Observation of Full Hierarchy of Temporal Quantum Correlations with a Superconducting Qubit

Chen-Yeh Wei; Chih-Sung Chuu; Hao-Cheng Weng; Huan-Yu Ku; Shin-Liang Chen; Yueh-Nan Chen

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Observation of Full Hierarchy of Temporal Quantum Correlations with a Superconducting Qubit

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A superconducting qubit in a depolarizing channel displays the full logical hierarchy of temporal quantum correlations, with nonmacrorealism vanishing before temporal steering, which vanishes before temporal inseparability.

desk verdict First experiment to see the full temporal-correlation hierarchy on a superconducting qubit; the physics is credible, but missing error bars and an unverified no-signaling-in-time assumption need fixing before I'd lean on it. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.01379 v1 pith:JTYZS5TM submitted 2025-05-02 quant-ph

Hao-Cheng Weng , Chen-Yeh Wei , Huan-Yu Ku , Shin-Liang Chen , Yueh-Nan Chen , Chih-Sung Chuu This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-ph PACS 03.67.-a03.65.Ta03.65.Yz

keywords temporalquantumcorrelationsLeggett-Garginequalitysteeringinseparabilitysuperconductingqubitchannelsimulationnon-Markovianitysuddendeath

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports an experiment on a single superconducting qubit that observes all three levels of the known hierarchy of temporal quantum correlations in one setting. The authors prepare the qubit in a maximally mixed state to enforce the no-signaling-in-time condition, then send it through engineered amplitude-damping, dephasing, and depolarizing channels while measuring three witnesses: temporal CHSH violation for nonmacrorealism, temporal steering robustness, and the pseudodensity-matrix $f$-function for temporal inseparability. Their central result is that in the depolarizing channel the three witnesses undergo sudden death at distinct times, with nonmacrorealism vanishing first, temporal steering second, and temporal inseparability last. If correct, this is a direct experimental confirmation that the logical hierarchy proposed for temporal correlations persists as a dynamical ordering, and it makes temporal steering a practical probe of non-Markovian noise, as demonstrated by a revival of steering in freely evolving qubits.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on three witness quantities evaluated at two times on the same qubit: $B_{\max}$, the normalized violation of the temporal CHSH inequality, which detects nonmacrorealism; $\mathrm{TSR}$, the minimal noise needed to fit the post-measurement states to a hidden-state model, which detects temporal steering; and $f = \lVert \mathcal{R} \rVert_{\mathrm{tr}} - 1$, where $\mathcal{R} = \frac{1}{4}\sum_{i,j} C_{ij}\,\sigma_i\otimes\sigma_j$ is the pseudodensity matrix built from two-time correlation expectations, which detects temporal inseparability. The device that makes the comparison clean is the maximally mixed initial state: with $\rho_0 = I/2$ the first measurement cannot change the second-time statistics, so the three witnesses measure temporal correlation rather than measurement disturbance. A second enabling element is the decomposition of the desired quantum channel into a probabilistic mixture of two extreme channels, implemented with CNOT gates and rotations, which lets the authors realize amplitude-damping, dephasing, and depolarizing dynamics and then read off the hierarchy from the distinct sudden-death times of the three witnesses.

What would settle it

Perform quantum state tomography of the initial state and an explicit no-signaling-in-time test, comparing the $t_2$ statistics conditioned on the $t_1$ outcome with the unconditional $t_2$ statistics. A state fidelity noticeably below $I/2$, or a nonzero difference between the conditioned and unconditional $t_2$ distributions, would show that the sudden-death ordering observed in the depolarizing channel could be an artifact of invasive measurement.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the three temporal quantum correlations---nonmacrorealism, temporal steering, and temporal inseparability---form a strict logical hierarchy, and that this hierarchy is directly visible in the decay dynamics of a single qubit. Concretely, for a qubit initialized in the maximally mixed state $\rho_0 = I/2$ and evolved through a depolarizing channel, the temporal CHSH violation $B_{\max}$ (nonmacrorealism) drops to zero first, the temporal steering robustness $\mathrm{TSR}$ vanishes second, and the $f$-function of the pseudodensity matrix (temporal inseparability) vanishes last. The same experiment also finds that freely evolving qubits can show a revival of temporal steering, which the authors attribute to non-Markovian crosstalk with neighboring qubits, and they use the decay and revival patterns to benchmark individual qubits on the processor.

