Investigating quantum wireless multihop teleportation under decoherence∗
Marlon David González Ramı́rez,1 Christian Nwachioma,2, 1
Adenike Grace Adepoju,1 and Babatunde James Falaye3, †

arXiv:1708.00087v6 [quant-ph] 24 Feb 2018

2

1
CIDETEC, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, UPALM, CDMX 07700, Mexico
Department of Physics, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology, Park Road, Islamabad 45550, Pakistan.
3
Applied Theoretical Physics Division, Department of Physics,
Federal University Lafia, P. M. B. 146, Lafia, Nigeria
(Dated: February 27, 2018)

This research work scrutinizes quantum routing protocol with multihop teleportation for wireless
mesh backbone networks, in amplitude and phase damping channels. After analyzing the quantum
multihop protocol, we select a four-qubit cluster state as the quantum channel for the protocol. The
quantum channel linking the intermediate nodes has been established via entanglement swapping
based on four-qubit cluster state. Also, we established the classical and the quantum route in
a distributed manner. We show that from the source node to the destination node, quantum
information can be teleported hop-by-hop through an amplitude damping channel. We show that
the quantum teleportation could be successful if the sender node performs Bell state measurements
(BSM), and the receiver introduces auxiliary particles, applies positive operative value measure and
then utilizes corresponding unitary transformation to recover the transmitted state. We scrutinize
the success probability of transferring the quantum state through a noisy channel. We found that
optimum probability would be attained if decoherence rate of amplitude damping channel (ξa )
is zero or the number of hops (N ) is above 75. Our numerical results evince susceptibility of
success probability to ξa and N . It has been shown that as the decoherence increases, the fidelity
exponentially decays until it vanishes. This decay is as a consequence of information loss from the
system to the surrounding. However, the fidelity can be enhanced by considering fewer hops.
Keywords: Multihop teleportation; Amplitude damping channel; Phase damping channel; Fourqubit cluster state; Fidelity.
PACS numbers: 03.67.Hk, 03.65.Ud, 42.50.-p, 03.67.-a, 03.65.Yz.

I.

INTRODUCTION

In the recent years, there has been incessant avidity
in studying multi-user quantum communication because
it offers the opportunity to construct quantum networks.
With quantum networks, quantum information between
physically separate quantum systems can be transmitted.
In fact, it forms a salient component of quantum computing and quantum cryptography systems. It has been discerned that transmission via quantum teleportation and,
directly from one node to another are two methods to
transmit an unknown quantum state between two nodes
[1]. In this paper, the later, i.e., the node-to-node transmission will be considered. Since quantum systems unavoidably interact with the environment, node-to-node
transmission easily debase the quantum states. Consequently, it would be reasonable to take the influence
of noise into consideration while investigating quantum
wireless multihop teleportation.
Recently, a scheme for faithful quantum communication in quantum wireless multihop networks, by performing quantum teleportation between two distant nodes

∗ https://arxiv.org/abs/1708.00087
† Electronic

address: babatunde.falaye@gmail.com

which do not initially share entanglement with each
other, was proposed by Wang et al. [2]. It has been
found in Ref. [4] that wireless quantum networks can be
established between nodes of different hops sharing two
qubit states. Xiong et al. [3] proposed a quantum communication network model where a mesh backbone network structure was introduced. The entanglement source
deployment problem has been scrutinized by Zou et al.
[5] in a quantum multihop network, which has a notable
impact on quantum connectivity.
Some other outstanding reports can be found in Refs.
([6–9] and references therein). Although several relevant results have been obtained along this direction,
most contributions have been based on 2- and 3-qubit
Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state as the quantum channel in a closed quantum system. However,
quantum systems cannot but interact with the environment. These unavoidable interactions make quantum
systems to lose some of their properties. In this paper, we
examine a quantum routing protocol with multihop teleportation for wireless mesh backbone networks, based on
four-qubit cluster state, in an amplitude damping channel, which can be induced experimentally.
The cluster state [10], which is a type of highly entangled state of multiple qubits, is generated in lattices of
qubits with Ising type interactions. On the basis of single
qubit operation, the cluster state serves as the initial re-

2
source for a universal computation scheme [11]. Cluster
state has been realized experimentally in photonic experiments [11] and in optical lattices of cold atoms [12]. In
this paper, we select four-qubit cluster state as the entangled resource. When the state of one particle in the
entangled pair changes, the state of other particle situated at a distant node changes non-contemporaneously.
Thus, entanglement swapping can be applied. Using a
classical communication channel, the results of the local
measurement can be transmitted from node-to-node.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we discuss wireless network and routing protocol. Section III deals with the process of establishing the
quantum channel. In section IV, we present quantum
wireless multihop teleportation in noisy channels. Some
relevant results and discussion are presented in Section
V. Section VI gives the conclusion.
II.

