Loss resilience of driven-dissipative remote entanglement in chiral waveguide quantum electrodynamics

Aashish A. Clerk; Abdullah Irfan; Andrew Lingenfelter; Mingxing Yao; Wolfgang Pfaff; Xi Cao

arxiv: 2404.00142 · v1 · submitted 2024-03-29 · 🪐 quant-ph

Loss resilience of driven-dissipative remote entanglement in chiral waveguide quantum electrodynamics

Abdullah Irfan , Mingxing Yao , Andrew Lingenfelter , Xi Cao , Aashish A. Clerk , Wolfgang Pfaff This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 02:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph

keywords remote entanglementchiral waveguidedriven-dissipativeloss resiliencestorage qubitssteady statewaveguide QED

0 comments

The pith

Coupling storage qubits to driven qubits in a chiral waveguide makes remote entanglement more resilient to loss.

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

The paper investigates limits on entanglement stabilization between remote qubits in open quantum systems subject to waveguide loss. It establishes that adding a pair of storage qubits to two driven qubits allows the steady state to be adjusted so the storage qubits reach higher entanglement than the driven qubits can achieve on their own. Reducing the entanglement shared by the driven qubits trades off to make the storage-qubit entanglement decay more slowly with increasing waveguide loss. A sympathetic reader would care because loss fundamentally constrains how much remote entanglement can be maintained in driven-dissipative protocols, and the scheme offers a concrete way to push that limit in systems such as superconducting circuits.

Core claim

By coupling a pair of storage qubits to the two driven qubits, the steady state can be tailored such that the storage qubits show a degree of entanglement that is higher than what can be achieved with only two driven qubits coupled to the waveguide. By reducing the degree of entanglement of the driven qubits, the entanglement between the storage qubits becomes more resilient to waveguide loss.

What carries the argument

Coupling of storage qubits to the driven qubits, which tailors the collective steady state so that entanglement is shifted to the storage pair and its sensitivity to waveguide loss is reduced.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes an ideal chiral waveguide with unidirectional propagation and no additional loss or back-scattering introduced by the storage-qubit couplings.

What would settle it

Measure the entanglement (concurrence or fidelity) between the storage qubits while varying the waveguide loss rate and compare the decay curve to the case of only two driven qubits; if the storage qubits show no higher starting entanglement or no slower decay with loss, the resilience claim does not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2404.00142 by Aashish A. Clerk, Abdullah Irfan, Andrew Lingenfelter, Mingxing Yao, Wolfgang Pfaff, Xi Cao.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (b), and we find that except when the waveguide loss is very small (η 2 ≈ 1), the optimal parameters are J12 ≈ Ω < γ. Furthermore, note that the asymmetry of the 2 + 2 drives is relatively much smaller than the 1 + 1 drives, suggesting that effective renormalization contin0.70 0.75 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 Transmission η 2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 Concurrence 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 Transmission η 2 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.0… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. The figure shows the steady state concurrence of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Establishing limits of entanglement in open quantum systems is a problem of fundamental interest, with strong implications for applications in quantum information science. Here, we study limits of entanglement stabilization between remote qubits. We theoretically investigate the loss resilience of driven-dissipative entanglement between remote qubits coupled to a chiral waveguide. We find that by coupling a pair of storage qubits to the two driven qubits, the steady state can be tailored such that the storage qubits show a degree of entanglement that is higher than what can be achieved with only two driven qubits coupled to the waveguide. By reducing the degree of entanglement of the driven qubits, we show that the entanglement between the storage qubits becomes more resilient to waveguide loss. Our analytical and numerical results offer insights into how waveguide loss limits the degree of entanglement in this driven-dissipative system, and offers important guidance for remote entanglement stabilization in the laboratory, for example using superconducting circuits.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Adding storage qubits lets you trade some driven-qubit entanglement for higher, more loss-resilient entanglement on the storage pair, but only under the ideal chiral-waveguide assumptions that the paper does not perturb.

