Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 117 references

Thermodynamics from indistinguishability: mitigating and amplifying the effects of the bath

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that an ensemble of spins that is indistinguishable to a shared bath settles into a non-thermal steady state, which shrinks or enlarges the bath's effect on energy while always cutting entropy production by up to 1/n.

desk verdict A solid analytic generalization of the two-spin collective dissipation result, with a genuine but localized overstatement in the power-enhancement section. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.10384 v2 pith:3JEQSNJ7 submitted 2019-08-27 quant-ph

Camille L. Latune , Ilya Sinayskiy , Francesco Petruccione This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords collectivedissipationbath-inducedcoherencesindistinguishablespinstotal-spinsectorsnon-thermalsteadystateentropyproductionquantumOttocyclethermalmachinepower
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 claims that making many spins indistinguishable from the point of view of a shared bath changes the thermodynamics of their thermalization. Starting from a thermal state at inverse temperature $\beta_0$ and coupling collectively to a bath at $\beta_B$, the ensemble does not relax to the ordinary thermal state; it relaxes to a mixture of thermal states of the total-spin sectors, with weights fixed by $\beta_0$. This non-thermal steady state shields the ensemble from the bath when $\beta_0/\beta_B > -1$ and amplifies the bath's effect when $\beta_0/\beta_B < -1$, with both effects growing with spin number $n$ and spin size $s$. The entropy change, free-energy variation, and entropy production are always reduced relative to independent dissipation, by up to a factor $1/n$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the decomposition of the initial thermal state into eigenspaces of the collective angular momentum $\mathbf{J}^2$ and $J_z$. Under the collective master equation the ladder operators $J_\pm$ act only inside each total-spin sector $J$, so the sector weights $p_J(\beta_0)=Z_J(\beta_0)/Z(\beta_0)$ are conserved, while the populations inside each sector relax to a thermal distribution at the bath temperature $\beta_B$. The steady state is therefore the fixed mixture of per-sector thermal states, Eq. (16), and every such state has apparent temperature $1/\beta_B$, which is what allows it to be stationary while carrying a different energy than the ordinary thermal state.

What would settle it

Prepare an ensemble of $n$ spins collectively coupled to a thermal cavity, start it in a thermal state at inverse temperature $\beta_0$, wait until equilibration, and measure the steady-state energy and entropy; the prediction Eq. (16) is falsified if the energy equals the global thermal energy $E_{\rm th}(\beta_B)$ or if the entropy production does not drop by roughly $1/n$ relative to independent dissipation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that an ensemble of $n$ spins of size $s$, initially thermal at inverse temperature $\beta_0$ and coupled collectively to a bath at $\beta_B$, does not relax to the global thermal state $\rho_{\rm th}(\beta_B)$. Instead it approaches the weighted mixture $\rho^\infty_{\beta_0}(\beta_B)=\sum_{J=J_0}^{ns} p_J(\beta_0)\sum_i \rho^{\,\rm th}_{J,i}(\beta_B)$ of thermal states of the total-spin sectors, with the weights $p_J(\beta_0)$ fixed by the initial temperature. This steady state is thermal only when $\beta_0=\pm\beta_B$. The paper shows that the resulting steady energy lies above or below the thermal energy according to whether $\beta_0/\beta_B>-1$ (mitigation) or $\beta_0/\beta_B<-1$ (amplification), that the entropy variation is always smaller than under independent dissipation, and that the free-energy variation and entropy production are reduced by up to a factor $1/n$.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the collective Born-Markov master equation with the secular approximation describes the full dissipative dynamics until the ensemble reaches the steady state, and, in the cycle analysis, that stroke durations are the same for collective and independent dissipation so that work comparison is a power comparison.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • When the ensemble starts much colder than a hot bath, collective coupling limits the final energy to roughly $1/n$ of the thermal energy it would reach under independent dissipation.
  • Starting from an inverted population against a cold bath, the same collective effect amplifies the bath's cooling action, with final energy and entropy reduced by up to a factor $1/n$.
  • Entropy production in the dissipative stroke is cut by up to a factor $1/n$, so large indistinguishable ensembles thermalize almost reversibly from an entropic standpoint.
  • In a quantum Otto cycle whose working medium is collectively coupled to both baths, the two mitigations compound and extracted work can exceed the independent-spin value by up to $(ns+1)/(s+1)$ in the ideal limit.
  • The steady-state energy saturates as $n$ grows instead of growing linearly, reproducing the saturation of excitation number seen in cavity experiments with Rydberg atoms.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If each isochoric stroke is long enough to reach the steady state but short compared with inhomogeneity timescales, the Otto-cycle power gain here should stack with the known collective equilibration speed-up; that combination is not analyzed in the paper.
  • The local spin temperature $\beta_{\rm Loc}\simeq \beta_B/n$ in the large-$|\beta_B|$ limit means a single spin inside the ensemble reads as much colder than the bath; measuring that local temperature would give a direct, spin-resolved test of the mitigation effect.
  • Because the sector weights $p_J(\beta_0)$ are conserved, the initial temperature acts as a resource that the bath cannot erase; this hints at a catalytic interpretation of bath-induced coherences, but the paper does not develop that resource-theoretic framing.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper considers n non-interacting spins of size s, initially in a thermal state at inverse temperature β0, interacting collectively with a bath at inverse temperature βB through a Dicke-type coupling. Using a secular Born-Markov master equation, the authors show that the steady state is a convex combination of thermal states in each total-spin sector, Eq. (16), which is generally non-thermal. They compare this steady state with the thermal state reached under independent dissipation and prove, for arbitrary n and s, inequalities governing the energy difference (mitigation for β0/βB > -1 and amplification for β0/βB < -1), a strict reduction in absolute entropy change, and a reduction in the free-energy variation and entropy production. The final part designs a quantum Otto cycle with collectively coupled baths and claims that the work extracted per cycle, and hence the power, can be enhanced by a factor up to (ns+1)/(s+1). Detailed analytical arguments are relegated to Appendices C-K.

