Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Observing High-dimensional Bell Inequality Violations using Multi-Outcome Spectral Measurements

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that the joint spectral intensity of a two-photon entangled state contains all the multi-outcome measurement statistics needed for a high-dimensional Bell test, and reports CGLMP inequality violations up to dimension d =…

desk verdict Solid experimental advance in high-dimensional Bell tests, but the passive basis assignment means the reported violations do not certify nonlocality, a limitation the authors themselves acknowledge. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.20796 v3 pith:PQ7XZ6HG submitted 2025-06-25 quant-ph physics.optics

Kiki Dekkers , Laura Serino , Nicola DAlessandro , Abhinandan Bhattacharjee , Benjamin Brecht , Armin Tavakoli , Christine Silberhorn , Jonathan Leach This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.optics
keywords high-dimensionalBellinequalityCGLMPbinarisationloopholejointspectralintensitytime-binentanglementfrequency-domainmeasurementsmulti-outcomenonlocality
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

The paper argues that a single phase-insensitive-looking measurement, the joint spectral intensity of two entangled photons, actually contains enough information to run a high-dimensional Bell test without the usual multi-outcome measurement hardware. By treating frequency bins as Fourier-space projections onto time-bin superpositions, the authors extract the conditional probabilities P(a,b|x,y) required by the CGLMP inequality and observe violations up to dimension d = 8. This matters because prior high-dimensional Bell tests emulated multi-outcome measurements with sequences of two-outcome projections, opening a binarisation loophole that local hidden variable models can exploit and that erodes the noise tolerance of high-dimensional entanglement. The result is presented as the first time the binarisation loophole has been closed in a high-dimensional Bell experiment.

What carries the argument

The central object is the mapping from the continuous joint spectral intensity $P(\phi_A,\phi_B) = \frac{1}{d^3}\frac{\sin^2[d(\phi_A+\phi_B)/2]}{\sin^2[(\phi_A+\phi_B)/2]}$ to the CGLMP conditional probabilities via $\phi_A \to \frac{2\pi}{d}(a + x/M)$ and $\phi_B \to \frac{2\pi}{d}(\mathrm{mod}(-b,d) + y/M - 1/4)$. This mapping converts frequency-binned coincidence counts into the d-outcome, M-basis probabilities $P(a,b|x,y)$, with the two CGLMP bases recovered at the specific offsets $x=0,\,M/2$ and $y=M/2,\,0$. The machinery exploits the periodicity of the Fourier transform of a discrete time-bin basis, so one spectral measurement yields many superposition bases at once, and wrapping of multiple 2π periods recovers the unmodulated distribution that would otherwise be suppressed by the Gaussian envelope of the time bins.

What would settle it

Run the same frequency-binned coincidence measurement but with the basis choice made actively and randomly, for example by switching in real time which subset of frequency bins is assigned to the CGLMP bases, with the switching spacelike separated from the photon-pair source, and check whether the CGLMP violation and p-values persist; if the violation vanishes once the settings are genuinely free, the passive-settings analysis does not certify Bell-nonlocality.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the joint spectral intensity of a discrete time-bin entangled state is not merely a phase-insensitive correlation map, but contains the full set of mutually unbiased bases needed to certify Bell-nonlocality. Because the Fourier transform of a discrete basis is periodic, a frequency-domain measurement projects onto a superposition of time-bin states with well-defined relative phases, and the interference fringes in the joint spectral intensity are exactly those projections. Wrapping the periodic fringes into one 2π window and binning into N = M×d outcomes yields the conditional probabilities P(a,b|x,y) of Eqs. (3)-(5), from which the CGLMP Bell parameter is computed. With this mapping, the authors violate the CGLMP inequality up to d = 8, with p-values as small as about $10^{-25}$ at d = 8, and claim the first high-dimensional Bell test that uses genuine multi-outcome measurements, thereby closing the binarisation loophole.