Load-bearing premise

The result depends on the prepared initial state being exactly the maximally mixed state $I/2$: if it is not, the measurement at $t_1$ can alter the statistics at $t_2$, and the reported witnesses could be inflated by measurement disturbance rather than by genuine temporal quantum correlation; the paper does not report a tomographic check of this preparation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In the depolarizing channel, the three witnesses vanish abruptly and in a fixed temporal order, making that channel a one-setting testbed for the full hierarchy.
Because sudden-death times of temporal steering differ between qubits and can be followed by revivals, TSR provides a qubit benchmark that captures non-Markovian noise beyond standard $T_1$ and $T_2$ figures.
Revival of temporal steering is presented as a signature of environment memory, supporting the use of temporal steering as a non-Markovianity witness in open quantum systems.
The hierarchy, once established, can be applied to identifying causal structure in quantum networks and to bounding the security of quantum key distribution with trusted or untrusted devices.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the ordering is a universal feature of single-qubit depolarizing dynamics, it doubles as an experimental sanity check: a reversed death order would flag preparation or measurement disturbance rather than a new physical effect.
The revival of temporal steering under non-Markovian crosstalk raises the possibility of engineering environment memory to prolong temporal quantum correlations for tasks such as quantum key distribution, a use the paper mentions but does not demonstrate.
A natural extension is to run the same three witnesses on two entangled qubits to see whether the temporal hierarchy and the spatial sudden death of entanglement share the same time ordering.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here is my take on arXiv:2505.01379. The genuinely new result is experimental: in an engineered depolarizing channel, a single superconducting qubit shows the predicted temporal ordering—nonmacrorealism suddenly dies first, temporal steering second, temporal inseparability last—and this is the first experimental evaluation of temporal steering robustness. The theoretical hierarchy is from earlier work by largely the same group, so the conceptual claim is not new; the measurement, the sudden-death timing, and the qubit-benchmark application are. That is a real contribution.

The paper does several things well. The engineered channels are checked by process tomography, the measured Bmax, TSR, and f curves track Lindblad calculations built from independent T1 and T2 rates, and the revival of TSR during free evolution is a sensible signature of non-Markovianity. The central ordering claim is not obtained by fitting the target result; it comes from raw data points, with the fitted parameters appearing only in the non-Markovian crosstalk model.

The soft spots are real but mostly fixable. Most importantly, no experimental point has an error bar, and no raw data or code are provided. That is not a minor omission for a paper whose headline is "unambiguously ranked" by sudden-death timing—without uncertainties, the claimed separation of time scales is not statistically supported, even though visually it is persuasive. Second, the no-signaling-in-time condition is assumed, not verified. Preparing a maximally mixed state does guarantee NSIT in principle, but the authors never report a tomographic check of their preparation or an explicit NSIT test. A small deviation from I/2 could inflate temporal CHSH and TSR through measurement disturbance. I do not think this destroys the result: the hierarchy in the depolarizing channel is clean and matches Lindblad theory. But it is a genuine gap, and the stress-test note correctly identifies it. Third, the non-Markovian revival model uses four fitted rates (gamma_A and gamma_P for system and environment over hbar J); it is a plausibility argument, not a prediction, and should be labeled that way. There are also small typos in the figure cross-references, with Fig. 4(a) cited twice.

The citation pattern is dominated by the authors' own previous papers, but that is appropriate here since the hierarchy was defined there; I do not see that as a flaw.