Significance. The main steady-state results are a nontrivial generalization of the two-qubit results of [6] and are derived with unusual care: the appendices contain explicit proofs of the derivative signs, the free-energy inequality, and the stability analysis under weak perturbations. If accepted, the mitigation/amplification effects and the entropy-production reduction would have broad consequences for collective thermal machines, quantum batteries, and state protection, and the paper connects the saturation effect to a concrete cavity-QED experiment. The central weakness is the translation of the work-per-cycle calculation into a power-enhancement claim: Section VIII A models no stroke duration, while the collective dissipator relaxes different total-J sectors at very different rates, so the claimed power factor is not established.

major comments (2)
  1. [VIII A, Eqs. (49)-(52)] The paper's central application claim of 'large power enhancements' rests on Eqs. (49) and (50), which compare work extracted per cycle, not power. The text immediately after Eq. (49) equates 'work extracted per cycle, determining the power of the engine' with -W_coh, and Eq. (52) is quoted in the conclusion as a power-enhancement factor. Since the duration of an Otto cycle is not modeled, this is a work ratio. A work advantage per cycle can shrink or reverse when divided by the actual cycle time if the collective engine's strokes are not equally fast. To substantiate the power claim, the authors need either to state that identical stroke durations are assumed and justify that assumption, or to provide a finite-time model.
  2. [VIII A and Eq. (16)] The cycle analysis assumes the working medium reaches the steady state ρ∞β0(βB) of Eq. (16) at the end of each isochoric stroke. However, the collective dissipator (1) relaxes different total-J sectors at rates proportional to Γ(ω)(J∓m)(J±m+1) (see Eq. (A.1)), so low-J sectors can be orders of magnitude slower than the bright J=ns sector. For moderate |β0|, the initial thermal state has substantial weight in low-J sectors (the multiplicities lJ can be large, as in Eq. (21)), so a fixed stroke duration may not be sufficient to reach (16). A work advantage computed from the full steady states (49) is therefore not guaranteed to survive in a finite-time cycle; the authors' remark that equilibration speed-up is not included does not resolve this, because a fair power comparison requires modeling the time to reach the steady state under both collective and independent dissipation.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A, Eq. (A.2)] The expression e^{−ℏ(J+m)ℏωβB} contains an extra ℏ in the exponent and should read e^{−(J+m)ℏωβB}; the surrounding equalities show the intended relation.
  2. [V C] The comparison with the experiment in Ref. [70] is qualitative; please state explicitly that the model assumes a thermal initial state at β0 and that the agreement is a tendency, not a quantitative verification.
  3. [Abstract and Concluding Remarks] In light of the power-versus-work issue in Section VIII A, please rephrase the abstract and the final paragraph so that 'power enhancement' is not claimed without a finite-time model; the derived quantity is a work-per-cycle ratio.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the steady-state thermodynamics is derived from the collective master equation, and the authors' self-citations are interpretive rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. The paper starts from the collective master equation (1) and uses the invariance of total-J eigenspaces (Sec. III) plus the per-sector steady solution of Appendix A to obtain Eq. (9). Combining this with the decomposition of an initial thermal state, Eq. (15), yields the central steady state Eq. (16). Energy, entropy, free-energy variation, and entropy production are then computed by direct algebra in Secs. V-VII and appendices C-F, with no fitted parameters and no external uniqueness theorem. The self-citations to the authors' earlier work ([6], [64]) are used for motivation, for the apparent-temperature interpretation in Appendix H, and for intuition about the local-state non-thermality; none of these citations enters the derivation of Eqs. (16)-(46). The work-per-cycle enhancement in Sec. VIII A is a genuine work comparison obtained from the derived energies, and the paper explicitly acknowledges that it did not model equilibration speed-up; the subsequent 'power enhancement' wording is a modeling extrapolation rather than a circular step. No prediction is equivalent by construction to its input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

