Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 1 minor 1 cited by

Acceleration Noise Induced Decoherence in Stern-Gerlach Interferometers for Gravity Experiments

T0 review · 1 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-05-23 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Stochastic acceleration noise induces only dephasing in the spin-space witness operator of Stern-Gerlach interferometers, with common-mode cancellation preventing contrast loss and position localisation decoherence.

desk verdict The paper shows acceleration noise produces only linear dephasing in SGIs via common-mode cancellation, while higher-order terms drive contrast loss. read the letter →

arxiv 2406.10832 v4 submitted 2024-06-16 quant-ph

Meng-Zhi Wu This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords Stern-Gerlachinterferometeraccelerationnoisedecoherencedephasingcommon-modecancellationmatter-wavegravityexperimentsspinwitnessoperator
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

The paper establishes that dephasing from stochastic acceleration noise follows a linear response whose transfer function is the Fourier transform of the unperturbed classical trajectories. It demonstrates that first-order acceleration noise affects only the witness operator constructed in spin space and leaves contrast and position localisation intact because of exact common-mode cancellation between the two arms. Higher-order noise terms, by contrast, produce both contrast loss and localisation decoherence whose decay factor is set by the noise power spectral density evaluated at the interferometer’s intrinsic frequency, which the author interprets as resonant driving of the test mass.

What carries the argument

The spin-space witness operator together with the linear-response transfer function given by the Fourier transform of the classical trajectories; common-mode cancellation for first-order acceleration noise.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures contrast loss or position-localisation decoherence in an SGI when only first-order acceleration noise is present and all other noise sources are suppressed would falsify the claim of exact common-mode cancellation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Stochastic acceleration noise only induces dephasing to the witness operator constructed in spin space, while it does not lead to contrast loss or position localisation decoherence due to common mode cancellation. Higher-order noise can induce both contrast loss and position localisation decoherence, contributing a decay factor proportional to the noise power spectrum density at the intrinsic frequency, interpreted as resonance between the noise and test mass. The dephasing itself behaves as a linear response whose transfer function is the Fourier transform of the unperturbed classical trajectories.

Load-bearing premise

The unperturbed classical trajectories remain a valid basis for the linear-response transfer function and common-mode cancellation applies exactly for first-order acceleration noise.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Dephasing magnitude is directly computable from the Fourier transform of the unperturbed trajectories for any given acceleration-noise spectrum.
  • Only higher-order noise terms produce measurable contrast loss or spatial decoherence, each scaling with the noise PSD at the intrinsic frequency.
  • Magnetic-field noise and quadratic noise can be analysed within the same framework to bound their contributions to the three decoherence channels.
  • The distinction between first-order and higher-order effects supplies a design criterion for gravity experiments that rely on SGIs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same cancellation mechanism may protect other two-path matter-wave interferometers against linear acceleration noise when the paths share a common reference trajectory.
  • Resonance at the intrinsic frequency suggests that narrow-band filtering of acceleration noise around that frequency could suppress higher-order decoherence more efficiently than broadband reduction.
  • The linear-response proof could be extended to include weak anharmonicities in the magnetic guide to test how quickly the cancellation breaks down.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes decoherence in Stern-Gerlach interferometers due to stochastic noises, claiming a rigorous proof that dephasing is a linear response with transfer function equal to the Fourier transform of unperturbed classical trajectories. It asserts that first-order stochastic acceleration noise induces only dephasing (via a spin-space witness operator) due to exact common-mode cancellation, while higher-order noise induces contrast loss and position-localisation decoherence proportional to the noise PSD at the intrinsic frequency. The framework is applied to magnetic-field and quadratic noise sources.

Significance. If the linear-response derivation and exact cancellation hold, the work supplies a useful separation of decoherence channels for gravity experiments with SGIs. The transfer-function construction is parameter-free once trajectories are fixed and could guide noise budgeting; the resonance interpretation of higher-order effects is physically transparent.

