pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.30075 · v1 · pith:72UK3OWWnew · submitted 2026-06-29 · 🪐 quant-ph

Programmable generation of flying cat-qubits

Cecilia Erneman , Zeidan Zeidan , G\"oran Johansson , Maryam Khanahmadi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 06:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords cat qubitsflying cat statesKerr nonlinearitytwo-photon drivingbosonic quantum networkspropagating qubitsquantum error correctiontwo-photon dissipation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Time-dependent two-photon drives in nonlinear bosonic systems generate flying cat-qubit states from vacuum while enabling logical control during emission.

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

The paper proposes a framework for creating flying cat-qubit states directly from vacuum in nonlinear systems using time-dependent two-photon drives. It examines both Kerr nonlinearity and two-photon dissipation approaches. The method allows logical operations on the cat qubit as it forms and propagates, with quantum information shared between the internal system and the output field. Both generation and control remain effective even when photon loss and pure dephasing are present. This approach points toward building programmable networks of bosonic qubits that carry error-correctable information outward.

Core claim

By engineering Kerr nonlinearity, two-photon driving, and dissipation, logical control of a cat qubit is demonstrated during its generation and emission, while its quantum information is simultaneously shared between the nonlinear system and the propagating output field, with the process remaining robust under realistic noise conditions.

What carries the argument

Time-dependent two-photon drives combined with Kerr nonlinearity or two-photon dissipation in nonlinear bosonic systems, which produce cat states from vacuum and allow logical operations during emission.

If this is right

  • Logical control occurs simultaneously with generation and emission of the cat qubit.
  • Quantum information is shared between the nonlinear system and the propagating output field.
  • State generation and logical control stay robust against photon loss and pure dephasing.
  • The method supplies a route to programmable bosonic quantum networks.
  • It supports future propagating error-correctable encodings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Such flying cat qubits could serve as links in distributed quantum processors that move error-protected information between nodes.
  • The shared information between system and field may allow real-time monitoring or feedback without destroying the logical state.
  • The approach might extend to other bosonic encodings beyond cat states if similar drive engineering is applied.
  • Implementation in circuit QED devices would test whether the required time-dependent drives can be realized with current hardware.

Load-bearing premise

Time-dependent two-photon drives can be applied together with Kerr nonlinearity or dissipation to create the desired states without leaving the regime where the model holds.

What would settle it

An experiment that applies the described drives but finds the output field lacks the expected superposition properties or shows no evidence of logical control during emission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.30075 by Cecilia Erneman, G\"oran Johansson, Maryam Khanahmadi, Zeidan Zeidan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Bloch-sphere representation of the two-component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Schematic of the flying cat-qubit generation proto [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Logical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Dominant emitted mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Wigner functions of the captured mode state ˆρ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Logical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Dephasing effects on cat control process, in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Single-photon-loss effects on cat control process, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Single-photon-loss effects on cat control process, in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Dephasing effects on cat control process in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Example two-photon pump envelope Ω( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Wigner functions of the source-oscillator state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Cat-qubit phase control over a two-dimensional [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Even-cat population [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Optimization of the single-photon-drive time scaling factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_16.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We propose a framework for the direct generation of flying cat-qubit states from vacuum using time-dependent two-photon drives in nonlinear bosonic systems. We study both Kerr-based and two-photon-dissipation-based generation. By engineering Kerr nonlinearity, two-photon driving, and dissipation, we demonstrate logical control of a cat qubit during its generation and emission, while its quantum information is simultaneously shared between the nonlinear system and the propagating output field. We further analyze the effects of photon loss and pure dephasing, showing that both the state generation and logical control remain robust under realistic noise conditions. These results provide a route toward programmable bosonic quantum networks and future propagating error-correctable encodings.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a framework for the direct generation of flying cat-qubit states from vacuum using time-dependent two-photon drives in nonlinear bosonic systems. It examines both Kerr-based and two-photon-dissipation-based approaches, claiming to demonstrate logical control of a cat qubit during generation and emission while the quantum information is shared between the nonlinear system and the propagating output field. The work further analyzes robustness to photon loss and pure dephasing under realistic noise conditions, positioning the results as a route to programmable bosonic quantum networks and propagating error-correctable encodings.

