvalues associated with the target qubit, its 5 neighborhood, and the remaining qubit...

    work page

  6. [6]

    We define one resource as a single noisy copy of a multipartite graph state

    LEP protocol resource evaluation As before, we define channel uses as the main perfor- mance metric. We define one resource as a single noisy copy of a multipartite graph state. Such a state can be distributed either by transmittingN−1qubits from a central source or by distributing Bell pairs and connect- ing them locally. As LEP protocol operates as a pu...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Pre-purification ThePre-purificationprocess applies only to the aux- iliary graph state and aims to improve its quality be- fore targeting the main graph purification. The protocol leverages TCP, which is known to be highly efficient for small graph states, such as GHZ states, consistent with the structure of the auxiliary graph state considered here. Thi...

    work page

  8. [8]

    The pa- rameterαspecifies the number of pre-purification TCP steps applied to the auxiliary state in each round

    S-αstrategy TheS-αstrategyis the basic form of LEP, where "S" denotessingleand refers to the application of a sin- gle auxiliary graph state per purification round, thereby achieving the highest fidelity in a single round. The pa- rameterαspecifies the number of pre-purification TCP steps applied to the auxiliary state in each round. For example, S-2indic...

    work page

  9. [9]

    C-αstrategy TheC-αstrategystands for the "C"ombination of pu- rification steps. Rather than drawing conclusions from fi- delityafterasinglepurificationround(S−α), weevaluate different orderings and combinations of auxiliary graph states across two rounds and select the sequence that yields the highest final fidelity. This strategy is combined with the S-α...

    work page

  10. [10]

    same” strategies are represented by a single color. Note that “same

    LEP-TCP-αstrategy The final approach we consider is a hybrid protocol, theLEP-TCP-αstrategy, that combines pre-purification, LEP, and TCP. Specifically, we apply the S-αstrategy for a limited number of rounds, determined by the strength and distribution of the asymmetric noise. Afterward, the TCP protocol is employed on the main graph state to further enh...

    work page

  11. [11]

    The simplest strategy,S−α, exhibits its typical behav- ior, requiring fewer resources to achieve higher fidelity in the presence of asymmetric noise

    We quantify the resource cost by the number of edges in the 2D cluster state, since each such edge requires the distribution and consumption of a Bell pair. The simplest strategy,S−α, exhibits its typical behav- ior, requiring fewer resources to achieve higher fidelity in the presence of asymmetric noise. However, even with unlimited resources and additio...

    work page doi:10.55776/p36009

  12. [12]

    H. J. Kimble, Nature453, 1023–1030 (2008)

    work page 2008

  13. [13]

    Kozlowski, A

    W. Kozlowski, A. Dahlberg, and S. Wehner,Proceed- ings of the 16th International Conference on emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies, CoNEXT ’20 (ACM, 2020) p. 1–16

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    Yurke and J

    B. Yurke and J. S. Denker, Phys. Rev. A29, 1419 (1984)

    work page 1984

  15. [15]

    Chiribella, G

    G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Phys. Rev. A80, 022339 (2009)

    work page 2009

  16. [16]

    K. Fang, J. Zhao, X. Li, Y. Li, and R. Duan, Science China Information Sciences66, 180509 (2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    J. A. Jones and D. Jaksch,Quantum Information, Computation and Communication(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2012)

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Cariolaro,Quantum Communications(Springer Inter- national Publishing, 2015)

    G. Cariolaro,Quantum Communications(Springer Inter- national Publishing, 2015)

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    Gisin and R

    N. Gisin and R. Thew, Nature photonics1, 165 (2007)

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    Weinfurter and A

    H. Weinfurter and A. Zeilinger,Quantum Information (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2001) p. 58–95

    work page 2001

  21. [21]

    Bugalho, B

    L. Bugalho, B. C. Coutinho, F. A. Monteiro, and Y. Omar, Quantum7, 920 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [23]

    J. I. Cirac, A. K. Ekert, S. F. Huelga, and C. Macchi- avello, Phys. Rev. A59, 4249 (1999)

    work page 1999

  23. [24]

    Beals, S

    R. Beals, S. Brierley, O. Gray, A. W. Harrow, S. Kutin, N. Linden, D. Shepherd, and M. Stather, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engi- neering Sciences469, 10.1098/rspa.2012.0686 (2013)

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.2012.0686 2012

  24. [25]

    A. S. Cacciapuoti, M. Caleffi, F. Tafuri, F. S. Catal- iotti, S. Gherardini, and G. Bianchi, IEEE Network34, 137–143 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [26]

    E. M. Kessler, I. Lovchinsky, A. O. Sushkov, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 150802 (2014)

    work page 2014

  26. [27]

    Sekatski, S

    P. Sekatski, S. Wölk, and W. Dür, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023052 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [28]