Bottom line: this paper is for people working on temporal quantum correlations, Leggett-Garg tests, and non-Markovian qubit characterization. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it to peer review but ask for a major revision that adds error bars, a state-preparation and NSIT check, and data or code release. As is, I would not lean on it.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental study of temporal quantum correlations in a single superconducting qubit implemented on IBM quantum hardware. The authors prepare the qubit in a maximally mixed state, implement amplitude-damping, dephasing, and depolarizing channels with controlled circuit parameters, and measure three temporal correlation quantifiers: Bmax (nonmacrorealism), temporal steering robustness TSR (temporal steering), and the f-function (temporal inseparability). They observe sudden death of these correlations at distinct times in the depolarizing channel, which they interpret as the full logical hierarchy of temporal quantum correlations. They also observe revival of temporal steering in a freely evolving qubit and attribute it to non-Markovian crosstalk with an environment qubit, supported by a simplified two-qubit model. The central claim is that the hierarchy is experimentally demonstrated by the distinct sudden-death time scales.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, this is a valuable experimental milestone: the first observation of the full hierarchy of nonmacrorealism, temporal steering, and temporal inseparability in a single physical system, with potential applications in quantum benchmarking and non-Markovianity detection. The experimental implementation of the engineered channels and the use of a superconducting circuit are appropriate for the claim. However, the result is only as strong as its experimental controls. Two issues are load-bearing: (i) the operational interpretation of the measured correlations relies on the no-signaling-in-time (NSIT) condition, which is asserted rather than verified; and (ii) no statistical uncertainties are reported, so the 'unambiguous ranking' of sudden-death times is not quantitatively supported. The non-Markovian revival model also uses fitted parameters and is presented as confirmatory rather than as a falsifiable prediction. These issues are addressable in revision, so the work merits further consideration.

major comments (3)

[Sec. II and Fig. 4] The NSIT condition is the operational backbone of all three measures, but the paper never verifies that the prepared initial state is sufficiently close to I/2. The text in Sec. II states that a maximally mixed state ensures the no-signaling-in-time condition; this is exact only for ρ0 = I/2. Any preparation error makes the t1 measurement invasive, and the post-measurement states at t2 will depend on the measurement basis, potentially inflating Bmax, TSR, and f by different amounts. Because the central claim is the ordering of the sudden-death times, the manuscript should report a tomographic characterization of the prepared state (e.g., fidelity to I/2) and an explicit NSIT test conducted at the same time scales, or at least a worst-case analysis showing that the observed ordering is robust against the measured preparation error. Without such a test, the hierarchy claim is not compelled by the data.
[Figs. 2 and 4] No error bars or uncertainty estimates appear on any experimental data point in Figs. 2 and 4. The manuscript's central statement that the sudden deaths of nonmacrorealism, temporal steering, and temporal inseparability occur 'on distinct time scales' and are 'unambiguously ranked' requires statistical support. The curves from the Lindblad master equation are useful comparisons, but the data points show visible scatter, and without propagated shot noise or gate-calibration uncertainties it is impossible to know whether the sudden-death times are actually separated. The authors should provide error bars (at least from projective-measurement shot noise) and, ideally, confidence intervals for the sudden-death locations, particularly in the depolarizing channel shown in Fig. 4(c).
[Sec. II, Fig. 2(a) inset] The non-Markovian revival claim is supported by a simplified two-qubit model with four free parameters: γA/ℏJ and γP/ℏJ for the system qubit and for the environment qubit. The text says the 'simplified model reproduces the revival and oscillation,' but these parameters are not independently determined; they are fitted to the observed revival. This is not a falsifiable prediction, and alternative non-Markovian noise mechanisms are not excluded. The paper should explicitly state that these are fitted parameters, and should ideally validate the crosstalk mechanism by an independent measurement (e.g., varying the environment qubit's frequency or measuring its final state). As written, the non-Markovianity demonstration is suggestive but not quantitatively rigorous.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. IV, second paragraph] The sentence 'the nonmacrorealism (Bmax>0), temporal inseparability (TSR≠0), and temporal steerability (f≠0)' swaps the definitions of TSR and f. TSR is the temporal steering robustness (temporal steering), and f is the temporal inseparability measure. This should be corrected to avoid confusion.
[Sec. IV, third paragraph] The text refers to 'Fig. 4(a) and 4(a), respectively' when discussing the amplitude-damping and dephasing channels; the second reference should be Fig. 4(b).
[Abstract and Introduction] The word 'casual' is used where 'causal' is intended ('identifying the casual structure', 'explore the casual structures'). Please correct these typos.
[Appendix A] The typo 'psuedodensity' should be 'pseudodensity' throughout the appendix.
[Fig. 3] The inset showing the geometric interpretation of the quantum channels on the Bloch sphere is described in the text but appears difficult to read at the current size; consider enlarging the inset or providing a separate figure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the experimental ordering is independent measured data, and the self-cited hierarchy theory is parameter-free prior work.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is the experimental observation of the hierarchy of temporal quantum correlations. The measures Bmax, TSR, and f are defined explicitly in Eqs. (1)-(5) from two-time statistics and quantum-state tomography; none of these definitions encodes the sudden-death ordering or the final hierarchy. The logical hierarchy itself is cited from prior work (Refs. [17-20], especially [20] by some of the present authors), but it is a parameter-free theoretical result whose stated assumptions do not include this experiment's data, so invoking it is legitimate independent support rather than circularity. The measured dots in Fig. 4 are raw data; the calculated curves are obtained from Lindblad master equations with the known T1 and T2 times, not from parameters fitted to the target sudden-death ordering. The crosstalk model in Fig. 2(a) does use parameters (gamma_A/hbar J, gamma_P/hbar J) chosen to reproduce the revival, but those curves are presented as an explanatory model, not as a prediction of the central hierarchy, and the hierarchy claim rests on the measured dots. The reliance on maximally mixed preparation to guarantee no-signaling-in-time is an experimental validity assumption; even if imperfect, this is a robustness concern rather than a circular reduction of the derivation to its inputs. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no result is equivalent to its definition by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the no-signaling-in-time protocol, Lindblad modeling, and a crosstalk model for the revival. The crosstalk model contributes four free ratios with no stated fitting procedure. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)

