Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

Catability as a metric for evaluating superposed coherent states

T0 review · 1 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-19 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Catability offers a measurable way to spot cat-like quantum superpositions using nonlinear squeezing.

desk verdict Catability is a workable, loss-robust metric for spotting cat-like features via nonlinear squeezing that skips full tomography. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.19723 v4 submitted 2025-05-26 quant-ph

Šimon Bräuer , Jan Provazník , Vojtěch Kala , Petr Marek This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords catstatesnonlinearsqueezingquantumsuperpositionstatedetectionfidelityphotonlossopticsmultiheadedcats
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 introduces catability as a directly measurable criterion for detecting cat-like features in quantum states. This criterion draws from nonlinear squeezing and avoids the need to reconstruct the full quantum state. It addresses a practical problem because fidelity often misses the superposition structure, especially in lossy conditions common to real experiments. Simulations demonstrate that the metric stays reliable under photon loss and lends itself to laboratory use. The same approach extends to more complex cases such as multiheaded cat states.

What carries the argument

Catability, a metric based on nonlinear squeezing that quantifies cat-like superposition features through higher-order correlations without requiring complete state knowledge.

What would settle it

Prepare a known cat state, apply controlled photon loss, and check whether catability stays high while fidelity to the ideal state drops sharply; or prepare a non-superposed state that shows strong nonlinear squeezing and verify whether catability remains low.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors define catability as a criterion rooted in nonlinear squeezing for detecting cat-like features in superposed coherent states. This metric bypasses full state tomography and reveals the desired structure in cases where fidelity to an ideal state fails. Numerical results confirm that the criterion remains effective under loss and supports direct experimental implementation, while naturally generalizing to multiheaded cat states.

Load-bearing premise

Nonlinear squeezing reliably signals the presence of cat-like superposition structure even when the state suffers loss and without comparison to an ideal reference.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Cat states can be identified in lossy environments without full state tomography.
  • The metric extends to multiheaded cat states and other exotic superpositions.
  • Experimental setups can implement the criterion directly using existing squeezing measurements.
  • It provides an alternative when fidelity measures fail to capture the superposition structure.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Verification protocols for cat-state-based quantum error correction could become simpler and less resource-intensive.
  • The underlying squeezing measurement might adapt to detect other non-classical features in continuous-variable systems.
  • Tests in superconducting or optical platforms with engineered loss would directly check the metric's practical limits.
  • Links to standard squeezing witnesses could unify several detection methods in quantum optics.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces catability, a metric based on nonlinear squeezing, as a novel way to evaluate superposed coherent states for cat-like features. It claims this approach is directly measurable, avoids full state tomography, identifies structure missed by fidelity, shows robustness to loss via numerical results, and extends to multi-headed cat states.

Significance. Should the claims hold, this metric offers a practical, experimentally implementable tool for detecting non-classical superposition in quantum states under realistic conditions, potentially advancing quantum technology applications by reducing the need for resource-intensive tomography. The numerical demonstrations of robustness and the generalization to multi-headed cats are noted strengths if the underlying simulations are reproducible.

major comments (1)
  1. Numerical results section: The central claim of robustness under loss rests on numerical simulations, but the manuscript does not specify the loss channel (e.g., amplitude damping rates or photon-loss probabilities) or the quantitative thresholds defining 'robustness,' which undermines verification of the metric's practical advantage over fidelity.
minor comments (2)
  1. Figure captions should explicitly state what quantities are plotted (e.g., catability vs. loss parameter) and reference the corresponding equations.
  2. The introduction would benefit from a brief comparison table contrasting catability with fidelity and other known cat-state witnesses.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comment. We address the point below and will revise the manuscript to improve clarity and reproducibility.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Numerical results section: The central claim of robustness under loss rests on numerical simulations, but the manuscript does not specify the loss channel (e.g., amplitude damping rates or photon-loss probabilities) or the quantitative thresholds defining 'robustness,' which undermines verification of the metric's practical advantage over fidelity.

