Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1304.6689 · Physical Review Letters

Comment on “Protocol for Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication”

Lev Vaidman A

Published May 23, 2014• 64 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

I argue that recent "Protocol for Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication" by Salih et al. [PRL 110, 170502 (2013), arXiv:1206.2042] is counterfactual only for one type of the information bit.
DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.112.208901

Related papers

Reply to "Comment on Protocol for Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication"

Hatim Salih, Li, Zheng-Hong, M. Al-Amri +1 more

In reply to Vaidman's Comment [arXiv:1304.6689], we show that his claim that our Protocol for Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication [PRL 110, 170502 (2013), arXiv:1206.2042] is counterfactual only for one type of information bit is wrong.

arXiv:1404.5392•Apr 22, 2014•4 citations

Comment on “Direct counterfactual transmission of a quantum state”

Lev Vaidman A

The protocol for counterfactual transmission of a qubit [Z.-H. Li et al., Phys. Rev. A 92, 052315 (2015)] relies on the counterfactuality of transmissions of bit 1 and of bit 0. Since counterfactuality of transmission of bit 0 is not established, the claim of counterfactuality of transmission of a quantum state is not established too.

arXiv:1511.06615•Physical Review A•Jun 2, 2016•27 citations

Reply to Comment on "Multitime Quantum Communication: Interesting But Not Counterfactual" by L. Vaidman

Robert B. Griffiths

This is a Reply to the Comment by Vaidman in arXiv:2306.16756 on the paper: R. B. Griffiths, Phys. Rev. A 107, 062219 (2023)

arXiv:2310.05968•Sep 23, 2023•0 citations

Counterfactual communication not achieved yet – A Comment on Salih et al. (2022)

Sandu Popescu

In this comment I argue that there are two major issues with the protocol presented in “The laws of physics do not prohibit counterfactual communication”, Hatim Salih, Will McCutcheon, Jonte R. Hance and John Rarity, npj Quantum Information (2022) 8:60. One is an erroneous interpretation of the role of clicks in detector D 0 and the second is the way in which post-selection is used. I argue that these invalidate the claims of that paper.

npj Quantum Information•Jul 24, 2025•1 citation

Comment on “Deterministic six states protocol for quantum communication” [Phys. Lett. A 358 (2006) 85]

Faisal A. A. El-Orany

arXiv:1107.4435•Physics Letters A•Dec 25, 2009•4 citations

Comment on “Multitime quantum communication: Interesting but not counterfactual”

Lev Vaidman A

In a recent paper, Griffiths [Phys. Rev. A 107, 062219 (2023)] analyzed a protocol for transmission of information between two parties introduced by Salih et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 170502 (2013)]. There is a considerable controversy about the counterfactuality of this protocol, and Griffiths suggested to resolve it by introducing a new measure of channel usage, which he called ``Cost.'' I argue that this measure is not appropriate because the original interaction-free measurement protocol which triggered the definition of the concept of counterfactuality is not counterfactual according to this measure.

arXiv:2306.16756•Physical Review A•Nov 8, 2023•2 citations
In a recent paper, Griffiths [Phys. Rev. A 107, 062219 (2023)] analyzed a protocol for transmission of information between two parties introduced by Salih et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 170502 (2013)]. There is a considerable controversy about the counterfactuality of this protocol, and Griffiths suggested to resolve it by introducing a new measure of channel usage, which he called ``Cost.'' I argue that this measure is not appropriate because the original interaction-free measurement protocol which triggered the definition of the concept of counterfactuality is not counterfactual according to this measure.