↓ Skip to main content

Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
23 news outlets
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
952 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
336 Mendeley
Title
Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications
Published in
Nature Communications, April 2017
DOI 10.1038/ncomms15043
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefano Pirandola, Riccardo Laurenza, Carlo Ottaviani, Leonardo Banchi

Abstract

Quantum communications promises reliable transmission of quantum information, efficient distribution of entanglement and generation of completely secure keys. For all these tasks, we need to determine the optimal point-to-point rates that are achievable by two remote parties at the ends of a quantum channel, without restrictions on their local operations and classical communication, which can be unlimited and two-way. These two-way assisted capacities represent the ultimate rates that are reachable without quantum repeaters. Here, by constructing an upper bound based on the relative entropy of entanglement and devising a dimension-independent technique dubbed 'teleportation stretching', we establish these capacities for many fundamental channels, namely bosonic lossy channels, quantum-limited amplifiers, dephasing and erasure channels in arbitrary dimension. In particular, we exactly determine the fundamental rate-loss tradeoff affecting any protocol of quantum key distribution. Our findings set the limits of point-to-point quantum communications and provide precise and general benchmarks for quantum repeaters.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 336 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 3 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 329 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 68 20%
Student > Master 46 14%
Researcher 41 12%
Student > Bachelor 24 7%
Professor 14 4%
Other 44 13%
Unknown 99 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 160 48%
Engineering 28 8%
Computer Science 21 6%
Mathematics 5 1%
Materials Science 5 1%
Other 12 4%
Unknown 105 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 178. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 October 2022.
All research outputs
#225,438
of 25,378,162 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#3,256
of 56,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,791
of 325,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#86
of 1,017 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,378,162 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 56,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,053 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,017 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.