    Authors: We thank the referee for identifying this gap. We agree that the numerical results section would be strengthened by explicitly specifying the loss channel and the quantitative criteria used to assess robustness. In the revised manuscript we will describe the precise loss model (a photon-loss channel with the range of loss probabilities considered) and define the thresholds that quantify robustness, together with a direct comparison to fidelity under the same conditions. These additions will allow readers to verify the claimed practical advantage. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity detected in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper defines catability as a measurable criterion explicitly rooted in the external prior concept of nonlinear squeezing rather than in terms of itself or its own outputs. Numerical demonstrations of robustness to loss and generalization to multi-headed cats are presented as independent verifications that do not reduce to fitted inputs renamed as predictions or to self-citation chains. The central claim bypasses tomography by construction from the squeezing concept and does not invoke uniqueness theorems or ansatzes from the authors' prior work as load-bearing justifications. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks with no steps that equate outputs to inputs by definition.

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

Review performed on abstract only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the provided text.

invented entities (1)
  • catability
    purpose: Directly measurable metric for cat-like features based on nonlinear squeezing
    Introduced in the abstract as the central new concept; no independent evidence or falsifiable prediction outside the paper is mentioned.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Catability as a metric for evaluating superposed coherent states." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2505.19723

@misc{pith2026250519723,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Catability as a metric for evaluating superposed coherent states},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2505.19723}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.19723}
}
read the original abstract

Superposed coherent states are central to quantum technologies, yet their reliable identification remains a challenge, especially in noisy or resource-constrained settings. We introduce a novel, directly measurable criterion for detecting cat-like features in quantum states, rooted in the concept of nonlinear squeezing. This approach bypasses the need for full state tomography and reveals structure where fidelity fails. The numerical results confirm its robustness under loss and its potential for experimental implementation. The method naturally generalizes to more exotic superpositions, including multiheaded cat states.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.19723 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Comparison of cat states subjected to different degrees of pure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Simulated direct measurement of the operator (12) for an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

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. Efficient characterization of general Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qubits

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new set of positive semidefinite operators for GKP qubits gives logical infidelity via three quadrature measurements and yields finite-dimensional approximations as ground states.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 74 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    If𝜉 (±) (𝛼)=0, thenˆ𝜌is an eigenstate of the opera- tor ˆO(±) (𝛼, 𝛾)and represents a perfect cat state|𝛼,±⟩, which is necessarily non-Gaussian

    work page

  2. [2]

    If0< 𝜉 (±) (𝛼)<1, thenˆ𝜌is an imperfect, approximate cat state with amplitude𝛼, but we can still confirm its non-Gaussian nature

    work page

  3. [3]

    Itmightbethecorrectcat statewithtoomuchdecoherence,adifferentcatstate,or a different state altogether

    If𝜉 (±) (𝛼) ≥1,wecannotsay. Itmightbethecorrectcat statewithtoomuchdecoherence,adifferentcatstate,or a different state altogether. Imperfect or approximate cat states are understood here as re- alisticquantumstatesthatmaybeexpressedassuperpositions or mixtures of ideal cat states and other components, arising, for example, from loss, decoherence, and othe...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Schrödinger, Die Naturwissenschaften23, 807 (1935), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01491891

    E. Schrödinger, Die Naturwissenschaften23, 807 (1935), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01491891

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01491891 1935

  5. [5]

    Jeong and M

    H. Jeong and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. A65, 042305 (2002)

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    T. C. Ralph, A. Gilchrist, G. J. Milburn, W. J. Munro, and S. Glancy, Physical Review A68, 042319 (2003), URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.68.042319

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.68.042319 2003

  7. [7]

    1103/physrevlett.100.030503

    A.P.Lund,T.C.Ralph,andH.L.Haselgrove,PhysicalReview Letters100, 030503 (2008), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/physrevlett.100.030503

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Lee and H

    S.-W. Lee and H. Jeong, Phys. Rev. A87, 022326 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 74 references
  1. [9]

    S.Omkar,Y.S.Teo,andH.Jeong,Phys.Rev.Lett.125,060501 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    S.Omkar,Y.S.Teo,S.-W.Lee,andH.Jeong,Phys.Rev.A103, 032602 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Hastrup and U

    J. Hastrup and U. L. Andersen, Physical Review Research 4, 043065 (2022), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physrevresearch.4.043065

    2022

  4. [12]

    J. Lee, N. Kang, S.-H. Lee, H. Jeong, L. Jiang, and S.-W. Lee, PRX Quantum5, 030322 (2024), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/ 10.1103/prxquantum.5.030322

    2024 doi

  5. [13]

    D. Su, I. Dhand, and T. C. Ralph, Physical Review A 106, 042614 (2022), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physreva.106.042614

    2022

  6. [14]

