- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Detecting strongly non-Gaussian entanglement

Serge Deside*, Tobias Haas*, and Nicolas J. Cerf

  • Centre for Quantum Information and Communication, École polytechnique de Bruxelles, CP 165/59, Université libre de Bruxelles, 1050 Brussels, Belgium

  • *These authors contributed equally to this work.
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033064 – Published 16 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/297d-3tbj

Abstract

Efficiently certifying non-Gaussian entanglement in continuous-variable quantum systems is a central challenge for advancing quantum information processing, photonic quantum computing, and metrology. Here, we put forward continuous-variable counterparts to the recently introduced entanglement criteria based on moments of the partially transposed state, together with simple readout schemes that require only a few replicas of the state, passive linear optics, and particle-number measurements. We develop a multicopy method that enables the detection of strongly non-Gaussian entanglement for various relevant state families overlooked by standard approaches, which include the entire class of NOON states. Further, it is robust against realistic experimental constraints (losses, noise, and finite statistics), which we demonstrate by extensive numerical simulations.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (141)

  1. A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935).
  2. J. S. Bell, On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox, Phys. Phys. Fiz. 1, 195 (1964).
  3. J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969).
  4. A. Aspect, J. Dalibard, and G. Roger, Experimental test of Bell's inequalities using time-varying analyzers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 1804 (1982).
  5. G. Weihs, T. Jennewein, C. Simon, H. Weinfurter, and A. Zeilinger, Violation of Bell's inequality under strict Einstein locality conditions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5039 (1998).
  6. B. G. Christensen, K. T. McCusker, J. B. Altepeter, B. Calkins, T. Gerrits, A. E. Lita, A. Miller, L. K. Shalm, Y. Zhang, S. W. Nam, N. Brunner, C. C. W. Lim, N. Gisin, and P. G. Kwiat, Detection-loophole-free test of quantum nonlocality, and applications, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 130406 (2013).
  7. P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory, J. Stat. Mech. (2004) P06002.
  8. H. Casini and M. Huerta, Entanglement entropy in free quantum field theory, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 42, 504007 (2009).
  9. J. Eisert, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Area laws for the entanglement entropy, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 277 (2010).
  10. D. A. Abanin and E. Demler, Measuring entanglement entropy of a generic many-body system with a quantum switch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 020504 (2012).
  11. R. Islam, R. Ma, P. M. Preiss, M. E. Tai, A. Lukinand, M. Rispoli, and M. Greiner, Measuring entanglement entropy in a quantum many-body system, Nature (London) 528, 77 (2015).
  12. A. M. Kaufman, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, P. M. Preiss, and M. Greiner, Quantum thermalization through entanglement in an isolated many-body system, Science 353, 794 (2016).
  13. T. Haas, Area laws from classical entropies, arXiv:2404.12320.
  14. Y. Deller, M. Gärttner, T. Haas, M. K. Oberthaler, M. Reh, and H. Strobel, Area laws and thermalization from classical entropies in a Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. A 112, L011303 (2025).
  15. Y. Deller, M. Gärttner, T. Haas, M. K. Oberthaler, M. Reh, and H. Strobel, Area laws for classical entropies in a spin-1 Bose-Einstein condensate, New J. Phys. 27, 043004 (2025).
  16. L. Bombelli, R. K. Koul, J. Lee, and R. D. Sorkin, Quantum source of entropy for black holes, Phys. Rev. D 34, 373 (1986).
  17. M. Srednicki, Entropy and area, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 666 (1993).
  18. C. Callan and F. Wilczek, On geometric entropy, Phys. Lett. B 333, 55 (1994).
  19. S. N. Solodukhin, Entanglement entropy of black holes, Living Rev. Relativity 14, 8 (2011).
  20. V. Vedral, M. B. Plenio, M. A. Rippin, and P. L. Knight, Quantifying entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2275 (1997).
  21. M. B. Plenio and S. Virmani, An introduction to entanglement measures, Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 1 (2007).
  22. E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Quantum resource theories, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025001 (2019).
  23. R. Jozsa and N. Linden, On the role of entanglement in quantum-computational speed-up, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A 459, 2011 (2003).