major comments (1)
  1. [mechanisms section / demonstration of common-mode cancellation] The central claim that first-order acceleration noise produces only dephasing with exact cancellation of contrast loss and position-localisation decoherence rests on the assumption that the two arms share identical position histories at linear order. Because the arms carry opposite magnetic moments, their unperturbed classical trajectories differ; a uniform acceleration noise therefore couples to two distinct position operators. The manuscript must explicitly demonstrate (in the section deriving the common-mode cancellation) that any residual differential coupling is identically zero or pushed to higher order, rather than merely asserted.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states the existence of a 'rigorous proof' but supplies neither the derivation steps nor error bounds; the main text should include the explicit linear-response calculation and the order at which cancellation holds.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful review and for identifying the need for greater explicitness in the common-mode cancellation argument. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the demonstration.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that first-order acceleration noise produces only dephasing with exact cancellation of contrast loss and position-localisation decoherence rests on the assumption that the two arms share identical position histories at linear order. Because the arms carry opposite magnetic moments, their unperturbed classical trajectories differ; a uniform acceleration noise therefore couples to two distinct position operators. The manuscript must explicitly demonstrate (in the section deriving the common-mode cancellation) that any residual differential coupling is identically zero or pushed to higher order, rather than merely asserted.

    Authors: We agree that the cancellation argument benefits from an expanded, step-by-step derivation rather than a concise statement. The manuscript already solves the unperturbed classical trajectories separately for each arm (incorporating the opposite magnetic moments that produce the Stern-Gerlach splitting) and then treats the stochastic acceleration as a uniform, mass-proportional force that is identical for both arms. Because the linear-response phase accumulated by each arm is therefore the same global shift, it factors out of the interference contrast and does not generate position-localisation decoherence; only the relative dephasing appears in the spin-space witness operator. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that the explicit verification that the differential coupling vanishes identically at linear order (with any residual appearing only at O(δa²)) is not written out in full detail. In the revised manuscript we will insert a new subsection that (i) writes the first-order trajectory corrections δx₁(t) and δx₂(t) under the common acceleration noise, (ii) shows that δx₁(t) = δx₂(t) because the force is independent of magnetic moment, and (iii) demonstrates that the resulting differential phase operator commutes with the contrast and localisation projectors at linear order. This will make the common-mode cancellation fully rigorous while leaving the higher-order resonance effects unchanged. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained via linear response and common-mode analysis.

full rationale

The paper derives dephasing as a linear response with transfer function from the Fourier transform of unperturbed trajectories, then shows common-mode cancellation for first-order acceleration noise on the spin-space witness operator. No steps reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-citations, or ansatzes; the central claims rest on explicit linear-response proofs and trajectory-based transfer functions that are independent of the target decoherence results. The analysis is presented as first-principles and does not invoke load-bearing self-citations or rename known results.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Review is abstract-only; ledger entries are inferred from stated mechanisms. The linear-response assumption and common-mode cancellation are treated as domain assumptions rather than derived results.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Dephasing is a linear response whose transfer function is the Fourier transform of the unperturbed classical trajectories
    Explicitly presented as the first rigorous result in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Common-mode cancellation holds exactly for first-order stochastic acceleration noise in the SGI geometry
    Invoked to conclude absence of contrast loss and position localisation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Acceleration Noise Induced Decoherence in Stern-Gerlach Interferometers for Gravity Experiments." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2406.10832

@misc{pith2026240610832,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Acceleration Noise Induced Decoherence in Stern-Gerlach Interferometers for Gravity Experiments},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2406.10832}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2406.10832}
}
read the original abstract

Stern-Gerlach interferometer (SGI) is a kind of matter-wave interferometer driven by magnetic field and has been proposed for various gravity experiments. Stochastic noises can lead to decoherence problems of SGI via various mechanisms. In this paper, I will theoretically study several mechanisms including dephasing, contrast loss and position localisation decoherence. I will firstly present a rigorous proof that the dephasing behaves as a linear response to the noise, with a transfer function given by the Fourier transform of the unperturbed classical trajectories. Then I will demonstrate that stochastic acceleration noise only induces dephasing to the witness operator constructed in spin space, while it does not lead to contrast loss or position localisation decoherence due to common mode cancellation. In contrast, higher-order noise can induce both contrast loss and position localisation decoherence, contributing a decay factor proportional to the noise power spectrum density at the intrinsic frequency, which can be physically interpreted as the resonance between the noise and test mass. Based on the result, I apply the framework to analyse two typical noise sources, magnetic field noise and quadratic noise.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2406.10832 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of an ideal Stern-Gerlach interferometer for gravity experiments. Under a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) The unperturbed trajectories of an interferometer under a time-independent magnetic field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The trajectories affected by acceleration noises, where (a) for a single path, (b) for acceleration noises [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Destructive Interference of Inertial Noise in Matter-wave Interferometry

    quant-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A theory shows that cross-correlated two-dimensional vibration noise in a matter-wave interferometer can be tuned to suppress dephasing by roughly the Q-factor of the noise.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Stern-Gerlach Interferometry with the Atom Chip , pages 263–301