Load-bearing premise

The measurement basis is not freely and randomly chosen: the settings x and y are determined after the fact by the detected photon frequencies, and the analysis treats these passively assigned settings as if they were independent choices in a standard Bell experiment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Frequency-only measurements are sufficient to certify Bell-nonlocality in high dimensions, removing the need for temporal-domain superposition measurements.
  • The binarisation loophole is closed, so high-dimensional states regain their noise-tolerance advantage, for example 35.5% noise tolerance at d = 8 compared with 14.9% for binarised measurements.
  • The approach generalises to other degrees of freedom such as pixel, path, orbital angular momentum or angle, and position or momentum.
  • High-dimensional quantum key distribution and other protocols that rely on Bell-certified correlations can be implemented with simpler, frequency-resolved detectors.
  • The joint spectral intensity, previously considered phase-insensitive and insufficient, is shown to encode the multi-outcome measurement statistics needed for CGLMP violations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the passive-setting analysis is accepted, the method effectively converts a nonlocal correlation test into a post-hoc classification of a single joint measurement; a stricter loophole-free test would require active random basis selection, which the authors note would discard half the data under a fair-sampling assumption.
  • The same wrapping-and-binning procedure could be applied to the extra measurement bases to construct custom Bell inequalities whose noise tolerance might exceed CGLMP; the authors' numerical checks suggest only marginal gains, but the question is open for other state families.
  • The ability to certify Bell nonlocality from frequency correlations alone might simplify device-independent quantum key distribution with time-frequency encoding, but the freedom-of-choice loophole must be addressed before security claims can be made.
  • A testable extension is to use the joint-spectral-intensity mapping to certify entanglement and steering from frequency-only measurements, extending the authors' remark that implications for steering remain to be explored.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experiment in which the joint spectral intensity (JSI) of a two-photon time-bin entangled state, measured with dispersive-fiber time-of-flight spectrometers, is used to extract the conditional probabilities P(a,b|x,y) of the CGLMP Bell inequality. The authors derive an analytic mapping (Eqs. 3-5) from the continuous phases phi_A, phi_B to discrete outcomes a,b and settings x,y, and report CGLMP violations for dimensions d=2 through d=8, with very small reported p-values. They claim that this closes the binarisation loophole and that frequency-only measurements are sufficient to certify high-dimensional Bell nonlocality.

Significance. The proposed mapping from joint spectral intensity to multi-outcome Bell-test probabilities is elegant and, if the experimental test were loophole-free, would constitute an important experimental simplification for high-dimensional Bell tests. The data are of high quality and the reported violations are large. However, the experiment's settings are passively determined by the same frequency degrees of freedom that define the outcomes, so the results do not certify Bell nonlocality as claimed. The paper's core contribution is better understood as a demonstration that the JSI contains the multi-outcome statistics that could be used in a Bell test under an explicit free-choice/fair-sampling assumption.

