Response to a comment on "Vindication of entanglement-based witnesses in hybrid quantum systems"

TL;DR

This paper defends a previously validated entanglement-based witness of non-classicality in hybrid quantum systems against criticisms, clarifying misconceptions and reaffirming its validity.

Contribution

It provides a detailed rebuttal to misconceptions in a comment criticizing their entanglement witness, reinforcing the witness's validity in hybrid quantum systems.

Findings

The original entanglement witness remains valid after critique.

Misconceptions in the comment do not undermine the witness.

The authors clarify misunderstandings about non-classicality in hybrid systems.

Abstract

In a recent paper, we vindicated a general entanglement-based witness of non-classicality in hybrid quantum systems. Our vindication refutes a counterexample to the witness, proposed by Hall and Reginatto. These authors recently commented further, claiming to expose "a huge number of errors and misconceptions" in it. However, their comment contains no refutation of our arguments, nor does it expose any error or misconception in them. But it does include a number of misconceptions about the witness of non-classicality. Here we respond to those.