pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.12130 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-12 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Quantum teleportation with coherent error in Bell-state measurement

Jeonghyeon Shin , Jaehak Lee , Soojoon Lee , Seung-Woo Lee
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 04:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum teleportationBell-state measurementcoherent errorsentanglementfidelitysuccess probabilityjoint measurements
0
0 comments X

The pith

Partially entangled Bell-state measurements still allow unit-fidelity quantum teleportation when success probability is tuned to the exact relation with channel entanglement.

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

This paper studies quantum teleportation under realistic conditions where the joint Bell-state measurement is imperfect due to coherent errors and therefore only partially entangled. It shows that the degree of entanglement present in the measurement directly controls the achievable teleportation fidelity. The authors derive an exact equation that gives the precise success probability required to reach unit fidelity for any given level of measurement entanglement and channel entanglement. A strategy is proposed that uses this relation to accept only certain measurement outcomes and thereby restore perfect teleportation fidelity without needing ideal hardware. A sympathetic reader would care because the result supplies a concrete, hardware-compatible route to high-performance teleportation using devices that are already available.

Core claim

The paper claims that the entanglement of joint measurements determines teleportation performance and that an exact quantitative relation exists among measurement entanglement, channel entanglement, and the success probability needed for unit-fidelity teleportation; by adopting an acceptance-probability strategy one can therefore overcome the limitations of partially entangled joint measurements and recover unit teleportation fidelity.

What carries the argument

The exact equation that relates the entanglement of the joint measurement, the entanglement of the quantum channel, and the success probability required to achieve unit-fidelity teleportation.

If this is right

  • Unit-fidelity teleportation is achievable even when the Bell-state measurement is only partially entangled.
  • The required success probability can be calculated directly from the measured values of measurement and channel entanglement.
  • Coherent errors arising from imperfect entangling operations can be mitigated by the acceptance-probability strategy without major hardware changes.
  • The same relation applies to the realistic error models illustrated in the work.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The quantitative relation could be used to set design targets for the entanglement quality of joint-measurement devices in quantum networks.
  • Similar equations might be derivable for other protocols that rely on joint measurements, such as entanglement swapping or quantum repeaters.
  • Direct tests of the equation on superconducting or photonic platforms would clarify whether the relation holds beyond the coherent-error models studied here.

Load-bearing premise

That the coherent-error models used for the joint measurements capture the dominant imperfections in real devices and that the acceptance-probability strategy can be implemented without introducing new uncontrolled errors.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures teleportation fidelity versus success probability for several controlled levels of measurement entanglement and finds that the observed success probability for unit fidelity deviates from the value predicted by the derived exact equation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.12130 by Jaehak Lee, Jeonghyeon Shin, Seung-Woo Lee, Soojoon Lee.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Coherent error in a Bell-state measurement (BSM). In the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Teleportation protocol in the measurement-reversal (MR) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Geometric structure of the elegant joint measurement (EJM) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Trade-o [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Teleportation fidelity for the elegant joint measurement with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Teleportation performance under a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Teleportation performance under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum teleportation is a fundamental protocol in quantum information science, whose performance is conventionally evaluated under the assumption of ideal Bell-state measurements. In realistic implementations, however, joint measurements are often imperfect and can deviate from maximally entangled bases due to coherent errors in entangling operations. In this work, we analytically show how the entanglement of joint measurements determines teleportation performance and propose a strategy to overcome the limitations imposed by partially entangled joint measurements to recover the unit teleportation fidelity. We then derive an exact equation revealing a quantitative relation between measurement entanglement, channel entanglement, and the success probability to realize the unit-fidelity teleportation. We illustrate our results using elegant joint measurements and realistic coherent error models arising from imperfect entangling operations in quantum systems. Our work provides fundamental insight into the role of measurement entanglement in quantum teleportation and establishes a practical framework for achieving faithful teleportation without requiring substantial modifications to existing hardware.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper analytically examines quantum teleportation when Bell-state measurements suffer coherent errors from imperfect entangling gates, deriving an exact quantitative relation between the entanglement of the joint measurement, the entanglement of the shared channel, and the success probability needed for unit-fidelity teleportation. It proposes an acceptance-probability strategy (post-selection on measurement outcomes) that compensates for partially entangled measurements to recover unit fidelity, and illustrates the results with elegant joint measurements and realistic coherent-error parametrizations.

