Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Realizing exceptional points by Floquet dissipative couplings in thermal atoms

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Periodic magnetic driving of a thermal atomic vapor realizes a tunable Floquet exceptional point far from the static phase boundary.

desk verdict Experiment looks real, but the Floquet-EP mechanism is unproven as written because the common Zeeman drive can be gauged away; the missing Supplement is load-bearing. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13616 v1 pith:7YXDAXYP submitted 2025-04-18 quant-ph physics.atom-ph

Zimo Zhang , Fengbo Zhang , Zhongxiao Xu , Ying Hu , Han Bao , Heng Shen This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords Floquetengineeringexceptionalpointanti-parity-timesymmetrydissipativecouplingthermalatomselectromagneticallyinducedtransparencyspinwavesnon-Hermitiansystems
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 periodically driving a warm rubidium vapor with an oscillating magnetic field creates Floquet sidebands of atomic spin waves in two spatially separated optical channels, and that the thermal motion of atoms couples those sidebands dissipatively. It reports that this Floquet dissipative coupling drives an anti-parity-time (anti-PT) symmetry phase transition at an exceptional point located far outside the static phase-breaking threshold. The coupling rate follows the Bessel-product law $\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}=|J_0(\delta_B/\omega_B)J_1(\delta_B/\omega_B)|\Gamma_c$, so the exceptional point can be moved by changing the driving frequency and amplitude. A sympathetic reader would care because it is the first atomic realization of a mechanism conjectured to enable non-Hermitian Floquet phases, such as skin effects and dissipative topological ladders, that have no static counterpart.

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective two-level non-Hermitian Hamiltonian of Eq. (3), whose off-diagonal imaginary coupling is the Floquet dissipative coupling. The periodic magnetic field dresses each channel's spin wave into sidebands with Bessel weights $J_m(\delta_B/\omega_B)$; atomic motion transports the coherence between the two channels, giving $\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}=|J_{n_1}(\delta_B/\omega_B)J_{n_2}(\delta_B/\omega_B)|\Gamma_c$. This identity sets the exceptional-point condition $|\Delta_0-n\omega_B|=2\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}$ and is the quantitative prediction that the measurements of EP location test.

What would settle it

Fix $\omega_B$ and sweep the modulation amplitude $\delta_B$ while watching the EIT splitting between the coupled sidebands; the law $\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}=|J_0(\delta_B/\omega_B)J_1(\delta_B/\omega_B)|\Gamma_c$ predicts that the coupling and the exceptional-point splitting vanish at the zeros of the Bessel factors. If a nonzero splitting persists at those zeros, the two-level truncation or the Bessel-product coupling law is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that dissipative coupling between two atomic spin waves can be created and tuned by Floquet engineering rather than by static parameters. In the experiment, two laser channels in a paraffin-coated $^{87}\mathrm{Rb}$ cell create collective ground-state coherences via $\Lambda$-type electromagnetically induced transparency, and a time-varying magnetic field $B_1\cos(\omega_B t)$ periodically shakes the Zeeman splitting, dressing each spin wave with sidebands labeled by integers $n$. Choosing the single-photon detuning so that the carrier in one channel is nearly degenerate with the first sideband in the other ($n_1-n_2=1$) makes the atomic motion mediate an effective imaginary coupling $\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}$ between the two sidebands. The system is then governed by the two-level anti-PT Hamiltonian of Eq. (3), whose eigenvalues give an exceptional point at $|\Delta_0-n\omega_B|=2\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}$. The paper reports that the measured splitting and the extracted EP locations match the predicted $\Gamma_{\mathrm{eff}}=|J_0(\delta_B/\omega_B)J_1(\delta_B/\omega_B)|\Gamma_c$, demonstrating an anti-PT transition in a regime where the static system is deep in the broken phase.