  24. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn, A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics, Nature (London) 409, 46 (2001).
  25. P. Kok, W. J. Munro, K. Nemoto, T. C. Ralph, J. P. Dowling, and G. J. Milburn, Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 135 (2007).
  26. S. Slussarenko and G. J. Pryde, Photonic quantum information processing: A concise review, App. Phys. Rev. 6, 041303 (2019).
  27. G. Moody, V. J. Sorger, D. J. Blumenthal, P. W. Juodawlkis, W. Loh, C. Sorace-Agaskar, A. E. Jones, K. C. Balram, J. C. F. Matthews, A. Laing, et al., 2022 Roadmap on integrated quantum photonics, J. Phys. Photon. 4, 012501 (2022).
  28. J. Romero and G. Milburn, Photonic quantum computing, in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Physics, edited by B. Foster (Oxford University Press, New York, 2019).
  29. I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbène, Quantum simulations with ultracold quantum gases, Nat. Phys. 8, 267 (2012).
  30. I. M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Quantum simulation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 153 (2014).
  31. E. Altman, K. R. Brown, G. Carleo, L. D. Carr, E. Demler, C. Chin, B. DeMarco, S. E. Economou, M. A. Eriksson, K.-M. C. Fu, et al., Quantum simulators: Architectures and opportunities, PRX Quantum 2, 017003 (2021).
  32. C. Viermann, M. Sparn, N. Liebster, M. Hans, E. Kath, A. Parra-López, M. Tolosa-Simeón, N. Sánchez-Kuntz, T. Haas, H. Strobel, S. Floerchinger, and M. K. Oberthaler, Quantum field simulator for dynamics in curved spacetime, Nature (London) 611, 260 (2022).
  33. M. Tolosa-Simeón, A. Parra-López, N. Sánchez-Kuntz, T. Haas, C. Viermann, M. Sparn, N. Liebster, M. Hans, E. Kath, H. Strobel, M. K. Oberthaler, and S. Floerchinger, Curved and expanding spacetime geometries in Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A 106, 033313 (2022).
  34. M. D’Achille, M. Gärttner, and T. Haas, Configurable photonic simulator for quantum field dynamics, PRX Quantum 7, 020370 (2026).
  35. G. M. D’Ariano, P. Lo Presti, and M. G. A. Paris, Using Entanglement improves the precision of quantum measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 270404 (2001).
  36. M. G. A. Paris, Quantum estimation for quantum technology, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 07, 125 (2009).
  37. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nat. Photon. 5, 222 (2011).
  38. L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018).
  39. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009).
  40. O. Gühne and G. Tóth, Entanglement detection, Phys. Rep. 474, 1 (2009).
  41. S. L. Braunstein and P. van Loock, Quantum information with continuous variables, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513 (2005).
  42. N. J. Cerf, G. Leuchs, and E. S. Polzik, Quantum Information with Continuous Variables of Atoms and Light (Imperial College Press, London, 2007).
  43. C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. García-Patrón, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, Gaussian quantum information, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 621 (2012).
  44. A. Serafini, Quantum Continuous Variables (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2017).
  45. R. Dong, M. Lassen, J. Heersink, C. Marquardt, R. Filip, G. Leuchs, and U. L. Andersen, Experimental entanglement distillation of mesoscopic quantum states, Nat. Phys. 4, 919 (2008).
  46. J. Schneeloch, C. C. Tison, M. L. Fanto, P. M. Alsing, and G. A. Howland, Quantifying entanglement in a 68-billion-dimensional quantum state space, Nat. Commun. 10, 2785 (2019).
  47. W. Asavanant, Y. Shiozawa, S. Yokoyama, B. Charoensombutamon, H. Emura, R. Alexander, S. Takeda, J.-i. Yoshikawa, N. Menicucci, H. Yonezawa, and A. Furusawa, Generation of time-domain-multiplexed two-dimensional cluster state, Science 366, 373 (2019).
  48. Z. Qin, M. Gessner, Z. Ren, X. Deng, D. Han, W. Li, X. Su, A. Smerzi, and K. Peng, Characterizing the multipartite continuous-variable entanglement structure from squeezing coefficients and the Fisher information, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 3 (2019).