WIRELESS MESH NETWORK AND
ROUTING PROTOCOL

A wireless mesh network (WMN) can be described as
a mesh network established through the connection of
wireless access points which have been installed at the location of each network users. It consists of mesh routers,
which are stationary, and the mesh client, which are removable. In WMN, there exist quantum wireless channel
and classical wireless channel for communications. The
classical channel serves the purpose of classical information transmission while the quantum wireless channel exists between neighbor nodes. Quantum information can
be transmitted from node-to-node only when quantum
route and classical route co-exist. Classical information
is transmitted along the classical route while quantum
information is via the quantum route.
In wireless quantum communication, there exists mesh
backbone network which consists of route nodes and edge
route nodes. We delineate the quantum mesh network in
Fig. 1. Node S wishes to send information to node D. To
achieve this, it scrutinizes its routing table to find if there

|Πi =
|χiS1 S2 ⊗

1
8

X

ς,κ∈[+,−]



is any available route to D. If there are available routes,
it forwards the packet to next hop node. However, in the
absence of none, source node S requests for a quantum
route discovery from the neighboring node E and thus,
the quantum route finding process commences. Once a
routing path that permits co-existence of quantum and
classical route, from the source node to the destination is
found and selected, the edge route node I sends a route
reply to node S. At this moment, the process of establishing the quantum channel commences.

III.

PROCESS OF ESTABLISHING THE
QUANTUM CHANNEL

In this section, we establish the quantum channel linking the nodes. As it can be seen in Figs. 2 (a) and (b),
S denotes the source node while the destination node
is denoted by D. The node S is not directly entangled
with D but entanglement swapping can be used to setup quantum channels between the two nodes. Thus, with
this swapping, quantum information can be transmitted
hop-by-hop from node S to node D. In the source node
S, there exists an arbitrary two-qubit entangled state,
|χiS1 S2 = a0 |00i + d0 |11i, whose density matrix can be
written as:

ρinS

a∗0 a0
 0
=
0
a∗0 d0


0
0
0
0


0 d∗0 a0
0 0 
.
0 0 
0 d∗0 d0

(1)

Let Nn denotes number of nodes such that between S
and D, we have Nn − 1 nodes. Also, let us represent
the number of hops by N . The entangle state of the
neighboring nodes is 4-qubit cluster state of the form
|CSi = τ0 |0000i + τ1 |0011i + τ2 |1100i − τ3 |1111i where
τ02 +τ12 +τ22 +τ33 = 1. Now, the edge node I performs Bell
state measurement on particle pairs (I3 , I4 ) and (I1 , I2 )
to obtain



|Φς iI3 I4 |Φκ iI1 I2 |0000i + |0011i ±(̺) ∓(ζ) |1100i ±(̺) ±(ζ) |1111i

R4 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3




+ |Ψς iI3 I4 |Φκ iI1 I2 |0100i − |0111i ±(̺) ∓(ζ) |1000i ±(̺) ∓(ζ) |1011i
R4 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3


+ |Φς iI3 I4 |Ψκ iI1 I2 ±(̺) |0100i ∓(̺) |0111i ±(ζ) |1000i ±(ζ) |1011i
R4 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3



+ |Ψς iI3 I4 |Ψκ iI1 I2 ±(̺) |0000i ±(̺) |0011i ±(ζ) |1100i ∓(ζ) |1111i
R4 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3

⊗N
i=3

ni

|CSi

,

(2)

3

FIG. 1: The quantum mesh backbone network. The dotted lines represent quantum channels while the solid lines denote
classical channels. Node S is not directly entangled with the node D. However, quantum channels between them can be
established via entanglement swapping.