Load-bearing premise

The result stands or falls on the reduction of the full periodically driven multi-sideband system to the two-level Hamiltonian with the Bessel-product coupling rate; if higher sidebands or extra coherences contribute, the observed transition would not be the claimed Floquet dissipative coupling.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The exceptional point can be placed at essentially arbitrary detunings by choosing the modulation frequency and depth, not just at the static threshold $2\Gamma_c$.
  • By setting $\omega_B=|\Delta_0|/n$, higher-order Floquet transitions with $n_1-n_2=2,3$ can be activated, as demonstrated for the second- and third-order couplings.
  • The tunable imaginary coupling between sidebands in a synthetic frequency dimension and a real spatial dimension can serve as a building block for Floquet dissipative band structures and ladders with a tunable number of legs.
  • The hertz-level resolution of the phase-transition threshold turns the vapor cell into a precision platform for testing Floquet non-Hermitian spectral predictions.
  • The experiment demonstrates controllable non-local dissipation in a quantum-accessible atomic medium, a step toward dissipative Floquet phases without static analogues.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A further test this claim suggests is to sweep the modulation depth through the zeros of $J_0$ or $J_1$; if the Bessel-product law is exact, the coupling and the EP splitting should vanish there.
  • A natural next step the paper does not take is to extend the two-channel setup to three or more channels, forming dissipatively coupled Floquet lattices in the combined frequency-space dimension.
  • Since the medium is a quantum atomic ensemble, one could probe whether the Floquet dissipative coupling produces or preserves quantum correlations between the channels, extending the experiment beyond classical-field observations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experiment in a warm 87Rb vapor cell in which two spatially separated EIT channels are driven by a common oscillating magnetic field. The authors claim that the periodic drive creates Floquet sidebands of the atomic spin-wave coherences and that atomic-motion-mediated dissipative coupling between sidebands with different Floquet indices realizes a tunable Floquet dissipative coupling. They infer an effective Hamiltonian (Eq. 3) with a Floquet-dependent coupling, predict an anti-PT-symmetry exceptional point at a detuning far from the static threshold, and report EIT spectra, peak-separation data, beat-frequency data, and an extracted coupling rate (Eq. 5) consistent with a product of Bessel functions. The central claims rest on Eqs. (3)-(5), whose derivations are not presented in the main text and whose supporting Supplemental Material reference [42] is a placeholder.

Significance. If the mechanism is correct, this would be a noteworthy advance: it would provide a first atomic-vapor realization of Floquet dissipative coupling, demonstrate an anti-PT transition induced by periodic driving far from the static threshold, and open a route to Floquet non-Hermitian topological phases in a platform with both real and synthetic dimensions. The measurements are potentially high-quality: the beat-frequency readout in Fig. 3(b) and the sideband-resolved EIT spectra in Fig. 2 give direct, non-circular evidence that something resembling a Floquet-avoided-level picture is at work. The authors also explicitly expose the Bessel-function sideband structure in Fig. 1(d). However, the paper's quantitative conclusion depends on model equations that are asserted, not derived here, and on fits whose parameters are extracted from the same data used for verification. The result is therefore an interesting but insufficiently supported claim in the present form.

major comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (3) and text preceding it] Equation (3) is introduced as the Floquet effective Hamiltonian with no derivation, and the only reference to its derivation, Ref. [42], is a placeholder with URL 'http://link.aps.org/supplemental/XXX'. This is load-bearing: the drive is described as a periodic Zeeman shift δB(t) = δ0 + δB cos(ωB t) that affects both channels in the same way, so a naive Markovian two-level reduction would produce a common scalar term δB cos(ωB t) I. Such a term commutes with the static Hamiltonian and can be removed by a gauge transformation, implying no new exceptional point. The off-diagonal phases e^{±i(Δ0−nωB)t} in Eq. (3) therefore require a derivation that makes clear how the finite-time, non-Markovian nature of the dissipative coupling produces this structure. Without that derivation, or an available Supplemental Material, the central claim is not yet substantiated.
  2. [Eq. (5) and Fig. 4(a)] The quantitative verification of Eq. (5) is partially circular: the data points for Γeff are obtained from the EP locations using the EP condition derived from Eq. (3), and then Eq. (5) is fitted to those same points with Γc and δB as free parameters. The reported 'Hz-level agreement' is therefore not a parameter-free prediction. The authors should provide an independent calibration of δB (for example from the sideband-height fits in Fig. 1(d)) and an independent measurement of Γc (for example from the static EP at B1=0), and then compare the Eq. (5) curve with no refitted parameters, or at least report the fit uncertainties and confidence intervals for Γc and δB.
  3. [Fig. 4(a) and Fig. 1(d)] The apparent values of the modulation depth differ between calibrations: Fig. 1(d) is fitted with δB ≈ 3 kHz, while Fig. 4(a) is fitted with δB ≈ 4.3 kHz. These may correspond to different driving strengths in different runs, but the manuscript does not state this explicitly. If both are from the same apparatus with nominally the same driving conditions, the discrepancy must be explained. The reader needs to know how the driving voltage is converted to δB, and whether δB is stable across the measurements.
  4. [Eq. (3) and multi-sideband truncation] The effective Hamiltonian in Eq. (3) truncates the infinite Floquet sideband ladder to two selected bands (n1 in CH1 and n2 in CH2) without a quantitative argument that all other sidebands can be neglected. Since the observed spectra in Fig. 1(c) show multiple sidebands, the neglected bands could in principle modify the level repulsion or the apparent EP. The authors should justify the two-band truncation explicitly, for instance by estimating the relative Bessel weights of the neglected channels and showing that their contributions are small over the parameter range of Figs. 2-4.
  5. [Ref. [42] and Supplemental Material availability] The manuscript repeatedly refers to 'the supplementary material[42]' for derivations, parameter estimates, and experimental details, but Ref. [42] is incomplete and not accessible on arXiv. This is not a formatting detail: a reader cannot verify the central derivation of Eq. (3), the derivation of Eq. (5), the relation between control power and Γc, the estimation of δB, or the fitting procedures. The authors should either include the derivation in the main text or make the Supplemental Material available in a complete, citable form.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains the typo 'exception point' instead of 'exceptional point'.
  2. [Fig. 2 caption] The labels '53Hz' and '6Hz' and the legend entries 'uncoupled'/'coupled' in Fig. 2 are not fully explained; the reader should be told which frequency splittings these numbers denote and how they were extracted.
  3. [Eq. (3)] The index n is defined only as n = n1 − n2 after Eq. (3); this notation would be clearer if defined before the equation, and the symbols n1 and n2 used in Eq. (3) should be explicitly tied to the Floquet bands in CH1 and CH2.
  4. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption of Fig. 4 mixes three different descriptions of driving strength ('≈ 5.5 kHz', '= 2.31 Vpp', '≈ 4 kHz') without specifying which run each applies to; the authors should give the magnetic-field amplitude (or a single calibrated quantity) for each panel.
  5. [Ref. [42] and Ref. [41]] Reference [42] is incomplete, and Ref. [41] lacks the article number or page range; a complete reference list with accessible links is needed.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The anomalous anti-PT transition is directly observed, but the claimed confirmation of the Floquet coupling rate (Eq. 5) is a two-parameter fit to model-extracted data, not an independent prediction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 'Realizing the highly controlled Floquet dissipative coupling', Eq. (5) and Fig. 4(a)]
    "Under a fixed modulation depth δB, EPs locations are recorded at various modulation frequencies ωB. Fig. 4(a) plots the deduced effective coupling rate Γ eff as a function of ωB, in a good agreement with the expected function (blue solid line) Γeff = |J0(δB/ωB)J1(δB/ωB)| Γc. ... Γc=93 Hz is extracted from the numerical fit."

    The data points shown as validating Eq. (5) are not independent measurements of Γeff: they are inferred by imposing Eq. (3)'s EP condition |−Δ0−nωB| = 2Γeff on the observed transition detunings. The 'expected' curve is then obtained by fitting the same dataset with Γc (scale) and δB (modulation depth) as free parameters (δB ≈ 4.3 kHz, Γc = 93 Hz). The agreement therefore tests only whether a two-parameter Bessel-product curve can represent the model-extracted points; it does not constitute a parameter-free prediction of the Floquet dissipative coupling rate.