read the letter

The core result is that coupling storage qubits to the driven pair lets the steady state reach higher entanglement on the storage qubits than the driven pair alone can sustain, and that lowering the driven-pair entanglement makes the storage entanglement hold up better against waveguide loss. That is the concrete design move the abstract highlights, and it is new relative to the prior driven-dissipative waveguide work the authors cite. The analytical and numerical treatment of the master equation gives a clear picture of how the dissipators shape the steady state, which is useful for people trying to stabilize remote entanglement in circuit QED or similar platforms. The paper also states the practical takeaway directly: the storage-qubit route offers guidance for lab implementations. That part is straightforward and worth having on record. The soft spot is the one the stress-test note flags. The model treats the storage-qubit couplings as lossless and non-reflective inside an ideal unidirectional waveguide. No scan or perturbation against finite back-scattering or extra decay channels appears in the abstract, and the claim that resilience improves rests on that idealization. If those extra channels are present at even modest strength, the reported advantage could shrink or vanish. The authors do not quantify how small those imperfections must stay for the gain to survive. The work is self-contained and the circularity burden looks low, but the lack of robustness checks against realistic imperfections is the main limitation. This is for readers already working on driven-dissipative entanglement in waveguides or quantum networks; it will not move the broader field. It is solid enough on its own terms to deserve a serious referee who can check the derivations and ask for the missing perturbation analysis. I would send it to review rather than desk-reject.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies limits of entanglement stabilization in open quantum systems by theoretically investigating driven-dissipative remote entanglement between qubits coupled to a chiral waveguide. The central claim is that coupling a pair of storage qubits to two driven qubits allows tailoring of the steady state such that the storage qubits achieve higher entanglement than is possible with only the driven qubits, and that reducing the driven-qubit entanglement makes the storage-qubit entanglement more resilient to waveguide loss. Analytical and numerical results are presented to support these findings and to offer guidance for laboratory implementations, e.g., in superconducting circuits.

Significance. If the central claims hold under the stated model, the work provides a concrete strategy for engineering loss-resilient remote entanglement by trading off entanglement between driven and storage qubits. This is a useful conceptual advance for driven-dissipative stabilization protocols in waveguide QED. The self-contained theoretical calculation with both analytical and numerical components is a strength.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract and implied model: the headline resilience gain is obtained under the assumption of an ideal unidirectional chiral waveguide with no back-scattering or additional decoherence channels introduced by the storage-qubit coupling. No perturbation analysis, parameter scan, or quantification of how finite back-scattering amplitudes or extra decay rates on the storage qubits would alter the effective dissipators and eliminate the reported advantage is provided; this assumption is load-bearing for the central claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of the significance of our work and for the constructive comment. We respond to the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and implied model: the headline resilience gain is obtained under the assumption of an ideal unidirectional chiral waveguide with no back-scattering or additional decoherence channels introduced by the storage-qubit coupling. No perturbation analysis, parameter scan, or quantification of how finite back-scattering amplitudes or extra decay rates on the storage qubits would alter the effective dissipators and eliminate the reported advantage is provided; this assumption is load-bearing for the central claim.

Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The manuscript explicitly studies the ideal chiral limit (unidirectional propagation, no backscattering), as indicated by the title, abstract, and the master-equation derivation in Sec. II. Within this model the storage-qubit entanglement is shown to exceed the driven-qubit entanglement and to become more resilient to waveguide loss. We agree that the absence of a perturbation analysis for finite backscattering or extra storage-qubit decay constitutes a limitation for assessing robustness in realistic devices. We will therefore add a concise discussion paragraph (new text in Sec. V) that (i) states the idealization, (ii) notes that the reported advantage requires high chirality (consistent with demonstrated values >99 % in circuit QED), and (iii) qualitatively indicates how small bidirectional terms would modify the effective dissipators. This revision clarifies the regime of validity without altering the central analytical and numerical results for the ideal case. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained from master equation

full rationale

The paper derives entanglement stabilization and loss resilience analytically and numerically from the driven-dissipative master equation for an ideal chiral waveguide. No load-bearing steps reduce to fitted parameters, self-citations, or ansatzes imported from prior work by the same authors; the central claims follow directly from the stated model assumptions without tautological redefinition or renaming of known results. This is the expected outcome for a self-contained theoretical calculation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. Standard open-system assumptions are implicit but not detailed.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5702 in / 1144 out tokens · 28634 ms · 2026-05-24T02:09:30.777251+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

Entanglement of two optical emitters mediated by a terahertz channel
quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

Steady-state entanglement with concurrence above 0.9 is generated between optical emitters by optically tuning Rabi-split dressed states to couple via a THz channel and collective dissipation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

J. F. Poyatos, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum Reser- voir Engineering with Laser Cooled Trapped Ions, Phys- ical Review Letters 77, 4728 (1996)

work page 1996
[2]