    A. Zang, A. Kolar, A. Gonzales, J. Chung, S. K. Gray, R. Kettimuthu, T. Zhong, and Z. H. Saleem, arXiv:2409.17089 10.48550/ARXIV.2409.17089 (2024)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.17089 2024

  28. [29]

    A. K. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 661 (1991)

    work page 1991

  29. [30]

    Yin, Y.-H

    J. Yin, Y.-H. Li, S.-K. Liao, M. Yang, Y. Cao, L. Zhang, J.-G. Ren, W.-Q. Cai, W.-Y. Liu, S.-L. Li, R. Shu, Y.-M. Huang, L. Deng, L. Li, Q. Zhang, N.-L. Liu, Y.-A. Chen, C.-Y. Lu, X.-B. Wang, F. Xu, J.-Y. Wang, C.-Z. Peng, A. K. Ekert, and J.-W. Pan, Nature582, 501–505 (2020)

    work page 2020

  30. [31]

    Hillery, V

    M. Hillery, V. Bužek, and A. Berthiaume, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1829 (1999)

    work page 1999

  31. [32]

    Gottesman, Phys

    D. Gottesman, Phys. Rev. A61, 042311 (2000)

    work page 2000

  32. [33]

    Li, W.-C

    G.-D. Li, W.-C. Cheng, Q.-L. Wang, L. Cheng, Y. Mao, and H.-Y. Jia, iScience27, 109836 (2024)

    work page 2024

  33. [34]

    C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Theoretical Computer Science560, 7 (2014), theoretical Aspects of Quantum Cryptography – celebrating 30 years of BB84

    work page 2014

  34. [35]

    F. Xu, X. Ma, Q. Zhang, H.-K. Lo, and J.-W. Pan, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025002 (2020)

    work page 2020

  35. [36]

    Xie, B.-H

    Y.-M. Xie, B.-H. Li, Y.-S. Lu, X.-Y. Cao, W.-B. Liu, H.- L. Yin, and Z.-B. Chen, Optics Letters46, 1632 (2021)

    work page 2021

  36. [37]

    Briegel, W

    H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 5932 (1998)

    work page 1998

  37. [38]

    Aschauer and H

    H. Aschauer and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 047902 (2002)

    work page 2002

  38. [39]

    Scheel and D.-G

    S. Scheel and D.-G. Welsch, Phys. Rev. A64, 063811 (2001)

    work page 2001

  39. [40]

    Hannegan, J

    J. Hannegan, J. D. Siverns, J. Cassell, and Q. Quraishi, Phys. Rev. A103, 052433 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [41]

    Knill and R

    E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Phys. Rev. A55, 900 (1997)

    work page 1997

  41. [42]

    Dür and H

    W. Dür and H. J. Briegel, Reports on Progress in Physics 70, 1381–1424 (2007)

    work page 2007

  42. [43]

    A. G. Fowler, D. S. Wang, C. D. Hill, T. D. Ladd, R. Van Meter, and L. C. L. Hollenberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 180503 (2010)

    work page 2010

  43. [45]

    Zwerger, H

    M. Zwerger, H. J. Briegel, and W. Dür, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 260503 (2013). 13

    work page 2013

  44. [46]

    Azuma, S

    K. Azuma, S. E. Economou, D. Elkouss, P. Hilaire, L. Jiang, H.-K. Lo, and I. Tzitrin, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 045006 (2023)

    work page 2023

  45. [47]

    Dür, H.-J

    W. Dür, H.-J. Briegel, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A59, 169 (1999)

    work page 1999

  46. [48]

    Zwerger, W

    M. Zwerger, W. Dür, and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. A85, 062326 (2012)

    work page 2012

  47. [49]

    J.-W. Pan, C. Simon, C. Brukner, and A. Zeilinger, Na- ture410, 1067–1070 (2001)

    work page 2001

  48. [50]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 722 (1996)

    work page 1996

  49. [51]

    Deutsch, A

    D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 2818 (1996)

    work page 1996

  50. [52]

    K. G. H. Vollbrecht and F. Verstraete, Phys. Rev. A71, 062325 (2005)

    work page 2005

  51. [53]

    Fang and Z.-W

    K. Fang and Z.-W. Liu, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 060405 (2020)

    work page 2020

  52. [54]

    Riera-Sàbat, P

    F. Riera-Sàbat, P. Sekatski, A. Pirker, and W. Dür, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 040502 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [55]

    D. E. Gottesman, Stabilizer Codes and Quantum Error Correction (California Institute of Technology, 1997)

    work page 1997

  54. [56]

    M. Hein, J. Eisert, and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. A69, 062311 (2004)

    work page 2004

  55. [57]