gamma_A_s/(hbar J), system qubit amplitude-damping ratio = 0.224
Used in the Fig. 2(a) inset model of crosstalk-induced non-Markovian revival; no fitting procedure or error bar is given.
gamma_P_s/(hbar J), system qubit dephasing ratio = 0.038
Used in the Fig. 2(a) inset model; no fitting procedure or error bar is given.
gamma_A_e/(hbar J), environment qubit amplitude-damping ratio = 0.359
Used in the Fig. 2(a) inset model; no fitting procedure or error bar is given.
gamma_P_e/(hbar J), environment qubit dephasing ratio = 0.083
Used in the Fig. 2(a) inset model; no fitting procedure or error bar is given.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The initial qubit state is exactly maximally mixed, so no-signaling in time holds.
Section II: the maximally mixed state ensures that the measurement at time t1 does not change the statistics at t2. If the preparation deviates, the violations could be inflated by measurement disturbance.
ad hoc to paper The simplified crosstalk model, Hint = hbar J (sigma+_1 sigma-_2 + sigma-_1 sigma+_2), with amplitude-damping and dephasing rates, captures the observed non-Markovian revival.
Section II text introduces this model to explain TSR revival; the rates appear as ratios in the Fig. 2(a) caption, but no independent measurement of J or the environment is reported.
domain assumption Lindblad master equations with known T1 and T2 describe the qubit evolution in the engineered channels.
Used to compute the theoretical curves in Fig. 4. This assumes Markovian noise and no crosstalk during the roughly 2 microsecond circuits, as stated in Section IV.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Observation of Full Hierarchy of Temporal Quantum Correlations with a Superconducting Qubit." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JTYZS5TM

@misc{pith2026250501379,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Observation of Full Hierarchy of Temporal Quantum Correlations with a Superconducting Qubit},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JTYZS5TM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.01379}
}

read the original abstract

Temporal quantum correlations provide an intriguing way of testing quantumness at the macroscopic level, with a logical hierarchy present among the quantum correlations associated with nonmacrorealism, temporal steering, and temporal inseparability. By manipulating the dynamics of a superconducting qubit, we observe the full hierarchy of temporal quantum correlations. Moreover, we show that the rich dynamics of the temporal quantum correlations, such as sudden death or revival of temporal steering, provides a useful and unique measure for benchmarking qubits on a realistic circuit. Our work finds applications in identifying the casual structure in a quantum network, the non-Markovianity of open quantum systems, and the security bounds of quantum key distribution. As an example, we demonstrate the non-Markovianity of a single superconducting qubit on the quantum circuit.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.01379 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Fidelity of the quantum channels, obtained by quan [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. (a) The measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The measured (dots) and calculated (curves) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

[1]

