- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

PRX Quantum

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

Recoil-Induced Errors and Their Correction in Photon-Mediated Entanglement between Atomic Qubits

Jan Apolín* and David P. Nadlinger†

  • *Present address: Institute for Quantum Electronics, Department of Physics, ETH Zürich, Otto-Stern-Weg 1, Zürich 8093, Switzerland.
  • †Contact author: david.nadlinger@physics.ox.ac.uk
PDF

PRX Quantum 7, 010326 – Published 6 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/29s3-dzl8

Abstract

Photonically interconnected matter qubit systems have wide-ranging applications across quantum science and technology, with entanglement between distant qubits serving as a universal resource. While state-of-the-art performance in heralded entanglement generation has thus far been achieved in trapped atomic systems modeled as stationary emitters, the improvements to fidelities and generation rates demanded by large-scale applications require consideration of their motional degrees of freedom. Here, we derive the effects of atomic motion on spontaneous emission coupled into arbitrary optical modes and study the implications for commonly used atom-atom entanglement protocols. We arrive at a coherent physical picture in the form of “kick operators” associated with each instant in the photonic wavepackets, which also suggests a method to mitigate motional errors by disentangling qubit and motion postherald. This proposed correction technique removes overheads associated with the thermal motion of atoms and may greatly increase entanglement rates in long-distance quantum network links by allowing single-photon-based protocols to be used in the high-fidelity regime.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Popular Summary

Entanglement between distant quantum bits is vital for large-scale quantum computing, secure communication, and tests of fundamental physics. Interfering light emitted by matter qubits is a natural way to create this entanglement. However, the trapped atoms that store qubits in two leading technologies—ion traps and optical tweezers—are not perfectly still: whenever they absorb or emit a photon, they recoil. Any atomic motion introduces errors. We present a universal description of these errors and propose a way to correct them to improve quantum link performance.

To generate remote entanglement, two atoms are excited by a laser and subsequently emit photons, whose interference and detection signals success. Motion influences this process in three closely connected ways: position-dependent optical path length (phase) changes, atom recoil that unintentionally entangles the qubit and its motion, and variations in the efficiency of collecting light from displaced atoms. We reveal these effects to be three aspects of a single underlying description and derive their consequences for widely used entanglement protocols.

Our framework also suggests a practical solution: the detection time of the link photon(s) is sufficient to precisely know the mathematical description of all motional aspects, such that errors can largely be counteracted by applying tailored forces to the atoms. This offers a path to improving both quality and generation rate in future quantum network links by drastically reducing the amount of laser cooling necessary. Moreover, our improved understanding of the studied effects might allow them to be used to engineer desirable qubit-motion interactions.

Article Text

References (88)

  1. N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, and H. Zbinden, Quantum cryptography, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 145 (2002).
  2. H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature 453, 1023 (2008).
  3. J. I. Cirac, A. K. Ekert, S. F. Huelga, and C. Macchiavello, Distributed quantum computation over noisy channels, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4249 (1999).
  4. L. Jiang, J. M. Taylor, A. S. Sørensen, and M. D. Lukin, Distributed quantum computation based on small quantum registers, Phys. Rev. A 76, 062323 (2007).
  5. N. H. Nickerson, J. F. Fitzsimons, and S. C. Benjamin, Freely scalable quantum technologies using cells of 5-to-50 qubits with very lossy and noisy photonic links, Phys. Rev. X 4, 041041 (2014).
  6. C. Monroe, R. Raussendorf, A. Ruthven, K. R. Brown, P. Maunz, L. M. Duan, and J. Kim, Large-scale modular quantum-computer architecture with atomic memory and photonic interconnects, Phys. Rev. A 89, 022317 (2014).
  7. B. Hensen, H. Bernien, A. E. Dréau, A. Reiserer, N. Kalb, M. S. Blok, J. Ruitenberg, R. F. L. Vermeulen, R. N. Schouten, C. Abellán, W. Amaya, V. Pruneri, M. W. Mitchell, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, D. Elkouss, S. Wehner, T. H. Taminiau, and R. Hanson, Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres, Nature 526, 682 (2015).
  8. W. Rosenfeld, D. Burchardt, R. Garthoff, K. Redeker, N. Ortegel, M. Rau, and H. Weinfurter, Event-ready bell test using entangled atoms simultaneously closing detection and locality loopholes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 010402 (2017).
  9. E. T. Khabiboulline, J. Borregaard, K. De Greve, and M. D. Lukin, Optical interferometry with quantum networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 070504 (2019).
  10. D. Gottesman and I. L. Chuang, Demonstrating the viability of universal quantum computation using teleportation and single-qubit operations, Nature 402, 390 (1999).
  11. S. Olmschenk, D. N. Matsukevich, P. Maunz, D. Hayes, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Quantum teleportation between distant matter qubits, Science 323, 486 (2009).
  12. W. Pfaff, B. J. Hensen, H. Bernien, S. B. van Dam, M. S. Blok, T. H. Taminiau, M. J. Tiggelman, R. N. Schouten, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and R. Hanson, Unconditional quantum teleportation between distant solid-state quantum bits, Science 345, 532 (2014).
  13. D. Main, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, B. C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, and D. M. Lucas, Distributed quantum computing across an optical network link, Nature 638, 383 (2025).
  14. M. Żukowski, A. Zeilinger, M. A. Horne, and A. K. Ekert, “Event-ready-detectors” Bell experiment via entanglement swapping, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 4287 (1993).
  15. D. L. Moehring, P. Maunz, S. Olmschenk, K. C. Younge, D. N. Matsukevich, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Entanglement of single-atom quantum bits at a distance, Nature 449, 68 (2007).
  16. S. Ritter, C. Nölleke, C. Hahn, A. Reiserer, A. Neuzner, M. Uphoff, M. Mücke, E. Figueroa, J. Bochmann, and G. Rempe, An elementary quantum network of single atoms in optical cavities, Nature 484, 195 (2012).
  17. H. Bernien, B. Hensen, W. Pfaff, G. Koolstra, M. S. Blok, L. Robledo, T. H. Taminiau, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, L. Childress, and R. Hanson, Heralded entanglement between solid-state qubits separated by three metres, Nature 497, 86 (2013).
  18. M. K. Bhaskar, R. Riedinger, B. Machielse, D. S. Levonian, C. T. Nguyen, E. N. Knall, H. Park, D. Englund, M. Lončar, D. D. Sukachev, and M. D. Lukin, Experimental demonstration of memory-enhanced quantum communication, Nature 580, 60 (2020).
  19. A. Delteil, Z. Sun, W.-b. Gao, E. Togan, S. Faelt, and A. Imamoğlu, Generation of heralded entanglement between distant hole spins, Nat. Phys. 12, 218 (2016).
  20. A. Ruskuc, C.-J. Wu, E. Green, S. L. N. Hermans, W. Pajak, J. Choi, and A. Faraon, Multiplexed entanglement of multi-emitter quantum network nodes, Nature 639, 54 (2025).
  21. J. O’Reilly, G. Toh, I. Goetting, S. Saha, M. Shalaev, A. L. Carter, A. Risinger, A. Kalakuntla, T. Li, A. Verma, and C. Monroe, Fast photon-mediated entanglement of continuously cooled trapped ions for quantum networking, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 090802 (2024).
  22. L. J. Stephenson, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, S. An, P. Drmota, T. G. Ballance, K. Thirumalai, J. F. Goodwin, D. M. Lucas, and C. J. Ballance, High-rate, high-fidelity entanglement of qubits across an elementary quantum network, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110501 (2020).
  23. C. Monroe and J. Kim, Scaling the ion trap quantum processor, Science 339, 1164 (2013).
  24. J. P. Covey, H. Weinfurter, and H. Bernien, Quantum networks with neutral atom processing nodes, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 90 (2023).
  25. J. Ramette, J. Sinclair, N. P. Breuckmann, and V. Vuletić, Fault-tolerant connection of error-corrected qubits with noisy links, npj Quantum Inf. 10, 58 (2024).
  26. Y. Li and J. D. Thompson, High-rate and high-fidelity modular interconnects between neutral atom quantum processors, PRX Quantum 5, 020363 (2024).
  27. P. Drmota, D. Main, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, M. A. Weber, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, C. J. Ballance, and D. M. Lucas, Robust quantum memory in a trapped-ion quantum network node, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 090803 (2023).
  28. J. M. Pino, J. M. Dreiling, C. Figgatt, J. P. Gaebler, S. A. Moses, M. S. Allman, C. H. Baldwin, M. Foss-Feig, D. Hayes, K. Mayer, C. Ryan-Anderson, and B. Neyenhuis, Demonstration of the trapped-ion quantum CCD computer architecture, Nature 592, 209 (2021).
  29. A. Reiserer and G. Rempe, Cavity-based quantum networks with single atoms and optical photons, Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 1379 (2015).
  30. H. Goto, S. Mizukami, Y. Tokunaga, and T. Aoki, Figure of merit for single-photon generation based on cavity quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053843 (2019).
  31. J. Schupp, V. Krcmarsky, V. Krutyanskiy, M. Meraner, T. E. Northup, and B. P. Lanyon, Interface between trapped-ion qubits and traveling photons with close-to-optimal efficiency, PRX Quantum 2, 020331 (2021).
  32. C. Cabrillo, J. I. Cirac, P. Garcia-Fernandez, and P. Zoller, Creation of entangled states of distant atoms by interference, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1025 (1999).
  33. S. Saha, M. Shalaev, J. O’Reilly, I. Goetting, G. Toh, A. Kalakuntla, Y. Yu, and C. Monroe, High-fidelity remote entanglement of trapped atoms mediated by time-bin photons, Nat. Commun. 16, 2533 (2025).
  34. S. Sunami, S. Tamiya, R. Inoue, H. Yamasaki, and A. Goban, Scalable networking of neutral-atom qubits: Nanofiber-based approach for multiprocessor fault-tolerant quantum computer, PRX Quantum 6, 010101 (2025).
  35. D. J. Wineland, W. M. Itano, J. C. Bergquist, and R. G. Hulet, Laser-cooling limits and single-ion spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 36, 2220 (1987).
  36. C. Hempel, B. P. Lanyon, P. Jurcevic, R. Gerritsma, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Entanglement-enhanced detection of single-photon scattering events, Nat. Photonics 7, 630 (2013).
  37. A. J. Rasmusson, I. Jung, F. G. Schroer, A. Kyprianidis, and P. Richerme, Measurement-induced heating of a trapped ion, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 57, 225002 (2024).
  38. D. Leibfried, R. Blatt, C. Monroe, and D. Wineland, Quantum dynamics of single trapped ions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 281 (2003).
  39. I. I. Ryabtsev, I. I. Beterov, D. B. Tretyakov, V. M. Entin, and E. A. Yakshina, Doppler- and recoil-free laser excitation of Rydberg states via three-photon transitions, Phys. Rev. A 84, 053409 (2011).
  40. L. Van Damme, Z. Zhang, A. Devra, S. J. Glaser, and A. Alberti, Motion-insensitive time-optimal control of optical qubits, Quantum Sci. Technol. 10, 035025 (2025).
  41. To elucidate the connection to usual concepts in atomic physics, we have defined the Lamb-Dicke parameter ηj for a constant photon wavevector k≈ωei/c (with ωei:=ωe−ωi), which is an excellent approximation as spontaneous emission from atoms is narrowband (Γ≪ωei), and the lower states i of interest typically do not differ much in energy, ωei≈ωei′. This choice merely aids exposition in the remote entanglement generation context; the model is straightforwardly generalized to lower levels with significantly different energies by not stating displacements in terms of a common ηj.
  42. V. Weisskopf and E. Wigner, Berechnung der natürlichen Linienbreite auf Grund der Dirac’schen Lichttheorie, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 114, 710 (1927).
  43. P. W. Milonni, The Quantum Vacuum: An Introduction to Quantum Electrodynamics (Academic, Boston, 1994).
  44. K. Rzazewski and W. Zakowicz, Spontaneous emission from an extended wavepacket, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 25, L319 (1992).
  45. M. V. Fedorov, M. A. Efremov, A. E. Kazakov, K. W. Chan, C. K. Law, and J. H. Eberly, Spontaneous emission of a photon: Wave-packet structures and atom-photon entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 72, 032110 (2005).
  46. The combined effect of excitation and decay from repeated unsuccessful attempts of a photon-mediated entanglement protocol can lead to a build-up of motional excitation, so on a conceptual level, the ρIMrest fraction cannot entirely be ignored. However, in this manuscript, we are concerned with the analysis of the qubit-qubit state resulting from the final attempt leading to success of such heralded protocols, for which the exact form of ρIMrest turns out not to be relevant, as long as the initial motional state ρM is known (this includes single-photon protocols; see Appendix pp3). To obtain the precise ρM for a given entanglement attempt, the effect of prior noncollected photon decays [given by ρIMrest representing the residual fraction of Eq. (4)], but also of other protocol steps, such as state preparation or recooling, may need to be considered.
  47. To factor out the transversal modes, i.e., to write the various quantities as functions of k^ only, independent of k=|k|, we have assumed the action of the imaging system to be independent of the photon frequency, which will be true in excellent approximation given the narrowband nature of atomic spontaneous emission. As with the definition of ηj, these assumptions are made for expository purposes only and are not essential to the model.
  48. U. Eichmann, J. C. Bergquist, J. J. Bollinger, J. M. Gilligan, W. M. Itano, D. J. Wineland, and M. G. Raizen, Young’s interference experiment with light scattered from two atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2359 (1993).
  49. R. Stockill, M. J. Stanley, L. Huthmacher, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, A. J. Miller, C. Matthiesen, C. Le Gall, and M. Atatüre, Phase-tuned entangled state generation between distant spin qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 010503 (2017).
  50. P. C. Humphreys, N. Kalb, J. P. J. Morits, R. N. Schouten, R. F. L. Vermeulen, D. J. Twitchen, M. Markham, and R. Hanson, Deterministic delivery of remote entanglement on a quantum network, Nature 558, 268 (2018).
  51. S. L. N. Hermans, M. Pompili, L. D. S. Martins, A. R.-P. Montblanch, H. K. C. Beukers, S. Baier, J. Borregaard, and R. Hanson, Entangling remote qubits using the single-photon protocol: An in-depth theoretical and experimental study, New J. Phys. 25, 013011 (2023).
  52. A. J. Stolk et al., Metropolitan-scale heralded entanglement of solid-state qubits, Sci. Adv. 10, eadp6442 (2024).
  53. E. T. Campbell and S. C. Benjamin, Measurement-based entanglement under conditions of extreme photon loss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 130502 (2008).
  54. N. Kalb, A. A. Reiserer, J. J. W. Bakermans, S. J. Kamerling, N. H. Nickerson, S. C. Benjamin, D. J. Twitchen, M. Markham, and R. Hanson, Entanglement distillation between solid-state quantum network nodes, Science 356, 928 (2017).
  55. L. Slodička, G. Hétet, N. Röck, P. Schindler, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt, Atom-atom entanglement by single-photon detection, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 083603 (2013).
  56. Here, we assume impulsive excitation to |e⟩ from an approximate plane wave field, as describes well a pulse from a mode-locked laser that is not exceedingly strongly focused, as often employed in high-rate, high-fidelity remote entanglement experiments. Given that in the trapped ion/atom context, the linewidth of the dipole transition used to quickly extract photons usually significantly exceeds the motional frequencies (Γ≫μj for each mode j), high-fidelity excitation to |e⟩ implies this impulsive regime, though the model could be adapted to different excitation schemes by an appropriate choice of L.
  57. J. Mizrahi, C. Senko, B. Neyenhuis, K. G. Johnson, W. C. Campbell, C. W. S. Conover, and C. Monroe, Ultrafast spin-motion entanglement and interferometry with a single atom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 203001 (2013).
  58. The approximate equality in Eq. (9) is due to a minor approximation made which holds as long as the overall collection/detection efficiency of the apparatus is not too large, as discussed in Appendix pp3. If the collection efficiency is high, the erroneous double-excitation component can sometimes result in a distinct herald signal that can be rejected as invalid (two detector clicks). This leads to a slight upward correction of the fidelity, but is immaterial for practical parameters.
  59. S. M. Barnett and P. M. Radmore, Methods in Theoretical Quantum Optics, Oxford Series in Optical and Imaging Sciences No. 15 (Clarendon, Oxford, 2005).
  60. D. J. Wineland, C. Monroe, W. M. Itano, D. Leibfried, B. E. King, and D. M. Meekhof, Experimental issues in coherent quantum-state manipulation of trapped atomic ions, J. Res. Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. 103, 259 (1998).
  61. C. Simon and William T. M. Irvine, Robust long-distance entanglement and a loophole-free bell test with ions and photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 110405 (2003).
  62. L.-M. Duan and H. J. Kimble, Efficient engineering of multiatom entanglement through single-photon detections, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 253601 (2003).
  63. J. Hofmann, M. Krug, N. Ortegel, L. Gérard, M. Weber, W. Rosenfeld, and H. Weinfurter, Heralded entanglement between widely separated atoms, Science 337, 72 (2012).
  64. C. Nölleke, A. Neuzner, A. Reiserer, C. Hahn, G. Rempe, and S. Ritter, Efficient teleportation between remote single-atom quantum memories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 140403 (2013).
  65. D. Hucul, I. V. Inlek, G. Vittorini, C. Crocker, S. Debnath, S. M. Clark, and C. Monroe, Modular entanglement of atomic qubits using both photons and phonons, Nat. Phys. 11, 37 (2015).
  66. V. Krutyanskiy, M. Galli, V. Krcmarsky, S. Baier, D. A. Fioretto, Y. Pu, A. Mazloom, P. Sekatski, M. Canteri, M. Teller, J. Schupp, J. Bate, M. Meraner, N. Sangouard, B. P. Lanyon, and T. E. Northup, Entanglement of trapped-ion qubits separated by 230 meters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 050803 (2023).
  67. T. Kim, P. Maunz, and J. Kim, Efficient collection of single photons emitted from a trapped ion into a single-mode fiber for scalable quantum-information processing, Phys. Rev. A 84, 063423 (2011).
  68. D. P. Nadlinger, P. Drmota, B. C. Nichol, G. Araneda, D. Main, R. Srinivas, D. M. Lucas, C. J. Ballance, K. Ivanov, E. Y.-Z. Tan, P. Sekatski, R. L. Urbanke, R. Renner, N. Sangouard, and J.-D. Bancal, Experimental quantum key distribution certified by Bell’s theorem, Nature 607, 682 (2022).
  69. K. K. Mehta, C. D. Bruzewicz, R. McConnell, R. J. Ram, J. M. Sage, and J. Chiaverini, Integrated optical addressing of an ion qubit, Nat. Nanotechnol. 11, 1066 (2016).
  70. K. K. Mehta, C. Zhang, M. Malinowski, T.-L. Nguyen, M. Stadler, and J. P. Home, Integrated optical multi-ion quantum logic, Nature 586, 533 (2020).
  71. F. W. Knollmann, E. Clements, P. T. Callahan, M. Gehl, J. D. Hunker, T. Mahony, R. McConnell, R. Swint, C. Sorace-Agaskar, I. L. Chuang, J. Chiaverini, and D. Stick, Integrated photonic structures for photon-mediated entanglement of trapped ions, Opt. Quantum 2, 230 (2024).
  72. O. Smedley, V. Natarajan, O. Jaramillo, H. M. Rivy, and K. K. Mehta, Atomic fluorescence collection into planar photonic devices, Opt. Quantum 3, 28 (2025).
  73. E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, D. Main, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, B. C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, and G. Araneda, Multipartite entanglement for multi-node quantum networks, arXiv:2408.00149.
  74. A. R. Vasquez, C. Mordini, C. Vernière, M. Stadler, M. Malinowski, C. Zhang, D. Kienzler, K. K. Mehta, and J. P. Home, Control of an atomic quadrupole transition in a phase-stable standing wave, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 133201 (2023).
  75. E. Clements et al., Sub-Doppler cooling of a trapped ion in a phase-stable polarization gradient, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2025).
  76. S. D. Barrett and P. Kok, Efficient high-fidelity quantum computation using matter qubits and linear optics, Phys. Rev. A 71, 060310(R) (2005).
  77. M. T. Uysal and J. D. Thompson, Rephasing spectral diffusion in time-bin spin-spin entanglement protocols, Phys. Rev. A 110, 052606 (2024).
  78. S. Kikura, R. Inoue, H. Yamasaki, A. Goban, and S. Sunami, Taming the recoil effect in cavity-assisted quantum interconnects, PRX Quantum 6, 040351 (2025).
  79. Y. Yu, S. Saha, M. Shalaev, G. Toh, J. O'Reilly, I. Goetting, A. Kalakuntla, and C. Monroe, Entanglement fidelity limits of photonically-networked atomic qubits from recoil and timing, arXiv:2503.19818.
  80. M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1997).
  81. B. Richards and E. Wolf, Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems, II. Structure of the image field in an aplanatic system, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 253, 358 (1959).
  82. L. Novotny, Principles of Nano-Optics (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 2012), 2nd ed.
  83. C. M. Bender and S. A. Orszag, Advanced Mathematical Methods for Scientists and Engineers, International Series in Pure and Applied Mathematics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1978), Chap. 6.
  84. A. Erdelyi, Asymptotic representations of Fourier integrals and the method of stationary phase, J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 3, 17 (1955).
  85. D. P. Nadlinger, Device-independent key distribution between trapped-ion quantum network nodes, DPhil thesis, University of Oxford, 2022.
  86. O. Băzăvan, S. Saner, D. J. Webb, E. M. Ainley, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, G. Araneda, D. M. Lucas, C. J. Ballance, and R. Srinivas, Squeezing, trisqueezing, and quadsqueezing in a spin-oscillator system, arXiv:2403.05471.
  87. C. Robens, S. Brakhane, W. Alt, F. Kleißler, D. Meschede, G. Moon, G. Ramola, and A. Alberti, High numerical aperture (NA=0.92) objective lens for imaging and addressing of cold atoms, Opt. Lett. 42, 1043 (2017).
  88. B. B. Blinov, D. L. Moehring, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Observation of entanglement between a single trapped atom and a single photon, Nature 428, 153 (2004).

Outline

Information

PRX Quantum 7, 010326– Published 6 February, 2026
  • Received 21 March 2025
  • Revised 24 October 2025
  • Accepted 2 December 2025
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