Significance. If the central derivation holds, the work supplies a concrete, parameter-free-style relation that clarifies the role of measurement entanglement in teleportation fidelity and offers a practical, hardware-light method to achieve faithful teleportation under coherent imperfections. The analytical character and explicit illustrations with imperfect entangling operations constitute a clear strength for quantum communication theory.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §3 (derivation)] The abstract and introduction assert an 'exact equation' linking measurement entanglement, channel entanglement, and success probability, yet the manuscript does not explicitly display the final closed-form relation or the intermediate steps that eliminate auxiliary parameters; without this, the claim that the relation is quantitative and exact cannot be verified for hidden assumptions or post-selection bias.
  2. [§4 (strategy and illustrations)] The acceptance-probability strategy is presented as compensating coherent errors without introducing new uncontrolled errors, but the text does not quantify the overhead in terms of discarded events or the resulting effective rate; this is load-bearing for the practicality claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§2] Notation for the entanglement measures (e.g., concurrence or negativity) of the measurement and channel should be unified and defined once in §2 before being used in the main equation.
  2. [Figures 2–4] Figure captions for the elegant joint measurements do not state the numerical values of the coherent-error parameters used in the plots, making reproducibility difficult.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and valuable comments, which have helped clarify and strengthen our presentation. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to improve explicitness and completeness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §3 (derivation)] The abstract and introduction assert an 'exact equation' linking measurement entanglement, channel entanglement, and success probability, yet the manuscript does not explicitly display the final closed-form relation or the intermediate steps that eliminate auxiliary parameters; without this, the claim that the relation is quantitative and exact cannot be verified for hidden assumptions or post-selection bias.

    Authors: We agree that the final closed-form relation and the elimination of auxiliary parameters should be displayed more prominently for verifiability. In the revised manuscript we have added an explicit statement of the exact quantitative relation at the end of Section 3, together with a compact derivation outline that shows how auxiliary parameters are removed. We have also inserted a clarifying sentence confirming that the post-selection is fully accounted for in the success probability and does not introduce hidden bias beyond the defined acceptance criterion. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§4 (strategy and illustrations)] The acceptance-probability strategy is presented as compensating coherent errors without introducing new uncontrolled errors, but the text does not quantify the overhead in terms of discarded events or the resulting effective rate; this is load-bearing for the practicality claim.

    Authors: We accept that an explicit quantification of the overhead strengthens the practicality discussion. The revised Section 4 now includes the acceptance probabilities for the illustrated joint measurements and coherent-error models, together with the resulting effective teleportation rates after post-selection. These additions make the rate-fidelity trade-off transparent while preserving the claim that the strategy requires no additional hardware. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper presents an analytical derivation of an exact quantitative relation between measurement entanglement, channel entanglement, and success probability for unit-fidelity teleportation, along with a post-selection strategy. No load-bearing steps reduce to self-definition, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or self-citation chains. The central equation is derived from entanglement measures and measurement operators rather than being equivalent to its inputs by construction. Illustrations with coherent-error models are treated as examples, not as the source of the general result. This matches the reader's assessment of an internally consistent derivation from definitions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard quantum-information definitions of entanglement and fidelity together with models of coherent errors; no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • coherent error parameters
    Strengths of phase or amplitude errors in the entangling operations used for the measurement basis; values are taken from realistic models but not numerically specified in the abstract.
axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard definitions of bipartite entanglement and teleportation fidelity in quantum mechanics
    Invoked to relate measurement entanglement to teleportation performance.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5455 in / 1177 out tokens · 111298 ms · 2026-05-13T04:24:31.184172+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The geomet- rical structure of the EJM is captured by the Bloch directions {nr}of the reduced operatorsW † r Wr

