Related papers: Comment on "Experimental retrodiction of trajector…
We point out that a concise proof of Theorem 2 in the article, 'On a quadratic estimate of Shafer' by L. Zhu contains a small mistake. Correcting this mistake and giving alternative proofs of Theorem 2 is the main aim of this note.
Correction to The Annals of Statistics (2006) 34, 1013--1044 [URL: http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.aos/1151418250]
We comment on one of the earliest derivations of the so-called wave-particle duality relation. Our aim is to point out a slight technical flaw in the proof, fixing it. Neither the physical content of the duality relation nor its validity is…
This paper was submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett in an earlier version. This version was published in my book. It was delayed in posting by a clerical error.
We correct several errors in Phys. Rev. D 66, 094011 (2002). [arXiv:hep-ph/0205210].
The interpretation of tunneling data in a recent Letter by Zasadzinski et al. is incorrect.
This reply tries to rectify some misunderstandings that are in our opinion contained in the Comment by Campostrini and Rossi, <hep-lat 99407008> on our paper <hep-lat 9407003>.
This paper has been withdrawn by the author(s), due to double submission. You can find it under: physics/0208019
The present Comment demonstrates important flaws of the paper Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2022, 24, 11958 by Opodi~\emph{et al.} Their crown result (``applicability map'') aims at indicating parameter ranges wherein two approximate methods…
Wibral et al. propose a measure of interaction delays rooted in an information-theoretic framework and contrast their measure with the bivariate momentary information transfer (MIT), introduced in Pompe, B., & Runge, J. (2011). Momentary…
We correct the second main theorem of the previous paper "A perturbation of the Dunkl harmonic oscillator on the line", by the first two authors. The corrections concern mainly certain estimates, which were also improved by adding more…
This is an erratum to our paper.
This Comment points out a number of errors in the recent paper by Zarechnaya, Dubrovinskaia, Dubrovinsky, et al. (Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 185501 (2009)). Results and conclusions presented by Zarechnaya et al. (2009) are either incorrect or…
In this comment we point out some wrong statements in the paper by Inc and Cavlak, Phys. Scr. 78 (2008) 045008
Comment on the paper Schiavoni et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 094101 (2003).
This is a Reply to the Comment posted as arXiv:1207.1261.
The original paper, as published in Nuclear Physics B in 1988, had a few factor-of-two errors. Some people got confused by those errors. The purpose of these errata is to make things clear. The revised version of the complete article is…
We comment on the paper "Teleportation with a uniformly accelerated partner" (quant-ph/0302179).
The claim in \cite{Al-Badawi:2025ipr} that *"the errors in the foundational components (3) and (5) of Ref. [1] invalidate all subsequent analyses, numerical results, and physical interpretations that depend on them"* is **entirely…
We argue that the interpretation of the experiment [Nature Physics 21, 708-715 (2025)] is misleading in two respects. First, the bias voltages impact the non-local differential conductance randomly, rather than systematically, and the bias…