  49. C. Gross, H. Strobel, E. Nicklas, T. Zibold, N. Bar-Gill, G. Kurizki, and M. K. Oberthaler, Atomic homodyne detection of continuous-variable entangled twin-atom states, Nature (London) 480, 219 (2011).
  50. H. Strobel, W. Muessel, D. Linnemann, T. Zibold, D. B. Hume, L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, and M. K. Oberthaler, Fisher information and entanglement of non-Gaussian spin states, Science 345, 424 (2014).
  51. J. Peise, I. Kruse, K. Lange, B. Lücke, L. Pezzè, J. Arlt, W. Ertmer, K. Hammerer, L. Santos, A. Smerzi, and C. Klempt, Satisfying the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen criterion with massive particles, Nat. Commun. 6, 8984 (2015).
  52. P. Kunkel, M. Prüfer, H. Strobel, D. Linnemann, A. Frölian, T. Gasenzer, M. Gärttner, and M. K. Oberthaler, Spatially distributed multipartite entanglement enables EPR steering of atomic clouds, Science 360, 413 (2018).
  53. K. Lange, J. Peise, B. Lücke, I. Kruse, G. Vitagliano, I. Apellaniz, M. Kleinmann, G. Tóth, and C. Klempt, Entanglement between two spatially separated atomic modes, Science 360, 416 (2018).
  54. M. Fadel, T. Zibold, B. Décamps, and P. Treutlein, Spatial entanglement patterns and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering in Bose-Einstein condensates, Science 360, 409 (2018).
  55. A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996).
  56. M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Separability of mixed states: Necessary and sufficient conditions, Phys. Lett. A 223, 1 (1996).
  57. L.-M. Duan, G. Giedke, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Inseparability criterion for continuous variable systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2722 (2000).
  58. R. Simon, Peres-Horodecki separability criterion for continuous variable systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 2726 (2000).
  59. R. F. Werner and M. M. Wolf, Bound entangled Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3658 (2001).
  60. S. Mancini, V. Giovannetti, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Entangling macroscopic oscillators exploiting radiation pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 120401 (2002).
  61. V. Giovannetti, S. Mancini, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Characterizing the entanglement of bipartite quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A 67, 022320 (2003).
  62. L. Lami, A. Serafini, and G. Adesso, Gaussian entanglement revisited, New J. Phys. 20, 023030 (2018).
  63. S. P. Walborn, B. G. Taketani, A. Salles, F. Toscano, and R. L. de Matos Filho, Entropic entanglement criteria for continuous variables, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 160505 (2009).
  64. S. P. Walborn, A. Salles, R. M. Gomes, F. Toscano, and P. H. S. Ribeiro, Revealing hidden Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen nonlocality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 130402 (2011).
  65. A. Saboia, F. Toscano, and S. P. Walborn, Family of continuous-variable entanglement criteria using general entropy functions, Phys. Rev. A 83, 032307 (2011).
  66. D. S. Tasca, Ł. Rudnicki, R. M. Gomes, F. Toscano, and S. P. Walborn, Reliable entanglement detection under coarse-grained measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 210502 (2013).
  67. J. Schneeloch and G. A. Howland, Quantifying high-dimensional entanglement with Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations, Phys. Rev. A 97, 042338 (2018).
  68. S. Floerchinger, T. Haas, and H. Müller-Groeling, Wehrl entropy, entropic uncertainty relations, and entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 103, 062222 (2021).
  69. S. Floerchinger, M. Gärttner, T. Haas, and O. R. Stockdale, Entropic entanglement criteria in phase space, Phys. Rev. A 105, 012409 (2022).
  70. M. Gärttner, T. Haas, and J. Noll, Detecting continuous-variable entanglement in phase space with the Q distribution, Phys. Rev. A 108, 042410 (2023).
  71. M. Gärttner, T. Haas, and J. Noll, General class of continuous variable entanglement criteria, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 150201 (2023).
  72. E. Shchukin and W. Vogel, Inseparability criteria for continuous bipartite quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 230502 (2005).
  73. A. Miranowicz and M. Piani, Comment on “Inseparability criteria for continuous bipartite quantum states”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 058901 (2006).