L. C. G. Govia, A. Lingenfelter, and A. A. Clerk, Stabiliz- ing two-qubit entanglement by mimicking a squeezed en- vironment, Physical Review Research 4, 023010 (2022)

work page 2022
[3]

Ma, X.-k

S.-l. Ma, X.-k. Li, X.-y. Liu, J.-k. Xie, and F.-l. Li, Stabi- lizing Bell states of two separated superconducting qubits via quantum reservoir engineering, Physical Review A 99, 042336 (2019)

work page 2019
[4]

S.-l. Ma, J. Zhang, X.-k. Li, Y.-l. Ren, J.-k. Xie, M.-t. Cao, and F.-l. Li, Coupling-modulation–mediated gener- ation of stable entanglement of superconducting qubits via dissipation, Europhysics Letters 135, 63001 (2021)

work page 2021
[5]

Stannigel, P

K. Stannigel, P. Rabl, and P. Zoller, Driven-dissipative preparation of entangled states in cascaded quantum- optical networks, New Journal of Physics 14, 063014 (2012)

work page 2012
[6]

Motzoi, E

F. Motzoi, E. Halperin, X. Wang, K. B. Whaley, and S. Schirmer, Backaction-driven, robust, steady-state long-distance qubit entanglement over lossy channels, Physical Review A 94, 032313 (2016)

work page 2016
[7]

Brown, E

T. Brown, E. Doucet, D. Rist` e, G. Ribeill, K. Cicak, J. Aumentado, R. Simmonds, L. Govia, A. Kamal, and L. Ranzani, Trade off-free entanglement stabilization in a superconducting qutrit-qubit system, Nature Commu- nications 13, 3994 (2022)

work page 2022
[8]

M. J. Kastoryano, F. Reiter, and A. S. Sørensen, Dissi- pative Preparation of Entanglement in Optical Cavities, Physical Review Letters 106, 090502 (2011)

work page 2011
[9]

D. C. Cole, S. D. Erickson, G. Zarantonello, K. P. Horn, P.-Y. Hou, J. J. Wu, D. H. Slichter, F. Reiter, C. P. Koch, and D. Leibfried, Resource-Efficient Dissipative Entan- glement of Two Trapped-Ion Qubits, Physical Review Letters 128, 080502 (2022)

work page 2022
[10]

Shankar, M

S. Shankar, M. Hatridge, Z. Leghtas, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, U. Vool, S. M. Girvin, L. Frunzio, M. Mir- rahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Autonomously stabilized en- tanglement between two superconducting quantum bits, Nature 504, 419 (2013)

work page 2013
[11]

M. E. Kimchi-Schwartz, L. Martin, E. Flurin, C. Aron, M. Kulkarni, H. E. Tureci, and I. Siddiqi, Stabilizing En- tanglement via Symmetry-Selective Bath Engineering in Superconducting Qubits, Physical Review Letters 116, 240503 (2016)

work page 2016
[12]

P. S. Shah, F. Yang, C. Joshi, and M. Mirhosseini, Sta- bilizing remote entanglement via waveguide dissipation (2024), arxiv:2402.15701 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[13]

H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature 453, 1023 (2008)

work page 2008
[14]

Wehner, D

S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Quantum inter- net: A vision for the road ahead, Science 362, eaam9288 (2018)

work page 2018
[15]

Sangouard, C

N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics, Reviews of Modern Physics 83, 33 (2011)

work page 2011
[16]

Lingenfelter, M

A. Lingenfelter, M. Yao, A. Pocklington, Y.-X. Wang, A. Irfan, W. Pfaff, and A. A. Clerk, Ex- act results for a boundary-driven double spin chain and resource-efficient remote entanglement stabilization (2023), arxiv:2307.09482 [cond-mat, physics:quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[17]

C. W. Gardiner, Driving a quantum system with the out- put field from another driven quantum system, Physical Review Letters 70, 2269 (1993)

work page 1993
[18]

Combes, J

J. Combes, J. Kerckhoff, and M. Sarovar, The SLH framework for modeling quantum input-output networks, Advances in Physics: X 2, 784 (2017)

work page 2017
[19]

Pichler, T

H. Pichler, T. Ramos, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Quan- tum optics of chiral spin networks, Physical Review A 91, 042116 (2015)

work page 2015
[20]