major comments (3)
  1. [Theory (Eqs. 3-5) and Experimental Results] The measurement settings x and y are deterministic functions of the measured phases phi_A and phi_B, as defined in Eqs. (3) and (4). Because the map from phase to (outcome, setting) is many-to-one, each detection event determines both the setting and the outcome. A local hidden variable model that fixes the photon frequencies can therefore reproduce the full observed distribution P(a,b,x,y) without any nonlocality, and the CGLMP bound of 2 does not apply to this scenario. The main text acknowledges the passive choice ('As the basis choices, x and y are made passively...'), but the abstract's claims that the experiment 'certifies' Bell-nonlocality and 'guarantees' nonlocal correlations are not supported. The analogy to Gisin's experiment (ref. 44) is not valid: in that experiment the basis was selected by a random beam splitter, not by the same degree of freedom as the outcome. To claim certification, the authors must implement active, independent basis choices, or explicitly re-frame all conclusions as being conditional on the fair-sampling/free-choice assumption.
  2. [Supplementary Information, Statistical significance (Eqs. 20-23)] The p-value analysis uses McDiarmid's inequality and treats P(x,y) as a settings distribution (Eq. 20) in a standard Bell game. In this experiment x and y are not freely chosen settings; they are functions of the measured frequencies (Eqs. 3-4), and therefore are not independent of any hidden variable that determines the photon properties. Consequently, the bound in Eq. (23) does not bound the probability that a local hidden variable model reproduces the observed CGLMP parameter. The reported p-values (e.g., 9.7e-25 for d=8) are therefore not evidence against local hidden variable theories. The authors should either provide a valid statistical test for the actual no-input scenario or state explicitly that the p-values are conditional on the assumption that the settings were chosen freely.
  3. [Supplementary Information, Data analysis] The 2π phase regions and the phase offset are determined by fitting the principal interference fringes in the measured joint spectral intensity. Since the mapping (3)-(4) assigns settings and outcomes based on the phase origin, this fitting procedure makes the extracted CGLMP parameter dependent on a data-based choice of the settings. The paper should describe whether the offset is fixed by an independent calibration and quantify the sensitivity of I_d to plausible variations of the fitted offset; otherwise the reported violation could reflect a favourable post-selection of the phase window.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Experimental Results] In the main text, 'C(∆νA, ∆νA)' should presumably be 'C(∆νA, ∆νB)'.
  2. [Theory, Eq. (3)] Equation (3) contains a typo: 'measuremenmt' should be 'measurement'.
  3. [References] Several references are incomplete (e.g., ref. 3 and ref. 5 lack publication years); the reference list should be completed.
  4. [Fig. 5] The caption of Fig. 5 states that error bars are standard deviations from Poisson resampling, but the number of experimental runs that produced the raw coincidence counts is not reported; please clarify.
  5. [Abstract] The claim that the experiment closes the binarisation loophole 'for the first time' should be qualified in light of the freedom-of-choice loophole, which remains open in the present experimental scheme.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The Bell 'settings' are defined from the same measured phases as the outcomes (Eqs. 3-4), so the reported CGLMP violation is, by construction, a relabeling of the joint spectral intensity rather than a Bell test with free inputs; the central nonlocality claim reduces to the binning construction.

  1. self definitional [Main text, Theory, Eqs. (3)-(4) and Results paragraph beginning 'As the basis choices...']
    "The mapping that is necessary for the CGLMP inequality is given by ϕ_A → 2π/d (a + x/M) and ϕ_B → 2π/d (mod(−b,d) + y/M − 1/4). ... As the basis choices, x and y are made passively, the experiment first measures P (a,b,x,y ) from which we establish the conditional probability P (a,b |x,y )."

    Equation (3) defines both the outcome a and the setting x as functions of the same measured phase ϕ_A, and Eq. (4) does the same for b and y from ϕ_B. Every detection event therefore fixes x and y together with a and b; the 'settings' are not independent inputs but deterministic labels attached to the same coincidence count. The conditional P(a,b|x,y) is consequently just the binned joint spectral intensity renormalized by the data-derived P(x,y). A local hidden variable that fixes ϕ_A and ϕ_B fixes a,b,x,y simultaneously, so the CGLMP bound of 2 does not apply to the constructed distribution.

  2. other [Supplementary Information, 'Statistical significance', Eqs. (20)-(23)]
    "We begin considering a general Bell inequality in the form B = Σ s_xy^ab P(ab|xy) ≤ β and estimate the probability of selecting settings (x,y) from the photon coincidences counts N_{a,b,x,y} detected when obtaining outcome (a,b): P(x,y) = Σ_{a,b} N_{a,b,x,y} / Σ_{a,b,x,y} N_{a,b,x,y}."

    The McDiarmid-based p-value bound assumes a settings distribution P(x,y) that is independent of the hidden variable. Here P(x,y) is estimated from the same coincidence counts that define the outcomes, and through Eqs. (3)-(4) the settings are deterministic functions of the phases contained in those counts. The 'questions' x,y are generated from the 'answers' a,b, so the p-value is not the probability that a local model with free settings reproduces the violation. The reported 'negligible p-values' therefore quantify fluctuations of the binning construction rather than a falsification of local hidden variables.

