Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 42 references

Multiple Quantum Many-Body Clustering Probed by Dynamical Decoupling

T0 review · 4 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 Spin cluster sizes disperse quadratically as they grow in time

desk verdict A genuinely useful DD-based detection scheme for MQC, attached to a headline quadratic clustering law that is not yet secured because the underlying inversion is unvalidated. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15183 v1 pith:WGIBMFVW submitted 2025-04-21 quant-ph

Gerónimo Sequeiros , Claudia M. Sánchez , Lisandro Buljubasich , Ana K. Chattah , Horacio M. Pastawski , Rodolfo H. Acosta This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords multiplequantumcoherencesdynamicaldecouplingspinclustersizedistributionTikhonovregularizationLoschmidtechoout-of-time-ordercorrelatorsFloquetprethermalizationnuclearmagneticresonance
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 establishes a new use of dynamical decoupling (DD)—a periodic pulse train usually employed to protect quantum states—as a sensitive detector for multiple-quantum NMR experiments on strongly coupled nuclear spins. With the boosted signal-to-noise ratio, the authors numerically invert the measured coherence spectra to recover the full distribution of spin-cluster sizes, not just its average. Their central observation is that the dispersion of the cluster-size distribution grows as $t_n^2$ with multiple-quantum evolution time, even though the cluster front itself propagates ballistically as $t_n^3$. The finding matters because cluster-size heterogeneity is a quantity that standard Gaussian fits cannot resolve, and any future model of many-body spin dynamics will need to reproduce this quadratic widening.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the combination of a double-quantum Hamiltonian $H_{\mathrm{DQ}} = -\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i<j} d_{ij}(I_i^+ I_j^+ + I_i^- I_j^-)$, engineered by a pulse sequence, with a detection stage built from a dynamical-decoupling Floquet train. The experiment measures a generalized echo $S_{n,\phi}$ for many reversion phases $\phi$; a Fourier transform over $\phi$ gives the distribution of even coherence orders $\tilde{S}_{n,k}$. That distribution is inverted through $\tilde{S}_{n,k} = \sum_j \exp(-k^2/s_j)\, f_n(s_j) + \epsilon_{n,k}$, with Tikhonov regularization, yielding the cluster-size distribution $f_n(s)$. The DD detection block is what supplies enough signal-to-noise for the numerically unstable inversion to work at long evolution times.

What would settle it

Generate synthetic multiple-quantum coherence data from a known cluster-size distribution whose true dispersion grows linearly (or not at all) with time, add realistic noise, run the paper's inversion pipeline, and check whether the recovered $\Delta s$ still grows as $t_n^2$. A quadratic output in that test would show the law is produced by the inversion; a non-quadratic output would support the physical claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is an empirical law for how spin clusters spread in size during double-quantum evolution in a dense three-dimensional dipolar system. Using adamantane as a highly interconnected spin network, the authors measure multiple-quantum coherence distributions at increasing evolution times and invert them—modeling each coherence profile as a weighted sum of Gaussians over cluster sizes—to obtain $f_n(s)$, the probability that a cluster contains $s$ correlated spins. They find that the distribution becomes bimodal at longer times, and that the full width at half maximum of the larger-cluster population, $\Delta s$, grows as $t_n^2$, while the fastest cluster front (the 97% cumulative point) grows as $t_n^3$. The authors state explicitly that they lack a microscopic model for the quadratic law; the claim is the empirical observation itself, made accessible by the improved sensitivity of DD-based acquisition.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the cluster-size distribution recovered by Tikhonov inversion faithfully represents the physical distribution, rather than being shaped by the regularizer; if the smoothing broadens the larger-cluster peak as it moves and flattens, the observed quadratic widening could be an artifact.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • DD acquisition reaches the same signal-to-noise as conventional free-induction-decay acquisition with roughly 22 times fewer scans at the longest probed evolution time, making otherwise impractical measurements routine.
  • Cluster-size distributions can be recovered at evolution times where the Loschmidt echo has decayed close to the noise floor, revealing correlations among hundreds of spins.
  • The observed $t_n^2$ widening of the dispersion, together with the $t_n^3$ ballistic front, gives a quantitative target for microscopic theories of double-quantum spin dynamics.
  • The method confirms the earlier ballistic-propagation picture for a three-dimensional dipolar spin network such as adamantane.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the quadratic law is physical, cluster growth is not described by a single growing size: the width of the cluster-size distribution carries independent information about scrambling, possibly a second velocity characterizing roughening of the operator front.
  • A synthetic-data validation of the inversion—feeding a known $f_n(s)$ into equation (3), adding noise, and checking the recovered $\Delta s$—would determine whether the $t_n^2$ law survives outside the regularizer. The paper does not report this test.
  • The same DD-boosted protocol could be applied to lower-dimensional or disordered spin systems to test whether quadratic dispersion is universal or specific to the three-dimensional dipolar network.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports a dynamical-decoupling-enhanced multiple-quantum (MQ) NMR study of polycrystalline adamantane. The authors insert a dynamical decoupling (DD) detection block into the standard MQC experiment, improving the signal-to-noise ratio by roughly a factor of 22 in scan count, and show that the DD-acquired coherence distributions reproduce the conventional FID-based distributions at n=6 and n=9 cycles. Using the improved data, they invert Eq. (3) with the Teal–Eccles adaptive-truncation algorithm to obtain cluster-size distributions f_n(s). From these distributions they extract three scaling features: the largest cluster size grows linearly with evolution time, the 97% cumulative propagation front grows as t^3 in agreement with earlier ballistic estimates, and, as the central new claim, the dispersion Δs of the larger-cluster population grows quadratically with evolution time, Δs ∝ t_n^2. The authors state that they lack a model for this quadratic law and present it as a first empirical observation.

