RECORD
Noise in Bose Josephson junctions: Decoherence and phase relaxation
Quantum Physics · Submitted 3 Nov 2009
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim Furthermore, we predict that such a noise induces an anomalous rate of decoherence among the components of the macroscopic superpositions, which is independent of the total number of atoms, leading to potential interferometric applications.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Squeezed states and macroscopic superpositions of coherent states have been predicted to be generated dynamically in Bose Josephson junctions. We solve exactly the quantum dynamics of such a junction in the presence of a classical noise coupled to the population-imbalance number operator (phase noise), accounting for, for example, the experimentally relevant fluctuations of the magnetic field. We calculate the correction to the decay of the visibility induced by the noise in the non-Markovian regime. Furthermore, we predict that such a noise induces an anomalous rate of decoherence among the components of the macroscopic superpositions, which is independent of the total number of atoms, leading to potential interferometric applications.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Squeezed states and macroscopic superpositions of coherent states have been predicted to be generated dynamically in Bose Josephson junctions. | background 1.00 | 0.04 | 0.04 | hedged possibility 0.60 |
| s1 | We solve exactly the quantum dynamics of such a junction in the presence of a classical noise coupled to the population-imbalance number operator (phase noise), accounting for, for example, the experimentally relevant fluctuations of the magnetic field. | method 0.74 | 0.96 | 0.08 | asserted 1.00 |
| s2 | We calculate the correction to the decay of the visibility induced by the noise in the non-Markovian regime. | result 0.55 | 0.95 | 0.11 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | Furthermore, we predict that such a noise induces an anomalous rate of decoherence among the components of the macroscopic superpositions, which is independent of the total number of atoms, leading to potential interferometric applications. | result 0.89 | 0.90 | 0.67 | asserted 0.61 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Squeezed states and macroscopic superpositions of coherent states have been predicted to be generated dynamically in Bose Josephson junctions. We solve exactly the quantum dynamics of such a junction in the presence of a classical noise coupled to the population-imbalance number operator (phase noise), accounting for, for example, the experimentally relevant fluctuations of the magnetic field. We calculate the correction to the decay of the visibility induced by the noise in the non-Markovian regime. Furthermore, we predict that such a noise induces an anomalous rate of decoherence among the components of the macroscopic superpositions, which is independent of the total number of atoms, leading to potential interferometric applications.
Human review
How the literature uses it
1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence
What it cites · 2 sentences without a confident label
Uses the method or tool of 1 paper
-
We quantify this entanglement by computing the quantum Fisher information [ref] and estimate the gain in phase sensitivity with respect to separable states.
Not all pure entangled states are useful for sub shot-noise interferometry · I. Introduction · 0.97
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.