L. D. Burkhart, J. D. Teoh, Y. Zhang, C. J. Ax- line, L. Frunzio, M. Devoret, L. Jiang, S. Girvin, and R. Schoelkopf, Error-Detected State Transfer and Entan- glement in a Superconducting Quantum Network, PRX Quantum 2, 030321 (2021)

work page 2021
[21]

Leung, Y

N. Leung, Y. Lu, S. Chakram, R. K. Naik, N. Earnest, 12 R. Ma, K. Jacobs, A. N. Cleland, and D. I. Schuster, De- terministic bidirectional communication and remote en- tanglement generation between superconducting qubits, npj Quantum Information 5, 1 (2019)

work page 2019
[22]

J. Niu, L. Zhang, Y. Liu, J. Qiu, W. Huang, J. Huang, H. Jia, J. Liu, Z. Tao, W. Wei, Y. Zhou, W. Zou, Y. Chen, X. Deng, X. Deng, C. Hu, L. Hu, J. Li, D. Tan, Y. Xu, F. Yan, T. Yan, S. Liu, Y. Zhong, A. N. Cleland, and D. Yu, Low-loss interconnects for modular supercon- ducting quantum processors, Nature Electronics 6, 235 (2023)

work page 2023
[23]

Campagne-Ibarcq, E

P. Campagne-Ibarcq, E. Zalys-Geller, A. Narla, S. Shankar, P. Reinhold, L. Burkhart, C. Axline, W. Pfaff, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. De- voret, Deterministic Remote Entanglement of Supercon- ducting Circuits through Microwave Two-Photon Tran- sitions, Physical Review Letters 120, 200501 (2018)

work page 2018
[24]

C. J. Axline, L. D. Burkhart, W. Pfaff, M. Zhang, K. Chou, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, P. Reinhold, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, On-demand quantum state transfer and en- tanglement between remote microwave cavity memories, Nature Physics 14, 705 (2018)

work page 2018
[25]

Kurpiers, P

P. Kurpiers, P. Magnard, T. Walter, B. Royer, M. Pechal, J. Heinsoo, Y. Salath´ e, A. Akin, S. Storz, J.-C. Besse, S. Gasparinetti, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Deterministic quantum state transfer and remote entanglement using microwave photons, Nature 558, 264 (2018)

work page 2018
[26]

L. B. Nguyen, Y. Kim, A. Hashim, N. Goss, B. Marinelli, B. Bhandari, D. Das, R. K. Naik, J. M. Kreike- baum, A. N. Jordan, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, Programmable Heisenberg interactions between Floquet qubits, Nature Physics 20, 240 (2024)

work page 2024
[27]

Lu, J.-L

M. Lu, J.-L. Ville, J. Cohen, A. Petrescu, S. Schrep- pler, L. Chen, C. J¨ unger, C. Pelletti, A. Marchenkov, A. Banerjee, W. P. Livingston, J. M. Kreikebaum, D. I. Santiago, A. Blais, and I. Siddiqi, Multipartite Entan- glement in Rabi-Driven Superconducting Qubits, PRX Quantum 3, 040322 (2022)

work page 2022
[28]

Sunada, S

Y. Sunada, S. Kono, J. Ilves, S. Tamate, T. Sugiyama, Y. Tabuchi, and Y. Nakamura, Fast Readout and Reset of a Superconducting Qubit Coupled to a Resonator with an Intrinsic Purcell Filter, Physical Review Applied 17, 044016 (2022)

work page 2022
[29]

Heinsoo, C

J. Heinsoo, C. K. Andersen, A. Remm, S. Krinner, T. Walter, Y. Salath´ e, S. Gasparinetti, J.-C. Besse, A. Potoˇ cnik, A. Wallraff, and C. Eichler, Rapid High- fidelity Multiplexed Readout of Superconducting Qubits, Physical Review Applied 10, 034040 (2018)

work page 2018
[30]

The two-qubit vacuum is the unique dark state of the two dissipators

It should be noted that because the collective loss dissi- pator is modified as well, the dark state condition is also broken, ˆc1|S1⟩ ̸= 0. The two-qubit vacuum is the unique dark state of the two dissipators

work page
[31]

Reiter and A

F. Reiter and A. S. Sørensen, Effective operator formal- ism for open quantum systems, Physical Review A 85, 032111 (2012)

work page 2012

[1] [1]

J. F. Poyatos, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum Reser- voir Engineering with Laser Cooled Trapped Ions, Phys- ical Review Letters 77, 4728 (1996)

work page 1996

[2] [2]