Significance. The dynamical decoupling detection block is a practical experimental contribution with a concrete, quantitative demonstration of SNR gain and a useful validation against standard acquisition at n=6 and n=9. If the quadratic width law were established robustly, it would constitute a new empirical scaling result for many-body clustering under double-quantum dynamics in a strongly interacting spin system, of interest to the NMR and quantum-scrambling communities. The significance of the manuscript therefore hinges on whether the extracted Δs(t_n) is a faithful property of the physical cluster-size distribution. The central weakness is that this quantity is obtained from an ill-posed numerical inversion whose regularization parameters, synthetic-data validation, and error propagation are not reported, so the reality of the quadratic growth is not yet empirically secured.

major comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (3) and Fig. 4b–4d] The inversion that produces f_n(s) from the coherence distributions is described as ill-posed, and the Teal–Eccles algorithm is referenced, but no regularization parameter, noise level, or convergence criterion is reported, and no synthetic-data test is shown. Tikhonov-type smoothing can preferentially broaden peaks as they move toward larger s and lose amplitude, so the quadratic growth of the FWHM in Fig. 4d could be generated by the regularizer even when the true width is constant or grows more slowly. To make the central claim load-bearing, the authors must report the regularization parameter and demonstrate with a synthetic benchmark (e.g., a known constant-width moving Gaussian) that the inversion recovers the correct width across the relevant range of amplitudes and positions.
  2. [Fig. 4c–4d] The 'larger cluster' population whose FWHM defines Δs is not operationally defined. The text says the width is represented by shadows and that the 97% cumulative value is used for the propagation front, but it does not specify how the two populations in the bimodal f_n(s) are separated, how the FWHM is computed for overlapping or asymmetric peaks, or how sensitive the extracted Δs is to these choices. A precise algorithm is needed, along with a stability check showing that the quadratic scaling persists under reasonable variations of the population-selection threshold and the cumulative level.
  3. [Fig. 4d] The data points in Fig. 4d are shown without error bars, and the fit to Δs ∝ t_n^2 is presented without a goodness-of-fit measure or a comparison to alternative scaling laws (for example, linear or t^β with a fitted β). Because Δs is a derived quantity obtained from an inversion of noisy experimental data, its uncertainty must be propagated through Eq. (3) and the extraction procedure. Without such uncertainty quantification, the claim that the growth is specifically quadratic is not quantitatively supported.
  4. [Figs. 3e and 4a] The DD detection block is validated against FID acquisition only at n=6 and n=9 (Fig. 3e), while the quadratic law in Fig. 4d relies on later times, including n=12 and beyond, where no FID reference is shown. The comparison at n=12 in Fig. 4a uses different numbers of scans for DD and FID and is only qualitative. The authors should demonstrate that the DD detection block does not distort the coherence distribution at long times, for instance by comparing DD against a high-scan-count FID at n=12, or by simulating the effect of the detection block on a known distribution.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'plycristalline' for 'polycrystalline', 'ara' for 'are', 'prethermatization' for 'prethermalization', and 'the the temporal increase' in the introduction; these should be corrected.
  2. [Fig. 2c] The wording 'The saturated scale in the last plot' is unclear; the authors should state explicitly that the color scale saturates above 4000 transients and that this saturation is an artifact of the display range.
  3. [Fig. 3b] The subscripts F and B for the forward and backward DQ blocks are used without being defined in the figure caption; they should be defined at first use in the text or caption.
  4. [Abstract and §I] The abstract mentions 'decay times greater than 1000-fold', which appears to refer to earlier DD work rather than to the present measurements; the body reports a ~22-fold reduction in scan number. The abstract should clarify which quantity is enhanced 1000-fold.
  5. [Eq. (3)] The notation uses both s_j for the kernel widths and s as the continuous cluster size; the relationship between the discrete grid s_j and the argument of f_n(s) should be stated explicitly, including the number of grid points and the range of s used in the inversion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the quadratic dispersion law is an empirical fit to inverted data, not a quantity predetermined by the paper's equations or by a self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's only new quantitative claim is the observation that Δs, the FWHM of the large-cluster population of the reconstructed cluster-size distribution f_n(s), grows as t_n^2 (Fig. 4d). This quantity is not an input to Eq. (3): the model S̃_{n,k}=Σ_j exp(-k^2/s_j) f_n(s_j)+ε relates coherence distributions to cluster sizes but contains no term forcing Δs ∝ t_n^2, and the Teal–Eccles/Tikhonov inversion does not encode that scaling. The quadratic curve is a fit to the reconstructed points, not a prediction derived from the model. The self-citations [10,12] are used only as prior experimental benchmarks for the largest-cluster growth and the 97% front; the present data independently reproduce those scalings, and the new quadratic observation does not depend on those citations. Even the t^3 front check against [12] is a confirmation using new data, not an argument whose conclusion is imported from the citation. The paper's explicit statement that it has no model for the quadratic law is a limitation, not a circular step. The reader's concern that Tikhonov smoothing may bias the FWHM growth is an experimental-robustness issue requiring synthetic-data validation, but it is not a case of a derived quantity reducing to an input by construction or by self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central quadratic-law claim rests on the inversion ansatz of Eq. (3), the assumption that DD readout is unbiased, and the choice of Tikhonov regularization, none of which are validated against synthetic data. The quadratic and cubic scaling coefficients are fitted to extracted quantities rather than derived from a model.

