Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Observation of Genuine High-dimensional Multi-partite Non-locality in Entangled Photon States

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports the first experimental observation of genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality, demonstrated by a Bell parameter $B = 8.302 \pm 0.024$ that exceeds the best possible value for one qubit and two qutrits.

desk verdict A credible experimental milestone, but the headline claim of genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality rests on a single 3.2-sigma violation and a numerical bound that is only in the supplement. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.10035 v1 pith:JGIRD4ZO submitted 2025-05-15 quant-ph

Xiao-Min Hu , Cen-Xiao Huang , Nicola d'Alessandro , Gabriele Cobucci , Chao Zhang , Yu Guo , Yun-Feng Huang , Chuan-Feng Li
show 5 more authors
Guang-Can Guo Xiaoqin Gao Marcus Huber Armin Tavakoli Bi-Heng Liu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords genuinehigh-dimensionalmultipartitenon-localityqutritGHZstateBellinequalitypathidentityentanglementwitnessmultiphotonnonlocalitydevice-independent
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 reports an experiment in which three photons are prepared in a three-level Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state using path identity, and the measured correlations break a chain of Bell-type inequalities beyond what any qubit-based quantum model could produce. The measured Bell parameter, $B = 8.302 \pm 0.024$, exceeds the local-hidden-variable bound of 7, the all-qubit bound of 7.446, the two-qubit-one-qutrit bound of 7.584, and the one-qubit-two-qutrit bound of 8.225. The authors claim this is the first observation of genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality, meaning the correlations cannot be reproduced by any quantum system in which the three particles have dimensions (2,2,2), (2,2,3), or (2,3,3). The result matters because it demonstrates that high-dimensional multiparticle entanglement can be certified through Bell violations, providing a step toward device-independent protocols in higher dimensions.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on a family of Bell-type inequalities for three parties with three outcomes each, based on a construction whose maximal value for an ideal three-qutrit GHZ state is 9. For systems of reduced local dimension, the same Bell functional has upper bounds computed by the method of Ref. [31]: 7.446 for (2,2,2), 7.584 for (2,2,3), and 8.225 for (2,3,3). The experimental engine is a path-identity scheme in which path modes encode qutrit information and polarization controls the exchange of paths between photons, yielding high-fidelity three- and four-qutrit GHZ states. The violation of the (2,3,3) bound by the measured $B = 8.302 \pm 0.024$ is what certifies genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality.