A. J. Leggett and Anupam Garg. Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the ﬂux there when no- body looks? Phys. Rev. Lett. , 54:857–860, Mar 1985

work page 1985
[2]

Leggett–garg inequalities

Clive Emary, Neill Lambert, and Franco Nori. Leggett–garg inequalities. Reports on Progress in Physics, 77(1):016001, Dec 2013

work page 2013
[3]

Leggett- garg macrorealism and temporal correlations

Giuseppe Vitagliano and Costantino Budroni. Leggett- garg macrorealism and temporal correlations. Phys. Rev. A, 107:040101, Apr 2023

work page 2023
[4]

J. S. Bell. On the einstein podolsky rosen paradox. 1:195 – 290, 1964

work page 1964
[5]

Ruskov, A

R. Ruskov, A. N. Korotkov, and A. Mizel. Signatures of quantum behavior in single-qubit weak measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 96:200404, May 2006

work page 2006
[6]

Palacios-Laloy, F

A. Palacios-Laloy, F. Mallet, F. Nguyen, P. Bertet, D. Vion, D. Esteve, and A. N. Korotkov. Experimental violation of a bell’s inequality in time with weak mea- surement. Nat. Phys. , 6:442–447, June 2010

work page 2010
[7]

Waldherr, P

G. Waldherr, P. Neumann, S. F. Huelga, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup. Violation of a temporal bell inequality for single spins in a diamond defect center. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 107:090401, 2011

work page 2011
[8]

M. E. Goggin, M. P. Almeida, M. Barbieri, B. P. Lanyon, J. L. O’Brien, A. G. White, and G. J. Pryde. Violation of the leggett–garg inequality with weak measurements of photons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA , 108:1256–1261, 2011

work page 2011

Show all 39 references

[9]

Dressel, C

J. Dressel, C. J. Broadbent, J. C. Howell, and A. N. Jordan. Experimental violation of two-party leggett-garg inequalities with semiweak measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett., 106:040402, 2011

2011
[10]

G. C. Knee, S. Simmons, E. M. Gauger, J. J.L. Morton, H. Riemann, N. V. Abrosimov, P. Becker, H.-J. Pohl, K. M. Itoh, M. L.W. Thewalt, G. A. D. Briggs, and S. C. Benjamin. Violation of a leggett–garg inequality with ideal non-invasive measurements. Nat. Commun. , 3:606, 2012

2012
[11]

Ideal negative measure- ments in quantum walks disprove theories based on clas- sical trajectories

Carsten Robens, Wolfgang Alt, Dieter Meschede, Clive Emary, and Andrea Alberti. Ideal negative measure- ments in quantum walks disprove theories based on clas- sical trajectories. Phys. Rev. X , 5:011003, 2015

2015
[12]

Experimen- tal test of non-macrorealistic cat states in the cloud

Huan-Yu Ku, Neill Lambert, Feng-Jui Chan, Clive Emary, Yueh-Nan Chen, and Franco Nori. Experimen- tal test of non-macrorealistic cat states in the cloud. npj Quantum Inf , 6:98, 2020

2020
[13]

Vieira, Huan-Yu Ku, and Costantino Budroni

Lucas B. Vieira, Huan-Yu Ku, and Costantino Budroni. Entanglement-breaking channels are a quantum memory resource. arXiv e-prints , page arXiv:2402.16789, Febru- ary 2024

2024
[14]

Dynamical landauer principle: Quan- tifying information transmission by thermodynamics

Chung-Yun Hsieh. Dynamical landauer principle: Quan- tifying information transmission by thermodynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 134:050404, Feb 2025

2025
[15]

Dynamical resource theory of incom- patibility preservability

Chung-Yun Hsieh, Benjamin Stratton, Chao-Hsien Wu, and Huan-Yu Ku. Dynamical resource theory of incom- patibility preservability. Phys. Rev. A , 111:022422, Feb 2025

2025
[16]

R. F. Werner. Quantum states with einstein-podolsky- rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model. Phys. Rev. A , 40:4277–4281, 1989

1989
[17]

Quantum correlations in the tempo- ral clauser–horne–shimony–holt (CHSH) scenario

Tobias Fritz. Quantum correlations in the tempo- ral clauser–horne–shimony–holt (CHSH) scenario. New Journal of Physics , 12(8):083055, aug 2010