free parameters (5)
  • Tikhonov regularization parameter = not stated
    Controls the smoothness of f_n(s) in Eq. (3). Not reported, so inferred widths and their scaling may depend on its choice.
  • Quadratic coefficient for Delta s(t) = not stated; Delta s proportional to t_n^2 curve in Fig. 4d
    The central quadratic law is obtained by fitting a parabola to FWHM values extracted from the inverted distributions. No uncertainty or model is given.
  • Cubic coefficient for 97% propagation front = not stated; curve in Fig. 4c
    The front growth t^3 is fitted to cumulative 97% values, and this fitted scaling is used to claim accordance with previous ballistic dynamics.
  • FWHM threshold / 97% cumulative level = 0.97
    A chosen reference level for defining the propagation front. An arbitrary convention that affects the fitted scaling exponent.
  • DD pulse parameters theta and tau = theta=45 degrees, tau=10 microseconds for n=12; parameter sweeps for other runs
    Optimized empirically to maximize signal-to-noise ratio. If DD detection alters the dynamics, the central claim is affected.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Average Hamiltonian Theory, first-order Magnus expansion gives the effective double-quantum Hamiltonian H_DQ in Eq. (1).
    Used to justify the DQ Hamiltonian and the DQ pulse sequence. This is standard in NMR but relies on the pulse sequence being the zeroth-order term of the Magnus expansion.
  • domain assumption The DD acquisition block does not substantially perturb the MQ coherence distribution, so the Fourier transform of DD-acquired signals yields the true S_n,k.
    Needed to interpret DD-acquired spectra as unbiased MQC data. Comparison is shown only for n=6 and n=9, not for the long times where the new claim is made.
  • ad hoc to paper The cluster size distribution can be represented as a weighted sum of Gaussian kernels with widths s_j (Eq. 3).
    This ansatz is chosen to make the inversion tractable. A different kernel could change the inferred f_n(s) and the resulting FWHM scaling.
  • domain assumption The secular dipolar Hamiltonian H_zz^d with only intermolecular couplings describes adamantane protons, with each molecule behaving as a spin-1/2 due to fast molecular tumbling.
    Standard model for adamantane, used to expect 3D network behavior. Any violation would change the interpretation of the scaling laws.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multiple Quantum Many-Body Clustering Probed by Dynamical Decoupling." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WGIBMFVW