What would settle it

An independent computation of the maximum of the implemented Bell functional over all one-qubit-two-qutrit quantum states that returns a value at or above 8.302 would refute the claim of genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the correlations of the three-qutrit GHZ state are strong enough to rule out not just local hidden variables but also every quantum model in which the local dimensions are not all three. Concretely, the measured Bell value sits 3.2 standard deviations above the best possible value for one qubit and two qutrits, so the experiment falsifies the hypothesis that the observed non-locality arises from mixed qubit-qutrit entanglement. The same setup also certifies genuine three-dimensional multipartite entanglement in a four-qutrit GHZ state with witness value $W = 1.841 \pm 0.029$, exceeding the $5/3$ threshold, with a lower fidelity bound of $0.841 \pm 0.029$.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion rests on the assumption that the numerical bound 8.225 for one qubit and two qutrits is an exact upper bound for the exact Bell functional used in the experiment, and that the functional has been implemented correctly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A Bell violation above the (2,3,3) bound provides a device-independent certificate that the prepared state is genuinely three-dimensional and multipartite entangled, not merely a qubit state or a qubit-qutrit mixture.
  • The two-basis fidelity witness, requiring only 54 projective measurements for three qutrits, certifies genuine three-dimensional multipartite entanglement more efficiently than full tomography, which needs 1728 settings.
  • The measured violation of the (2,3,3) bound at 3.2 standard deviations, with a p-value below $10^{-2}$ from 10,143 counts, shows that finite statistics suffice for a confident claim.
  • The four-qutrit witness value $W = 1.841 \pm 0.029$, exceeding the $5/3$ threshold, demonstrates that the path-identity preparation method extends to four particles.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same dimension-dependent bounding technique could be applied to other multi-outcome Bell scenarios, yielding quantitative dimension witnesses that go beyond qubit vs qutrit classification.
  • If the chain of bounds can be extended to four or more parties, the path-identity platform is a candidate for observing genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality in larger systems, for which no noise-tolerant Bell inequalities are currently known.
  • A future experiment that closes the detection loophole would test whether the observed genuine high-dimensional non-locality persists without fair-sampling assumptions, which is relevant for device-independent randomness and key distribution.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports an experimental implementation of three- and four-photon GHZ states in dimension three using the path-identity scheme. The authors verify genuine three-dimensional multipartite entanglement via a two-basis witness (W = 1.849 ± 0.016 for three qutrits and 1.841 ± 0.029 for four qutrits, both above the 5/3 bound). For the non-locality test, they measure the Bell parameter B = 8.302 ± 0.024, exceeding the LHV bound 7, the all-qubit bound 7.446, the two-qubit-one-qutrit bound 7.584, and the one-qubit-two-qutrit bound 8.225, with the last violation at 3.2 standard deviations. They interpret this as the first observation of genuine high-dimensional multipartite non-locality.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a significant step: it pushes experimental quantum non-locality beyond the qubit framework into the multipartite high-dimensional regime, with implications for device-independent certification of entanglement dimension. The paper has clear strengths: high HOM visibilities (0.974–0.996), robust violations of the LHV and qubit bounds (54σ and 7σ), use of an independent numerical bound from Ref. [31] rather than a fitted parameter, and a careful finite-count analysis. The main risk is that the headline claim rests on a 3.2σ violation of a numerical upper bound that is not verified in the main text; a small error in the bound or in the implemented Bell functional would reduce the claim to non-locality beyond qubits (still noteworthy but not 'genuinely high-dimensional' in the paper's sense).

major comments (3)
  1. [Multi-partite high-dimensional non-locality, Eq. (3)] The decisive exclusion of one-qubit-two-qutrit quantum models rests entirely on the numerical bound B ≤ 8.225, which is stated to derive from the methods of Ref. [31] and is delegated to Section 6 of the Supplementary Materials. Because the measured value is only 0.077 (3.2σ) above this bound, a small error in the numerical optimization or a mismatch between the implemented Bell functional (nine global settings, outcome labeling) and the functional for which the bound was computed would invalidate the central claim. The authors should state the explicit Bell functional (inputs, outcomes, and coefficients), provide the numerical certificate (including convergence parameters for the Navascués–Vértesi-type hierarchy), and ideally an independent verification or a clear derivation in the main text or SM.
  2. [Non-locality, finite-count analysis] The reported p-value for the (2,3,3) violation is 'p < 10^-2' from a Chernoff bound based on 10,143 counts, alongside a 3.2σ Gaussian deviation. The paper should state whether this p-value is one-sided, whether it is corrected for multiple comparisons across the four inequalities in Eq. (3), and how the standard error 0.024 is propagated from the relative frequency estimates across the nine settings. The confidence in the strongest claim is marginal, so a transparent and conservative statistical treatment is essential.
  3. [Discussion / Abstract] The abstract and conclusion use unqualified language such as 'demonstrating multi-partite quantum non-locality' and 'observation of genuine high-dimensional multi-particle non-locality'. Because the experiment postselects four-fold coincidences and the Discussion acknowledges that the detection loophole is not closed, the conclusion should explicitly state that the observation holds under the fair-sampling assumption. This is standard practice for photonic Bell tests but should be stated where the headline claim is made.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figure 4 caption] The caption says 'X, Y, Z' while the text refers to the three inputs as 'X, Y, W'; please make the notation consistent.
  2. [Finite count analysis, Eq. (4)] The Kullback–Leibler divergence is written as 'DKL (WB + ∆exp||W B)' with an inconsistent use of 'W B' versus 'WB'; define all symbols and fix the notation.
  3. [Entanglement detection via efficient fidelity estimation] The claim that 'tomography would require 1728 projection measurements' for three qutrits is not immediately obvious (a full density-matrix determination would require fewer projective measurements); please clarify the counting.
  4. [Experimental three-dimensional four-photon GHZ Entanglement] The text alternates between 'HWP3' and 'HWPA3' when describing the path-exchange setup; please unify the notation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the Bell bounds are external, B is measured, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction.