where ni = n, and i = 1, ..., N . We have denoted
the four Bell states as |Φ± i = 2−1/2 (|00i ± |11i) and
|Ψ± i = 2−1/2 (|01i ± |10i). The ±(̺) , ∓(̺) and ±(ζ) , ∓(ζ)
represent the results corresponding to BSM on qubit
pairs (I3 , I4 ) and (I1 , I2 ) respectively. Now, with the
application of proper Pauli operator on qubit R4 , the
entangled state of R4 , D1 , D2 , D3 can be realized. For
instance, if the entangled state of R4 , D1 , D2 , D3 is
|0100i − |0111i − |1000i − |1011i, applying the Pauli z
matrix and then the Pauli x, entangled state |CSi can
be realized. Now, edge route node I sends the result
of the measurements along with route reply to node S
through edge node E. Once node S receives the information, quantum channel between nodes S and D would
be established. Thus the quantum state can then be
transferred from node A to node J. A similar study was
reported recently in Ref. [3]. However, in the present
study, we shall consider the viability of a cluster state
as the entanglement resource and the influence of noisy
channels on the multihop teleportation.
IV. QUANTUM WIRELESS MULTIHOP
TELEPORTATION IN NOISY CHANNELS

In this section, we investigate the inuence of noisy
channel on quantum wireless multihop teleportation.
Two noisy channels: amplitude and phase damping channels would be considered.
A.

Quantum wireless multihop teleportation in
amplitude damping channel

The general behavior of model for amplitude damping
channel is characterized by the following set of Kraus

operators [13]

K0Am



 √ 
1 p0
0 ξa
Am
=
,
, K1 =
¯
0 0
0
ξa

(3)

where ξa (0 ≤ ξa ≤ 1) represents the decoherence rate
which characterize the probability error of amplitudedamping when a particle passes through a noisy environment and ξ¯a = 1 − ξa .
To achieve the aim of this section, first, let us consider
a one-hop teleportation through the amplitude damping
channel. From Figs. 2 (a) and (b), it can be seen that S is
a neighborhood node of E and consequently, we can infer
that particles S3 , E1 , E3 and E2 are entangled such that
the quantum entanglement is |CSiS3 E1 E3 E2 . In order to
transmit |χiS1 S2 through a noisy channel, we perform
Bell state measurements on particles pairs (S1 , S3 ) and
(S2 , E3 ), and then take the noise model into consideration, thus we obtain.

|Ωi =

1X
2
A,B

with

S2 E3

A±

S1 S3

B ± |Π′′ i ,

|Π′′ i = |χi ⊗ |CS ′ i ,

A, B ∈ [Φ, Ψ] ,
(4)

where we have used the following formulas for mathematical simplicity:

4

S2 E3

Ψ±

S1 S3

S2 E3

Φ±

S1 S3

S2 E3
S2 E3

Ψ
Φ

±

±

S1 S3
S1 S3


Ψ± |Π′′ i = ∓(ς) ∓(σ) ξ̄a2 d0 τ0 |00iE1 E3 + a0 ξa2 τ0 − τ3 |11iE1 E2
+ ξ¯a a0 τ2 |10i
Ψ± |Π′′ i = ±(ς) ±(σ) ξ̄a d0 τ1 |01i

Φ |Π i = ± ± ξ̄a d0 τ2 |10iE1 E3 + ξ¯a a0 τ1 |01iE1 E2

Φ± |Π′′ i = ±(ς) ∓(σ) d0 ξa2 τ0 − τ3 |11iE1 E3 + ξ¯a2 a0 τ0 |00iE1 E2 .
′′

(ς)

(σ)

The ±(ς) and ±(σ) , ∓(σ) represent the results corresponding to BSM on qubit pairs (S1 , S3 ) and (S2 , E3 )
respectively. Now, node S transmits this result to node
E. By using an appropriate unitary transformation, the