@misc{pith2026250415183,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multiple Quantum Many-Body Clustering Probed by Dynamical Decoupling},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WGIBMFVW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15183}
}
read the original abstract

The manipulation of quantum information in large systems requires precise control of quantum systems that are out-of-equilibrium. As the size of the system increases, its fragility in response to external perturbations and intrinsic decoherence processes also increases. The degradation of the system response makes accurate measurements a challenging and time-consuming task. However, quantum information lifetime enhancement can be achieved by dynamical decoupling techniques (DD), where an external drive with a frequency much higher than the system's internal evolution renders signal acquisition with decay times greater than 1000-fold. In this study, we demonstrate that the system response during a prethermal period, subject to Floquet control, can be utilized to probe the multiple quantum evolution of dense and highly connected spin systems. This approach exhibits an enhanced sensitivity at a reduced experimental time. The enhanced signal-to-noise ratio achieved enabled the use of numerical inversion strategies to model the evolution of the excited multiple quantum coherences, which describe the number of correlated spins within a cluster. We observed for the first time, to the best of our knowledge, that the increase in the number of correlated spins with multiple quantum evolution is accompanied by an increase in the distribution of spin cluster sizes, which follows a quadratic law.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.15183 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [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 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D. A. Roberts and B. Swingle, Lieb-Robinson bound and the butterfly effect in quantum field theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 091602 (2016). 6

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Swingle, Unscrambling the physics of out-of-time- order correlators, Nat

    B. Swingle, Unscrambling the physics of out-of-time- order correlators, Nat. Phys. 14, 988 (2018)

    2018

  3. [3]

    A. I. Larkin and Y. N. Ovchinikov, Quasiclassical method in the theory of superconductivity, Sov. Phys. JETP 28, 1200 (1969)

    work page 1969

  4. [4]

    Munowitz and A

    M. Munowitz and A. Pines, Multiple-quantum nu- clear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, Science 233, 525 (1986)

    work page 1986

  5. [5]

    Khitrin, Growth of NMR multiple-quantum co- herences in quasi-one-dimensional systems, Chemical Physics Letters 274, 217 (1997)

    A. Khitrin, Growth of NMR multiple-quantum co- herences in quasi-one-dimensional systems, Chemical Physics Letters 274, 217 (1997)

    work page 1997

  6. [6]

    J. M. Maldacena, Black holes and quantum information, Nature Reviews Physics 2, 123 (2020)

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Kitaev, A toy quantum black hole, in Brown Phys

    A. Kitaev, A toy quantum black hole, in Brown Phys. Colloq., March 6 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Goldman and J

    N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Periodically driven quan- tum systems: Effective Hamiltonians and engineered gauge fields, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031027 (2014)

    2014

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    S. A. Weidinger and M. Knap, Floquet prethermalization and regimes of heating in a periodically driven, interact- ing quantum system, Scientific Reports 7, 45382 (2017)

    2017

  2. [10]

    C. M. S´ anchez, A. K. Chattah, K. X. Wei, L. Buljuba- sich, P. Cappellaro, and H. M. Pastawski, Perturbation independent decay of the Loschmidt echo in a many-body system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 030601 (2020)

    2020

  3. [11]

    C. M. S´ anchez, A. K. Chattah, and H. M. Pastawski, Emergent decoherence induced by quantum chaos in a many-body system: A Loschmidt echo observation through NMR, Phys. Rev. A 105, 052232 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    S´ anchez, H

    C. S´ anchez, H. Pastawski, and A. Chattah, Low pertur- bation limit decoherence analyzed by scaling the double quantum Hamiltonian, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Open 16-17, 100104 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    A. R. Brown and L. Susskind, Second law of quantum complexity, Phys. Rev. D 97, 086015 (2018)

    2018

  6. [14]

    Xu and B

    S. Xu and B. Swingle, Accessing scrambling using matrix product operators, Nature Physics 16, 199–204 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    Lozano-Negro, P

    F. Lozano-Negro, P. R. Zangara, and H. M. Pastawski, Ergodicity breaking in an incommensurate system ob- served by OTOCs and Loschmidt echoes: From quantum diffusion to sub-diffusion., Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 150, 111175 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    McCartney, E

    C. McCartney, E. Chen, and S. R. Moulik, Measuring butterfly velocity in the XY model on emerging quantum computers, arXiv:2411.10206 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    F. D. Dom´ ınguez and G. A.´Alvarez, Dynamics of quan- tum information scrambling under decoherence effects measured via active spin clusters, Physical Review A 104, 062406 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Schuster and N