2010
[18]

Temporal steering inequality

Yueh-Nan Chen, Che-Ming Li, Neill Lambert, Shin-Liang Chen, Yukihiro Ota, Guang-Yin Chen, and Franco Nori. Temporal steering inequality. Phys. Rev. A , 89:032112, Mar 2014

2014
[19]

Fitzsimons, Jonathan A

Joseph F. Fitzsimons, Jonathan A. Jones, and Vlatko Vedral. Quantum correlations which imply causation. Scientiﬁc Reports , 5(1):18281, 2015

2015
[20]

Hierarchy in temporal quan- tum correlations

Huan-Yu Ku, Shin-Liang Chen, Neill Lambert, Yueh- Nan Chen, and Franco Nori. Hierarchy in temporal quan- tum correlations. Phys. Rev. A , 98:022104, Aug 2018

2018
[21]

K. Ried, M. Agnew, L. Vermeyden, D. Janzing, R. W. Spekkens, and K. J. Resch. A quantum advantage for inferring causal structure. Nat. Phys. , 11:414, 2015

2015
[22]

Quan- tifying non-markovianity with temporal steering

Shin-Liang Chen, Neill Lambert, Che-Ming Li, Adam Miranowicz, Yueh-Nan Chen, and Franco Nori. Quan- tifying non-markovianity with temporal steering. Phys. Rev. Lett., 116:020503, Jan 2016

2016
[23]

Steering- enhanced quantum metrology using superpositions of noisy phase shifts

Kuan-Yi Lee, Jhen-Dong Lin, Adam Miranowicz, Franco Nori, Huan-Yu Ku, and Yueh-Nan Chen. Steering- enhanced quantum metrology using superpositions of noisy phase shifts. Phys. Rev. Res. , 5:013103, Feb 2023

2023
[24]

Temporal steering and security of quantum key distribution with mutually un- biased bases against individual attacks

Karol Bartkiewicz, Anton ´ ınˇCernoch, Karel Lemr, Adam Miranowicz, and Franco Nori. Temporal steering and security of quantum key distribution with mutually un- biased bases against individual attacks. Phys. Rev. A , 93:062345, Jun 2016

2016
[25]

Hidden nonmacrorealism: Reviving the leggett-garg inequality with stochastic operations

Huan-Yu Ku, Hao-Cheng Weng, Yen-An Shih, Po-Chen Kuo, Neill Lambert, Franco Nori, Chih-Sung Chuu, and Yueh-Nan Chen. Hidden nonmacrorealism: Reviving the leggett-garg inequality with stochastic operations. Phys- ical Review Research, 3(4):043083, 2021

2021
[26]

Leggett-garg inequalities and no-signa ling in time: A quasiprobability approach

JJ Halliwell. Leggett-garg inequalities and no-signa ling in time: A quasiprobability approach. Physical Review A, 93(2):022123, 2016

2016
[27]

Temporal steering in four dimensions with applications to coupled qubits and magnetoreception

Huan-Yu Ku, Shin-Liang Chen, Hong-Bin Chen, Neill Lambert, Yueh-Nan Chen, and Franco Nori. Temporal steering in four dimensions with applications to coupled qubits and magnetoreception. Phys. Rev. A , 94:062126, Dec 2016

2016
[28]

Spatio-temporal steering for testing non- classical correlations in quantum networks

Shin-Liang Chen, Neill Lambert, Che-Ming Li, Guang- Yin Chen, Yueh-Nan Chen, Adam Miranowicz, and Franco Nori. Spatio-temporal steering for testing non- classical correlations in quantum networks. Scientiﬁc Re- ports, 7(1):3728, 2017

2017
[29]

A. J. Leggett. Macroscopic quantum systems and the quantum theory of measurement. Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement , 69:80–100, Mar 1980. 7

1980
[30]

M. P. Almeida, F. de Melo, M. Hor-Meyll, A. Salles, S. P. Walborn, P. H. Souto Ribeiro, and L. Davi- dovich. Environment-induced sudden death of entangle- ment. Science, 316(5824):579, Apr 2007

2007
[31]

Ting Yu and J. H. Eberly. Sudden death of entanglement. Science, 323(5914):598, Jan 2009