ρoutE

E1 E2

E1 E3

±





2
|a0 | τ02 ξ¯a4 + ξa4 + τ12 + τ22 ξ¯a2 − 2τ0 τ3 ξa2 + τ32

0
=

0
a∗0 d0

Accordingly to Eq. 5, the states of E1 , E2 are not normalized, it then implies that each outcome of the measurement has different probability. In order to avoid redundancy, we shall not discuss all the outcomes but one.
For other cases, node E can apply similar approach to
reconstruct the original state. Now, suppose the result
of Bell state measurement is |Ψ+ iS1 ,S3 |Φ− iS2 ,E3 , consequently, without loss of generality, the state of qubit
pair (E1 , E3 ) collapses to G = 2−1 ξ̄a (a0 τ2 |10iE1 E2 −
d0 τ1 |01iE1 ,E3 ). With this result, the state |χi can be
recovered at Node E. In order for this to be achieved,
it is required to apply positive-operator valued measure
(POVM) [14].
In utilizing POVM, first an ancilla (i.e., auxiliary quantum system) is prepared in a known state, say ρanc . Combining this ancilla with the original quantum state gives
an uncorrelated state. Now, the combined Hilbert space
will be subjected to a maximal test which is represented
by orthogonal resolution of the identity. The results of
this test is related to orthogonal projector
which satisfies
P
the relations: Kµ Kν = δµν Kν and µ Kµ = 1. The probability that preparation k will be followed by outcome µ
is represented by Kµk = T r(Aµ ρk ), where Aµ denotes
an operator acting on the Hilbert space. The set of Aµ
is called POVM [14]. Several studies and applications of
POVM have been noted down in many literature [15–18].
The current study will also utilize it.
To do that, we need to set up a close indistinguishability such that the coefficient of |00iE1 ,E2 is a0 and that
of |11iE1 ,E2 should be d0 . To accomplish this, node E
performs a local unitary operation UT = σx ⊗ I2×2 on

(5)

state |χi can be retrieved. Thus, the quantum communication is completed successfully. The output density that
reaches node E is

0
0
0
0


0
d∗0 a0

0
0
.

0
0




2
2
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
0 |d0 | τ0 ξ̄a + ξa + τ1 + τ2 ξ̄a − 2τ0 τ3 ξa + τ3
(6)

G to obtain G0 = 2−1 ξ̄a (a0 τ2 |00iE1 E2 − d0 τ1 |11iE1 E3 ).
Now, the node introduces auxiliary qubits, say DE with
state |00iDE . Entangling these qubits with G0 gives
G1 = 2−1 ξ̄a (a0 τ2 |0000iE1 E2 DE −d0 τ1 |1100iE1 E2 DE ). The
node then performs a C-NOT operation on qubit pairs
(E1 , D) and (E2 , E) to obtain

G2 = 1/4 a0 |00iE1 E2 + d0 |11iE1 E2

⊗ ξ¯a τ2 |00iDE − ξ¯a τ1 |11iDE

+ a0 |00iE1 E2 − d0 |11iE1 E2

⊗ ξ¯a τ2 |00i + ξ¯a τ1 |11i
.
(7)
DE

DE

With the condition that τ2 |00iDE ∓ τ1 |11iDE can be conclusively discerned using a suitable measurement, state
a0 |00iE1 E2 ± d0 |11iE1 E2 can be obtained at node E.
The optimal POVM required can be written in the following subspace
1
1
|Λ1 i hΛ1 | , P2 = |Λ2 i hΛ2 | ,
̺
̺
2
X
1
P3 = I −
|Λi i hΛi | ,
̺ i=1
P1 =

(8)

where

1
1
,
|00i − ¯ |11i
ξ¯a τ2
ξa τ1
DE

1
1
1
|00i + ¯ |11i
,
|Λ2 i = √
¯
γa ξa τ2
ξa τ1
DE
1
1
with γa =
2 +
2 .
¯
¯
ξa τ1
ξa τ2

1
|Λ1 i = √
γa



(9)

5

FIG. 2: The process of establishing quantum channel. (a) Before route-finding process. (b) After route-finding process. The
red lines represent Bell state measurement.

I denotes an identity operator and ̺ is a parameter
which defines the range of positivity of operator P3 . Now,
if the node’s POVM result yields P1 whose probability
is hG1 | P1 |G1 i = 1/(4̺γa ), then one can infer the state
of qubits E1 E2 to be a0 |00i − d0 |11i. Afterward, the
node performs unitary operation I2×2 ⊗ σz on the particles in order to retrieve the original state. However,
suppose the result is P2 , with a probability calculated
by hG1 |P2 | G1 i = 1/(4̺γa ), then the node finds that
the state of qubits E1 E2 is a0 |00i + d0 |11i which is the
original state of the particle. Suppose the result is P3 ,
the teleportation fails because of the node’s ineptitude to
infer anything about the identity of the particles state.
Thus the success probability becomes
S−E
Psuc
=