    The EJM is an iso- entangled measurement so that all four basis states possess the same amount of entanglement, quantified byE M(t)=p 1−(3/4) cos 2 tindependent of the outcomer. The geomet- rical structure of the EJM is captured by the Bloch directions {nr}of the reduced operatorsW † r Wr. The corresponding Bloch vectors have common radius q 1−E 2 M =( √ ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    0 3 /8 3 /4 t 0 /8 /4 (a) 0 3 /8 3 /4 t 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0Ftele (b) Optimal Standard Classical 2/30.1 0.4 0.7 1.0 Pmax succ FIG

    The amount of entanglement of this state is given byE c(φ)=sin 2φ. 0 3 /8 3 /4 t 0 /8 /4 (a) 0 3 /8 3 /4 t 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0Ftele (b) Optimal Standard Classical 2/30.1 0.4 0.7 1.0 Pmax succ FIG. 8. Teleportation performance under aZX-based BSM withZZ- type coherent error. (a) Maximum success probabilityP max succ for faith- ful teleportation as a function o...

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Teleporting an Unknown Quantum state Via Dual Classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen channels, Phys. 11 Rev. Lett.70, 1895 (1993)

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2010)

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Pirandola, J

    S. Pirandola, J. Eisert, C. Weedbrook, A. Furusawa, and S. L. Braunstein, Advances in quantum teleportation, Nat. Photonics 9, 641–652 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Bouwmeester, J.-W

    D. Bouwmeester, J.-W. Pan, K. Mattle, M. Eibl, H. Weinfurter, and A. Zeilinger, Experimental quantum teleportation, Nature 390, 575 (1997)

    work page 1997

  7. [7]

    Boschi, S

    D. Boschi, S. Branca, F. De Martini, L. Hardy, and S. Popescu, Experimental Realization of Teleporting an Unknown Pure Quantum State via Dual Classical and Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen Channels, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 1121 (1998)

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    Furusawa, J.L

    A. Furusawa, J.L. Sørensen, S.L. Braunstein, C.A. Fuchs, H.J. Kimble, and E.S. Polzik, Unconditional Quantum Teleporta- tion, Science282, 706 (1998)

    work page 1998

  9. [9]

    Barrettet al., Deterministic quantum teleportation of atomic qubits, Nature429, 737 (2004)

    M.D. Barrettet al., Deterministic quantum teleportation of atomic qubits, Nature429, 737 (2004)

    work page 2004

  10. [10]

    Olmschenk, D.N

    S. Olmschenk, D.N. Matsukevich, P. Maunz, D. Hayes, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Quantum teleportation between distant matter qubits, Science323, 486 (2009)

    work page 2009

  11. [11]

    Steffenet al., Deterministic quantum teleportation with feed- forward in a solid state system, Nature500, 319 (2013)

    L. Steffenet al., Deterministic quantum teleportation with feed- forward in a solid state system, Nature500, 319 (2013)

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    Wang, X.-D

    X.-L. Wang, X.-D. Cai, Z.-E. Su, M.-C. Chen, D. Wu, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, C.-Y . Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Quantum teleportation of multiple degrees of freedom of a single photon, Nature518, 516 (2015)

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    Gottesman and I

    D. Gottesman and I. L. Chuang, Demonstrating the viability of universal quantum computation using teleportation and single- qubit operations, Nature402, 390–393 (1999)

    work page 1999

  14. [14]

    H. J. Briegel, W. D ¨ur, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum Re- peaters: The Role of Imperfect Local Operations in Quantum Communication, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 5932 (1998)

    work page 1998

  15. [15]

    Raussendorf and H

    R. Raussendorf and H. J. Briegel, A One-Way Quantum Com- puter, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5188–5191 (2001)

    work page 2001

  16. [16]

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

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    de Riedmatten, I

    H. de Riedmatten, I. Marcikic, W. Tittel, H. Zbinden, D. Collins, and N. Gisin, Long Distance Quantum Teleportation in a Quantum Relay Configuration, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 047904 (2004)

    work page 2004

  18. [18]

    Lee and H

    S.-W. Lee and H. Jeong, Near-deterministic quantum telepor- tation and resource-efficient quantum computation using linear optics and hybrid qubits, Phys. Rev. A87, 022326 (2013)

    work page 2013

  19. [19]

    Sunet al., Quantum teleportation with independent sources and prior entanglement distribution over a network, Na- ture Photonics10, 671 (2016)