full rationale

The mathematical derivation of Eq. (5) from Eq. (1) is self-contained: the joint spectral intensity of the maximally entangled state is computed by a direct Fourier transform, and the CGLMP expression follows from the standard CGLMP bases. The experimental Bell parameter is not obtained by fitting I_d to the data; it is a deterministic function of the measured JSI through the mapping of Eqs. (3)-(4). The self-citations, notably refs. [26] and [32], are not load-bearing in a circular way: ref. [32] (with a coauthor) is used to motivate the binarisation loophole, but the paper also gives an independent correlation-space argument for why binarised and multi-outcome scenarios differ, and ref. [26] is prior experimental state-generation work rather than the derivation of the Bell claim. However, the central 'Bell-nonlocality' claim reduces by construction to a relabeling of the joint phase distribution. Because the settings x,y are defined from the same phases as the outcomes, the experiment does not realize a Bell scenario with free, independent inputs; the passive-basis limitation is explicitly acknowledged in the main text. Consequently, the CGLMP violation is a genuine number for the binned distribution but does not, as claimed, certify or guarantee Bell-nonlocal correlations. The circularity score is therefore 6: a central 'prediction' is equivalent to its inputs by construction, though the underlying quantum-mechanical formula for the binned distribution is independently correct.

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

The central claims rest on standard quantum mechanics plus four domain assumptions: the state preparation produces the ideal maximally entangled time-bin state; the dispersive fibre implements a Fourier transform; the envelope can be corrected by wrapping; and the passive settings define a valid Bell test. The last assumption is the most fragile.

free parameters (1)
  • Phase period and offset for 2pi regions = Determined by fitting three diagonal Gaussians to principal interference fringes; separation restricted to integer…
    In the data analysis (Supplementary), the boundaries of the 2pi phase periods are found by fitting the JSI fringes. This calibration determines the mapping from frequency to (a,x) and (b,y), so any error or arbitrariness in this fit propagates into the extracted Bell parameter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The two-photon state generated by SPDC with cosine-kernel pump shaping is the maximally entangled time-bin state |psi_d> = (1/sqrt(d)) sum_j |j>_A |j>_B.
    The paper relies on ref [26] for the preparation of controllable high-dimensional temporal-mode entanglement. If the state deviates from maximally entangled, the analysis in Eq. (5) is approximate.
  • domain assumption Dispersive-fibre time-of-flight spectrometry implements the Fourier-transform measurement |phi> = (1/sqrt(d)) sum_j exp(-ij phi)|j> for each photon, with phi proportional to frequency detuning times time-bin spacing.
    This is the core physical mapping (Fig. 2 and Methods). If the spectrometer does not faithfully implement the Fourier transform (e.g., due to dispersion nonlinearity or finite time resolution), the derived P(a,b|x,y) does not correspond to the CGLMP measurements.
  • domain assumption The unmodulated P(phi_A, phi_B) can be recovered by wrapping (summing) the measured JSI over multiple 2pi regions, correcting for the Gaussian envelope from finite time-bin width.
    The data analysis (Supplementary) assumes the envelope modulation can be removed by summing periodic regions. This is exact only if the envelope is broad enough that the wrapped envelope is constant; otherwise the extracted conditional probabilities are biased.
  • domain assumption The measurement settings in the Bell test may be defined passively by binning the continuous frequency outcomes, and the resulting P(a,b|x,y) is treated as a Bell correlation with the settings independent of the hidden variable.
    The authors explicitly note this is a manifestation of the detection loophole (main text, passive basis choice paragraph). The p-value analysis assumes the settings distribution P(x,y) estimated from the data is appropriate for McDiarmid's inequality. This assumption is required for the Bell violation to certify nonlocality, and it is not justified by the experiment.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Observing High-dimensional Bell Inequality Violations using Multi-Outcome Spectral Measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PQ7XZ6HG

@misc{pith2026250620796,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Observing High-dimensional Bell Inequality Violations using Multi-Outcome Spectral Measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PQ7XZ6HG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.20796}
}
read the original abstract