  74. A. Miranowicz, M. Piani, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Inseparability criteria based on matrices of moments, Phys. Rev. A 80, 052303 (2009).
  75. J. Eisert, S. Scheel, and M. B. Plenio, Distilling Gaussian states with Gaussian operations is impossible, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 137903 (2002).
  76. J. Fiurášek, Gaussian transformations and distillation of entangled Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 137904 (2002).
  77. G. Giedke and J. I. Cirac, Characterization of Gaussian operations and distillation of Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. A 66, 032316 (2002).
  78. J. Niset, J. Fiurášek, and N. J. Cerf, No-go theorem for Gaussian quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 120501 (2009).
  79. M. Walschaers, Non-Gaussian quantum states and where to find them, PRX Quantum 2, 030204 (2021).
  80. U. Chabaud and M. Walschaers, Resources for bosonic quantum computational advantage, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 090602 (2023).
  81. B. C. Sanders, Quantum dynamics of the nonlinear rotator and the effects of continual spin measurement, Phys. Rev. A 40, 2417 (1989).
  82. J. P. Dowling, Quantum optical metrology—The lowdown on high-N00N states, Contemp. Phys. 49, 125 (2008).
  83. A. Elben, R. Kueng, H.-Y. R. Huang, R. van Bijnen, C. Kokail, M. Dalmonte, P. Calabrese, B. Kraus, J. Preskill, P. Zoller, and B. Vermersch, Mixed-state entanglement from local randomized measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 200501 (2020).
  84. A. Neven, J. Carrasco, V. Vitale, C. Kokail, A. Elben, M. Dalmonte, P. Calabrese, P. Zoller, B. Vermersch, R. Kueng, and B. Kraus, Symmetry-resolved entanglement detection using partial transpose moments, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 152 (2021).
  85. X.-D. Yu, S. Imai, and O. Gühne, Optimal entanglement certification from moments of the partial transpose, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 060504 (2021).
  86. T. A. Brun, Measuring polynomial functions of states, Quantum Inf. Comput. 4, 401 (2004).
  87. A. Hertz, O. Oreshkov, and N. J. Cerf, Multicopy uncertainty observable inducing a symplectic-invariant uncertainty relation in position and momentum phase space, Phys. Rev. A 100, 052112 (2019).
  88. M. Arnhem, C. Griffet, and N. J. Cerf, Multicopy observables for the detection of optically nonclassical states, Phys. Rev. A 106, 043705 (2022).
  89. C. Griffet, M. Arnhem, S. De Bièvre, and N. J. Cerf, Interferometric measurement of the quadrature coherence scale using two replicas of a quantum optical state, Phys. Rev. A 108, 023730 (2023).
  90. C. Griffet, T. Haas, and N. J. Cerf, Accessing continuous-variable entanglement witnesses with multimode spin observables, Phys. Rev. A 108, 022421 (2023).
  91. F. Marsili, V. B. Verma, J. A. Stern, S. Harrington, A. E. Lita, T. Gerrits, I. Vayshenker, B. Baek, M. D. Shaw, R. P. Mirin, and S. W. Nam, Detecting single infrared photons with 93% system efficiency, Nat. Photon. 7, 210 (2013).
  92. D. V. Reddy, R. R. Nerem, S. W. Nam, R. P. Mirin, and V. B. Verma, Superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors with 98% system detection efficiency at 1550 nm, Optica 7, 1649 (2020).
  93. R. Cheng, Y. Zhou, S. Wang, M. Shen, T. Taher, and H. X. Tang, A 100-pixel photon-number-resolving detector unveiling photon statistics, Nature (London) 17, 112 (2023).
  94. W. Bakr, J. Gillen, A. Peng, S. Fölling, and M. Greiner, A quantum gas microscope for detecting single atoms in a Hubbard-regime optical lattice, Nature (London) 462, 74 (2009).
  95. J. Sherson, C. Weitenberg, M. Endres, M. Cheneau, I. Bloch, and S. Kuhr, Single-atom-resolved fluorescence imaging of an atomic Mott insulator, Nature (London) 467, 68 (2010).
  96. D. B. Hume, I. Stroescu, M. Joos, W. Muessel, H. Strobel, and M. K. Oberthaler, Accurate atom counting in mesoscopic ensembles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 253001 (2013).