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

No free parameters are fitted to data; all quantities are physical inputs (n, s, ω, β0, βB) or derived from them (pJ(β0) from the initial thermal state). No new physical entities are introduced; bath-induced coherences are an existing phenomenon studied in prior work.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Born, Markov, and secular approximations apply to the collective dissipative dynamics.
    Specified in Section II before Eq. (1); required for the Lindblad form of the master equation.
  • domain assumption The bath cannot distinguish the n spins, so the interaction is collective (V = g J_x O_B).
    Central modeling assumption; defines the problem and is required for the decomposition into total-spin sectors.
  • domain assumption The initial state of the ensemble is a thermal state at inverse temperature β0 with no coherences between different total-spin sectors.
    Section IV; needed for the steady state form (16). The authors argue in Appendix B that the result extends to a broader class of initial states, but do not prove it fully.
  • domain assumption Baths can have negative (or apparent negative) temperatures.
    Introduced after Eq. (2); needed for the amplification regime β0/βB < -1 and for negative-temperature baths in thermal machines.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Thermodynamics from indistinguishability: mitigating and amplifying the effects of the bath." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3JEQSNJ7

@misc{pith2026190810384,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Thermodynamics from indistinguishability: mitigating and amplifying the effects of the bath},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3JEQSNJ7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.10384}
}
read the original abstract

Rich quantum effects emerge when several quantum systems are indistinguishable from the point of view of the bath they interact with. In particular, delocalised excitations corresponding to coherent superposition of excited states appear and change drastically the dynamics and steady state of the systems. Such phenomena, which are central mechanisms of superradiance, present interesting properties for thermodynamics and potentially other quantum technologies. Indeed, a recent paper [Phys. Rev. A 99, 052105 (2019)] studies these properties in a pair of indistinguishable two-level systems and points out surprising effects of mitigation and amplification of the bath's action on the energy and entropy of the pair. Here, we generalise the study to ensembles of arbitrary number of spins of arbitrary size (i.e. dimension). We confirm that the previously uncovered mitigation and amplification effects remain, but also that they become more and more pronounced with growing number of spins and growing spin size. Moreover, we find that the free energy variation and the entropy production associated with the bath-driven dissipation are systematically reduced, formalising the idea of mitigation of the bath's action. Most remarkably, the combination of mitigation effects from two baths at different temperatures can result in amplifying their action. This is illustrated with cyclic thermal machines, and leads to large power enhancements. The reduction of irreversibility is also an interesting aspect since irreversibility is known to limit the performance of thermodynamic tasks. The above findings might also lead to interesting applications in collective work extraction, quantum battery charging, state protection, light harvesting devices, quantum biology, but also for the study of entropy production. Moreover, some experimental realisations and observations suggest that such effects are within reach.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.10384 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Illustration of the general behaviour of the steady [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) Plots of the ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: presents the graphs of S+(βB) and S th(βB) as a function of ~ωβB for ensembles of n = 4 spins of size s = 1/2, s = 3/2, and s = 9/2 ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Plots of the ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Plots of the entropy production per spin Σ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Plots of (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Plots of the entropy difference [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [6]

    Thus, it is not obvious whether such phenomena have a classical analogue (see also discussion in the next Sec- tion VIII B)

    for a pair of two-level systems and extended in Ap- pendixes H, I, and J for ensemble of n spins of size s. Thus, it is not obvious whether such phenomena have a classical analogue (see also discussion in the next Sec- tion VIII B). By contrast, the result from [13] stems from superradiance, which is a dynamical effect. Moreover, classical analogues of sup...

  2. [1]

    effective amplifica- tion

    In other words the steady state ρ∞ β0(βB) is mostly made of the eigenstates {|J = ns,m⟩}−ns≤m≤ns, which are Dicke states [1, 2] (totally symmetric states). Such states contains only positive global coherences, or correlations. As shown in [64], positive correlations increase the apparent temperature of ensembles when the underlying diagonal state (in the ...

  3. [2]

    Gross and S

    M. Gross and S. Haroche, Superradiance: An essay on the theory of collective spontaneous emission , Physics Reports (Review Section of Physics Letters) 93, 301- 396 (1982)

    1982

  4. [3]

    In the present situation however such direct relation is much more complex to exhibit

    it was possible to explicitly relates the steady state energy to the amount of bath-induced coherences in the local basis. In the present situation however such direct relation is much more complex to exhibit. Nevertheless, one can still pinpoint bath-induced coherences (between states of the local basis) as responsible for the dramatic alteration of the ...