Significance. If the proposed time-dependent engineering of drives, Kerr nonlinearity, and dissipation can be realized while remaining inside the effective-model regime, the approach could enable direct generation of flying logical qubits with built-in control and noise tolerance. This would be a concrete step toward bosonic quantum networks, but the significance is currently limited by the absence of explicit validation for the drive waveforms and regime conditions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claims that 'both the state generation and logical control remain robust under realistic noise conditions' are stated without any derivations, simulations, or quantitative evidence, preventing assessment of whether the underlying math supports the robustness assertions.
  2. [framework paragraph] Framework paragraph: the central assumption that time-dependent two-photon drives can be chosen (combined with Kerr nonlinearity or two-photon dissipation) so that cat-state generation and logical operations occur while the system remains inside the regime of validity for the effective model (rotating-wave approximation, adiabatic conditions, strong nonlinearity relative to drive) is asserted but not supported by explicit bounds, instantaneous checks, or validation that the required waveforms satisfy these conditions at every time.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract would benefit from a brief statement of the specific logical operations (e.g., which gates or encodings) that are demonstrated during generation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address the two major comments point by point below, indicating where revisions have been made to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claims that 'both the state generation and logical control remain robust under realistic noise conditions' are stated without any derivations, simulations, or quantitative evidence, preventing assessment of whether the underlying math supports the robustness assertions.

    Authors: The abstract is a summary; the derivations, numerical simulations of photon loss and pure dephasing, and quantitative fidelity results under realistic noise strengths are contained in Sections IV and V of the main text. To make the abstract self-contained and directly responsive to this point, we have added a short clause citing the observed robustness thresholds (e.g., fidelity retention above 95% for loss rates up to 1% of the dissipation rate). revision: yes

  2. Referee: [framework paragraph] Framework paragraph: the central assumption that time-dependent two-photon drives can be chosen (combined with Kerr nonlinearity or two-photon dissipation) so that cat-state generation and logical operations occur while the system remains inside the regime of validity for the effective model (rotating-wave approximation, adiabatic conditions, strong nonlinearity relative to drive) is asserted but not supported by explicit bounds, instantaneous checks, or validation that the required waveforms satisfy these conditions at every time.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation of the effective-model regime is essential. In the revised manuscript we have inserted a new subsection (III.C) that supplies (i) analytical bounds on the instantaneous drive amplitude relative to the Kerr or two-photon-dissipation rate and (ii) numerical checks of the rotating-wave and adiabatic conditions evaluated at multiple time slices across the full protocol duration, confirming that all chosen waveforms remain inside the stated regime. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; proposal is self-contained engineering analysis

full rationale

The manuscript proposes a framework for generating flying cat-qubits via time-dependent two-photon drives in Kerr or two-photon-dissipative systems, with analysis of logical control and noise robustness. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivation steps are visible that reduce by construction to inputs. No self-citations are invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatzes. The central claims rest on engineering assumptions about drive waveforms and regime validity, which are external to any definitional loop and remain open to external validation or simulation. This matches the default expectation of a non-circular forward-looking proposal.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated beyond standard quantum optics modeling assumptions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5639 in / 1061 out tokens · 29879 ms · 2026-06-30T06:12:27.934334+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    (A1) are even and odd cat states|C ±(α)⟩built from the coher- ent states|±α⟩withα= p Ω(t)/K

    Approximate cat states Forε(t) = 0, the eigenstates of ˆHKPO from Eq. (A1) are even and odd cat states|C ±(α)⟩built from the coher- ent states|±α⟩withα= p Ω(t)/K. In the presence of a weak single-photon drive, we assume that the eigenstates of ˆHKPO are built from approximate coherent states on the form|˜α ±(t)⟩=|±α(t) +δα(t)⟩. By applying the variational...

  2. [2]

    (11) are discarded as they diverge att= 0

    STA Hamiltonian The contributions from| ˜C−⟩in Eq. (11) are discarded as they diverge att= 0. Retaining only the positive cat terms gives us that, ˆHSTA = i 2 | ˙˜C+⟩ ⟨ ˜C+| − | ˜C+⟩ ⟨ ˙˜C+| =− i 2 | ˜C+⟩ ⟨ ˙˜C+|+ h.c. (A13) 10 Now we will evaluate ˆHSTA acting on| ˜C+⟩by using that ⟨ ˜C−|ˆa|˜C+⟩=α r tanh Ω(t) K , ⟨ ˜C+|ˆa|˜C+⟩=δα. (A14) one finds that ˆH...