full rationale

The central observation—an anti-PT phase transition at |Δ0| ≈ ωB ≫ 2Γc in the driven system while the static system is deep in the broken phase—is a direct experimental result and does not reduce to the fitted parameters, so the paper is not wholly circular. Equation (3)'s EP condition is a model prediction that is at least qualitatively tested by the observed threshold location. The main circularity is confined to the quantitative validation of Eq. (5): Γeff is extracted through the same effective-Hamiltonian relation used to state the prediction, and Γc and δB are fitted to those extracted values, making the 'good agreement' a consistency check rather than an independent confirmation. The derivation of the effective Hamiltonian is deferred to Supplemental Material [42], which is a completeness/support issue rather than a circularity; static Hamiltonian Eq. (1) rests on independent prior work [41], and the self-citations [33,43] are not load-bearing for the central claim. Overall: partial, not pervasive, circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the validity of the two-level effective model of Eq. (3), which is asserted without derivation in the main text, and on the Bessel-product form of the coupling rate (Eq. 5), whose parameters are fitted to the data. The static dissipative coupling mechanism is inherited from prior work (ref. [41]). No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Γc = 93 Hz
    Dissipative coupling rate between the two spatial channels; extracted from a numerical fit to the EP locations in Fig. 4(a).
  • δB = ≈4.3 kHz (Fig. 4a), ≈3 kHz (Fig. 1d)
    Zeeman modulation depth; fitted from Bessel-function fits to EIT peak heights and EP locations, and stated to be close to an independently estimated value.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Floquet theorem: a time-periodic Hamiltonian generates sidebands with Bessel-function weights.
    Invoked in the text when stating that atomic spin waves are dressed by harmonics with weights J_m(δB/ωB).
  • domain assumption Two-level truncation: the system can be described by only two Floquet sidebands (n1 and n2), with all other sidebands neglected.
    Required for Eq. (3) to hold; no validity criterion is given in the main text.
  • domain assumption Dissipative coupling mechanism: ballistic atomic motion and wall bouncing couple spin waves in different spatial channels at rate Γc, as established in prior work.
    Adopted from Ref. [41] (Peng et al., Nat. Phys. 2016), which provides the static anti-PT model.
  • ad hoc to paper Floquet dissipative coupling rate: Γeff = |J_{n1}(δB/ωB) J_{n2}(δB/ωB)| Γc.
    Presented as an expected function in Eq. (5) but not derived in the main text; relies on the missing Supplemental Material for justification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Realizing exceptional points by Floquet dissipative couplings in thermal atoms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7YXDAXYP

@misc{pith2026250413616,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Realizing exceptional points by Floquet dissipative couplings in thermal atoms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7YXDAXYP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13616}
}
read the original abstract

Exceptional degeneracies and generically complex spectra of non-Hermitian systems are at the heart of numerous phenomena absent in the Hermitian realm. Recently, it was suggested that Floquet dissipative coupling in the space-time domain may provide a novel mechanism to drive intriguing spectral topology with no static analogues, though its experimental investigation in quantum systems remains elusive. We demonstrate such Floquet dissipative coupling in an ensemble of thermal atoms interacting with two spatially separated optical beams, and observe an anomalous anti-parity-time symmetry phase transition at an exception point far from the phase-transition threshold of the static counterpart. Our protocol sets the stage for Floquet engineering of non-Hermitian topological spectra, and for engineering new quantum phases that cannot exist in static systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13616 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematics for Floquet dissipative coupling in thermal atomic ensembles. (a) Experimental setup. Two spatially [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Transmission spectra of output probe light in anti- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Anomalous anti- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Realizing the highly controlled Floquet dissipative coupling. (a) Dissipative coupling rate Γ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [42]

    Peng, P. et al. Anti-parity-time symmetry with flying atoms. Nat. Phys. 12, 1139-1145 (2016)

    work page 2016

  2. [1]

    C. M. Bender and S. Boettcher, Real spectra in non-Hermitian Hamiltonians having PT symmetry.Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243-5246 (1998)

    work page 1998

  3. [2]

    Z. Gong, Y. Ashida, K. Kawabata, K. Takasan, S. Higashikawa, and M. Ueda, Topological Phases of Non-Hermitian Systems. Phys. Rev. X 8, 031079 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [3]

    Kawabata, K

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, M. Ueda, and M. Sato, Symmetry and Topology in Non-Hermitian Physics. Phys. Rev. X 9, 041015 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [4]

    Coulais, R

    C. Coulais, R. Fleury, and J. van Wezel, Topology and broken Hermiticity. Nat. Phys. 17, 9-13 (2021)

    work page 2021

  6. [5]

    Hu, et al

    B. Hu, et al. Non-Hermitian topological whispering gallery. Nature 597, 655-659 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [6]

    K. Wang, A. Dutt, C. C. Wojcik, et al. Topological complex-energy braiding of non-Hermitian bands. Nature 598, 59-64 (2021)

    work page 2021

  8. [7]

    W. Wang, X. Wang, and G. Ma. Non-Hermitian morphing of topological modes. Nature 608, 50-55 (2022)

    work page 2022

Show all 49 references
  1. [8]

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, F. K. Kunst, Exceptional topology of non-Hermitian systems. Rev. Mod. Phys 93, 015005 (2021)