  5. [4]

    Benatti, R

    F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and U. Marzolino, Entangling two unequal atoms through a common bath , Phys. Rev. A 81, 012105 (2010)

    2010

  6. [5]

    Dicke, Coherence in Spontaneous Radiation Pro- cesses, Phys

    RH. Dicke, Coherence in Spontaneous Radiation Pro- cesses, Phys. Rev. 93, 99 (1954)

    1954

  7. [7]

    Benatti, R

    F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and M. Piani, Environment Induced Entanglement in Markovian Dissipative Dy- namics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 070402 (2003)

    2003

  8. [8]

    M. O. Scully, K. R. Chapin, K. E. Dorfman, M. B. Kim, and A. Svidzinsky, Quantum heat engine power can be increased by noise-induced coherence, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108, 15097 (2011)

    2011

Show all 117 references
  1. [9]

    M. H. M. Passos, W. F. Balthazar, A. Z. Khoury, M. Hor-Meyll, L. Davidovich, and J. A. O. Huguenin, Ex- perimental investigation of environment-induced entan- glement using an all-optical setup , Phys. Rev. A 97, 022321 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    C. L. Latune, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione,Energetic and entropic effects of bath-induced coherences , Phys. Rev. A 99, 052105 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    H. Wang, S. Liu, and J. He, Thermal entanglement in two-atom cavity QED and the entangled quantum Otto engine, Phys. Rev. E 79, 041113 (2009)

    2009

  4. [12]

    C ¸ akmak, A

    B. C ¸ akmak, A. Manatuly, and ¨O. E. M¨ ustecaplıoˇ glu, Thermal production, protection, and heat exchange of quantum coherences, Phys. Rev. A 96, 032117 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    working fluid

    D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, W. Niedenzu, P. Brumer, and G. Kurizki, Power enhancement of heat engines via cor- related thermalization in a three-level “working fluid” , Sci. Rep. 5:14413 (2015)

    2015

  6. [14]

    Uzdin, Coherence-Induced Reversibility and Collec- tive Operation of Quantum Heat Machines via Coher- ence Recycling, Phys

    R. Uzdin, Coherence-Induced Reversibility and Collec- tive Operation of Quantum Heat Machines via Coher- ence Recycling, Phys. Rev. Applied 6, 024004 (2016)

    2016

  7. [15]

    Mehta and R

    V. Mehta and R. S. Johal, Quantum Otto engine with exchange coupling in the presence of level degeneracy , Phys. Rev. E 96, 032110 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Watanabe, B.P

    G. Watanabe, B.P. Venkatesh, P. Talkner, M.-J. Hwang, and A. del Campo, Quantum Statistical Enhancement of the Collective Performance of Multiple Bosonic En- gines, arXiv:1904.07811

    1904 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Niedenzu and G

    W. Niedenzu and G. Kurizki, Cooperative many-body enhancement of quantum thermal machine power , New J. Phys. 20, 113038 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Holubec and T

    V. Holubec and T. Novotn´ y,Effects of noise-induced co- herence on the performance of quantum absorption re- frigerators, J. Low Temp. Phys. 192, 147-198 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    Hewgill, A

    A. Hewgill, A. Ferraro, and G. De Chiara, Quantum correlations and thermodynamic performances of two- qubit engines with local and common baths , Phys. Rev. A 98, 042102 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    K. E. Dorfman, D. V. Voronine, S. Mukamel, and M. O. Scully, Photosynthetic reaction center as a quantum heat engine, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 27462751 (2013)

    2013

  13. [21]

    M. O. Scully, Quantum Photocell: Using Quantum Co- herence to Reduce Radiative Recombination and In- crease Efficiency, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 207701 (2010)

    2010

  14. [22]

    A. A. Svidzinsky, K. E. Dorfman, M. O. Scully, En- hancing photovoltaic power by Fano-induced coherence , Phys. Rev. A 84, 053818 (2011)

    2011

  15. [23]

    A. A. Svidzinsky, K. E. Dorfman, M. O. Scully, Enhanc- ing photocell power by noise-induced coherence , Coher- ent Optical Phenomena 1, 7-14 (2012)

    2012

  16. [24]

    D. Xu, C. Wang, Y. Zhao and J. Cao, Polaron effects on the performance of light-harvesting systems: a quantum heat engine perspective, New J. Phys.18, 023003 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    Creatore, M

    C. Creatore, M. A. Parker, S. Emmott, and A.W. Chin, Efficient Biologically Inspired Photocell Enhanced 25 by Delocalized Quantum States , Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 253601 (2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    Romero, R

    E. Romero, R. Augulis, V. I. Novoderezhkin, M. Fer- retti, J. Thieme, D. Zigmantas and R. van Grondelle, Quantum coherence in photosynthesis for efficient solar- energy conversion, Nature Phys. 10, 676-682 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Killoran, S