    Leghtas, G

    Z. Leghtas, G. Kirchmair, B. Vlastakis, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. H. Devoret, and M. Mirrahimi, Physical Review Letters 111, 120501 (2013), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physrevlett.111.120501

    2013

  7. [15]

    Duivenvoorden, B

    K. Duivenvoorden, B. M. Terhal, and D. Weigand, Physical ReviewA95,012305(2017),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/physreva.95.012305

    2017

  8. [17]

    A. P. Lund, H. Jeong, T. C. Ralph, and M. S. Kim, Physical ReviewA70,020101(2004),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/physreva.70.020101

    2004

  9. [18]

    D. V. Sychev, A. E. Ulanov, A. A. Pushkina, M. W. Richards, I. A. Fedorov, and A. I. Lvovsky, Nature Photonics11, 379 (2017), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphoton. 2017.57

    2017 doi

  10. [19]

    D.J.WeigandandB.M.Terhal,PhysicalReviewA97,022341 (2018),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.97. 022341

    2018 doi

  11. [20]

    M.Ježek,A.Tipsmark,R.Dong,J.Fiurášek,L.Mišta,R.Filip, andU.L.Andersen,PhysicalReviewA86,043813(2012),URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.86.043813

    2012 doi

  12. [21]

    Yukawa, K

    M. Yukawa, K. Miyata, T. Mizuta, H. Yonezawa, P. Marek, R. Filip, and A. Furusawa, Optics Express21, 5529 (2013), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.21.005529

    2013 doi

  13. [22]

    Eaton, C

    M. Eaton, C. González-Arciniegas, R. N. Alexander, N. C. Menicucci, and O. Pfister, Quantum6, 769 (2022), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2022-07-20-769

    2022 doi

  14. [23]

    M. Endo, T. Nomura, T. Sonoyama, K. Takahashi, S. Takasu, D.Fukuda,T.Kashiwazaki,A.Inoue,T.Umeki,R.Nehra,etal. (2025), URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2502.08952

    2025

  15. [24]

    Vlastakis, G

    B. Vlastakis, G. Kirchmair, Z. Leghtas, S. E. Nigg, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Science342, 607 (2013), URLhttp://dx.doi. org/10.1126/science.1243289

    2013 doi

  16. [25]

    N. Ofek, A. Petrenko, R. Heeres, P. Reinhold, Z. Leghtas, B.Vlastakis,Y.Liu,L.Frunzio,S.M.Girvin,L.Jiang,etal.,Na- ture536, 441 (2016), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ nature18949

    2016

  17. [26]

    Roudsari, P

    X.L.He,Y.Lu,D.Q.Bao,H.Xue,W.B.Jiang,Z.Wang,A.F. Roudsari, P. Delsing, J. S. Tsai, and Z. R. Lin, Nature Com- munications14,6358(2023),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1038/s41467-023-42057-0

    2023

  18. [27]

    C.Monroe,D.M.Meekhof,B.E.King,andD.J.Wineland,Sci- ence272,1131(1996),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.272.5265.1131

    1996

  19. [28]

    Kienzler, C

    D. Kienzler, C. Flühmann, V. Negnevitsky, H.-Y. Lo, M. Marinelli, D. Nadlinger, and J. Home, Physical Review Letters116, 140402 (2016), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/physrevlett.116.140402

    2016

  20. [29]

    Omran, H

    A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S.Ebadi,H.Bernien,A.S.Zibrov,H.Pichler,S.Choi,etal.,Sci- ence365, 570 (2019), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1126/ science.aax9743

    2019

  21. [30]

    Hacker, S

    B. Hacker, S. Welte, S. Daiss, A. Shaukat, S. Ritter, L. Li, and G. Rempe, Nature Photonics13, 110 (2019), URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41566-018-0339-5

    2019 doi

  22. [31]

    Shomroni, L

    I. Shomroni, L. Qiu, and T. J. Kippenberg, Physical Review A101, 033812(2020), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physreva.101.033812

    2020

  23. [32]

    Hauer, J

    B. Hauer, J. Combes, and J. Teufel, Physical Review Letters 130, 213604 (2023), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physrevlett.130.213604

    2023

  24. [34]

    Walschaers, PRX Quantum2, 030204 (2021), URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/prxquantum.2.030204

    M. Walschaers, PRX Quantum2, 030204 (2021), URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/prxquantum.2.030204

    2021 doi

  25. [35]

    Lachman and R

    L. Lachman and R. Filip, Progress in Quantum Electronics 6 83, 100395 (2022), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. pquantelec.2022.100395