Violation of Bell inequalities is an essential requirement for many quantum information and communication protocols. In high-dimensional systems, Bell inequality tests face the challenge of implementing genuinely multi-outcome measurements, since the emulation of these with separate dichotomic projections opens a binarisation loophole that local hidden variable theories can exploit. Here we show that the joint spectral intensity of a two-photon entangled state contains access to the necessary multi-outcome measurements to overcome this obstacle and certify and violate a Bell inequality for high-dimensional states. This result is contrary to the belief that the joint spectral intensity is a phase-insensitive quantity and does not have sufficient information to certify entanglement or Bell-nonlocality. Using this approach, we violate the CGLMP Bell inequality up to dimension d = 8, all with negligible p-values, and for the first time close the binarisation loophole in high-dimensional Bell experiments. Guaranteeing Bell-nonlocal correlations using frequency-only measurements removes the technological hurdle of measurements in the temporal domain, thus greatly simplifying any practical implementation of future high-dimensional quantum information protocols.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.20796 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. c. In order to not artificially constrain local hidden variable theories, high-dimensional Bell tests require that each binary-outcome measurement must be treated as an independent uncharacterised setting. The binarised ap￾proach, which generates P(˜a, ˜b|F , ˆ Gˆ), requires Alice and Bob to not only make a choice of which basis to measure but also which outcome to examine, i.e. the number of choices that Alice and … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png]
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png]
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Data for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Robust One-Sided Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution via High-Dimensional Steering

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    High-dimensional one-sided device-independent QKD protocols using quantum steering achieve higher noise and loss tolerance with increasing dimension, demonstrated experimentally up to d=11.

  2. Binarisation-loophole-free observation of high-dimensional quantum nonlocality

    quant-ph 2026-01 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A photonic Bell experiment with four-outcome measurements closes the binarisation loophole and shows genuine four-dimensional nonlocality beyond qutrit limits.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Ac \' n , author N

    author author A. Ac \' n , author N. Gisin ,\ and\ author L. Masanes ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.120405 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 97 ,\ pages 120405 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.97.120405 2006

  2. [2]

    author author J. S. \ Bell ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195 journal journal Physics \ volume 1 ,\ pages 195 ( year 1964 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1103/physicsphysiquefizika.1.195 1964

  3. [3]

    Collins , author N

    author author D. Collins , author N. Gisin , author N. Linden , author S. Massar ,\ and\ author S. Popescu ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.040404 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 88 ,\ pages 040404 NoStop

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.88.040404

  4. [4]

    author author R. T. \ Thew , author A. Ac \' n , author H. Zbinden ,\ and\ author N. Gisin ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.010503 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 93 ,\ pages 010503 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.93.010503 2004

  5. [5]

    Ikuta \ and\ author H

    author author T. Ikuta \ and\ author H. Takesue ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.93.022307 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 93 ,\ pages 022307 NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.93.022307

  6. [6]

    author author A. C. \ Dada , author J. Leach , author G. S. \ Buller , author M. J. \ Padgett ,\ and\ author E. Andersson ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1996 journal journal Nat. Phys. \ volume 7 ,\ pages 677 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/nphys1996 2025

  7. [7]

    \ Lo , author C.-M

    author author H.-P. \ Lo , author C.-M. \ Li , author A. Yabushita , author Y.-N. \ Chen , author C.-W. \ Luo ,\ and\ author T. Kobayashi ,\ https://www.nature.com/articles/srep22088 journal journal Sci. Rep. \ volume 6 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Wang , author S

    author author J. Wang , author S. Paesani , author Y. Ding , author R. Santagati , author P. Skrzypczyk , author A. Salavrakos , author J. Tura , author R. Augusiak , author L. Man c inska , author D. Bacco , author D. Bonneau , author J. W. \ Silverstone , author Q. Gong , author A. Ac \' n , author K. Rottwitt , author L. K. \ Oxenl we , author J. L. \ ...

    doi:10.1126/science.aar7053

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    \ Hu , author C.-X

    author author X.-M. \ Hu , author C.-X. \ Huang , author N. d'Alessandro , author G. Cobucci , author C. Zhang , author Y. Guo , author Y.-F. \ Huang , author C.-F. \ Li , author G.-C. \ Guo , author X. Gao , author M. Huber , author A. Tavakoli ,\ and\ author B.-H. \ Liu ,\ h...

    doi

  2. [10]

    \ Hu , author Y

    author author X.-M. \ Hu , author Y. Guo , author B.-H. \ Liu , author Y.-F. \ Huang , author C.-F. \ Li ,\ and\ author G.-C. \ Guo ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aat9304 journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 4 ,\ pages eaat9304 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    doi