    N. Killoran, S. F. Huelga, and M. Plenio, Enhancing light-harvesting power with coherent vibrational interac- tions: A quantum heat engine picture , Journal of Chem- ical Physics 143, 155102 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    W. M. Brown and E. M. Gauger, Light-harvesting with guide-slide superabsorbing condensed-matter nanostruc- tures, arXiv:1803.08036

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Su, C.-P

    S.-H. Su, C.-P. Sun, S.-W. Li, J.-C. Chen, Photoelectric converters with quantum coherence , Phys. Rev. E 93, 052103 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    Chen, P.-Y

    H.-B. Chen, P.-Y. Chiu, and Y.-N. Chen, , Vibration- induced coherence enhancement of the performance of a biological quantum heat engine, Phys. Rev. E94, 052101 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Romero, V

    E. Romero, V. I. Novoderezhkin and R. van Grondelle, Quantum design of photosynthesis for bio-inspired solar- energy conversion, Nature 543, 355-365 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    M. H. Lee, and A. Troisi, Vibronic enhancement of ex- citation energy transport: Interplay between local and non-local exciton-phonon interactions , J. Chem. Phys. 146, 075101 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    Rebentrost, M

    P. Rebentrost, M. Mohseni, I. Kassal, S. Lloyd and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Environment-assisted quantum trans- port, New J. Phys. 11, 033003 (2009)

    2009

  26. [34]

    Ishizaki, and G

    A. Ishizaki, and G. R. Fleming, Unified treatment of quantum coherent and incoherent hopping dynamics in electronic energy transfer: Reduced hierarchy equation approach , J. Chem. Phys. 130, 234111 (2009)

    2009

  27. [35]

    Lloyd, Journal of Physics: Conference Series Quan- tum coherence in biological systems, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 302, 012037 (2011)

    S. Lloyd, Journal of Physics: Conference Series Quan- tum coherence in biological systems, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 302, 012037 (2011)

    2011

  28. [36]

    S. F. Huelga and M. B. Plenio, Vibrations, quanta and biology, Contemporary Physics, 54, 181207 (2013)

    2013

  29. [37]

    C. L. Latune, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione, Heat flow reversals without reversing the arrow of time: The role of internal quantum coherences and correlations , Phys. Rev. Research 1, 033097 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Collini, C

    E. Collini, C. Y. Wong, K. E. Wilk, P. M. G. Curmi, P. Brumer, and G. D. Scholes, Coherently wired light- harvesting in photosynthetic marine algae at ambient temperature, Nature 463, 644-648 (2010)

    2010

  31. [39]

    Lambert, Y.-N

    N. Lambert, Y.-N. Chen, Y.-C. Cheng, C.-M. Li, G.- Y. Chen and F. Nori, Quantum Biology, Nat. Phys. 9, 10-18 (2013)

    2013

  32. [40]

    Brandner, M

    K. Brandner, M. Bauer, and U. Seifert, Universal Coherence-Induced Power Losses of Quantum Heat En- gines in Linear Response, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 170602 (2017)

    2017

  33. [41]

    A.W. Chin J. Prior, R. Rosenbach, F. Caycedo-Soler, S. F. Huelga and M. B. Plenio, The role of non-equilibrium vibrational structures in electronic coherence and reco- herence in pigmentprotein complexes , Nature Phys. 9, 113-118 (2013)

    2013

  34. [42]

    Krisnanda, C

    T. Krisnanda, C. Marletto, V. Vedral, M. Paternostro, and T. Paterek, Probing quantum features of photosyn- thetic organisms, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 60 (2018)

    2018

  35. [43]

    Juli` a-Farr´ e, T

    S. Juli` a-Farr´ e, T. Salamon, A. Riera, M. N. Bera, and M. Lewenstein, Bounds on Capacity and Power of Quantum Batteries, arXiv:1811.04005

    arXiv

  36. [44]

    G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, M. Campisi, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Extractable Work, the Role of Correlations, and Asymptotic Freedom in Quantum Batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 047702 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Uzdin, A

    R. Uzdin, A. Levy, and R. Kosloff, Equivalence of Quan- tum Heat Machines, and Quantum-Thermodynamic Signatures, Phys. Rev. X 5, 031044 (2015)

    2015

  38. [46]

    G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Quantum versus classical many-body batter- ies, Phys. Rev. B 99, 205437 (2019)

    2019

  39. [47]

    J. O. Gonz´ alez, J. P. Palao, D. Alonso, and L. A. Cor- rea, Classical simulation of quantum-coherent thermal machines, Phys. Rev. E 99, 062102 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Herbert Spohn, J. Math. Phys. 19, 1227 (1978)

    1978

  41. [49]