L. C. G. Govia, A. Lingenfelter, and A. A. Clerk, Stabiliz- ing two-qubit entanglement by mimicking a squeezed en- vironment, Physical Review Research 4, 023010 (2022)

work page 2022

[3] [3]

Ma, X.-k

S.-l. Ma, X.-k. Li, X.-y. Liu, J.-k. Xie, and F.-l. Li, Stabi- lizing Bell states of two separated superconducting qubits via quantum reservoir engineering, Physical Review A 99, 042336 (2019)

work page 2019

[4] [4]

S.-l. Ma, J. Zhang, X.-k. Li, Y.-l. Ren, J.-k. Xie, M.-t. Cao, and F.-l. Li, Coupling-modulation–mediated gener- ation of stable entanglement of superconducting qubits via dissipation, Europhysics Letters 135, 63001 (2021)

work page 2021

[5] [5]

Stannigel, P

K. Stannigel, P. Rabl, and P. Zoller, Driven-dissipative preparation of entangled states in cascaded quantum- optical networks, New Journal of Physics 14, 063014 (2012)

work page 2012

[6] [6]

Motzoi, E

F. Motzoi, E. Halperin, X. Wang, K. B. Whaley, and S. Schirmer, Backaction-driven, robust, steady-state long-distance qubit entanglement over lossy channels, Physical Review A 94, 032313 (2016)

work page 2016

[7] [7]

Brown, E

T. Brown, E. Doucet, D. Rist` e, G. Ribeill, K. Cicak, J. Aumentado, R. Simmonds, L. Govia, A. Kamal, and L. Ranzani, Trade off-free entanglement stabilization in a superconducting qutrit-qubit system, Nature Commu- nications 13, 3994 (2022)

work page 2022

[8] [8]

M. J. Kastoryano, F. Reiter, and A. S. Sørensen, Dissi- pative Preparation of Entanglement in Optical Cavities, Physical Review Letters 106, 090502 (2011)

work page 2011

[9] [9]

D. C. Cole, S. D. Erickson, G. Zarantonello, K. P. Horn, P.-Y. Hou, J. J. Wu, D. H. Slichter, F. Reiter, C. P. Koch, and D. Leibfried, Resource-Efficient Dissipative Entan- glement of Two Trapped-Ion Qubits, Physical Review Letters 128, 080502 (2022)

work page 2022

[10] [10]

Shankar, M

S. Shankar, M. Hatridge, Z. Leghtas, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, U. Vool, S. M. Girvin, L. Frunzio, M. Mir- rahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Autonomously stabilized en- tanglement between two superconducting quantum bits, Nature 504, 419 (2013)

work page 2013

[11] [11]

M. E. Kimchi-Schwartz, L. Martin, E. Flurin, C. Aron, M. Kulkarni, H. E. Tureci, and I. Siddiqi, Stabilizing En- tanglement via Symmetry-Selective Bath Engineering in Superconducting Qubits, Physical Review Letters 116, 240503 (2016)

work page 2016

[12] [12]

P. S. Shah, F. Yang, C. Joshi, and M. Mirhosseini, Sta- bilizing remote entanglement via waveguide dissipation (2024), arxiv:2402.15701 [quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2024

[13] [13]

H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature 453, 1023 (2008)

work page 2008

[14] [14]

Wehner, D

S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Quantum inter- net: A vision for the road ahead, Science 362, eaam9288 (2018)

work page 2018

[15] [15]

Sangouard, C

N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics, Reviews of Modern Physics 83, 33 (2011)

work page 2011

[16] [16]

Lingenfelter, M

A. Lingenfelter, M. Yao, A. Pocklington, Y.-X. Wang, A. Irfan, W. Pfaff, and A. A. Clerk, Ex- act results for a boundary-driven double spin chain and resource-efficient remote entanglement stabilization (2023), arxiv:2307.09482 [cond-mat, physics:quant-ph]

work page arXiv 2023

[17] [17]

C. W. Gardiner, Driving a quantum system with the out- put field from another driven quantum system, Physical Review Letters 70, 2269 (1993)

work page 1993

[18] [18]

Combes, J

J. Combes, J. Kerckhoff, and M. Sarovar, The SLH framework for modeling quantum input-output networks, Advances in Physics: X 2, 784 (2017)

work page 2017

[19] [19]

Pichler, T

H. Pichler, T. Ramos, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Quan- tum optics of chiral spin networks, Physical Review A 91, 042116 (2015)

work page 2015

[20] [20]