    Q.-C. Sunet al., Quantum teleportation with independent sources and prior entanglement distribution over a network, Na- ture Photonics10, 671 (2016)

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    Valivarthiet al., Quantum teleportation across a metropolitan fibre network, Nature Photonics10, 676 (2016)

    R. Valivarthiet al., Quantum teleportation across a metropolitan fibre network, Nature Photonics10, 676 (2016)

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    Renet al., Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation, Na- ture549, 70 (2017)

    J.-G. Renet al., Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation, Na- ture549, 70 (2017)

    work page 2017

  22. [22]

    Lee, T.C

    S.-W. Lee, T.C. Ralph, and H. Jeong, Fundamental building block for all-optical scalable quantum networks, Phys. Rev. A 100, 052303 (2019)

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Valivarthiet al., Teleportation Systems Toward a Quantum Internet, PRX Quantum1, 020317 (2020)

    R. Valivarthiet al., Teleportation Systems Toward a Quantum Internet, PRX Quantum1, 020317 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Llewellynet al., Chip-to-chip quantum teleportation and multi-photon entanglement in silicon, Nature Physics16, 148 (2020)

    D. Llewellynet al., Chip-to-chip quantum teleportation and multi-photon entanglement in silicon, Nature Physics16, 148 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Chouet al., Deterministic teleportation of a quantum gate between two logical qubits, Nature561, 368 (2018)

    K.S. Chouet al., Deterministic teleportation of a quantum gate between two logical qubits, Nature561, 368 (2018)

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Wanet al., Quantum gate teleportation between separated qubits in a trapped-ion processor, Science364, 875 (2019)

    Y . Wanet al., Quantum gate teleportation between separated qubits in a trapped-ion processor, Science364, 875 (2019)

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    Lee, S.-W

    S.M. Lee, S.-W. Lee, H. Jeong, and H.S. Park, Quantum Tele- portation of Shared Quantum Secret, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 060501 (2020)

    work page 2020

  28. [28]

    Nielsen and C.M

    M.A. Nielsen and C.M. Caves, Reversible quantum operations and their application to teleportation, Phys. Rev. A55, 2547 (1997)

    work page 1997

  29. [29]

    Horodecki, P

    M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, General tele- portation channel, singlet fraction, and quasidistillation, Phys. Rev. A60, 1888–1898 (1999)

    work page 1999

  30. [30]

    Banaszek, Optimal quantum teleportation with an arbitrary pure state, Phys

    K. Banaszek, Optimal quantum teleportation with an arbitrary pure state, Phys. Rev. A62, 024301 (2000)

    work page 2000

  31. [31]

    Karlsson and M

    A. Karlsson and M. Bourennane, Quantum teleportation using three-particle entanglement, Phys. Rev. A58, 4394 (1998)

    work page 1998

  32. [32]

    Lee and M.S

    J. Lee and M.S. Kim, Entanglement Teleportation via Werner States, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 4236 (2000)

    work page 2000

  33. [33]

    Mor and P

    T. Mor and P. Horodecki, Teleportation via generalized measurements, and conclusive teleportation, arXiv:quant- ph/9906039 (1999)

    work page arXiv 1999

  34. [34]

    W. Son, J. Lee, M.S. Kim, and Y .-J. Park, Conclusive teleporta- tion of ad-dimensional unknown state, Phys. Rev. A64, 064304 (2001)

    work page 2001

  35. [35]

    Bowen and S

    G. Bowen and S. Bose, Teleportation as a Depolarizing Quan- tum Channel, Relative Entropy, and Classical Capacity, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 267901 (2001)

    work page 2001

  36. [36]

    Li, C.-F

    W.-L. Li, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Probabilistic teleportation and entanglement matching, Phys. Rev. A61, 034301 (2000)

    work page 2000

  37. [37]

    S. Oh, S. Lee, and H. W. Lee, Fidelity of quantum teleportation through noisy channels, Phys. Rev. A66, 022316 (2002)

    work page 2002

  38. [38]

    Agrawal and A

    P. Agrawal and A. K. Pati, Probabilistic quantum teleportation, Phys. Lett. A305, 12–17 (2002)

    work page 2002

  39. [39]