    K. V. Hovhannisyan, M. Perarnau-Llobet, M. Huber, and A. Ac´ ın,Entanglement Generation is Not Neces- sary for Optimal Work Extraction , Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 240401 (2013)

    2013

  42. [50]

    Kilgour and D

    M. Kilgour and D. Segal, Coherence and decoherence in quantum absorption refrigerators , Phys. Rev. E 98, 012117 (2018)

    2018

  43. [51]

    M. P. M¨ uller, Correlating Thermal Machines and the Second Law at the Nanoscale , Phys. Rev. X 8, 041051 (2018)

    2018

  44. [52]

    J. M. R. Parrondo, C. Van den Broeck and R. Kawai, Entropy production and the arrow of time, New J. Phys. 11, 073008 (2009)

    2009

  45. [53]

    Spohn and J

    H. Spohn and J. L. Lebowitz, Adv. Chem. Phys 38, 109 (1978)

    1978

  46. [54]

    Alicki, J

    R. Alicki, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 12, (1979)

    1979

  47. [55]

    F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, J. M. Renes, and R. W. Spekkens, Resource Theory of Quantum States Out of Thermal Equilibrium , Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 250404 (2013)

    2013

  48. [56]

    J. P. Santos, L. C. C´ eleri, G. T. Landi and M. Paternos- tro, The role of quantum coherence in non-equilibrium entropy production , npj Quantum Information 5:23 (2019)

    2019

  49. [57]

    Deffner and E

    S. Deffner and E. Lutz, Nonequilibrium Entropy Pro- duction for Open Quantum Systems , Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 140404 (2011)

    2011

  50. [58]

    J. P. Santos, G. T. Landi, and M. Paternostro, Wigner Entropy Production Rate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 220601 (2017)

    2017

  51. [59]

    Brunelli, L

    M. Brunelli, L. Fusco, R. Landig, W. Wieczorek, J. Hoelscher-Obermaier, G. Landi, F. L. Semi˜ ao, A. Fer- raro, N. Kiesel, T. Donner, G. De Chiara, and M. Pa- ternostro, Experimental Determination of Irreversible Entropy Production in out-of-Equilibrium Mesoscopic Quantum Syst...

    2018

  52. [60]

    Pietzonka and U

    P. Pietzonka and U. Seifert, Universal Trade-Off be- 26 tween Power, Efficiency, and Constancy in Steady-State Heat Engines, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 190602 (2018)

    2018

  53. [61]

    A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic Uncer- tainty Relation for Biomolecular Processes , Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 158101 (2015)

    2015

  54. [62]

    T. R. Gingrich, J. M. Horowitz, N. Perunov, and J. L. England, Dissipation Bounds All Steady-State Current Fluctuations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 120601 (2016)

    2016

  55. [63]

    Pietzonka, A

    P. Pietzonka, A. C. Barato, and U. Seifert, Universal bounds on current fluctuations, Phys. Rev. E93, 052145 (2016)

    2016

  56. [64]

    C. L. Latune, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione, Apparent temperature: demystifying the relation between quantum coherence, correlations, and heat flows , Quantum Sci. Technol. 4, 025005 (2019)

    2019

  57. [65]

    Guarnieri, G

    G. Guarnieri, G. T. Landi, S. R. Clark, and J. Goold, Thermodynamics of precision in quantum non equilib- rium steady states , arXiv:1901.10428

    1901 arXiv

  58. [66]

    A. M. Timpanaro, G. Guarnieri, J. Goold, and G. T. Landi, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations from ex- change fluctuation theorems, arXiv:1904.07574

    1904 arXiv

  59. [67]

    S. Su, W. Shen, J. Du, and J. Chen, Thermody- namic coupling rule for far-from-equilibrium systems , arXiv:1904.04113

    1904 arXiv

  60. [68]

    C. J. Wood and D. G. Cory, Cavity cooling to the ground state of an ensemble quantum system , Phys. Rev. A 93, 023414 (2016)

    2016

  61. [69]

    Aberg, Catalytic Coherence, Phys

    J. Aberg, Catalytic Coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 150402 (2014)

    2014

  62. [70]

    Ghosh, C

    A. Ghosh, C. L. Latune, L. Davidovich, and G. Kurizki, Catalysis of heat-to-work conversion in quantum ma- chines, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114, 1215612161 (2017)

    2017

  63. [71]

    C. J. Wood, T. W. Borneman, and D. G. Cory, Cavity Cooling of an Ensemble Spin System , Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 050501 (2014)

    2014

  64. [72]

    Barberena, R

    D. Barberena, R. J. Lewis-Swan, J. K. Thompson, and A. Maria Rey, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053411 (2019)

    2019

  65. [73]

    Y. Hama, W. J. Munro, and K. Nemoto, Relaxation to Negative Temperatures in Double Domain Systems , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 060403 (2018)