2009
[32]

Sanders, Yu-Ao Chen, and Jian-Wei Pan

He Lu, Chang Liu, Dong-Sheng Wang, Luo-Kan Chen, Zheng-Da Li, Xing-Can Yao, Li Li, Nai-Le Liu, Cheng- Zhi Peng, Barry C. Sanders, Yu-Ao Chen, and Jian-Wei Pan. Experimental quantum channel simulation. Phys. Rev. A , 95:042310, Apr 2017

2017
[33]

Nielsen and Isaac L

Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang. Quantum Com- putation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 10th edition, 2011

2011
[34]

Quantifying quan- tumness of channels without entanglement

Huan-Yu Ku, Josef Kadlec, Anton ´ ın ˇCernoch, Marco T´ ulio Quintino, Wenbin Zhou, Karel Lemr, Neill Lambert, Adam Miranowicz, Shin-Liang Chen, Franco Nori, and Yueh-Nan Chen. Quantifying quan- tumness of channels without entanglement. PRX Quantum, 3:020338, May 2022

2022
[35]

Visually quantifying single- qubit quantum memory

Wan-Guan Chang, Chia-Yi Ju, Guang-Yin Chen, Yueh- Nan Chen, and Huan-Yu Ku. Visually quantifying single- qubit quantum memory. Phys. Rev. Res. , 6:023035, Apr 2024

2024
[36]

Shounak Datta, Shiladitya Mal, and A. S. Majumdar. Protecting temporal correlations of two-qubit states us- ing quantum channels with memory, 2018

2018
[37]

Huelga, ´Angel Rivas, and Martin B

Susana F. Huelga, ´Angel Rivas, and Martin B. Ple- nio. Non-markovianity-assisted steady state entangle- ment. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 108:160402, Apr 2012

2012
[38]

Nonlocal memory eﬀects allow perfect teleportation with mixed states

Elsi-Mari Laine, Heinz-Peter Breuer, and Jyrki Piilo. Nonlocal memory eﬀects allow perfect teleportation with mixed states. Scientiﬁc Reports , 4(1):4620, 2014

2014
[39]

Linearly positive histories: probabilities for a robust family of sequences of quantum events

Sheldon Goldstein and Don N Page. Linearly positive histories: probabilities for a robust family of sequences of quantum events. Physical review letters , 74(19):3715, 1995

1995

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

A. J. Leggett and Anupam Garg. Quantum mechanics versus macroscopic realism: Is the ﬂux there when no- body looks? Phys. Rev. Lett. , 54:857–860, Mar 1985

work page 1985

[2] [2]

Leggett–garg inequalities

Clive Emary, Neill Lambert, and Franco Nori. Leggett–garg inequalities. Reports on Progress in Physics, 77(1):016001, Dec 2013

work page 2013

[3] [3]

Leggett- garg macrorealism and temporal correlations

Giuseppe Vitagliano and Costantino Budroni. Leggett- garg macrorealism and temporal correlations. Phys. Rev. A, 107:040101, Apr 2023

work page 2023

[4] [4]

J. S. Bell. On the einstein podolsky rosen paradox. 1:195 – 290, 1964

work page 1964

[5] [5]

Ruskov, A

R. Ruskov, A. N. Korotkov, and A. Mizel. Signatures of quantum behavior in single-qubit weak measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 96:200404, May 2006

work page 2006

[6] [6]

Palacios-Laloy, F

A. Palacios-Laloy, F. Mallet, F. Nguyen, P. Bertet, D. Vion, D. Esteve, and A. N. Korotkov. Experimental violation of a bell’s inequality in time with weak mea- surement. Nat. Phys. , 6:442–447, June 2010

work page 2010

[7] [7]

Waldherr, P

G. Waldherr, P. Neumann, S. F. Huelga, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup. Violation of a temporal bell inequality for single spins in a diamond defect center. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 107:090401, 2011

work page 2011

[8] [8]

M. E. Goggin, M. P. Almeida, M. Barbieri, B. P. Lanyon, J. L. O’Brien, A. G. White, and G. J. Pryde. Violation of the leggett–garg inequality with weak measurements of photons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA , 108:1256–1261, 2011

work page 2011