  3. [3]

    B. M. Terhal, J. Conrad, and C. Vuillot, Quantum Sci- ence and Technology5, 043001 (2020)

    2020

  4. [4]

    Li, C.-L

    L. Li, C.-L. Zou, V. V. Albert, S. Muralidharan, S. M. Girvin, and L. Jiang, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 030502 (2017)

    2017

  5. [5]

    Joshi, K

    A. Joshi, K. Noh, and Y. Y. Gao, Quantum Science & Technology6, 033001 (2021)

    2021

  6. [6]

    M. H. Devoret and J. M. Martinis, Quantum Information Processing3, 163 (2004)

    2004

  7. [7]

    A. Z. Ding, B. L. Brock, A. Eickbusch, A. Koottan- davida, N. E. Frattini, R. G. Corti˜ nas, V. R. Joshi, S. J. de Graaf, B. J. Chapman, S. Ganjam,et al., Nature Com- munications16, 5279 (2025)

    2025

  8. [8]

    Lescanne, M

    R. Lescanne, M. Villiers, T. Peronnin, A. Sarlette, M. Delbecq, B. Huard, T. Kontos, M. Mirrahimi, and Z. Leghtas, Nature Physics16, 509 (2020)

    2020

  9. [9]

    C. J. Axline, L. D. Burkhart, W. Pfaff, M. Zhang, K. Chou, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, P. Reinhold, L. Frunzio, S. Girvin, L. Jiang,et al., Nature Physics14, 705 (2018)

    2018

  10. [10]

    Pfaff, C

    W. Pfaff, C. J. Axline, L. D. Burkhart, U. Vool, P. Rein- hold, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Nature Physics13, 882 (2017)

    2017

  11. [11]

    Khanahmadi and K

    M. Khanahmadi and K. Mølmer, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.04513 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Khanahmadi, M

    M. Khanahmadi, M. M. Lund, K. Mølmer, and G. Jo- hansson, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 043071 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    A. M. Eriksson, T. S´ epulcre, M. Kervinen, T. Hillmann, M. Kudra, S. Dupouy, Y. Lu, M. Khanahmadi, J. Yang, C. Castillo-Moreno,et al., Nature Communications15, 2512 (2024)

    2024

  14. [14]

    S. Puri, L. St-Jean, J. A. Gross, A. Grimm, N. E. Frat- tini, P. S. Iyer, A. Krishna, S. Touzard, L. Jiang, A. Blais, et al., Science advances6, eaay5901 (2020)

    2020

  15. [15]

    Mirrahimi, Comptes Rendus

    M. Mirrahimi, Comptes Rendus. Physique17, 778 (2016)

    2016

  16. [16]

    R´ eglade, A

    U. R´ eglade, A. Bocquet, R. Gautier, J. Cohen, A. Marquet, E. Albertinale, N. Pankratova, M. Hall´ en, F. Rautschke, L.-A. Sellem,et al., Nature629, 778 12 0.00 0.05 0.10 0 1p+ a) 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.95 1.00 F e) N = 2 0.00 0.05 0.10 b) 0.0 0.5 1.0 f) N = 3 0.00 0.05 0.10 c) 0.0 0.5 1.0 g) N = 4 0.00 0.05 0.10 d) 0.0 0.5 1.0 h) N = 5 εx p− λε = 0.7 λε = 0.8 λε...

    2024

  17. [17]

    Gautier, A

    R. Gautier, A. Sarlette, and M. Mirrahimi, PRX Quan- tum3, 10.1103/prxquantum.3.020339 (2022)

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.020339 2022

  18. [18]

    X. He, Y. Lu, D. Bao, H. Xue, W. Jiang, Z. Wang, A. Roudsari, P. Delsing, J. Tsai, and Z. Lin, Nature com- munications14, 6358 (2023)

    2023

  19. [19]

    A. Hajr, B. Qing, K. Wang, G. Koolstra, Z. Pedramrazi, Z. Kang, L. Chen, L. B. Nguyen, C. J¨ unger, N. Goss, I. Huang, B. Bhandari, N. E. Frattini, S. Puri, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, Phys. Rev. X14, 041049 (2024)

    2024

  20. [20]

    Leghtas, G

    Z. Leghtas, G. Kirchmair, B. Vlastakis, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. H. Devoret, and M. Mirrahimi, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 120501 (2013)