    Verstraete and H

    F. Verstraete and H. Verschelde, Optimal Teleportation with a Mixed State of Two Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 097901 (2003)

    work page 2003

  40. [40]

    Park, S.-W

    K. Park, S.-W. Lee, and H. Jeong, Quantum teleportation be- tween particle-like and field-like qubits using hybrid entan- glement under decoherence effects, Phys. Rev. A86, 062301 (2012)

    work page 2012

  41. [41]

    S.-W. Lee, D. G. Im, Y .-H. Kim, H. Nha, and M. S. Kim, Quan- tum teleportation is a reversal of quantum measurement, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033119 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Im, C.-H

    D.-G. Im, C.-H. Lee, Y . Kim, H. Nha, M.S. Kim, S.-W. Lee, and Y .-H. Kim, Optimal teleportation via noisy quantum channels without additional qubit resources, npj Quantum Information7, 86 (2021)

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    V . H. Brauer and A. Vald´es-Hern´andez, Enhancing teleportation via noisy channels: effects of the induced multipartite entangle- ment, Phys. Rev. A109, 052606 (2024)

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    Knill, Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices, Nature434, 39–44 (2005)

    E. Knill, Quantum computing with realistically noisy devices, Nature434, 39–44 (2005)

    work page 2005

  45. [45]

    Greenbaum and Z

    D. Greenbaum and Z. Dutton, Modeling coherent errors in quantum error correction, Quantum Sci. Technol.3, 015007 (2018)

    work page 2018

  46. [46]

    Bravyi, M

    S. Bravyi, M. Englbrecht, R. K ¨onig, and N. Peard, Correct- ing coherent errors with surface codes, npj Quantum Inf.4, 55 (2018)

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    F. Venn, J. Behrends, and B. B´eri, Coherent-Error Threshold for Surface Codes from Majorana Delocalization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 060603 (2023)

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    J. Ku, X. Xu, M. Brink, D. C. McKay, J. B. Hertzberg, M. H. Ansari, and B. L. T. Plourde, Suppression of Unwanted ZZ In- teractions in a Hybrid Two-Qubit System, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 200504 (2020)

    work page 2020

  49. [49]

    Z. Ni, S. Li, L. Zhang, J. Chu, J. Niu, T. Yan, X. Deng, L. Hu, J. Li, Y . Zhong, S. Liu, F. Yan, Y . Xu, and D. Yu, Scal- able Method for Eliminating Residual ZZ Interaction between 12 Superconducting Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 040502 (2022)

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    Eckstein, B

    F. Eckstein, B. Han, S. Trebst, and G. Y . Zhu, Robust teleporta- tion of a surface code and cascade of topological quantum phase transitions, PRX Quantum5, 040313 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Sundaresan, I

    N. Sundaresan, I. Lauer, E. Pritchett, E. Magesan, P. Jurcevic, and J. M. Gambetta, Reducing unitary and spectator errors in cross resonance with optimized rotary echoes, PRX Quantum 1, 020318 (2020)

    work page 2020

  52. [52]

    Morgado and S

    M. Morgado and S. Whitlock, Quantum simulation and com- puting with Rydberg-interacting qubits, A VS Quantum Sci.3, 023501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    C. Fang, Y . Wang, S. Huang, K. R. Brown, and J. Kim, Crosstalk Suppression in Individually Addressed Two-Qubit Gates in a Trapped-Ion Quantum Computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 240504 (2022)

    work page 2022

  54. [54]

    Gisin, Entanglement 25 years after quantum teleportation: Testing joint measurements in quantum networks, Entropy21, 325 (2019)

    N. Gisin, Entanglement 25 years after quantum teleportation: Testing joint measurements in quantum networks, Entropy21, 325 (2019)

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    E. G. Cavalcanti, R. Chaves, F. Giacomini, and Y .-C. Liang, Fresh perspectives on the foundations of quantum physics, Nat. Rev. Phys.5, 323 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    B ¨aumer, N

    E. B ¨aumer, N. Gisin, and A. Tavakoli, Demonstrating the power of quantum computers, certification of highly entangled mea- surements and scalable quantum nonlocality, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 117 (2021)

    work page 2021

  57. [57]