    Mark Keil, Shimon Machluf, Yair Margalit, Zhifan Zhou, Omer Amit, Or Dobkowski, Yonathan Japha, Samuel Moukouri, Daniel Rohrlich, Zina Binstock, Yaniv Bar-Haim, Men- achem Givon, David Groswasser, Yigal Meir, and Ron Folman. Stern-Gerlach Interferometry with the Atom Chip , pages 263–301. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Doherty, Neil B

    Marcus W. Doherty, Neil B. Manson, Paul Delaney, Fedor Jelezko, J¨ org Wrachtrup, and Lloyd C.L. Hollenberg. The nitrogen-vacancy colour centre in diamond. Physics Reports, 528(1):1–45, 2013. The nitrogen-vacancy colour centre in diamond

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    Inertial measurement with solid-state spins of nitrogen-vacancy center in diamond

    Liye Zhao, Xiang Shen, Lumin Ji, and Pu Huang. Inertial measurement with solid-state spins of nitrogen-vacancy center in diamond. Advances in Physics: X , 7, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Scala, M

    M. Scala, M. S. Kim, G. W. Morley, P. F. Barker, and S. Bose. Matter-wave interferometry of a levitated thermal nano-oscillator induced and probed by a spin. Phys. Rev. Lett., 111:180403, Oct 2013

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    High-precision gravimeter based on a nano-mechanical resonator hybrid with an electron spin

    Xing-Yan Chen and Zhang-Qi Yin. High-precision gravimeter based on a nano-mechanical resonator hybrid with an electron spin. Opt. Express, 26(24):31577–31588, Nov 2018

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    M. P. Ledbetter, K. Jensen, R. Fischer, A. Jarmola, and D. Budker. Gyroscopes based on nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond. Phys. Rev. A , 86:052116, Nov 2012

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Stable three-axis nuclear-spin gyroscope in diamond

    Ashok Ajoy and Paola Cappellaro. Stable three-axis nuclear-spin gyroscope in diamond. Phys. Rev. A, 86:062104, Dec 2012

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Morley, Hendrik Ulbricht, Marko Toroˇ s, Mauro Paternostro, Andrew A

    Sougato Bose, Anupam Mazumdar, Gavin W. Morley, Hendrik Ulbricht, Marko Toroˇ s, Mauro Paternostro, Andrew A. Geraci, Peter F. Barker, M. S. Kim, and Gerard Milburn. Spin entanglement witness for quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. Lett., 119:240401, Dec 2017

    work page 2017

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Joos and H

    E. Joos and H. D. Zeh. The emergence of classical properties through interaction with the environment. Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik B Condensed Matter, 59(2):223–243, Jun 1985

    1985

  2. [10]

    Quantum superposition of massive objects and collapse models

    Oriol Romero-Isart. Quantum superposition of massive objects and collapse models. Phys. Rev. A, 84:052121, Nov 2011

    2011

  3. [11]

    Coherent inflation for large quantum superpositions of levitated micro- spheres

    Oriol Romero-Isart. Coherent inflation for large quantum superpositions of levitated micro- spheres. New Journal of Physics , 19(12):123029, dec 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    On-chip quantum interference of a superconducting microsphere

    H Pino, J Prat-Camps, K Sinha, B Prasanna Venkatesh, and O Romero-Isart. On-chip quantum interference of a superconducting microsphere. Quantum Science and Technology , 3(2):025001, jan 2018

    2018

  5. [13]

    Roda-Llordes, A

    M. Roda-Llordes, A. Riera-Campeny, D. Candoli, P. T. Grochowski, and O. Romero-Isart. Macroscopic quantum superpositions via dynamics in a wide double-well potential. Phys. Rev. Lett., 132:023601, Jan 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Grochowski, and Oriol Romero-Isart

    Andreu Riera-Campeny, Marc Roda-Llordes, Piotr T. Grochowski, and Oriol Romero-Isart. Wigner Analysis of Particle Dynamics and Decoherence in Wide Nonharmonic Potentials. Quantum, 8:1393, July 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    Berthold-Georg Englert, Julian Schwinger, and Marlan O. Scully. Is spin coherence like humpty-dumpty? i. simplified treatment. Foundations of Physics , 18(10):1045–1056, Oct 1988