  3. [11]

    V\'ertesi , author S

    author author T. V\'ertesi , author S. Pironio ,\ and\ author N. Brunner ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.060401 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 104 ,\ pages 060401 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  4. [12]

    \ Hu , author C

    author author X.-M. \ Hu , author C. Zhang , author B.-H. \ Liu , author Y. Guo , author W.-B. \ Xing , author C.-X. \ Huang , author Y.-F. \ Huang , author C.-F. \ Li ,\ and\ author G.-C. \ Guo ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.060402 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett....

    doi

  5. [13]

    Kaszlikowski , author P

    author author D. Kaszlikowski , author P. Gnaci \'n ski , author M. \.Z ukowski , author W. Miklaszewski ,\ and\ author A. Zeilinger ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.4418 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 85 ,\ pages 4418 ( year 2000 ) NoStop

    doi

  6. [14]

    Zhu , author M

    author author F. Zhu , author M. Tyler , author N. H. \ Valencia , author M. Malik ,\ and\ author J. Leach ,\ https://doi.org/10.1116/5.0033889 journal journal AVS Quantum Sci. \ volume 3 ,\ pages 011401 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  7. [15]

    Srivastav , author N

    author author V. Srivastav , author N. H. \ Valencia , author W. McCutcheon , author S. Leedumrongwatthanakun , author S. Designolle , author R. Uola , author N. Brunner ,\ and\ author M. Malik ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.12.041023 journal journal Phys. Rev. X \ volume...

    doi

  8. [16]

    Bechmann-Pasquinucci \ and\ author W

    author author H. Bechmann-Pasquinucci \ and\ author W. Tittel ,\ https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.61.062308 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 61 ( year 2000 ) NoStop

    doi

  9. [17]

    author author N. J. \ Cerf , author M. Bourennane , author A. Karlsson ,\ and\ author N. Gisin ,\ https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.127902 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 88 ( year 2002 ) NoStop

    2002 doi

  10. [18]

    Durt , author D

    author author T. Durt , author D. Kaszlikowski , author J.-L. \ Chen ,\ and\ author L. C. \ Kwek ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.69.032313 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 69 ,\ pages 032313 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004 doi

  11. [19]

    Sheridan \ and\ author V

    author author L. Sheridan \ and\ author V. Scarani ,\ https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.82.030301 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 82 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  12. [20]

    Bru \ and\ author C

    author author D. Bru \ and\ author C. Macchiavello ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.127901 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 88 ,\ pages 127901 ( year 2002 ) NoStop

    2002 doi

  13. [21]

    Wang , author F.-G

    author author C. Wang , author F.-G. \ Deng , author Y.-S. \ Li , author X.-S. \ Liu ,\ and\ author G. L. \ Long ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.71.044305 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 71 ,\ pages 044305 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    doi

  14. [22]

    Zhong , author H

    author author T. Zhong , author H. Zhou , author R. D. \ Horansky , author C. Lee , author V. B. \ Verma , author A. E. \ Lita , author A. Restelli , author J. C. \ Bienfang , author R. P. \ Mirin , author T. Gerrits , author S. W. \ Nam , author F. Marsili , author M. D. \ Sh...

    doi

  15. [23]

    Sit , author F

    author author A. Sit , author F. Bouchard , author R. Fickler , author J. Gagnon-Bischoff , author H. Larocque , author K. Heshami , author D. Elser , author C. Peuntinger , author K. G \"u nthner , author B. Heim , author C. Marquardt , author G. Leuchs , author R. W. \ Boyd ...

    doi

  16. [24]

    \ Luo , author H.-S

    author author Y.-H. \ Luo , author H.-S. \ Zhong , author M. Erhard , author X.-L. \ Wang , author L.-C. \ Peng , author M. Krenn , author X. Jiang , author L. Li , author N.-L. \ Liu , author C.-Y. \ Lu , author A. Zeilinger ,\ and\ author J.-W. \ Pan ,\ https://doi.org/10.11...

    doi

  17. [25]

    author author C. L. \ Morrison , author F. Graffitti , author P. Barrow , author A. Pickston , author J. Ho ,\ and\ author A. Fedrizzi ,\ https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0089313 journal journal APL Photonics \ volume 7 ,\ pages 066102 ( year 2022 ) ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.0725...