1
,
2̺γa

(10)

and using Eqs. (1) and Eqs. (6), we obtain the analytical
expression for the fidelity as




FS−E = τ02 ξ̄a4 + ξa4 + τ12 + τ22 ξ̄a2 − 2τ0 τ3 ξa2 + τ32
2

× |a0 |2 + |d0 |2 .
(11)
Now, let us consider two-hop teleportation, i.e., S-ET. There exit no direct quantum channel between node
S and T. However, nodes S and E are entangled while

nodes E and T are also entangled. In that case, node
S transmits ρinS through a noisy channel to node E and
then node E transmit ρoutE to node T through a noisy
channel. Consequently, the quantum channel between
nodes S and T will be established. Following the same
procedure, it is easy to find that the success probability
is


1
1
E−T
Psuc =
1−
,
(12)
̺γa
4̺γa
and the analytical expression for the fidelity
FE−T =

3


 2 4
τ0 ξ¯a + ξa4 + τ12 + τ22 ξ¯a2 − 2τ0 τ3 ξa2 + τ32
2

2
2
× |a0 | + |d0 |
.
(13)

Now, let’s assume that the information is transmitted
to node N i , where i = 2, 4, 6, ...2k denotes the number
of Bell state measurement needed to be performed. In
that sense, the source node is equivalent to N 0 , node E
is equivalent to N 2 and the destination is equivalent to
N 2k . Thus, then the total probability of success can be
written as
Pasuc


=1− 1−

1
2̺γa

N

,

(14)

6

FIG. 3: (a) Variation of the probability of success as a function of number of hops (N ) for various decoherence rate of amplitude damping
channel ξa . (b) Variation of the probability of success as a function of ξa for various N . (c) Plot of fidelity as a function of ξa for various
N . (d) Plot of fidelity as a function of N for various ξa . We take ̺ = 1 in our numerical computations.

and the fidelity of the complete multihop teleportation
becomes
a
Ftot.
=

2N


τ02 ξ̄a4 + ξa4 + τ12 + τ22 ξ̄a2 − 2τ0 τ3 ξa2 + τ32
2

2
2
× |a0 | + |d0 |
.
(15)



We would like to remind the readers that the above equation should not be confused with the fidelity of the N-th
hop teleportation.

B.

Quantum wireless multihop teleportation in
phase damping channel

The general behavior of the model for phase damping
channel is characterized by the following set of Kraus

operators [13]





q 
p
p
1 0
1 0
0 0
Ph
Ph
Ph
¯
K0 = ξp
, K1 = ξp
, K2 = ξp
0 1
0 0
0 1
(16)
where ξp (0 ≤ ξp ≤ 1) represents the decoherence rate
of phase damping noise and ξ¯p = 1 − ξp . Following the
same procedure of section IV A, we can calculate the total probability of success of multihop teleportation from
source to the destination node as
N

1
1
1
p
, where γp =
Psuc = 1− 1 −
2 +
2 .
2
2
2̺γp
ξ̄p τ1
ξ̄p τ2
(17)
and the fidelity of the complete multihop teleportation
becomes

2

p
Ftot.
= τ02 ξ¯p2 + ξp2 + τ12 + τ22 + τ32 ξ¯p4 + 2τ32 ξp2 ξ̄p2
2
2N 
|a0 |2 + |d0 |2 .
(18)
ξp4 τ32

7

FIG. 4: (a) Variation of the probability of success as a function of number of hops (N ) for various decoherence rate of phase damping
channel ξp . (b) Variation of the probability of success as a function of ξp for various N . (c) Plot of fidelity as a function of ξp for various
N . (d) Plot of fidelity as a function of N for various ξp . We take ̺ = 1 in our numerical computations.