    1988

  8. [16]

    Schwinger, M

    J. Schwinger, M. O. Scully, and B.-G. Englert. Is spin coherence like humpty-dumpty? ii. general theory. Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik D Atoms, Molecules and Clusters , 10(2):135–144, Jun 1988

    1988

  9. [17]

    Scully, Berthold-Georg Englert, and Julian Schwinger

    Marlan O. Scully, Berthold-Georg Englert, and Julian Schwinger. Spin coherence and humpty- dumpty. iii. the effects of observation. Phys. Rev. A , 40:1775–1784, Aug 1989. 18

    1989

  10. [18]

    Jun Jing, Ting Yu, Chi-Hang Lam, J. Q. You, and Lian-Ao Wu. Control relaxation via dephasing: A quantum-state-diffusion study. Phys. Rev. A , 97:012104, Jan 2018

    2018

  11. [19]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver. A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits. Applied Physics Reviews , 6(2):021318, 06 2019

    2019

  12. [20]

    Decoherence in solid-state qubits

    Luca Chirolli and Guido Burkard. Decoherence in solid-state qubits. Advances in Physics , 57(3):225–285, 2008

    2008

  13. [21]

    van de Kamp, Ryan J

    Marko Toroˇ s, Thomas W. van de Kamp, Ryan J. Marshman, M. S. Kim, Anupam Mazum- dar, and Sougato Bose. Relative acceleration noise mitigation for nanocrystal matter-wave interferometry: Applications to entangling masses via quantum gravity. Phys. Rev. Research, 3:023178, Jun 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Quantum gravitational sensor for space debris

    Meng-Zhi Wu, Marko Toroˇ s, Sougato Bose, and Anupam Mazumdar. Quantum gravitational sensor for space debris. Phys. Rev. D , 107:104053, May 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Dephasing due to electromagnetic interactions in spatial qubits.Phys

    Martine Schut, Herre Bosma, MengZhi Wu, Marko Toroˇ s, Sougato Bose, and Anupam Mazum- dar. Dephasing due to electromagnetic interactions in spatial qubits.Phys. Rev. A, 110:022412, Aug 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Inertial Torsion Noise in Matter-Wave Interferometers for Gravity Experiments

    Meng-Zhi Wu, Marko Toroˇ s, Sougato Bose, and Anupam Mazumdar. Inertial Torsion Noise in Matter-Wave Interferometers for Gravity Experiments. arXiv: 2404.15455 , 4 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Decoherence: the quantum-to-classical transition

    Maximilian Schlosshauer. Decoherence: the quantum-to-classical transition. The Frontiers Collection (Springer-Verlag, 2007) , 2007

    2007

  18. [26]

    Van Kampen

    N.G. Van Kampen. A cumulant expansion for stochastic linear differential equations. ii. Physica, 74(2):239–247, 1974

    1974

  19. [27]

    Stochastic differential equations

    N.G Van Kampen. Stochastic differential equations. Physics Reports, 24(3):171–228, 1976

    1976

  20. [28]

    Real- ization of a complete stern-gerlach interferometer: Toward a test of quantum gravity

    Yair Margalit, Or Dobkowski, Zhifan Zhou, Omer Amit, Yonathan Japha, Samuel Moukouri, Daniel Rohrlich, Anupam Mazumdar, Sougato Bose, Carsten Henkel, and Ron Folman. Real- ization of a complete stern-gerlach interferometer: Toward a test of quantum gravity. Science Advances, 7...

    2021

  21. [29]

    Goussev, R

    A. Goussev, R. A. Jalabert, H. M. Pastawski, and D. Ariel Wisniacki. Loschmidt echo. Scholarpedia, 7(8):11687, 2012

    2012

  22. [30]

    Y. Japha. Unified model of matter-wave-packet evolution and application to spatial coherence of atom interferometers. Phys. Rev. A , 104:053310, Nov 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Quantum uncertainty limit for stern-gerlach interferometry with massive objects

    Yonathan Japha and Ron Folman. Quantum uncertainty limit for stern-gerlach interferometry with massive objects. Phys. Rev. Lett., 130:113602, Mar 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    Henkel and R

    C. Henkel and R. Folman. Internal decoherence in nano-object interferometry due to phonons. AVS Quantum Science, 4(2):025602, 06 2022