    2021

  2. [9]

    K. Ding, C. Fang, and G. Ma, Non-Hermitian topology and exceptional-point geometries. Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 745-760 (2022)

    2022

  3. [10]

    T. E. Lee, Anomalous Edge State in a Non-Hermitian Lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 133903 (2016)

    2016

  4. [11]

    F. K. Kunst, E. Edvardsson, J. C. Budich, and E. J. Bergholtz, Biorthogonal Bulk-Boundary Correspondence in Non-Hermitian Systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 026808 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    V. M. Martinez Alvarez, J. E. Barrios Vargas, and L. E. F. Foa Torres, Non-Hermitian robust edge states in one dimension: Anomalous localization and eigenspace condensation at exceptional points. Phys. Rev. B 97, 121401 (2018). 6

    2018

  6. [13]

    Xiong, Why does bulk boundary correspondence fail in some non-Hermitian topological models

    Y. Xiong, Why does bulk boundary correspondence fail in some non-Hermitian topological models. J. Phys. Commun. 2, 035043 (2018)

    2018

  7. [14]

    Yao, and Z

    S. Yao, and Z. Wang, Edge States and Topological Invariants of Non-Hermitian Systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 086803 (2018)

    2018

  8. [15]

    L. Xiao, T. Deng, K. Wang, G. Zhu, Z. Wang, W. Yi, and P. Xue. Non-Hermitian bulk–boundary correspondence in quantum dynamics. Nat. Phys. 16, 761-766 (2020)

    2020

  9. [16]

    Carlstr¨ om and E

    J. Carlstr¨ om and E. J. Bergholtz, Exceptional links and twisted Fermi ribbons in non-Hermitian systems. Phys. Rev. A 98, 042114 (2018)

    2018

  10. [17]

    C. H. Lee, G. Li, Y. Liu, T. Tai, R. Thomale, and X. Zhang, Tidal surface states as fingerprints of non-Hermitian nodal knot metals. arXiv:1812.02011

    arXiv

  11. [18]

    Carlstr¨ om, M

    J. Carlstr¨ om, M. St˚ alhammar, J. C. Budich, and E. J. Bergholtz, Knotted non-Hermitian metals,” Phys. Rev. B 99, 161115 (2019)

    2019

  12. [19]

    H. Xu, D. Mason, L. Jiang, and J. G. E. Harris, Topological energy transfer in an optomechanical system with exceptional points. Nature 537, 80-83 (2016)

    2016

  13. [20]

    Andr˙ e Eckardt, Atomic quantum gases in periodically driven optical lattices. Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 011004 (2017)

    2017

  14. [21]

    Goldman and J

    N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Periodically Driven Quantum Systems: Effective Hamiltonians and Engineered Gauge Fields. Phys. Rev. X 4, 031027 (2014)

    2014

  15. [22]

    Goldman, J

    N. Goldman, J. C. Budich, and P. Zoller, Topological quantum matter with ultracold gases in optical lattices. Nat. Phys. 12, 639-645 (2016)

    2016

  16. [23]

    M. S. Rudner, N. H. Lindner, E. Berg, and M. Levin, Anomalous Edge States and the Bulk-Edge Correspondence for Periodically Driven Two-Dimensional Systems. Phys. Rev. X 3, 031005 (2013)

    2013

  17. [24]

    N. H. Lindner, G. Refae, abd V. Galitski, Floquet topological insulator in semiconductor quantum wells. Nat. Phys. 7, 490-495 (2011)

    2011

  18. [25]

    Carl Budich, Y

    J. Carl Budich, Y. Hu, and P. Zoller, Helical Floquet Channels in 1D Lattices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 105302 (2017)

    2017

  19. [26]

    D. A. Anderson, S. A. Miller, G. Raithel, J. Gordon, M. Butler, and C. Holloway, Optical Measurements of Strong Microwave Fields with Rydberg Atoms in a Vapor Cell, Phys. Rev. Appl. 5, 034003 (2016)

    2016

  20. [27]

    S. A. Miller, D. A. Anderson, and G. Raithel, Radio frequency-modulated Rydberg states in a vapor cell, New J. Phys. 18, 053017 (2016)

    2016

  21. [28]

