Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication Related

Topics

Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations Quantum State Preparation Representation

Reply to "Comment on 'Semiquantum-key distribution using less than four quantum states' "

arXiv

Authors: Xiangfu Zou, Daowen Qiu

Year

2010

Paper ID

10771

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Recently Boyer and Mor pointed out the first conclusion of Lemma 1 in our original paper is not correct, and therefore, the proof of Theorem 5 based on Lemma 1 is wrong. Furthermore, they gave a direct proof for Theorem 5 and affirmed the conclusions in our original paper. In this reply, we admit the first conclusion of Lemma 1 is not correct, but we need to point out the second conclusion of Lemma 1 is correct. Accordingly, all the proofs for Lemma 2, Lemma 3, and Theorems 3--6 are only based on the the second conclusion of Lemma 1 and therefore are correct.

Why This Paper Matters

This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
It adds a 2010 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
Recently Boyer and Mor pointed out the first conclusion of Lemma 1 in our original paper is not correct, and therefore, the proof of Theorem 5 based on Lemma 1 is wrong.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Become a member Sign in

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

[1] DOI https://doi.org/arXiv:1010.4233 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/1010.4233 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/1010.4233

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0

Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.