  97. C. Gross and W. S. Bakr, Quantum gas microscopy for single atom and spin detection, Nat. Phys. 17, 1316 (2021).
  98. D. R. Curtiss, Recent extensions of Descartes’ rule of signs, Ann. Math. 19, 251 (1918).
  99. A. K. Ekert, C. M. Alves, D. K. L. Oi, M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and L. C. Kwek, Direct estimations of linear and nonlinear functionals of a quantum state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 217901 (2002).
  100. C. M. Alves, P. Horodecki, D. K. L. Oi, L. C. Kwek, and A. K. Ekert, Direct estimation of functionals of density operators by local operations and classical communication, Phys. Rev. A 68, 032306 (2003).
  101. A. J. Daley, H. Pichler, J. Schachenmayer, and P. Zoller, Measuring entanglement growth in quench dynamics of bosons in an optical lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 020505 (2012).
  102. J. Gray, L. Banchi, A. Bayat, and S. Bose, Machine-learning-assisted many-body entanglement measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 150503 (2018).
  103. S. Fuchs, J. J. Abel, J. Nathanael, J. Reinhard, F. Wiesner, M. Wünsche, S. Skruszewicz, C. Rödel, D. Born, H. Schmidt, and G. G. Paulus, Photon counting of extreme ultraviolet high harmonics using a superconducting nanowire single-photon detector, Appl. Phys. B 128, 26 (2022).
  104. Although not Hermitian in general, the operators are normal and can therefore be treated as observables [105]. It is straightforward to verify that the multicopy method extends to normal operators.
  105. M.-J. Hu, X.-M. Hu, and Y.-S. Zhang, Are observables necessarily Hermitian? Quantum Stud.: Math. Found. 4, 243 (2017).
  106. M. Reck, A. Zeilinger, H. J. Bernstein, and P. Bertani, Experimental realization of any discrete unitary operator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 58 (1994).
  107. N. J. Cerf, C. Adami, and P. G. Kwiat, Optical simulation of quantum logic, Phys. Rev. A 57, R1477 (1998).
  108. W. R. Clements, P. C. Humphreys, B. J. Metcalf, W. S. Kolthammer, and I. A. Walmsley, Optimal design for universal multiport interferometers, Optica 3, 1460 (2016).
  109. A. Z. Goldberg, G. S. Thekkadath, and K. Heshami, Measuring the quadrature coherence scale on a cloud quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 107, 042610 (2023).
  110. J. Williamson, On the algebraic problem concerning the normal forms of linear dynamical systems, Am. J. Math. 58, 141 (1936).
  111. K. P. Seshadreesan, L. Lami, and M. M. Wilde, Rényi relative entropies of quantum Gaussian states, J. Math. Phys. 59, 072204 (2018).
  112. B. Yurke and D. Stoler, Generating quantum mechanical superpositions of macroscopically distinguishable states via amplitude dispersion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 13 (1986).
  113. Centering both cats (α=β=0), i.e., reducing the state to the vacuum, requires z>0 for the state to be well defined.
  114. The only exception being when |α|,|β|≲1 for the odd cat state.
  115. M. Gessner, L. Pezzè, and A. Smerzi, Efficient entanglement criteria for discrete, continuous, and hybrid variables, Phys. Rev. A 94, 020101(R) (2016).
  116. P. A. Franken, A. E. Hill, C. W. Peters, and G. Weinreich, Generation of optical harmonics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7, 118 (1961).
  117. P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, T. Lamprou, E. Pisanty, M. F. Ciappina, P. Tzallas, and M. Lewenstein, High photon number entangled states and coherent state superposition from the extreme ultraviolet to the far infrared, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 123603 (2022).
  118. P. Walther, J.-W. Pan, M. Aspelmeyer, R. Ursin, S. Gasparoni, and A. Zeilinger, De Broglie wavelength of a non-local four-photon state, Nature (London) 429, 158 (2004).
  119. M. W. Mitchell, J. S. Lundeen, and A. M. Steinberg, Super-resolving phase measurements with a multiphoton entangled state, Nature (London) 429, 161 (2004).