    2018

  66. [74]

    J. M. Raimond, P. Goy, M. Gross, C. Fabre, and S. Haroche, Collective Absorption of Blackbody Radiation by Rydberg Atoms in a Cavity: An Experiment on Bose Statistics and Brownian Motion , Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 117 (1982)

    1982

  67. [75]

    R. G. DeVoe and R. G. Brewer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 2049 (1996)

    1996

  68. [76]

    Alicki and D

    R. Alicki and D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, Non-equilibrium quantum heat machines , New J. Phys. 17, 115012 (2015)

    2015

  69. [77]

    Breuer and F

    H. Breuer and F. Petruccione, Theory of Open Quantum Systems, (Oxford, Oxford, 2002)

    2002

  70. [78]

    Cohen-Tannoudji, J

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Roc, and G. Grynberg, Processus d’interaction entre photons et atomes , (EDP Science/CNRS ´Editions, Paris, 2001)

    2001

  71. [79]

    Alicki, Comment on ”Nanoscale Heat Engine Beyond the Carnot Limit” , arXiv:1401.7865

    R. Alicki, Comment on ”Nanoscale Heat Engine Beyond the Carnot Limit” , arXiv:1401.7865

    arXiv

  72. [80]

    C. L. Latune, I. Sinayskiy, F. Petruccione, Quantum coherence, many-body correlations, and non-thermal ef- fects for autonomous thermal machines , Scientific Re- ports 9:3191 (2018)

    2018

  73. [81]

    R. J. de Assis, T. M. de Mendona, C. J. Villas-Boas, A. M. de Souza, R. S. Sarthour, I. S. Oliveira, N. G. de Almeida, Efficiency of a quantum Otto heat engine operating under a reservoir at effective negative temper- atures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 240602 (2019)

    2019

  74. [82]

    Kosloff, Quantum thermodynamics and open-systems modeling, J

    R. Kosloff, Quantum thermodynamics and open-systems modeling, J. Chem. Phys. 150, 204105 (2019)

    2019

  75. [83]

    Brunner, N

    N. Brunner, N. Linden, S. Popescu, and P. Skrzypczyk, Virtual qubits, virtual temperatures, and the foundations of thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. E 85, 051117 (2012)

    2012

  76. [84]

    Lu and O

    Z. Lu and O. Raz, Nonequilibrium thermodynamics of the Markovian Mpemba effect and its inverse , Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 114, 5083 (2017)

    2017

  77. [85]

    J. J. Sakurai, Modern Quantum Mechanics (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA, 1993)

    1993

  78. [86]

    E. B. Mpemba and D. G. Osborne, Cool?, Phys. Educ. 4, 172 (1969)

    1969

  79. [87]

    Lasanta, F

    A. Lasanta, F. Vega Reyes, A. Prados, and A. Santos, When the Hotter Cools More Quickly: Mpemba Effect in Granular Fluids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 148001 (2017)

    2017

  80. [88]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. A. Pollock, F. C. Binder, L. C´ eleri, J. Goold, S. Vinjanampathy, and K. Modi, ] Enhancing the Charging Power of Quantum Batteries , Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 150601 (2017)

    2017

  81. [89]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (10th Anniversary Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    2010

  82. [90]

    T. B. Batalh˜ ao, S. Gherardini, J. P. Santos, G. T. Landi, and M. Paternostro, Characterizing irreversibil- ity in open quantum systems , arXiv:1806.08441

    arXiv

  83. [91]

    Strasberg and M

    P. Strasberg and M. Esposito, Non-Markovianity and negative entropy production rates , Phys. Rev. E 99, 012120 (2019)

    2019

  84. [92]

    Alvarado Barrios, F

    G. Alvarado Barrios, F. Albarr´ an-Arriagada, F. A. C´ ardenas-L´ opez, G. Romero, and J. C. Retamal,Role of quantum correlations in light-matter quantum heat engines, Phys. Rev. A 96, 052119 (2017)

    2017

  85. [93]

    Ferraro, M

    D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V. Pelle- grini, and M. Polini, High-Power Collective Charging of a Solid-State Quantum Battery , Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 117702 (2018)

    2018

  86. [94]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. A. Pollock, and S. Vinjanam- pathy, Quantum Batteries - Review Chapter , arXiv:1805.05507

    arXiv

  87. [95]

    Altintas, A

    F. Altintas, A. ¨U. C. Hardal, and ¨O. E. M¨ ustecaplıoˇ glu, Quantum correlated heat engine with spin squeezing , Phys. Rev. E 90, 032102 (2014)

    2014

  88. [96]

    Plastina, A

    F. Plastina, A. Alecce, T. J. G. Apollaro, G. Falcone, G. Francica, F. Galve, N. Lo Gullo, and R. Zambrini, Irreversible Work and Inner Friction in Quantum Ther- modynamic Processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 260601 (2014)