full rationale

The central claim is the measured Bell value B = 8.302 ± 0.024 exceeding the bounds in Eq. (3). The experimental value is obtained by counting nine global settings; the bounds are not derived from those counts. Eq. (3) is stated to follow from Ref. 12's Bell functional and the numerical methods of Ref. 31, and the (3,3,3) ≤ 9 value is the algebraic maximum, so the comparison is external to the data. No parameter is fitted to the measured B, and no input probability is defined in terms of the output claim. The GME witness in Eq. (2) is taken from Ref. 11, which includes two of the present authors; however, that is a published, parameter-free theorem about a threshold and is evaluated directly from counts, so it is a minor self-citation rather than a load-bearing circular step. The fact that the (2,3,3) bound is delegated to SM Section 6 and the experiment assumes fair sampling are verification and loophole concerns, not instances of the derivation reducing to its own inputs.

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

The central claim rests on standard quantum mechanics, the validity of the numerical dimension bounds, the path-identity state preparation, and fair sampling. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced; the bounds are computed rather than fitted.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The NPA-type hierarchy of Refs. [31,32] yields valid upper bounds on Bell parameters for quantum correlations with fixed local dimensions.
    Used to set the numerical bounds in Eq. (3); the main text defers the certificate to SM Section 6.
  • domain assumption The path-identity scheme with polarization-controlled path exchange produces the intended three-qutrit and four-qutrit GHZ states, with four-fold coincidence post-selecting the target state.
    Core of the state preparation, described around Figs. 1 and 2.
  • domain assumption Fair sampling: detected four-fold coincidences are representative of the emitted quantum state.
    Standard in Bell experiments without detection-loophole closure; acknowledged in the Discussion as a future challenge.
  • standard math The Bell functional B is symmetric under party permutation, so bounds computed for one permutation apply to all.
    Stated after Eq. (3) and used to cover all dimension tuples.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Observation of Genuine High-dimensional Multi-partite Non-locality in Entangled Photon States." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JGIRD4ZO

@misc{pith2026250510035,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Observation of Genuine High-dimensional Multi-partite Non-locality in Entangled Photon States},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JGIRD4ZO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.10035}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum information science has leaped forward with the exploration of high-dimensional quantum systems, offering greater potential than traditional qubits in quantum communication and quantum computing. To advance the field of high-dimensional quantum technology, a significant effort is underway to progressively enhance the entanglement dimension between two particles. An alternative effective strategy involves not only increasing the dimensionality but also expanding the number of particles that are entangled. We present an experimental study demonstrating multi-partite quantum non-locality beyond qubit constraints, thus moving into the realm of strongly entangled high-dimensional multi-particle quantum systems. In the experiment, quantum states were encoded in the path degree of freedom (DoF) and controlled via polarization, enabling efficient operations in a two-dimensional plane to prepare three- and four-particle Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) states in three-level systems. Our experimental results reveal ways in which high-dimensional systems can surpass qubits in terms of violating local-hidden-variable theories. Our realization of multiple complex and high-quality entanglement technologies is an important primary step for more complex quantum computing and communication protocols.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Detecting high-dimensional entanglement with simple measurements

    quant-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A witness method detects high-dimensional Schmidt numbers using only strings of single-qubit Pauli measurements, demonstrated up to 16-dimensional photonic entanglement.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [31]

    Navascués & T

    M. Navascués & T. Vértesi. Bounding the Set of Finite Di- mensional Quantum Correlations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 020501. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 115.020501 (2015)

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2015

  2. [1]

    W. K. Wootters & W. H. Zurek. A single quantum cannot be cloned. Nature 299, 802–803. https://doi.org/10.1038/ 299802a0 (1982)

    work page 1982

  3. [2]

    Scarani et al

    V . Scarani et al. The security of practical quantum key distri- bution. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1301–1350. https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.81.1301 (2009)

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.1301 2009

  4. [3]

    Budroni, A

    C. Budroni, A. Cabello, O. Gühne, M. Kleinmann & J.-A. Lars- son. Kochen-Specker contextuality. Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 045007. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys. 94.045007 (2022)