    Del Santo, J

    F. Del Santo, J. Czartowski, K. ˙Zyczkowski, and N. Gisin, Iso- entangled bases and joint measurements, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 023085 (2024)

    work page 2024

  58. [58]

    Pauwels, A

    J. Pauwels, A. Pozas-Kerstjens, F. del Santo, and N. Gisin, Clas- sification of joint quantum measurements based on entangle- ment cost of localization, Phys. Rev. X15, 021013 (2025)

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Tavakoli, N

    A. Tavakoli, N. Gisin, and C. Branciard, Bilocal Bell Inequali- ties Violated by the Quantum Elegant Joint Measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 220401 (2021)

    work page 2021

  60. [60]

    Tavakoli, A

    A. Tavakoli, A. Pozas-Kerstjens, M.-X. Luo, and M.-O. Re- nou, Bell nonlocality in networks, Rep. Prog. Phys.85, 056001 (2022)

    work page 2022

  61. [61]

    Huang, X.-M

    C.-X. Huang, X.-M. Hu, Y . Guo, C. Zhang, B.-H. Liu, Y .- F. Huang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, N. Gisin, C. Branciard, and A. Tavakoli, Entanglement Swapping and Quantum Correla- tions via Symmetric Joint Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 030502 (2022)

    work page 2022

  62. [62]

    D. Ding, M. X. Yu, Y . Q. He, H. S. Ji, T. Gao, and F. L. Yan, Quantum teleportation based on the elegant joint measurement, Phys. Lett. A527, 129991 (2024)

    work page 2024

  63. [63]

    Y . W. Cheong and S.-W. Lee, Balance Between Information Gain and Reversibility in Weak Measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150402 (2012)

    work page 2012

  64. [64]

    Banaszek, Fidelity Balance in Quantum Operations, Phys

    K. Banaszek, Fidelity Balance in Quantum Operations, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 1366 (2001)

    work page 2001

  65. [65]

    Lim, Y .-S

    H.-T. Lim, Y .-S. Ra, K.-H. Hong, S.-W. Lee, and Y .-H. Kim, Fundamental Bounds in Measurements for Estimating Quan- tum States, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 020504 (2014)

    work page 2014

  66. [66]

    S.-W. Lee, J. Kim, and H. Nha, Complete Information Balance in Quantum Measurement, Quantum5, 414 (2021)

    work page 2021

  67. [67]

    Hong, Y .-S

    S. Hong, Y .-S. Kim, Y .-W. Cho, J. Kim, S.-W. Lee, and H.- T. Lim, Demonstration of Complete Information Trade-Offin Quantum Measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 050401 (2022)

    work page 2022

  68. [68]

    G. S. Paraoanu, Microwave-induced coupling of superconduct- ing qubits, Phys. Rev. B74, 140504 (2006)

    work page 2006

  69. [69]

    Rigetti and M

    C. Rigetti and M. Devoret, Fully microwave-tunable universal gates in superconducting qubits with linear couplings and fixed transition frequencies, Phys. Rev. B81, 134507 (2010)

    work page 2010

  70. [70]

    J. M. Chow, A. D. C ´orcoles, J. M. Gambetta, C. Rigetti, B. R. Johnson, J. A. Smolin, J. R. Rozen, G. A. Keefe, M. B. Roth- well, M. B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen, Simple All-Microwave Entangling Gate for Fixed-Frequency Superconducting Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 080502 (2011)

    work page 2011

  71. [71]

    Magesan and J

    E. Magesan and J. M. Gambetta, Effective Hamiltonian models of the cross-resonance gate, Phys. Rev. A101, 052308 (2020)

    work page 2020

  72. [72]

    Tripathi, M

    V . Tripathi, M. Khezri, and A. N. Korotkov, Operation and in- trinsic error budget of a two-qubit cross-resonance gate, Phys. Rev. A100, 012301 (2019)

    work page 2019

  73. [73]

    Gour, Family of concurrence monotones and its applications, Phys

    G. Gour, Family of concurrence monotones and its applications, Phys. Rev. A71, 012318 (2005)

    work page 2005