Experimental quantum communication enhancement by superposing trajectories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In quantum communication networks, wires represent well-defined trajectories along which quantum systems are transmitted. In spite of this, trajectories can be used as a quantum control to govern the order of different noisy communication channels, and such a control has been shown to enable the transmission of information even when quantum communication protocols through well-defined trajectories fail. This result has motivated further investigations on the role of the superposition of trajectories in enhancing communication, which revealed that the use of quantum control of parallel communication channels, or of channels in series with quantum-controlled operations, can also lead to communication advantages. Building upon these findings, here we experimentally and numerically compare different ways in which two trajectories through a pair of noisy channels can be superposed. We observe that, within the framework of quantum interferometry, the use of channels in series with quantum-controlled operations generally yields the largest advantages. Our results contribute to clarify the nature of these advantages in experimental quantum-optical scenarios, and showcase the benefit of an extension of the quantum communication paradigm in which both the information exchanged and the trajectory of the information carriers are quantum.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".