    2022 doi

  26. [36]

    Lee and H

    C.-W. Lee and H. Jeong, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 220401 (2011)

    2011

  27. [37]

    Fiurášek and M

    J. Fiurášek and M. Ježek, Physical Review A87, 062115 (2013),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.87. 062115

    2013 doi

  28. [39]

    H.Kwon,C.-Y.Park,K.C.Tan,andH.Jeong,NewJ.Phys.19, 043024 (2017), ISSN 1367-2630

    2017

  29. [40]

    Chu, Science380, 274 (2023), URLhttp://dx.doi

    M.Bild,M.Fadel,Y.Yang,U.vonLüpke,P.Martin,A.Bruno, and Y. Chu, Science380, 274 (2023), URLhttp://dx.doi. org/10.1126/science.adf7553

    2023 doi

  30. [41]

    M.G.Genoni,M.L.Palma,T.Tufarelli,S.Olivares,M.S.Kim, andM.G.A.Paris,PhysicalReviewA87,062104(2013),URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.87.062104

    2013 doi

  31. [42]

    Stoler, Physical Review D1, 3217 (1970), URLhttp:// dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.1.3217

    D. Stoler, Physical Review D1, 3217 (1970), URLhttp:// dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevd.1.3217

    1970 doi

  32. [43]

    E.Y.C.Lu,LettereAlNuovoCimentoSeries22,1241(1971), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02770161

    1971 doi

  33. [44]

    H. P. Yuen, Physical Review A13, 2226 (1976), URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.13.2226

    1976 doi

  34. [45]

    S. L. Braunstein, Physical Review A71, 055801 (2005), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.71.055801

    2005 doi

  35. [46]

    B.Yadin,F.C.Binder,J.Thompson,V.Narasimhachar,M.Gu, andM.Kim,PhysicalReviewX8,041038(2018),URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevx.8.041038

    2018 doi

  36. [48]

    W. Jia, V. Xu, K. Kuns, M. Nakano, L. Barsotti, M. Evans, N. Mavalvala, members of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration†, R. Abbott, I. Abouelfettouh, et al., Science385, 1318 (2024), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.ado8069

    2024 doi

  37. [49]

    Gottesman and J

    D. Gottesman and J. Preskill, Physical Review A63, 022309 (2001),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.63. 022309

    2001 doi

  38. [50]

    doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ada9c4

    A.n.Oruganti,I.Derkach,R.Filip,andV.C.Usenko,Quantum ScienceandTechnology10,025023(2025),URLhttp://dx. doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ada9c4

    2025 doi

  39. [51]

    K. Park, C. Oh, R. Filip, and P. Marek, Physical Review Applied18, 014060 (2022), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/physrevapplied.18.014060

    2022

  40. [52]

    S. L. Braunstein and H. J. Kimble, Physical Review Let- ters80, 869 (1998), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physrevlett.80.869

    1998

  41. [53]

    Furusawa, J

    A. Furusawa, J. L. Sørensen, S. L. Braunstein, C. A. Fuchs, H. J. Kimble, and E. S. Polzik, Science282, 706 (1998), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.282.5389.706

    1998 doi

  42. [54]

    Bräuer, T

    Š. Bräuer, T. Opatrný, and P. Marek, Physical Review Re- search7, 033176 (2025), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/9cxn-t1vf

    2025

  43. [55]

    V. Kala, J. Fadrný, M. Neset, J. Bílek, P. Marek, and M. Ježek (2025), URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2503.07574

    2025

  44. [56]

    Miyata, H

    K. Miyata, H. Ogawa, P. Marek, R. Filip, H. Yonezawa, J.-i. Yoshikawa, and A. Furusawa, Physical Review A93, 022301 (2016),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93. 022301

    2016 doi

  45. [57]

    Konno, A

    S. Konno, A. Sakaguchi, W. Asavanant, H. Ogawa, M.Kobayashi,P.Marek,R.Filip,J.-i.Yoshikawa,andA.Furu- sawa,PhysicalReviewApplied15,024024(2021),URLhttp: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevapplied.15.024024

    2021 doi

  46. [58]

    Š.BräuerandP.Marek,OpticsExpress29,22648(2021),URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.427637

    2021 doi

  47. [59]

    V. Kala, R. Filip, and P. Marek, Optics Express30, 31456 (2022), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.464759

    2022 doi

  48. [60]

