Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Non-Markovian master equation for a damped driven two-state system

Quantum Physics · Submitted 24 Nov 2009

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We present a detailed microscopic derivation for a non-Markovian master equation for a driven two-state system interacting with a general structured reservoir.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID0911.4600 (version 1)
Pith IDQPV43TQ4, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationPinja Haikka. "Non-Markovian master equation for a damped driven two-state system." arXiv:0911.4600 (2009). https://pith.science/paper/QPV43TQ4
Claim paper

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

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,886 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.60 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.14 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

We present a detailed microscopic derivation for a non-Markovian master equation for a driven two-state system interacting with a general structured reservoir. The master equation is derived using the time-convolutionless projection operator technique in the limit of weak coupling between the two-state quantum system and its environment. We briefly discuss the Markov approximation, the secular approximation and their validity.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 We present a detailed microscopic derivation for a non-Markovian master equation for a driven two-state system interacting with a general structured reservoir. contribution 1.00 0.96 0.43 asserted 1.00
s1 The master equation is derived using the time-convolutionless projection operator technique in the limit of weak coupling between the two-state quantum system and its environment. method 0.99 0.95 0.15 asserted 1.00
s2 We briefly discuss the Markov approximation, the secular approximation and their validity. contribution 0.40 0.68 0.05 unclear 0.63

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

We present a detailed microscopic derivation for a non-Markovian master equation for a driven two-state system interacting with a general structured reservoir. The master equation is derived using the time-convolutionless projection operator technique in the limit of weak coupling between the two-state quantum system and its environment. We briefly discuss the Markov approximation, the secular approximation and their validity.

Human review
How the literature uses it

1 arXiv paper cite this in 4 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 2 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 1 paper
Cites it as background 1 paper

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.