  120. K. J. Resch, K. L. Pregnell, R. Prevedel, A. Gilchrist, G. J. Pryde, J. L. O’Brien, and A. G. White, Time-reversal and super-resolving phase measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 223601 (2007).
  121. T. Nagata, R. Okamoto, J. L. O’Brien, K. Sasaki, and S. Takeuchi, Beating the standard quantum limit with four-entangled photons, Science 316, 726 (2007).
  122. I. Afek, O. Ambar, and Y. Silberberg, High-NOON states by mixing quantum and classical light, Science 328, 879 (2010).
  123. Y. Israel, I. Afek, S. Rosen, O. Ambar, and Y. Silberberg, Experimental tomography of NOON states with large photon numbers, Phys. Rev. A 85, 022115 (2012).
  124. S. Slussarenko, M. M. Weston, H. M. Chrzanowski, L. K. Shalm, V. B. Verma, S. W. Nam, and G. J. Pryde, Unconditional violation of the shot-noise limit in photonic quantum metrology, Nat. Photon. 11, 700 (2017).
  125. E. Callus, M. Gärttner, and T. Haas, Interferometric entanglement detection using two states, Phys. Rev. A 112, 033704 (2025).
  126. C. Rodó, G. Adesso, and A. Sanpera, Operational quantification of continuous-variable correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 110505 (2008).
  127. A. Hertz, E. Karpov, A. Mandilara, and N. J. Cerf, Detection of non-Gaussian entangled states with an improved continuous-variable separability criterion, Phys. Rev. A 93, 032330 (2016).
  128. S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, The computational complexity of linear optics, Theory Comput. 9, 143 (2013).
  129. X. Gao, M. Isoard, F. Sun, C. E. Lopetegui, Y. Xiang, V. Parigi, Q. He, and M. Walschaers, Correlation-pattern-based continuous variable entanglement detection through neural networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 220202 (2024).
  130. A. Pasharavesh and M. Bajcsy, Generation of non-Gaussian states of light using deterministic photon subtraction, New J. Phys. 26, 113022 (2024).
  131. D. Su, C. R. Myers, and K. K. Sabapathy, Conversion of Gaussian states to non-Gaussian states using photon-number-resolving detectors, Phys. Rev. A 100, 052301 (2019).
  132. O. Rudolph, Further results on the cross norm criterion for separability, Quantum Inf. Process. 4, 219 (2005).
  133. C. Zhang, S. Yu, Q. Chen, and C. H. Oh, Detecting and estimating continuous-variable entanglement by local orthogonal observables, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 190501 (2013).
  134. A. Hertz, M. Arnhem, A. Asadian, and N. J. Cerf, Realignment separability criterion assisted with filtration for detecting continuous-variable entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 104, 022427 (2021).
  135. S. Aggarwal and S. Adhikari, Theoretical proposal for the experimental realization of realignment operation, Quantum Inf. Process. 23, 223 (2024).
  136. P. Horodecki, J. I. Cirac, and M. Lewenstein, Bound entanglement for continuous variables is a rare phenomenon, in Quantum Information with Continuous Variables, edited by S. L. Braunstein and A. K. Pati (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2003), pp. 211–228.
  137. B. Jungnitsch, T. Moroder, and O. Gühne, Taming multiparticle entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 190502 (2011).
  138. B. Dubus, T. Haas, and N. J. Cerf, From bosons and fermions to spins: A multi-mode extension of the Jordan-Schwinger map, arXiv:2411.04918.
  139. S. Gandhari, V. V. Albert, T. Gerrits, J. M. Taylor, and M. J. Gullans, Precision bounds on continuous-variable state tomography using classical shadows, PRX Quantum 5, 010346 (2024).
  140. S. Becker, N. Datta, L. Lami, and C. Rouze, Classical shadow tomography for continuous variables quantum systems, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 70, 3427 (2024).
  141. S. Deside, T. Haas, and N. J. Cerf, Detecting strongly non-Gaussian entanglement, GitHub, 2025, https://github.com/Tobi-Haas/Detecting-strongly-non-Gaussian-entanglement.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033064– Published 16 July, 2026
  • Received 30 August 2025
  • Accepted 2 April 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation