- 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

Remote Entanglement Generation Via Enhanced Quantum State Transfer

Tian-Le Wang1,2, Peng Wang1,2,3, Ze-An Zhao1,2, Sheng Zhang1,2,3, Ren-Ze Zhao1,2, Xiao-Yan Yang1,2, Hai-Feng Zhang1,2, Zhi-Fei Li1,2, Yuan Wu1,2 et al.

Liang-Liang Guo4, Yong Chen4, Hao-Ran Tao4, Lei Du4, Chi Zhang4, Zhi-Long Jia4, Wei-Cheng Kong4, Peng Duan1,2,*, Ming Gong1,2,5,6,†, and Guo-Ping Guo1,2,4,‡

  • *Contact author: pengduan@ustc.edu.cn
  • †Contact author: gongm@ustc.edu.cn
  • ‡Contact author: gpguo@ustc.edu.cn
PDF

PRX Quantum 7, 010348 – Published 10 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/4x8d-cmyx

Abstract

Achieving robust and scalable remote quantum entanglement is one of the fundamental challenges for the development of distributed quantum networks and modular quantum computing systems. In this context, perfect state transfer (PST) and fractional state transfer (FST) have emerged as promising schemes for quantum state transfer and remote entanglement generation using only nearest-neighbor couplings. In this work, we propose a quantum state transfer scheme based on a zig-zag configuration, which introduces a control parameter for PST and FST. We show that this new parameter can suppress the population in the intermediate qubits, thereby reducing losses and enhancing state transfer. In certain limiting cases, our new scheme reduces to the conventional PST scheme, revealing an elegant mathematical structure inherent in the design. We experimentally demonstrate our proposed scheme on a superconducting quantum processor, achieving an 18% reduction in error for remote Bell state generation in a 1D (1×5) qubit chain with enhanced robustness to specific noise channels. Furthermore, we extend our approach to a 2D (3×3) network and successfully generate a W state among the four corner qubits. These results highlight the potential of our new enhanced quantum state transfer scheme for scalable and noise-resilient quantum communication and computing.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Popular Summary

Many quantum computing tasks require creating entanglement between qubits that are not next to each other. A promising way to do this is quantum state transfer: by engineering couplings in a chain or lattice of qubits, an excitation can move coherently from one site to another, and at intermediate times it can be shared between distant sites to generate entanglement.

In this work we design and experimentally demonstrate protocols for perfect and fractional quantum state transfer in superconducting qubit networks. Our approach forms a parameterized family of Hamiltonians that interpolates between the standard perfect-transfer model and a regime where every other site becomes effectively inactive. In the latter case, the dynamics largely avoids the “inactive” qubits, which reduces the impact of local noise and improves robustness during the transfer.

We implement these protocols on superconducting processors in one-dimensional chains (3 and 5 qubits) and in a two-dimensional 3×3 subarray of a larger chip. Using fractional transfer, we demonstrate remote entanglement generation, including a Bell state in 1D and a W state in 2D. Our results provide a practical route to long-range entanglement generation and connectivity in scalable superconducting quantum processors.

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (93)

  1. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  2. M. Brooks, Beyond quantum supremacy: The hunt for useful quantum computers, Nature 574, 19 (2019).
  3. A. I. Google Quantum and Collaborators, Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold, Nature 638, 920 (2025).
  4. F. Arute et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature 574, 505 (2019).
  5. T. Jiang et al., Generation of 95-qubit genuine entanglement and verification of symmetry-protected topological phases, arXiv:2505.01978.
  6. D. Gao et al., Establishing a new benchmark in quantum computational advantage with 105-qubit Zuchongzhi 3.0 processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 090601 (2025).
  7. Q. Zhu et al., Quantum computational advantage via 60-qubit 24-cycle random circuit sampling, Sci. Bull. 67, 240 (2022).
  8. Y. Wu et al., Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 180501 (2021).
  9. M. Gong et al., Quantum walks on a programmable two-dimensional 62-qubit superconducting processor, Science 372, 948 (2021).
  10. K. Wang et al., Probing many-body bell correlation depth with superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021024 (2025).
  11. H. Dong et al., Measuring the spectral form factor in many-body chaotic and localized phases of quantum processors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 010402 (2025).
  12. S. Xu et al., Non-Abelian braiding of Fibonacci anyons with a superconducting processor, Nat. Phys. 20, 1469 (2024).
  13. X. Zhang et al., Digital quantum simulation of Floquet symmetry-protected topological phases, Nature 607, 468 (2022).
  14. Z.-H. Liu et al., Prethermalization by random multipolar driving on a 78-qubit superconducting processor, Nature 650, 79 (2026).
  15. Y.-H. Shi et al., Quantum simulation of topological zero modes on a 41-qubit superconducting processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 080401 (2023).
  16. Y. Liu et al., Interplay between disorder and topology in Thouless pumping on a superconducting quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 16, 108 (2025).
  17. M. AbuGhanem, IBM quantum computers: Evolution, performance, and future directions, J. Supercomput. 81, 687 (2025).
  18. Y. Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. X. Wei, E. van den Berg, S. Rosenblatt, H. Nayfeh, Y. Wu, M. Zaletel, K. Temme, and A. Kandala, Evidence for the utility of quantum computing before fault tolerance, Nature 618, 500 (2023).
  19. E. J. Zhang et al., High-performance superconducting quantum processors via laser annealing of transmon qubits, Sci. Adv. 8, eabi6690 (2022).
  20. C.-L. Deng et al., High-order topological pumping on a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 140402 (2024).
  21. W. Huang et al., Exact quantum critical states with a superconducting quantum processor, arXiv:2502.19185.
  22. J. Chu et al., Scalable algorithm simplification using quantum AND logic, Nat. Phys. 19, 126 (2023).
  23. H.-S. Zhong et al., Phase-programmable Gaussian boson sampling using stimulated squeezed light, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 180502 (2021).
  24. H.-S. Zhong et al., Quantum computational advantage using photons, Science 370, 1460 (2020).
  25. S. A. Moses et al., A race-track trapped-ion quantum processor, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041052 (2023).
  26. D. Bluvstein et al., Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays, Nature 626, 58 (2024).
  27. S. Storz, A. Kulikov, J. D. Schär, V. Barizien, X. Valcarce, F. Berterottière, N. Sangouard, J.-D. Bancal, and A. Wallraff, Complete self-testing of a system of remote superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 030801 (2025).
  28. S. Storz et al., Loophole-free bell inequality violation with superconducting circuits, Nature 617, 265 (2023).
  29. P. Magnard, S. Storz, P. Kurpiers, J. Schar, F. Marxer, J. Lutolf, T. Walter, J. C. Besse, M. Gabureac, K. Reuer, A. Akin, B. Royer, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Microwave quantum link between superconducting circuits housed in spatially separated cryogenic systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 260502 (2020).
  30. J. Song, S. Yang, P. Liu, H.-L. Zhang, G.-M. Xue, Z.-Y. Mi, W.-G. Zhang, F. Yan, Y.-R. Jin, and H.-F. Yu, Realization of high-fidelity perfect entangler between remote superconducting quantum processors, arXiv:2407.20338.
  31. X. Deng, W. Zheng, X. Liao, H. Zhou, Y. Ge, J. Zhao, D. Lan, X. Tan, Y. Zhang, S. Li, and Y. Yu, Long-range ZZ interaction via resonator-induced phase in superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 020801 (2025).
  32. M. Mollenhauer, A. Irfan, X. Cao, S. Mandal, and W. Pfaff, A high-efficiency plug-and-play superconducting qubit network, arXiv:2407.16743 (2024).
  33. J. Niu et al., Demonstrating path-independent anyonic braiding on a modular superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 20601 (2024).
  34. J. Qiu, Y. Liu, L. Hu, Y. Wu, J. Niu, L. Zhang, W. Huang, Y. Chen, J. Li, S. Liu, Y. Zhong, L. Duan, and D. Yu, Deterministic quantum state and gate teleportation between distant superconducting chips, Sci. Bull. (Beijing) 70, 351 (2025).
  35. J. Niu et al., Low-loss interconnects for modular superconducting quantum processors, Nat. Electron. 6, 235 (2023).
  36. Y. Zhong, H. S. Chang, A. Bienfait, E. Dumur, M. H. Chou, C. R. Conner, J. Grebel, R. G. Povey, H. Yan, D. I. Schuster, and A. N. Cleland, Deterministic multi-qubit entanglement in a quantum network, Nature 590, 571 (2021).
  37. A. Gold, J. P. Paquette, A. Stockklauser, M. J. Reagor, M. S. Alam, A. Bestwick, N. Didier, A. Nersisyan, F. Oruc, A. Razavi, B. Scharmann, E. A. Sete, B. Sur, D. Venturelli, C. J. Winkleblack, F. Wudarski, M. Harburn, and C. Rigetti, Entanglement across separate silicon dies in a modular superconducting qubit device, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 142 (2021).
  38. K. N. Smith, G. S. Ravi, J. M. Baker, and F. T. Chong, in 2022 55th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO) (IEEE, Chicago, IL, USA, 2022), pp. 1092–1109.
  39. M. Malekakhlagh, T. Phung, D. Puzzuoli, K. Heya, N. Sundaresan, and J. Orcutt, Enhanced quantum state transfer and Bell-state generation over long-range multimode interconnects via superadiabatic transitionless driving, Phys. Rev. Appl. 22, 024006 (2024).
  40. M. Christandl, N. Datta, A. Ekert, and A. J. Landahl, Perfect state transfer in quantum spin networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 187902 (2004).
  41. M.-H. Yung and S. Bose, Perfect state transfer, effective gates, and entanglement generation in engineered bosonic and fermionic networks, Phys. Rev. A 71, 032310 (2005).
  42. A. Kay, Perfect, efficient, state transfer and its application as a constructive tool, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 08, 641 (2010).
  43. V. X. Genest, L. Vinet, and A. Zhedanov, Quantum spin chains with fractional revival, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 371, 348 (2016).
  44. X. Li, Y. Ma, J. Han, T. Chen, Y. Xu, W. Cai, H. Wang, Y. P. Song, Z.-Y. Xue, Z.-Q. Yin, and L. Sun, Perfect quantum state transfer in a superconducting qubit chain with parametrically tunable couplings, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 054009 (2018).
  45. C. Zhang, T.-L. Wang, Z.-A. Zhao, X.-Y. Yang, L.-L. Guo, Z.-L. Jia, P. Duan, and G.-P. Guo, Fast and perfect state transfer in superconducting circuit with tunable coupler, Chin. Phys. B 32, 110305 (2023).
  46. L. Xiang, J. Chen, Z. Zhu, Z. Song, Z. Bao, X. Zhu, F. Jin, K. Wang, S. Xu, Y. Zou, H. Li, Z. Wang, C. Song, A. Yue, J. Partridge, Q. Guo, R. Mondaini, H. Wang, and R. T. Scalettar, Enhanced quantum state transfer by circumventing quantum chaotic behavior, Nat. Commun. 15, 4918 (2024).
  47. F. A. Roy et al., Parity-dependent state transfer for direct entanglement generation, Nat. Commun. 16, 2660 (2025).
  48. R. J. Chapman, M. Santandrea, Z. Huang, G. Corrielli, A. Crespi, M. H. Yung, R. Osellame, and A. Peruzzo, Experimental perfect state transfer of an entangled photonic qubit, Nat. Commun. 7, 11339 (2016).
  49. A. Perez-Leija, R. Keil, A. Kay, H. Moya-Cessa, S. Nolte, L.-C. Kwek, B. M. Rodríguez-Lara, A. Szameit, and D. N. Christodoulides, Coherent quantum transport in photonic lattices, Phys. Rev. A 87, 012309 (2013).
  50. M. Bellec, G. M. Nikolopoulos, and S. Tzortzakis, Faithful communication Hamiltonian in photonic lattices, Opt. Lett. 37, 4504 (2012).
  51. J. Zhang, G. L. Long, W. Zhang, Z. Deng, W. Liu, and Z. Lu, Simulation of Heisenberg XY interactions and realization of a perfect state transfer in spin chains using liquid nuclear magnetic resonance, Phys. Rev. A 72, 012331 (2005).
  52. T. Tian, S. Lin, L. Zhang, P. Yin, P. Huang, C. Duan, L. Jiang, and J. Du, Perfect coherent transfer in an on-chip reconfigurable nanoelectromechanical network, Phys. Rev. B 101, 174303 (2020).
  53. P. Kurpiers, P. Magnard, T. Walter, B. Royer, M. Pechal, J. Heinsoo, Y. Salathe, A. Akin, S. Storz, J. C. Besse, S. Gasparinetti, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Deterministic quantum state transfer and remote entanglement using microwave photons, Nature 558, 264 (2018).
  54. C. J. Axline, L. D. Burkhart, W. Pfaff, M. Zhang, K. Chou, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, P. Reinhold, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, On-demand quantum state transfer and entanglement between remote microwave cavity memories, Nat. Phys. 14, 705 (2018).
  55. P. Campagne-Ibarcq, E. Zalys-Geller, A. Narla, S. Shankar, P. Reinhold, L. Burkhart, C. Axline, W. Pfaff, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret, Deterministic remote entanglement of superconducting circuits through microwave two-photon transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 200501 (2018).
  56. Y. P. Zhong, H. S. Chang, K. J. Satzinger, M. H. Chou, A. Bienfait, C. R. Conner, É. Dumur, J. Grebel, G. A. Peairs, R. G. Povey, D. I. Schuster, and A. N. Cleland, Violating bell’s inequality with remotely connected superconducting qubits, Nat. Phys. 15, 741 (2019).
  57. A. Bienfait, K. J. Satzinger, Y. P. Zhong, H. S. Chang, M. H. Chou, C. R. Conner, É. Dumur, J. Grebel, G. A. Peairs, R. G. Povey, and A. N. Cleland, Phonon-mediated quantum state transfer and remote qubit entanglement, Science 364, 368 (2019).
  58. N. Leung, Y. Lu, S. Chakram, R. K. Naik, N. Earnest, R. Ma, K. Jacobs, A. N. Cleland, and D. I. Schuster, Deterministic bidirectional communication and remote entanglement generation between superconducting qubits, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 18 (2019).
  59. H. S. Chang, Y. P. Zhong, A. Bienfait, M. H. Chou, C. R. Conner, E. Dumur, J. Grebel, G. A. Peairs, R. G. Povey, K. J. Satzinger, and A. N. Cleland, Remote entanglement via adiabatic passage using a tunably dissipative quantum communication system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 240502 (2020).
  60. F. Yan, P. Krantz, Y. Sung, M. Kjaergaard, D. L. Campbell, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Tunable coupling scheme for implementing high-fidelity two-qubit gates, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 054062 (2018).
  61. C. Zhang, T.-L. Wang, L.-L. Guo, X.-Y. Yang, X.-X. Yang, P. Duan, Z.-L. Jia, W.-C. Kong, and G.-P. Guo, Characterization of tunable coupler without a dedicated readout resonator in superconducting circuits, Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 024001 (2023).
  62. G. M. L. Gladwell, Inverse Problems in Vibration, Solid Mechanics and Its Applications Vol. 119 (Springer Science & Business Media, 2005).
  63. M. Chu and G. Golub, Inverse Eigenvalue Problems: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications (Oxford University Press, 2005).
  64. T.-L. Wang, Z.-A. Zhao, P. Wang et al., Inverse designed Hamiltonian for perfect state transfer and remote entanglement generation, and applications in superconducting qubits, (to be published).
  65. H.-T. Hu, X. Lin, A.-M. Guo, Z. Lin, and M. Gong, Hidden self-duality in quasiperiodic network models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 246301 (2025).
  66. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/4x8d-cmyx for details, which includes Refs. [75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93].
  67. X.-Y. Yang, H.-F. Zhang, L. Du, H.-R. Tao, L.-L. Guo, T.-L. Wang, Z.-L. Jia, W.-C. Kong, Z.-Y. Chen, P. Duan, and G.-P. Guo, Fast, universal scheme for calibrating microwave crosstalk in superconducting circuits, Appl. Phys. Lett. 125, 044001 (2024).
  68. J. X. Zhang, Z.-Y. Chen, Y.-J. Wang, B.-H. Lu, H.-F. Zhang, J.-N. Li, P. Duan, Y.-C. Wu, and G.-P. Guo, Demonstrating a universal logical gate set in error-detecting surface codes on a superconducting quantum processor, arXiv:2405.09035.
  69. S. Zhang et al., Demonstrating coherent quantum routers for bucket-brigade quantum random access memory on a superconducting processor, arXiv:2505.13958.
  70. H.-F. Zhang et al., Experimental robustness benchmark of quantum neural network on a superconducting quantum processor, arXiv:2505.16714.
  71. P. Wang, B.-H. Lu, T.-L. Wang, S. Zhang, Z.-Y. Chen, H.-F. Zhang, R.-Z. Zhao, X.-Y. Yang, Z.-A. Zhao, Z.-Z. Zhang, X.-X. Song, Y.-C. Wu, P. Duan, and G.-P. Guo, Spectator leakage elimination in CZ gates via tunable coupler interference on a superconducting quantum processor, arXiv:2507.14531.
  72. J. A. Smolin, J. M. Gambetta, and G. Smith, Efficient method for computing the maximum-likelihood quantum state from measurements with additive Gaussian noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 070502 (2012).
  73. F. Mei, G. Chen, L. Tian, S.-L. Zhu, and S. Jia, Robust quantum state transfer via topological edge states in superconducting qubit chains, Phys. Rev. A 98, 012331 (2018).
  74. M. Neeley, R. C. Bialczak, M. Lenander, E. Lucero, M. Mariantoni, A. D. O’Connell, D. Sank, H. Wang, M. Weides, J. Wenner, Y. Yin, T. Yamamoto, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Martinis, Generation of three-qubit entangled states using superconducting phase qubits, Nature 467, 570 (2010).
  75. P. V. Klimov, J. Kelly, J. M. Martinis, and H. Neven, The snake optimizer for learning quantum processor control parameters, arXiv:2006.04594.
  76. P. Duan, Z. Jia, C. Zhang, L. Du, H. Tao, X. Yang, L. Guo, Y. Chen, H. Zhang, Z. Peng, W. Kong, H.-O. Li, G. Cao, and G.-P. Guo, Broadband flux-pumped Josephson parametric amplifier with an on-chip coplanar waveguide impedance transformer, Appl. Phys. Express 14, 042011 (2021).
  77. Y.-Y. Wang et al., Exploring Hilbert-space fragmentation on a superconducting processor, PRX Quantum 6, 010325 (2025).
  78. H. Li, Y.-Y. Wang, Y.-H. Shi, K. Huang, X. Song, G.-H. Liang, Z.-Y. Mei, B. Zhou, H. Zhang, J.-C. Zhang, S. Chen, S. P. Zhao, Y. Tian, Z.-Y. Yang, Z. Xiang, K. Xu, D. Zheng, and H. Fan, Observation of critical phase transition in a generalized Aubry-André-Harper model with superconducting circuits, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 40 (2023).
  79. Z.-C. Xiang, K. Huang, Y.-R. Zhang, T. Liu, Y.-H. Shi, C.-L. Deng, T. Liu, H. Li, G.-H. Liang, Z.-Y. Mei, H. Yu, G. Xue, Y. Tian, X. Song, Z.-B. Liu, K. Xu, D. Zheng, F. Nori, and H. Fan, Simulating Chern insulators on a superconducting quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 14, 5433 (2023).
  80. P. Virtanen et al. (SciPy 1.0 Contributors), SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python, Nat. Methods 17, 261 (2020).
  81. J. Jazzbin, “Geatpy: The genetic and evolutionary algorithm toolbox with high performance in python”, https://github.com/geatpy-dev/geatpy/ (accessed 2020) (2020).
  82. A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, C. J. Wood, J. Lishman, J. Gacon, S. Martiel, P. D. Nation, L. S. Bishop, A. W. Cross, B. R. Johnson, and J. M. Gambetta, Quantum computing with Qiskit, arXiv:2405.08810.
  83. S. Diamond and S. Boyd, CVXPY: A Python-embedded modeling language for convex optimization, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 17, 2909 (2016).
  84. A. Agrawal, R. Verschueren, S. Diamond, and S. Boyd, A rewriting system for convex optimization problems, J. Control Decis. 5, 42 (2018).
  85. G. C. Knee, E. Bolduc, J. Leach, and E. M. Gauger, Quantum process tomography via completely positive and trace-preserving projection, Phys. Rev. A 98, 062336 (2018).
  86. S. T. Merkel, J. M. Gambetta, J. A. Smolin, S. Poletto, A. D. Córcoles, B. R. Johnson, C. A. Ryan, and M. Steffen, Self-consistent quantum process tomography, Phys. Rev. A 87, 062119 (2013).
  87. A. N. Korotkov, Error matrices in quantum process tomography, arXiv:1309.6405.
  88. J. Johansson, P. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP: An open-source Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1760 (2012).
  89. J. Johansson, P. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP 2: A Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 1234 (2013).
  90. A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025005 (2021).
  91. L.-L. Guo, P. Duan, S. Zhang, X.-X. Yang, C. Zhang, L. Du, H.-F. Zhang, H.-R. Tao, T.-L. Wang, Z.-L. Jia, Z.-Y. Chen, and G.-P. Guo, Universal scalable characterization and correction of pulse distortions in controlled quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Appl. 21, 064060 (2024).
  92. L. E. Fischer, A. Chiesa, F. Tacchino, D. J. Egger, S. Carretta, and I. Tavernelli, Universal qudit gate synthesis for transmons, PRX Quantum 4, 030327 (2023).
  93. J.-M. Cai, Z.-W. Zhou, and G.-C. Guo, Decoherence effects on the quantum spin channels, Phys. Rev. A 74, 022328 (2006).

Outline

Information

PRX Quantum 7, 010348– Published 10 March, 2026
  • Received 29 September 2025
  • Accepted 4 February 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