    2013

  21. [21]

    Guillaud and M

    J. Guillaud and M. Mirrahimi, Phys. Rev. X9, 041053 (2019)

    2019

  22. [22]

    Putterman, K

    H. Putterman, K. Noh, C. T. Hann, G. S. MacCabe, S. Aghaeimeibodi, R. N. Patel, M. Lee, W. M. Jones, H. Moradinejad, R. Rodriguez,et al., Nature638, 927 (2025)

    2025

  23. [23]

    Chamberland, K

    C. Chamberland, K. Noh, P. Arrangoiz-Arriola, E. T. Campbell, C. T. Hann, J. Iverson, H. Putterman, T. C. Bohdanowicz, S. T. Flammia, A. Keller, G. Refael, J. Preskill, L. Jiang, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, O. Painter, and F. G. Brand˜ ao, PRX Quantum3, 010329 (2022)

    2022

  24. [24]

    Khanahmadi and K

    M. Khanahmadi and K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. A107, 013705 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    Krisnanda, F

    T. Krisnanda, F. Valadares, K. T. N. Chu, P. Song, A. Copetudo, C. Y. Fontaine, L. c. v. Lachman, R. Filip, and Y. Y. Gao, Phys. Rev. Res.8, 023026 (2026)

    2026

  26. [26]

    J. D. Teoh, N. Cottet, P. Winkel, L. D. Burkhart, L. Frunzio, and R. J. Schoelkopf, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.18547 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    H. Goto, Z. Lin, T. Yamamoto, and Y. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. A99, 023838 (2019)

    2019

  28. [28]

    Mirrahimi, Z

    M. Mirrahimi, Z. Leghtas, V. V. Albert, S. Touzard, R. J. Schoelkopf, L. Jiang, and M. H. Devoret, New Journal of Physics16, 045014 (2014)

    2014

  29. [29]

    S. Puri, S. Boutin, and A. Blais, npj Quantum Informa- tion3, 18 (2017)

    2017

  30. [30]

    Grimm, N

    A. Grimm, N. E. Frattini, S. Puri, S. O. Mundhada, S. Touzard, M. Mirrahimi, S. M. Girvin, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Nature584, 205 (2020)

    2020

  31. [31]

    Z. Wang, M. Pechal, E. A. Wollack, P. Arrangoiz-Arriola, M. Gao, N. R. Lee, and A. H. Safavi-Naeini, Physical Review X9, 10.1103/physrevx.9.021049 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.021049 2019

  32. [32]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gus- tavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Applied Physics Reviews6, 10.1063/1.5089550 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5089550 2019

  33. [33]

    D. Ruiz, R. Gautier, J. Guillaud, and M. Mirrahimi, Phys. Rev. A107, 042407 (2023)

    2023

  34. [34]

    Gautier, M

    R. Gautier, M. Mirrahimi, and A. Sarlette, PRX Quan- tum4, 040316 (2023)

    2023

  35. [35]

    A Wave Function approach to dissipative processes

    Y. Castin, J. Dalibard, and K. Molmer, A wave function approach to dissipative processes (2008), arXiv:0805.4002 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  36. [36]

    A. H. Kiilerich and K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 123604 (2019)

    2019

  37. [37]

    A. H. Kiilerich and K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. A102, 023717 (2020)

    2020

  38. [38]

    Combes, J

    J. Combes, J. Kerckhoff, and M. Sarovar, Advances in Physics: X2, 784 (2017)

    2017

  39. [39]

    Kanao and H

    T. Kanao and H. Goto, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013192 (2024)

    2024

  40. [40]

    Bartolo, F

    N. Bartolo, F. Minganti, W. Casteels, and C. Ciuti, Phys. Rev. A94, 033841 (2016)

    2016

  41. [41]

    del Campo, Phys

    A. del Campo, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 100502 (2013)

    2013

  42. [42]

    V. V. Albert, S. O. Mundhada, A. Grimm, S. Touzard, M. H. Devoret, and L. Jiang, Quantum Science and Tech- nology4, 035007 (2019)

    2019

  43. [43]

    M. Yuan, Q. Xu, and L. Jiang, Phys. Rev. A106, 062422 (2022)

    2022

  44. [44]

    J. M. Gertler, S. van Geldern, S. Shirol, L. Jiang, and C. Wang, PRX Quantum4, 020319 (2023)

    2023