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys 2022

  5. [4]

    N. J. Cerf, M. Bourennane, A. Karlsson & N. Gisin. Security of Quantum Key Distribution Using d-Level Systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 127902. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.88.127902 (2002)

    work page 2002

  6. [5]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P . Horodecki, M. Horodecki & K. Horodecki. Quantum entanglement. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865–942. https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.81.865 (2009)

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.865 2009

  7. [6]

    Liu et al

    Y. Liu et al. Device-independent quantum random-number generation. Nature 562, 548–551. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038/s41586-018-0559-3 (2018)

    work page 2018

  8. [7]

    D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne & A. Zeilinger. in Bell’s theorem, quantum theory and conceptions of the universe 69–72 (Springer, 1989)

    work page 1989

Show all 61 references
  1. [8]

    X.-M. Hu, Y. Guo, B.-H. Liu, C.-F. Li & G.-C. Guo. Progress in quantum teleportation. Nature Reviews Physics 5, 339–353. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / s42254 - 023 - 00588 - x (2023)

    2023

  2. [9]

    J. L. O’Brien. Optical Quantum Computing. Science 318, 1567–

  3. [11]

    Cobucci & A

    G. Cobucci & A. Tavakoli. Detecting the dimensionality of genuine multiparticle entanglement. Science Advances 10, eadq4467. https : / / www . science . org / doi / abs / 10 . 1126/sciadv.adq4467 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Lawrence

    J. Lawrence. Mermin inequalities for perfect correlations in many-qutrit systems. Phys. Rev. A 95, 042123. https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.95.042123 (2017)

    2017 doi

  5. [13]

    Hu et al

    X.-M. Hu et al. Observation of Stronger-than-Binary Correla- tions with Entangled Photonic Qutrits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 180402. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.120.180402 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Reimer et al

    C. Reimer et al. High-dimensional one-way quantum process- ing implemented on d-level cluster states. Nature Physics 15, 148–153. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / s41567 - 018 - 0347-x (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    Y. Wang, Z. Hu, B. C. Sanders & S. Kais. Qudits and high- dimensional quantum computing.Frontiers in Physics 8, 589504. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2020.589504 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Zhong et al

    H.-S. Zhong et al. 12-Photon Entanglement and Scalable Scattershot Boson Sampling with Optimal Entangled-Photon Pairs from Parametric Down-Conversion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 250505. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.121.250505 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    S. A. Moses et al. A Race-Track Trapped-Ion Quantum Proces- sor. Phys. Rev. X 13, 041052. https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevX.13.041052 (2023)

    2023 doi

  10. [18]

    Cao et al

    S. Cao et al. Generation of genuine entanglement up to 51 su- perconducting qubits. Nature 619, 738–742. https : / / doi . org/10.1038/s41586-023-06195-1 (2023)

    2023 doi

  11. [19]

    Barreiro et al

    J. Barreiro et al. Demonstration of genuine multipartite entan- glement with device-independent witnesses. Nature Physics 9, 559–562. ISSN : 1745-2481. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / nphys2705 (2013)

    2013

  12. [20]

    Erven et al

    C. Erven et al. Experimental three-photon quantum nonlocal- ity under strict locality conditions. Nature photonics 8, 292–296. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphoton.2014.50 (2014)

    2014 doi

  13. [21]

    Bäumer, N

    E. Bäumer, N. Gisin & A. Tavakoli. Demonstrating the power of quantum computers, certification of highly entangled mea- surements and scalable quantum nonlocality. npj Quantum In- formation 7, 117. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / s41534 - 021-00450-x (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Krenn, A

    M. Krenn, A. Hochrainer, M. Lahiri & A. Zeilinger. Entangle- ment by Path Identity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 080401. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett . 118 . 080401 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Friis, G

    N. Friis, G. Vitagliano, M. Malik & M. Huber. Entanglement Certification From Theory to Experiment. Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 72–

  16. [24]

    Erhard, M

    M. Erhard, M. Krenn & A. Zeilinger. Advances in high- dimensional quantum entanglement. Nature Reviews Physics 2, 365–381. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / s42254 - 020 - 0193-5 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    Mattle, H