L. D. Burkhart, J. D. Teoh, Y. Zhang, C. J. Ax- line, L. Frunzio, M. Devoret, L. Jiang, S. Girvin, and R. Schoelkopf, Error-Detected State Transfer and Entan- glement in a Superconducting Quantum Network, PRX Quantum 2, 030321 (2021)

work page 2021

[21] [21]

Leung, Y

N. Leung, Y. Lu, S. Chakram, R. K. Naik, N. Earnest, 12 R. Ma, K. Jacobs, A. N. Cleland, and D. I. Schuster, De- terministic bidirectional communication and remote en- tanglement generation between superconducting qubits, npj Quantum Information 5, 1 (2019)

work page 2019

[22] [22]

J. Niu, L. Zhang, Y. Liu, J. Qiu, W. Huang, J. Huang, H. Jia, J. Liu, Z. Tao, W. Wei, Y. Zhou, W. Zou, Y. Chen, X. Deng, X. Deng, C. Hu, L. Hu, J. Li, D. Tan, Y. Xu, F. Yan, T. Yan, S. Liu, Y. Zhong, A. N. Cleland, and D. Yu, Low-loss interconnects for modular supercon- ducting quantum processors, Nature Electronics 6, 235 (2023)

work page 2023

[23] [23]

Campagne-Ibarcq, E

P. Campagne-Ibarcq, E. Zalys-Geller, A. Narla, S. Shankar, P. Reinhold, L. Burkhart, C. Axline, W. Pfaff, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. De- voret, Deterministic Remote Entanglement of Supercon- ducting Circuits through Microwave Two-Photon Tran- sitions, Physical Review Letters 120, 200501 (2018)

work page 2018

[24] [24]

C. J. Axline, L. D. Burkhart, W. Pfaff, M. Zhang, K. Chou, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, P. Reinhold, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, On-demand quantum state transfer and en- tanglement between remote microwave cavity memories, Nature Physics 14, 705 (2018)

work page 2018

[25] [25]

Kurpiers, P

P. Kurpiers, P. Magnard, T. Walter, B. Royer, M. Pechal, J. Heinsoo, Y. Salath´ e, A. Akin, S. Storz, J.-C. Besse, S. Gasparinetti, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Deterministic quantum state transfer and remote entanglement using microwave photons, Nature 558, 264 (2018)

work page 2018

[26] [26]

L. B. Nguyen, Y. Kim, A. Hashim, N. Goss, B. Marinelli, B. Bhandari, D. Das, R. K. Naik, J. M. Kreike- baum, A. N. Jordan, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, Programmable Heisenberg interactions between Floquet qubits, Nature Physics 20, 240 (2024)

work page 2024

[27] [27]

Lu, J.-L

M. Lu, J.-L. Ville, J. Cohen, A. Petrescu, S. Schrep- pler, L. Chen, C. J¨ unger, C. Pelletti, A. Marchenkov, A. Banerjee, W. P. Livingston, J. M. Kreikebaum, D. I. Santiago, A. Blais, and I. Siddiqi, Multipartite Entan- glement in Rabi-Driven Superconducting Qubits, PRX Quantum 3, 040322 (2022)

work page 2022

[28] [28]

Sunada, S

Y. Sunada, S. Kono, J. Ilves, S. Tamate, T. Sugiyama, Y. Tabuchi, and Y. Nakamura, Fast Readout and Reset of a Superconducting Qubit Coupled to a Resonator with an Intrinsic Purcell Filter, Physical Review Applied 17, 044016 (2022)

work page 2022

[29] [29]

Heinsoo, C

J. Heinsoo, C. K. Andersen, A. Remm, S. Krinner, T. Walter, Y. Salath´ e, S. Gasparinetti, J.-C. Besse, A. Potoˇ cnik, A. Wallraff, and C. Eichler, Rapid High- fidelity Multiplexed Readout of Superconducting Qubits, Physical Review Applied 10, 034040 (2018)

work page 2018

[30] [30]

The two-qubit vacuum is the unique dark state of the two dissipators

It should be noted that because the collective loss dissi- pator is modified as well, the dark state condition is also broken, ˆc1|S1⟩ ̸= 0. The two-qubit vacuum is the unique dark state of the two dissipators

work page

[31] [31]

Reiter and A

F. Reiter and A. S. Sørensen, Effective operator formal- ism for open quantum systems, Physical Review A 85, 032111 (2012)

work page 2012