    Jotzu, M

    G. Jotzu, M. Messer, R. Desbuquois, M. Lebrat, T. Uehlinger, D. Greif, and T. Esslinger, Experimental realization of the topological Haldane model with ultracold fermions. Nature 515, 237-240 (2014)

    2014

  22. [29]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, M. Atala, J. T. Barreiro, S. Nascimb˙ ene, N. R. Cooper, I. Bloch and N. Goldman, Measuring the Chern number of Hofstadter bands with ultracold bosonic atoms. Nat. Phys. 11, 162-166 (2015)

    2015

  23. [30]

    and other intriguing phenomena. On the theoretical side, recent studies [31, 32] conjectured that Floquet non-Hermitian systems featuring dissipative couplings in combined space-time (Floquet) domain can host unique spectral topology and anomalous skin modes that cannot exist ...

    2025 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Weidemann, M

    S. Weidemann, M. Kremer, S. Longhi, and A. Szameitand, Topological triple phase transition in non-Hermitian Floquet quasicrystals. Nature 601, 354-359 (2022)

    2022

  25. [32]

    Zhang and J

    X. Zhang and J. Gong, Non-Hermitian Floquet topological phases: Exceptional points, coalescent edge modes, and the skin effect. Phys. Rev. B 101, 045415 (2020)

    2020

  26. [33]

    Wu and J.-H

    H. Wu and J.-H. An, Floquet topological phases of non-Hermitian systems. Phys. Rev. B 102, 041119(R) (2020)

    2020

  27. [34]

    W. Cao, X. Lu, X. Meng, J. Sun, H. Shen, and Y. Xiao, Reservoir-Mediated Quantum Correlations in Non-Hermitian Optical System. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 030401 (2020)

    2020

  28. [35]

    J. Sun, X. Zhang, W. Qu, E. E. Mikhailov, I. Novikova, H. Shen, and Y. Xiao, Spatial Multiplexing of Squeezed Light by Coherence Diffusion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 030401 (2019)

    2019

  29. [36]

    Boller, A

    K.-J. Boller, A. Imamoˇ glu, and S. E. Harris, Observation of electromagnetically induced transparency. Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2593 (1991)

    1991

  30. [37]

    Fleischhauer, A

    M. Fleischhauer, A. Imamoglu, and J. P. Marangos, Electromagnetically induced transparency: Optics in coherent media. Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 633 (2005)

    2005

  31. [38]

    Novikova, R

    I. Novikova, R. L. Walsworth, and Y. Xiao, Electromagnetically induced transparency-based slow and stored light in warm atoms. Laser & Photonics Review 6, 333-353 (2012)

    2012

  32. [39]

    Ge and H

    L. Ge and H. E. T¨ ureci, Antisymmetric PT-photonic structures with balanced positive- and negative-index materials. Phys. Rev. A 88, 053810 (2013)

    2013

  33. [40]

    Li et al

    Y. Li et al. , Anti-parity-time symmetry in diffusive systems. Science 364, 170 (2019)

    2019

  34. [41]

    Zhang, R

    H. Zhang, R. Huang, S.-D. Zhang, Y. Li, C.-W. Qiu, F. Nori, and H. Jing, Breaking Anti-PT Symmetry by Spinning a Resonator. Nano Lett. 20 7594 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/XXX

  36. [44]

    D. Hao, L. Wang, X. Lu, X. Cao, S. Jia, Y. Hu, and Y. Xiao, Topological Atomic Spin Wave Lattices by Dissipative Couplings. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 153602 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    L. Ding, K. Shi, Q. Zhang, D. Shen, X. Zhang, and W. Zhang, Experimental Determination of PT -Symmetric Exceptional Points in a Single Trapped Ion. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 083604 (2021)

    2021

  38. [46]

    Bardyn, et al

    C.-E. Bardyn, et al. Topology by dissipation. N. J. Phys. 15, 085001 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    Leefmans, et al

    C. Leefmans, et al. Topological dissipation in a time-multiplexed photonic resonator network. Nat. Phys. 18, 442-449 (2022)

    2022

  40. [48]

    Yoshida, and Y

    T. Yoshida, and Y. Hatsugai, Bulk edge correspondence of classical difusion phenomena. Sci. Rep. 11, 888 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Parto, C

    M. Parto, C. Leefmans, J. Williams, F. Nori, and A. Marandi, Non-Abelian effects in dissipative photonic topological lattices. Nat. Commun. 14, 1440 (2023)

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.