    K. Mattle, H. Weinfurter, P . G. Kwiat & A. Zeilinger. Dense Coding in Experimental Quantum Communication. Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4656–4659. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103/PhysRevLett.76.4656 (1996)

    1996

  18. [26]

    Hu et al

    X.-M. Hu et al. Pathways for Entanglement-Based Quantum Communication in the Face of High Noise. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 110505. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.127.110505 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Ecker et al

    S. Ecker et al. Overcoming Noise in Entanglement Distribution. Phys. Rev. X 9, 041042. https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevX.9.041042 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    B. P . Lanyon et al. Simplifying quantum logic using higher- dimensional Hilbert spaces. Nature Physics 5, 134–140. https: //doi.org/10.1038/nphys1150 (2009)

    2009 doi

  21. [29]

    Fedorov, L

    A. Fedorov, L. Steffen, M. Baur, M. P . da Silva & A. Wall- raff. Implementation of a Toffoli gate with superconducting cir- cuits. Nature 481, 170–172. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / nature10713 (2012)

    2012

  22. [30]

    Ringbauer et al

    M. Ringbauer et al. A universal qudit quantum processor with trapped ions. Nature Physics 18, 1053–1057. https : / / doi . org/10.1038/s41567-022-01658-0 (2022)

    2022 doi

  23. [32]

    Tavakoli, D

    A. Tavakoli, D. Rosset & M.-O. Renou. Enabling Computation of Correlation Bounds for Finite-Dimensional Quantum Sys- tems via Symmetrization. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 070501. https: / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett . 122 . 070501 (2019)

    2019

  24. [33]

    Erhard, M

    M. Erhard, M. Malik, M. Krenn & A. Zeilinger. Experimental greenberger–horne–zeilinger entanglement beyond qubits.Na- ture Photonics 12, 759–764. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038 / s41566-018-0257-6 (2018)

    2018

  25. [34]

    Cervera-Lierta, M

    A. Cervera-Lierta, M. Krenn, A. Aspuru-Guzik & A. Galda. Ex- perimental High-Dimensional Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger 6 Entanglement with Superconducting Transmon Qutrits. Phys. Rev. Appl. 17, 024062. https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevApplied.17.024062 (2 2022)

  26. [35]

    Bao et al

    J. Bao et al. Very-large-scale integrated quantum graph photon- ics. Nature Photonics 17, 573–581. https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1038/s41566-023-01187-z (2023)

    2023

  27. [36]

    Fickler et al

    R. Fickler et al. Interface between path and orbital angular mo- mentum entanglement for high-dimensional photonic quan- tum information. Nature Communications 5, 4502. ISSN : 2041-

  28. [37]

    Bavaresco et al

    J. Bavaresco et al. Measurements in two bases are sufficient for certifying high-dimensional entanglement. Nat. Phys. 14, 1032–

  29. [38]

    Bourennane et al

    M. Bourennane et al. Experimental Detection of Multipartite Entanglement using Witness Operators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 087902. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.92.087902 (2004)

    2004

  30. [39]

    Lu et al

    C.-Y. Lu et al. Experimental entanglement of six photons in graph states. Nature Physics 3, 91–95. ISSN : 1745-2481. https: //doi.org/10.1038/nphys507 (2007)

    2007 doi

  31. [40]

    Yao et al

    X.-C. Yao et al. Observation of eight-photon entanglement. Na- ture Photonics 6, 225–228. ISSN : 1749-4893. https : / / doi . org/10.1038/nphoton.2011.354 (2012)

    2012 doi

  32. [41]

    Wang et al

    X.-L. Wang et al. Experimental Ten-Photon Entanglement.Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 210502. https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.117.210502 (2016)

    2016

  33. [42]

    Thomas, L

    P . Thomas, L. Ruscio, O. Morin & G. Rempe. Efficient genera- tion of entangled multiphoton graph states from a single atom. Nature 608, 677–681. ISSN : 1476-4687. https : / / doi . org / 10.1038/s41586-022-04987-5 (2022)

    2022 doi

  34. [43]