    2022

  25. [33]

    Spin-Dependent Force and Inverted Harmonic Potential for Rapid Creation of Macroscopic Quantum Superpositions

    Run Zhou, Qian Xiang, and Anupam Mazumdar. Spin-Dependent Force and Inverted Harmonic Potential for Rapid Creation of Macroscopic Quantum Superpositions. arXiv: 2408.11909, 8 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Tuning the adiabaticity of spin dynamics in diamond nitrogen vacancy centers

    Y B Band and Y Japha. Tuning the adiabaticity of spin dynamics in diamond nitrogen vacancy centers. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter , 34(25):255503, apr 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    Experimental fault-tolerant universal quantum gates with solid-state spins under ambient conditions

    Xing Rong, Jianpei Geng, Fazhan Shi, Ying Liu, Kebiao Xu, Wenchao Ma, Fei Kong, Zhen Jiang, Yang Wu, and Jiangfeng Du. Experimental fault-tolerant universal quantum gates with solid-state spins under ambient conditions. Nature Communications, 6(1):8748, Nov 2015

    2015

  28. [36]

    Pedernales, Gavin W

    Julen S. Pedernales, Gavin W. Morley, and Martin B. Plenio. Motional dynamical decoupling for interferometry with macroscopic particles. Phys. Rev. Lett., 125:023602, Jul 2020

    2020

  29. [37]

    An exact quantum theory of the time-dependent harmonic oscillator and of a charged particle in a time-dependent electromagnetic field

    WB Riesenfeld. An exact quantum theory of the time-dependent harmonic oscillator and of a charged particle in a time-dependent electromagnetic field. Journal of mathematical physics , 10(8):1458–1473, 1969. 19

    1969

  30. [38]

    Ralph Lewis and P

    H. Ralph Lewis and P. G. L. Leach. A direct approach to finding exact invariants for one-dimensional time-dependent classical Hamiltonians. Journal of Mathematical Physics , 23(12):2371–2374, 12 1982

    1982

  31. [39]

    Salomon S. Mizrahi. The geometrical phase: An approach through the use of invariants. Physics Letters A , 138(9):465–468, 1989

    1989

  32. [40]

    On the lewis–riesenfeld (dodonov–man’ko) in- variant method

    Julio Guerrero and Francisco F L´ opez-Ruiz. On the lewis–riesenfeld (dodonov–man’ko) in- variant method. Physica Scripta, 90(7):074046, jun 2015

    2015

  33. [41]

    The quantum arnold transformation

    V Aldaya, F Coss´ ıo, J Guerrero, and F F L´ opez-Ruiz. The quantum arnold transformation. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , 44(6):065302, jan 2011

    2011

  34. [42]

    Marshman, Anupam Mazumdar, Ron Folman, and Sougato Bose

    Ryan J. Marshman, Anupam Mazumdar, Ron Folman, and Sougato Bose. Constructing nano- object quantum superpositions with a stern-gerlach interferometer. Phys. Rev. Res., 4:023087, May 2022

    2022

  35. [43]

    Viktor Iv´ ady, Tam´ as Simon, Jeronimo R. Maze, I. A. Abrikosov, and Adam Gali. Pressure and temperature dependence of the zero-field splitting in the ground state of nv centers in diamond: A first-principles study. Phys. Rev. B , 90:235205, Dec 2014

    2014

  36. [44]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro. Quantum sensing. Rev. Mod. Phys., 89:035002, Jul 2017

    2017

  37. [45]

    Fast transport and splitting of spin-orbit-coupled spin-1 bose-einstein condensates

    Yaning Xu, Yuanyuan Chen, and Xi Chen. Fast transport and splitting of spin-orbit-coupled spin-1 bose-einstein condensates. Phys. Rev. A , 109:063310, Jun 2024

    2024

  38. [46]

    Johnsson, Gavin K

    Mattias T. Johnsson, Gavin K. Brennen, and Jason Twamley. Macroscopic superpositions and gravimetry with quantum magnetomechanics. Scientific Reports, 6(1):37495, Nov 2016

    2016

  39. [47]

    Scully and M

    Marlan O. Scully and M. Suhail Zubairy. Quantum Optics. Cambridge University Press, 1997

    1997

  40. [48]

    Norman F. Ramsey. A new molecular beam resonance method. Phys. Rev., 76:996–996, Oct 1949