V.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 3(a) gives the variation of success chance as a
function of the number of hops for various decoherence
rate of amplitude damping channel (ξa ). We first consider a case where there is no interaction between the
quantum system and the environment (i.e. ξa = 0). We
observe that the success probability proliferates until it
reaches ≈ 1 (at N ≈ 75) where no significant variation
can be discerned. However, as the ξa increases, the probability of having successful teleportation decreases until it finally varnished. This insinuates that the success
chance of multihop teleportation in a very noisy channel
is very slim. Figure 3 (b) explains this further. In addition, this figure reveals that the success probability of
multihop teleportation in a noisy environment can be improved within some range of ξa by increasing the number
of nodes. Figure 3(b), indeed shows the susceptibility of

Psuc to N and ξa . Furthermore, Fig. 3(a) shows that
optimum probability would be attained if ξa = 0 and
N > 75. Figure 3(b) corroborates this fact
In Figures 3(c) and (d), we show the variation of fidelity as a function of decoherence rate and the number
of hops. As it can be found in Figures 3(c), irrespective
of the number of hops, the fidelity dwindles as the decoherence increases. This figure reveals that information
loss can be minimized via considering few nodes. In other
words, the more the nodes, the less the fidelity of output
quantum system at the destination node. As anticipated,
in 3(d), it is found that when there is no interaction with
the environment, the fidelity is 1 for any number of hops.
However, as the decoherence increases, the fidelity decays until it vanishes. This decay is as a consequence
of information loss from the system to the surrounding.
Figures 3(a-d) show that success probability and fidelity
are highly sensitive to variations in N .

8
Figure 4(a) is the same as 3 (a) but for phase damping channel. This gure reveals that if the noisy channel
is phase damping channel, then about 80 hops would be
needed in order to obtain success probability of 1. This
shows that phase damping channel is noisier than the
amplitude damping channel. Figure 4 (b) explains this
further. Figure 4(c) reveals a situation whereby more
noise leads to more efficiency, for N = 2. In Figure
4(d), we found that the delity decays more rapidly than
its counterpart in phase damping channel. The effect of
phase damping channel is more dominant on the delity
and success probability of the state being teleported as
compared to amplitude damping channel. From Figures
3 and 4, we found that the multihop teleportation with
fewer hops are more prone to noise in comparison to more
hops.
Figures 3(a), 3(b), 4(a) and 4(b) shows that success
probability increases as the number hop increase. This is
because increase in hops number leads to a corresponding
boost of the network connectivity. Thus, the probability
of success is enhanced greatly.
VI.

CONCLUSION

quantum entanglement swapping, the quantum link was
established between the source node and the destination
node and quantum states are transferred via quantum
teleportation from one hop to the other. We have shown
that the quantum teleportation would be successful if
the sender node performs a Bell state measurement, and
the receiver node introduces auxiliary particles, applies
positive operative value measure and then utilizes corresponding unitary transformation to recover the transmitted state. We have numerically scrutinized the success
probability of transferring the quantum state through an
amplitude and phase damping channel. We found that,
as the decoherence increases, the probability of having
successful teleportation decreases until it finally becomes
zero which insinuates that the success chance of multihop teleportation in a very noisy channel is very slim.
It has also been shown that the enhancement of the fidelity becomes smaller as the number of hops increase.
This corroborates result of Ref. [20] i.e., the best transmission efficiency can be achieved via using of quantum
routing protocol based on the minimal hops principle.
This study represents the furtherance of recent studies
[2, 3, 13, 17, 19, 20].
Acknowledgments

To sum it up, in this paper, we have examined a quantum routing protocol with multihop teleportation for
wireless mesh backbone networks in amplitude and phase
damping channels. The quantum channel that linked the
intermediate nodes has been realized through entanglement swapping based on four-qubit cluster state. After

We thank the referees for the positive enlightening
comments and suggestions, which have greatly helped us
in making improvements to this paper. BJF acknowledges the supports from CONACYT during his stay at
ESFM-IPN, where he started this work.

[1] C. Pan, F.G. Deng and G. L. Long, “High-dimension
multiparty quantum secret sharing scheme with EinsteinPodolsky-Rosen pairs”, Chin. Phys. 15 (2006) 2228.
[2] K. Wang, X. T. Yu, S. L. Lu, Y. X. Gong, “Quantum
wireless multihop communication based on arbitrary Bell
pairs and teleportation”, Phys. Rev. A 89 (2014) 022329.
[3] P. Y. Xiong, X. T. Yu, Z. C. Zhang, H. T. Zhan and J.
Y. Hua, “Routing protocol for wireless quantum multihop mesh backbone network based on partially entangled
GHZ state”, Front. Phys. 12 (2017) 120302.
[4] N. Metwally, “Entanglement routers via a wireless quantum network based on arbitrary two qubit systems”,
Phys. Scri. 89 (2014) 125103.
[5] Z. Z. Zou, X. T. Yu and Z. C. Zhang, “Quantum connectivity optimization algorithms for entanglement source
deployment in a quantum multi-hop network”, Front.
Phys. 13 (2018) 130202.
[6] S. T. Cheng, C. Y. Wang and M. H. Tao, “Quantum
communication for wireless wide-area networks”, IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 23 (2005)
1424.
M. Jiang, H. Li, Z. K. Zhang and J. Zeng, “Faithful teleportation via multi-particle quantum states in a network
with many agents”, Quantum Inf. Process. 11 (2012) 23.
[7] N. Metwally, “Entangled network and quantum commu-