    Hu et al

    X.-M. Hu et al. Experimental creation of multi-photon high- dimensional layered quantum states. npj Quantum Information 6, 88. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-020-00318- 6 (2020)

    2020 doi

  35. [44]

    Chernoff

    H. Chernoff. A Measure of Asymptotic Efficiency for Tests of a Hypothesis Based on the sum of Observations. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 23, 493 –507. https://doi.org/10. 1214/aoms/1177729330 (1952)

    1952

  36. [45]

    Dimi´ c & B

    A. Dimi´ c & B. Daki´ c. Single-copy entanglement detection. npj Quantum Information 4. ISSN : 2056-6387. http : / / dx . doi . org/10.1038/s41534-017-0055-x (Feb. 2018)

    2018 doi

  37. [46]

    Krenn, X

    M. Krenn, X. Gu & A. Zeilinger. Quantum Experiments and Graphs: Multiparty States as Coherent Superpositions of Per- fect Matchings. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 240403. https://link. aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett . 119 . 240403 (2017)

    2017

  38. [47]

    X. Gu, L. Chen, A. Zeilinger & M. Krenn. Quantum experi- ments and graphs. III. High-dimensional and multiparticle en- tanglement. Phys. Rev. A 99, 032338. https : / / link . aps . org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.99.032338 (2019)

    2019 doi

  39. [48]

    Lo Franco & G

    R. Lo Franco & G. Compagno. Indistinguishability of Elemen- tary Systems as a Resource for Quantum Information Process- ing. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 240403. https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.240403 (24 2018)

    2018 doi

  40. [49]

    Lee et al

    D. Lee et al. Entangling three identical particles via spatial over- lap. Opt. Express 30, 30525–30535. https://doi.org/10. 1364/OE.460866 (2022)

    2022

  41. [50]

    M. R. Barros et al. Entangling bosons through particle indistin- guishability and spatial overlap. Opt. Express 28, 38083–38092. https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.410361 (2020)

    2020 doi

  42. [51]

    Chin, Y.-S

    S. Chin, Y.-S. Kim & S. Lee. Graph Picture of Linear Quantum Networks and Entanglement. Quantum 5, 611. ISSN : 2521-327X. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-12-23-611 (Dec. 2021)

    2021 doi

  43. [52]

    Chin, Y.-S

    S. Chin, Y.-S. Kim & M. Karczewski. Shortcut to multipartite entanglement generation: A graph approach to boson subtrac- tions. npj Quantum Inf 10, 67. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41534-024-00845-6 (2024)

    2024

  44. [53]

    Hillery & A

    M. Hillery & A. Berthiaume. Quantum secret sharing. Phys. Rev. A 59, 1829–1834. https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevA.59.1829 (1999)

    1999

  45. [54]

    Liu et al

    L.-Z. Liu et al. Distributed quantum phase estimation with entangled photons. Nature photonics 15, 137–142. https : / / link . aps . org / doi / 10 . 1103 / PhysRevA . 59 . 1829 (2021)

    2021

  46. [55]

    Zhong et al

    H.-S. Zhong et al. Quantum computational advantage using photons. Science 370, 1460–1463. https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.59.1829 (2020)

    2020 doi

  47. [56]

    Hu et al

    X.-M. Hu et al. Efficient Generation of High-Dimensional En- tanglement through Multipath Down-Conversion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 090503. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.125.090503 (2020)

    2020

  48. [57]

    Hu et al

    X.-M. Hu et al. Experimental High-Dimensional Quantum Tele- portation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 230501. https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.230501 (2020)

    2020 doi

  49. [58]

    Xing et al

    W.-B. Xing et al. Preparation of multiphoton high-dimensional GHZ states. Opt. Express 31, 24887–24896. https : / / opg . optica.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-31-15-24887 (2023). Acknowledgements We thank Mateus Araújo for helpful discussions. The group in USTC was supported by t...

    2023

  50. [87]

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254- 018- 0003- 5 (2019)

    2019 doi

  51. [1037]

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-018-0203-z (2018)

    2018 doi

  52. [1570]

    https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/ science.1142892 (2007)

    2007

  53. [1723]

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5502 (2014)

    2014 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.