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Serino , author W

    author author L. Serino , author W. Ridder , author A. Bhattacharjee , author J. Gil-Lopez , author B. Brecht ,\ and\ author C. Silberhorn ,\ https://doi.org/10.1364/OPTICAQ.532334 journal journal Optica Quantum \ volume 2 ,\ pages 339 ( year 2025 a ) NoStop

    doi

  19. [27]

    Bavaresco , author N

    author author J. Bavaresco , author N. Herrera Valencia , author C. Kl \"o ckl , author M. Pivoluska , author P. Erker , author N. Friis , author M. Malik ,\ and\ author M. Huber ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-018-0203-z journal journal Nat. Phys. \ volume 14 ,\ pages 1032 ...

    doi

  20. [28]

    Morelli , author M

    author author S. Morelli , author M. Huber ,\ and\ author A. Tavakoli ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.170201 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 131 ,\ pages 170201 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023 doi

  21. [29]

    Cobucci \ and\ author A

    author author G. Cobucci \ and\ author A. Tavakoli ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adq4467 journal journal Sci. Adv. \ volume 10 ,\ pages eadq4467 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  22. [30]

    Lib , author S

    author author O. Lib , author S. Liu , author R. Shekel , author Q. He , author M. Huber , author Y. Bromberg ,\ and\ author G. Vitagliano ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.210202 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 134 ,\ pages 210202 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    doi

  23. [31]

    Yu , author S

    author author H. Yu , author S. Sciara , author M. Chemnitz , author N. Montaut , author B. Crockett , author B. Fischer , author R. Helsten , author B. Wetzel , author T. A. \ Goebel , author R. G. \ Kr \"a mer , author B. E. \ Little , author S. T. \ Chu , author S. Nolte , ...

    doi

  24. [32]

    Tavakoli , author R

    author author A. Tavakoli , author R. Uola ,\ and\ author J. Pauwels ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.111.042433 journal journal Phys. Rev. A \ volume 111 ,\ pages 042433 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    2025 doi

  25. [33]

    Zohren \ and\ author R

    author author S. Zohren \ and\ author R. D. \ Gill ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.120406 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 100 ,\ pages 120406 ( year 2008 ) NoStop

    2008 doi

  26. [34]

    author author N. T. \ Islam , author C. Cahall , author A. Aragoneses , author A. Lezama , author J. Kim ,\ and\ author D. J. \ Gauthier ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.7.044010 journal journal Phys. Rev. Appl. \ volume 7 ,\ pages 044010 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    doi

  27. [35]

    Vagniluca , author B

    author author I. Vagniluca , author B. Da Lio , author D. Rusca , author D. Cozzolino , author Y. Ding , author H. Zbinden , author A. Zavatta , author L. K. \ Oxenl we ,\ and\ author D. Bacco ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.14.014051 journal journal Phys. Rev. Appl....

    doi

  28. [36]

    Tang , author Z

    author author C. Tang , author Z. Ma , author Z. Li , author Y. Sua ,\ and\ author Y.-P. \ Huang ,\ https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.537834 journal journal Opt. Lett. \ volume 49 ,\ pages 5735 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  29. [37]

    Serino , author J

    author author L. Serino , author J. Gil-Lopez , author M. Stefszky , author R. Ricken , author C. Eigner , author B. Brecht ,\ and\ author C. Silberhorn ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.020306 journal journal PRX Quantum \ volume 4 ,\ pages 020306 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    doi

  30. [38]

    Serino , author C

    author author L. Serino , author C. Eigner , author B. Brecht ,\ and\ author C. Silberhorn ,\ https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.544206 journal journal Opt. Express \ volume 33 ,\ pages 5577 ( year 2025 b ) NoStop

    2025 doi

  31. [39]

    \ Lu , author J

    author author H.-H. \ Lu , author J. M. \ Lukens , author N. A. \ Peters , author O. D. \ Odele , author D. E. \ Leaird , author A. M. \ Weiner ,\ and\ author P. Lougovski ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.030502 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 120 ,\ pages ...