    M. Hein, W. Dür, J. Eisert, R. Raussendorf, M. V. den Nest, and H. J. Briegel, arXiv:quant-ph/0602096 10.48550/ARXIV.quant-ph/0602096 (2006)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0602096 2006

  56. [58]

    Aschauer, W

    H. Aschauer, W. Dür, and H.-J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. A 71, 012319 (2005)

    work page 2005

  57. [59]

    W. Dür, H. Aschauer, and H.-J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 107903 (2003)

    work page 2003

  58. [60]

    de Bone, R

    S. de Bone, R. Ouyang, K. Goodenough, and D. Elk- ouss, IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering1, 1–10 (2020)

    work page 2020

  59. [61]

    Széchenyi, O

    Áron Rozgonyi, G. Széchenyi, O. Kálmán, and T. Kiss, arXiv:2501.12268 10.48550/arxiv.2501.12268 (2025)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.12268 2025

  60. [62]

    Krastanov, A

    S. Krastanov, A. S. de la Cerda, and P. Narang, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033164 (2021)

    work page 2021

  61. [63]

    H. J. Briegel and R. Raussendorf, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 910 (2001)

    work page 2001

  62. [64]

    Kruszynska, A

    C. Kruszynska, A. Miyake, H. J. Briegel, and W. Dür, Phys. Rev. A74, 052316 (2006)

    work page 2006

  63. [65]

    An introduction to measurement based quantum computation

    R. Jozsa, arXiv:quant-ph/0508124 10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0508124 (2005)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0508124 2005

  64. [66]

    H. J. Briegel, D. E. Browne, W. Dür, R. Raussendorf, and M. Van den Nest, Nature Physics5, 19–26 (2009)

    work page 2009

  65. [67]

    Fujii and K

    K. Fujii and K. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. A80, 042308 (2009)

    work page 2009

  66. [68]

    Rozpędek, T

    F. Rozpędek, T. Schiet, L. P. Thinh, D. Elkouss, A. C. Doherty, and S. Wehner, Phys. Rev. A97, 062333 (2018)

    work page 2018

  67. [69]

    Krastanov, V

    S. Krastanov, V. V. Albert, and L. Jiang, Quantum3, 123 (2019)

    work page 2019

  68. [70]

    Miguel-Ramiro, F

    J. Miguel-Ramiro, F. Riera-Sàbat, and W. Dür, PRX Quantum4, 040323 (2023)

    work page 2023

  69. [71]

    Salek and A

    F. Salek and A. Winter, IEEE Transactions on Informa- tion Theory71, 4374–4384 (2025)

    work page 2025

  70. [72]

    Balmaseda and J

    A. Balmaseda and J. I. de Vicente, Phys. Rev. A112, 032436 (2025)

    work page 2025

  71. [73]

    Miguel-Ramiro, A

    J. Miguel-Ramiro, A. Pirker, and W. Dür, Quantum9, 1702 (2025)

    work page 2025

  72. [74]

    C. Popp, T. C. Sutter, and B. C. Hiesmayr, arXiv:2603.03925 10.48550/ARXIV.2603.03925 (2026)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.03925 2026

  73. [75]

    Two-colorable graph is a graph, whose vertices are col- ored only using two colors, such that no two neighboring vertices are colored the same

    work page

  74. [76]

    1, these are performed locally within each party’s laboratory

    Although the protocol involves two-qubit gates such as CNOTs, as shown in Fig. 1, these are performed locally within each party’s laboratory. The protocol, therefore, falls within the LOCC framework

    work page

  75. [77]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computa- tion and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edi- tion (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    work page 2010

  76. [78]

    Withk̸=l,label distinct protocol calls withl > kandk, l∈K, whereKis defined as the number of calls

    To quantify the shift between the two highest-fidelity points, we define the relative gainG % as the percent- age increase in fidelity from the first maximum(Fk, Rk) to the second maximum(Fl, Rl), G% = Fl −F k Fk ×100. Withk̸=l,label distinct protocol calls withl > kandk, l∈K, whereKis defined as the number of calls. This equation can also be adapted for ...

    work page

  77. [79]

    Cuquet and J

    M. Cuquet and J. Calsamiglia, Phys. Rev. A86, 042304 (2012)

    work page 2012

  78. [80]

    Wallnöfer, A

    J. Wallnöfer, A. Pirker, M. Zwerger, and W. Dür, Scien- tific Reports9, 314 (2019)

    work page 2019

  79. [81]

    Meignant, D

    C. Meignant, D. Markham, and F. Grosshans, Phys. Rev. A100, 052333 (2019)

    work page 2019

  80. [82]

    Prielinger, K

    L. Prielinger, K. Goodenough, G. Avis, S. Kras- tanov, D. Towsley, and G. Vardoyan, arXiv:2508.14737 10.48550/ARXIV.2508.14737 (2025)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.14737 2025

Showing first 80 references.