    Marek, Physical Review Letters132, 210601 (2024), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.132

    P. Marek, Physical Review Letters132, 210601 (2024), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.132. 210601

    2024 doi

  49. [61]

    Š.Bräuer, J.Provazník, V.Kala, andP.Marek,Supplement ma- terial for: Catability as a metric for evaluating superposed co- herent states(2025), see supplementary material for additional figures, derivations, and footnotes

    2025

  50. [62]

    Bräuer, J

    Š. Bräuer, J. Provazník, V. Kala, and P. Marek,Catability as a metric for evaluating superposed coherent states,GitHubrepos- itoryhttps://github.com/jan-provaznik/catability

  51. [63]

    Le Jeannic, A

    H. Le Jeannic, A. Cavaillès, K. Huang, R. Filip, and J. Laurat, Physical Review Letters120, 073603 (2018), URLhttp:// dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.120.073603

    2018 doi

  52. [64]

    Provazník, P

    J. Provazník, P. Marek, J. Laurat, and R. Filip, Optics Express 33, 16520 (2025), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe. 555180

    2025 doi

  53. [65]

    J. S. Ivan, K. K. Sabapathy, and R. Simon, Physical Review A84, 042311 (2011), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physreva.84.042311

    2011

  54. [66]

    Mari and J

    A. Mari and J. Eisert, Physical Review Letters109, 230503 (2012),URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett. 109.230503

    2012 doi

  55. [67]

    Takahashi, K

    H. Takahashi, K. Wakui, S. Suzuki, M. Takeoka, K. Hayasaka, A. Furusawa, and M. Sasaki, Physical Review Letters 101, 233605 (2008), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/ physrevlett.101.233605

    2008

  56. [68]

    Takase, J.-i

    K. Takase, J.-i. Yoshikawa, W. Asavanant, M. Endo, and A. Furusawa, Physical Review A103, 013710 (2021), URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.103.013710

    2021 doi

  57. [69]

    Ourjoumtsev, H

    A. Ourjoumtsev, H. Jeong, R. Tualle-Brouri, and P. Grangier, Nature448, 784 (2007), ISSN 1476-4687

    2007

  58. [70]

    Commun.337, 96 (2015), ISSN 0030-4018

    A.Laghaout,J.S.Neergaard-Nielsen,andU.L.Andersen,Opt. Commun.337, 96 (2015), ISSN 0030-4018

    2015

  59. [71]

    Chabaud, D

    U. Chabaud, D. Markham, and F. Grosshans, Physical Review Letters124, 063605 (2020), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10. 1103/physrevlett.124.063605

    2020

  60. [72]

    Chabaud, G

    U. Chabaud, G. Roeland, M. Walschaers, F. Grosshans, V. Pa- rigi, D. Markham, and N. Treps, PRX Quantum2, 020333 (2021), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1103/prxquantum. 2.020333

    2021 doi

  61. [73]

    Fiurášek, Optics Express30, 30630 (2022), URLhttp:// dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.466175

    J. Fiurášek, Optics Express30, 30630 (2022), URLhttp:// dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.466175

    2022 doi

  62. [74]

    J.Cohen,W.C.Smith,M.H.Devoret,andM.Mirrahimi,Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 060503 (2017)

    2017

  63. [75]

    C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt, R. Gommers, P. Virtanen, D. Cournapeau, E. Wieser, J. Taylor, S. Berg, N. J. Smith, et al., Nature585, 357 (2020), URLhttp://dx.doi. org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    2020 doi

  64. [76]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, et al., Nature Methods17, 261 (2020), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2

    2020 doi

  65. [77]

    J.D.Hunter,ComputinginScience&Engineering9,90(2007), URLhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1109/mcse.2007.55. 7 Supplementary Material for: Catability as a metric for evaluating superposed coherent states Šimon Bräuer, Jan Provazník, Vojtěch Kala, Petr Marek Optics Department, Faculty of Sc...

    2007 doi

  66. [78]

    This follows from the linearity of expectation values and the convexity of mixed states: any expectation value for a mixed state is a convex combination of those for pure states

    Listopadu 12, 77146 Olomouc, Czech Republic (April 27, 2026) GAUSSIAN BENCHMARK FOR THE OPERATORˆO To determine the minimum expectation value of the operatorˆOover all Gaussian states, it is sufficient to consider onlypure Gaussian states. This follows from the linearity of ex...

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed May 19, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.