    doi

  32. [40]

    author author H. H. \ Lu , author N. A. \ Peters , author A. M. \ Weiner ,\ and\ author J. M. \ Lukens ,\ https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTQE.2023.3266662 journal journal IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. \ volume 29 ,\ pages 1 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    2023

  33. [41]

    Avenhaus , author A

    author author M. Avenhaus , author A. Eckstein , author P. J. \ Mosley ,\ and\ author C. Silberhorn ,\ https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.34.002873 journal journal Opt. Lett. \ volume 34 ,\ pages 2873 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    2009 doi

  34. [42]

    Widomski , author M

    author author A. Widomski , author M. Ogrodnik ,\ and\ author M. Karpiński ,\ https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.05523 journal journal Optica \ volume 11 ,\ pages 1 ( year 2024 ) ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.05523 2308.05523 NoStop

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    Li \ and\ author S

    author author W. Li \ and\ author S. Zhao ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-23310-9 journal journal Sci. Rep. \ volume 8 ,\ pages 4812 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    Tittel , author J

    author author W. Tittel , author J. Brendel , author H. Zbinden ,\ and\ author N. Gisin ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.3563 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 81 ,\ pages 3563 ( year 1998 ) NoStop

    1998 doi

  37. [45]

    Gisin \ and\ author H

    author author N. Gisin \ and\ author H. Zbinden ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9601(99)00807-5 journal journal Phys. Lett. A \ volume 264 ,\ pages 103 ( year 1999 ) NoStop

    1999 doi

  38. [46]

    author author D. J. \ Saunders , author S. J. \ Jones , author H. M. \ Wiseman ,\ and\ author G. J. \ Pryde ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1766 journal journal Nat. Phys. \ volume 6 ,\ pages 845 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  39. [47]

    Designolle , author G

    author author S. Designolle , author G. Iommazzo , author M. Besançon , author S. Knebel , author P. Gelß ,\ and\ author S. Pokutta ,\ http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.043059 journal journal Phys. Rev. Res. \ volume 5 ( year 2023 ) NoStop

    doi

  40. [48]

    Monmayrant , author S

    author author A. Monmayrant , author S. Weber ,\ and\ author B. Chatel ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/43/10/103001 journal journal J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. \ volume 43 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  41. [49]

    Patera , author C

    author author G. Patera , author C. Navarrete-Benlloch , author G. J. \ de Valc \'a rcel ,\ and\ author C. Fabre ,\ https://doi.org/10.1140/epjd/e2012-30036-2 journal journal Eur. Phys. J. D \ volume 66 ,\ pages 241 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    doi

  42. [50]

    author author D. N. \ Klyshko ,\ https://doi.org/10.1070/qe1980v010n09abeh010660 journal journal Sov. J. Quantum Electron. \ volume 7 ,\ pages 1112 ( year 1980 ) NoStop

    1980 doi

  43. [51]

    Elkouss \ and\ author S

    author author D. Elkouss \ and\ author S. Wehner ,\ http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/npjqi.2016.26 journal journal npj Quantum Inf \ volume 2 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  44. [52]

    McDiarmid \ ( year 1989 ) NoStop

    author author C. McDiarmid \ ( year 1989 ) NoStop

    1989

  45. [53]

    Tavakoli , author A

    author author A. Tavakoli , author A. Pozas-Kerstjens , author P. Brown ,\ and\ author M. Araújo ,\ http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.96.045006 journal journal Rev. of Mod. Phys. \ volume 96 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  46. [54]

    Braun , author A

    author author G. Braun , author A. Carderera , author C. W. \ Combettes , author H. Hassani , author A. Karbasi , author A. Mokhtari ,\ and\ author S. Pokutta ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.14103 title Conditional gradient methods ( year 2023 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.1410...

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    author author I. M. \ Bomze , author F. Rinaldi ,\ and\ author D. Zeffiro ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.10261 title Frank-wolfe and friends: a journey into projection-free first-order optimization methods ( year 2021 ),\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.10261 arXiv:2106.10261 [math....

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.