    2014

  89. [97]

    A. ¨U. C. Hardal, M. Paternostro, and ¨O. E. M¨ ustecaplıoˇ glu,Phase-space interference in extensive and nonextensive quantum heat engines , Phys. Rev. E 97, 042127 (2018)

    2018

  90. [98]

    Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, W

    D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, W. Kopylov, and G. Schaller, Cooperative efficiency boost for quantum heat engines , Phys. Rev. A 99, 022129 (2019)

    2019

  91. [99]

    Feldmann and R

    T. Feldmann and R. Kosloff, Quantum lubrication: Sup- pression of friction in a first-principles four-stroke heat engine, Phys. Rev. E 73, 025107 (2006)

    2006

  92. [100]

    Jaramillo, M

    J. Jaramillo, M. Beau, and A. del Campo. Quantum supremacy of many-particle thermal machines , New J. Phys. 18, 075019 (2016). 27

    2016

  93. [101]

    Holubec and A

    V. Holubec and A. Ryabov, Cycling Tames Power Fluc- tuations near Optimum Efficiency , Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 120601 (2018)

    2018

  94. [102]

    M. O. Scully, Quantum Afterburner: Improving the Ef- ficiency of an Ideal Heat Engine , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 050602 (2002)

    2002

  95. [103]

    H. T. Quan, Y.-x. Liu, C. P. Sun, and F. Nori, Quantum thermodynamic cycles and quantum heat engines , Phys. Rev. E 76, 031105 (2007)

    2007

  96. [104]

    M. Kloc, P. Cejnar, and G. Schaller, Collective performance of a finite-time quantum Otto cycle , arXiv:1905.08692

    1905 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Campisi, R

    M. Campisi, R. Fazio, The power of a critical heat en- gine, Nature Comm. 7:11895 (2016)

    2016

  98. [106]

    Holubec, and A

    V. Holubec, and A. Ryabov, Work and power fluctua- tions in a critical heat engine , Phys. Rev. E 96, 030102 (2017)

    2017

  99. [107]

    Ma, S.-H

    Y.-H. Ma, S.-H. Su, and C.-P. Sun, Quantum thermody- namic cycle with quantum phase transition , Phys. Rev. E 96, 022143 (2017)

    2017

  100. [108]

    C. Sun, V. Y. Chernyak, A. Piryatinski, N. A. Sinitsyn, Cooperative Light Emission in the Presence of Strong Inhomogeneous Broadening, arXiv:1906.11412

    1906 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Altintas, A

    F. Altintas, A. ¨U. C. Hardal, and ¨O. E. M¨ ustecaplıoˇ glu, Rabi model as a quantum coherent heat engine: From quantum biology to superconducting circuits, Phys. Rev. A 91, 023816 (2015)

    2015

  102. [110]

    main system

    and recent extensions [111]. Furthermore, we also showed that the mitigation of the bath effects becomes stronger when the number of spins increases. Then, an other interesting application can be to maintain a spin ensemble (much) colder than the bath, essential in many fields l...

  103. [111]

    N. E. Nefedkin, E. S. Andrianov, A. A. Zyablovsky, A. A. Pukhov, A. V. Dorofeenko, A. P. Vinogradov, and A. A. Lisyansky, Superradiance of a subwavelength array of classical nonlinear emitters, Opt. Express 24, 3464-3478 (2016)

    2016

  104. [112]

    Tsyplyatyev and D

    O. Tsyplyatyev and D. Loss, Dynamics of the inhomo- geneous Dicke model for a single-boson mode coupled to a bath of nonidentical spin-1/2 systems , Phys. Rev. A 80, 023803 (2009)

    2009

  105. [113]

    Coffey, and R

    B. Coffey, and R. Friedberg, Effect of short-range Coulomb interaction on cooperative spontaneous emis- sion, Phys. Rev. A 17, 1033 (1977)

    1977

  106. [114]

    P. O. Boykin, T. Mor, V. Roychowdhury, F. Vatan, and R. Vrijen, Algorithmic cooling and scalable nmr quantum computers, Proc. Ntl Ac. Sci., 99(6):33883393 (2002)

    2002

  107. [115]

    ´A. M. Alhambra, M. Lostaglio, and C. Perry, Heat-Bath Algorithmic Cooling with optimal thermalization strate- gies, Quantum 3, 188 (2019)

    2019

  108. [116]

    Merkli, H

    M. Merkli, H. Song, and G. P. Berman, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48, 275304 (2015)

    2015

  109. [117]

    R. P. Feynman, An Operator Calculus Having Applica- tions in Quantum Electrodynamics , Phys. Rev. 84, 108 (1951)

    1951

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.