    1949

  41. [49]

    The feynman path integral approach to atomic interferometry: A tutorial

    Pippa Storey and Claude cohen tannoudji. The feynman path integral approach to atomic interferometry: A tutorial. Journal De Physique Ii , 4:1999–2027, 1994

    1999

  42. [50]

    Junca, A

    J. Junca, A. Bertoldi, D. O. Sabulsky, G. Lef` evre, X. Zou, J.-B. Decitre, R. Geiger, A. Lan- dragin, S. Gaffet, P. Bouyer, and B. Canuel. Characterizing earth gravity field fluctuations with the miga antenna for future gravitational wave detectors. Phys. Rev. D, 99:104026, May 2019

    2019

  43. [51]

    transition probability

    A. Uhlmann. The “transition probability” in the state space of a ∗-algebra. Reports on Mathematical Physics, 9(2):273–279, 1976

    1976

  44. [52]

    Pedernales, and Martin B

    Ludovico Lami, Julen S. Pedernales, and Martin B. Plenio. Testing the quantumness of gravity without entanglement. Phys. Rev. X , 14:021022, May 2024

    2024

  45. [53]

    M. J. Snadden, J. M. McGuirk, P. Bouyer, K. G. Haritos, and M. A. Kasevich. Measurement of the earth’s gravity gradient with an atom interferometer-based gravity gradiometer. Phys. Rev. Lett., 81:971–974, Aug 1998

    1998

  46. [54]

    Sorrentino, Q

    F. Sorrentino, Q. Bodart, L. Cacciapuoti, Y.-H. Lien, M. Prevedelli, G. Rosi, L. Salvi, and G. M. Tino. Sensitivity limits of a raman atom interferometer as a gravity gradiometer. Phys. Rev. A, 89:023607, Feb 2014

    2014

  47. [55]

    Extracting the differential phase in dual atom interferometers by modulating magnetic fields

    Yu-Ping Wang, Jia-Qi Zhong, Xi Chen, Run-Bing Li, Da-Wei Li, Lei Zhu, Hong-Wei Song, Jin Wang, and Ming-Sheng Zhan. Extracting the differential phase in dual atom interferometers by modulating magnetic fields. Optics Communications, 375:34–37, 2016

    2016

  48. [56]

    Jalabert and Horacio M

    Rodolfo A. Jalabert and Horacio M. Pastawski. Environment-independent decoherence rate in classically chaotic systems. Phys. Rev. Lett., 86:2490–2493, Mar 2001

    2001

  49. [57]

    Stability of quantum motion in chaotic and regular systems

    Asher Peres. Stability of quantum motion in chaotic and regular systems. Phys. Rev. A , 30:1610–1615, Oct 1984

    1984

  50. [58]

    The stochastic-quantum correspondence

    Jacob A Barandes. The stochastic-quantum correspondence. arXiv:2302.10778, 2023

    2023

  51. [59]

    The stochastic-quantum theorem

    Jacob A Barandes. The stochastic-quantum theorem. arXiv:2309.03085, 2023. 20

    2023

  52. [60]

    Feynman propagator for time-dependent lagrangians possessing an invariant quadratic in momentum

    A K Dhara and S V Lawande. Feynman propagator for time-dependent lagrangians possessing an invariant quadratic in momentum. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , 17(12):2423, aug 1984

    1984

  53. [61]

    Geometry and non-adiabatic response in quantum and classical systems

    Michael Kolodrubetz, Dries Sels, Pankaj Mehta, and Anatoli Polkovnikov. Geometry and non-adiabatic response in quantum and classical systems. Physics Reports, 697:1–87, 2017. Geometry and non-adiabatic response in quantum and classical systems

    2017

  54. [62]

    Light-pulse atom interferometry

    Jason M Hogan, David MS Johnson, and Mark A Kasevich. Light-pulse atom interferometry. In Atom Optics and Space Physics , pages 411–447. IOS Press, 2009

    2009

  55. [63]

    Edward H. Kerner. Note on the forced and damped oscillator in quantum mechanics.Canadian Journal of Physics , 36(3):371–377, 1958

    1958

  56. [64]

    Quantum Master Equations

    Heinz-Peter Breuer and Francesco Petruccione. Quantum Master Equations. In The Theory of Open Quantum Systems . Oxford University Press, 01 2007. 21

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed May 23, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.