nication”, Phys. Lett. A 375 (2011) 4268.
[8] Z. Z. Li, G. Xu, X. B. Chen, X. Sun and Y. X. Yang,
“Multi-user quantum wireless network communication
based on multi-qubit GHZ state”, IEEE Commun. Lett.
20 (2016) 2470.
[9] Z. Z. Li, G. Xu, X. B. Chen, X. Sun and Y. X. Yang,
“Multi-user quantum wireless network communication
based on multi-qubit GHZ state”, IEEE Commun. Lett.
20 (2016) 2470.
K. Wang, X. Yu and S. Lu, “Quantum state propagation
in quantum wireless multi-hop network based on EPR
pairs”, Antennas & Propagation (ISAP), 2013 Proceedings of the International Symposium 2 (2013) 1260 IEEE.
[10] H. J. Briegel and R. Raussendorf, “Persistent entanglement in arrays of interacting particles”, Phys. Rev. Lett.
86 (2001) 910.
[11] N. Kiesel, C. Schmid, U. Weber, G. Toth, O. Gühne,
R. Ursin and H. Weinfurter, “Experimental analysis of
a four-qubit photon cluster state”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95
(2005) 210502.
[12] O. Mandel, M. Greiner, A. Widera, T. Rom, T. W.
Hänsch and I. Bloch “Controlled collisions for multiparticle entanglement of optically trapped atoms”, Science 425 (2003) 937.
[13] A. G. Adepoju, B. J. Falaye, G. H. Sun, O. Camacho-

9

[14]

[15]

[16]
[17]

Nieto and S. H. Dong “Joint remote state preparation
(JRSP) of two-qubit equatorial state in quantum noisy
channels”, Phys. Lett. A 381 (2017) 581.
B. J. Falaye, G. H. Sun, O. Camacho-Nieto and S. H.
Dong, “JRSP of three-particle state via three tripartite
GHZ class in quantum noisy channels”, Int. J. Quantum
Inf. 14 (2016) 1650034.
E. B. Davies and J. T. Lewis, “An operational approach to quantum probability”, Commun. Math. Phys.
17 (1970) 239.
A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods Vol.
57, Springer, 2006.
J. Wu, “Symmetric and probabilistic quantum state sharing via positive operator-valued measure”, Int. J. Theor.
Phys. 49 (2010) 324.
G. M. D’Ariano, P. Lo Presti and M. F. Sacchi, “Bell
measurements and observables”, Phys. Lett. A 272
(2000) 32.
M. D. González Ramirez, B. J. Falaye, G. H. Sun, M.
Cruz-Irisson and S. H. Dong, “Quantum teleportation

and information splitting via four-qubit cluster state and
a Bell state”, Front. Phys. 12 (2017) 120306.
[18] F. L. Yan and H. W. Ding, “Probabilistic teleportation of
an unknown two-particle state with a four-particle pure
entangled state and positive operator valued measure”,
Chin. Phys. Lett. 23 (2006) 17.
[19] A. G. Adepoju, B. J. Falaye, G. H. Sun, O. CamachoNieto and S. H. Dong, “Teleportation with twodimensional electron gas formed at the interface of a
GaAs heterostructure”, Laser Phys. 27 (2017) 035201.
B. J. Falaye, A. G. Adepoju, A. S. Aliyu, M. M. Melchor,
M. S. Liman, O. J. Oluwadare, M. D. González-Ramirez
and K. J. Oyewumi, “Investigating quantum metrology
in noisy channels”, Scientific Reports 7 (2017) 16622.
[20] L. H. Shi, X. T. Tao, X. F. Cai, Y. X. Gong and Z. C.
Zhang, “Quantum information transmission in the quantum wireless multihop network based on Werner state”,
Chinese Physics B, 24 (2014) 050308.