    T. Schuster and N. Y. Yao, Operator growth in open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 160402 (2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    Zhou and B

    T. Zhou and B. Swingle, Operator growth from global out-of-time-order correlators, Nature Communications 14, 3411 (2023)

    2023

  12. [20]

    Yan and N

    B. Yan and N. A. Sinitsyn, Recovery of damaged informa- tion and the out-of-time-ordered correlators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 040605 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    A. M. Green, A. Elben, C. H. Alderete, L. K. Joshi, N. H. Nguyen, T. V. Zache, Y. Zhu, B. Sundar, and N. M. Linke, Experimental measurement of out-of-time-ordered correlators at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 140601 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Suter and G

    D. Suter and G. A. ´Alvarez, Colloquium: Protecting quantum information against environmental noise, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 041001 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    Beatrez, O

    W. Beatrez, O. Janes, A. Akkiraju, A. Pillai, A. Oddo, P. Reshetikhin, E. Druga, M. McAllister, M. Elo, B. Gilbert, D. Suter, and A. Ajoy, Floquet prethermaliza- tion with lifetime exceeding 90 s in a bulk hyperpolarized solid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 170603 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    A. Ajoy, R. Nirodi, A. Sarkar, P. Reshetikhin, E. Druga, A. Akkiraju, M. McAllister, G. Maineri, S. Le, A. Lin, et al., Dynamical decoupling in interacting systems: ap- plications to signal-enhanced hyperpolarized readout, arXiv:2008.08323 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Beatrez, C

    W. Beatrez, C. Fleckenstein, A. Pillai, E. de Leon Sanchez, A. Akkiraju, J. D. Alcala, S. Conti, P. Reshetikhin, E. Druga, M. Bukov, and A. Ajoy, Critical prethermal discrete time crystal cre- ated by two-frequency driving, Nature Physics 19, 407 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Y. Li, T. Zhou, Z. Wu, P. Peng, S. Zhang, R. Fu, R. Zhang, W. Zheng, P. Zhang, H. Zhai, X. Peng, and J. Du, Emergent universal quench dynamics in randomly interacting spin models, Nature Physics 20 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    R. H. Acosta, R. C. Zamar, and G. A. Monti, NMR pro- ton spin dynamics in thermotropic liquid crystals subject to multipulse excitation, Phys. Rev. E 68, 041705 (2003)

    2003

  20. [28]

    L. F. Santos, The quick drive to pseudo-equilibrium, Na- ture Physics 17, 426 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    P. Peng, C. Yin, X. Huang, C. Ramanathan, and P. Cap- pellaro, Floquet prethermalization in dipolar spin chains, Nature Physics 17, 444 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Mori, Floquet states in open quantum systems, An- nual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 14, 35 (2023)

    T. Mori, Floquet states in open quantum systems, An- nual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 14, 35 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    W. W. Ho, T. Mori, D. A. Abanin, and E. G. Dalla Torre, Quantum and classical Floquet prethermalization, An- nals of Physics 454, 169297 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Haeberlen, High Resolution NMR in solids (Academic Press, 1976)

    U. Haeberlen, High Resolution NMR in solids (Academic Press, 1976)

    1976

  25. [33]

    J. Baum, M. Munowitz, A. N. Garroway, and A. Pines, Multiple-quantum dynamics in solid state NMR, J. Chem. Phys. 83, 2015 (1985)

    1985

  26. [34]

    Baum and A

    J. Baum and A. Pines, NMR studies of clustering in solids, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 108, 7447 (1986)

    1986

  27. [35]

    F. S. Lozano-Negro, C. M. S´ anchez, A. K. Chattah, G. A. ´Alvarez, and H. M. Pastawski, Global out-of-time-order correlators as a signature of scrambling dynamics of local observables, Phys. Rev. A 110, 042410 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Goussev, R

    A. Goussev, R. A. Jalabert, H. M. Pastawski, and D. A. Wisniacki, Loschmidt echo, Scholarpedia7, 11687 (2012)

    2012

  29. [37]

    Lacelle, S

    S. Lacelle, S. Hwang, and B. C. Gerstein, Multiple quan- tum nuclear magnetic resonance of solids: A cautionary note for data analysis and interpretation, The Journal of Chemical Physics 99, 8407 (1993)

    1993

  30. [38]

    C. M. S´ anchez, P. R. Levstein, L. Buljubasich, H. M. Pastawski, and A. K. Chattah, Quantum dynamics of ex- citations and decoherence in many-spin systems detected with Loschmidt echoes: its relation to their spreading through the Hilbert space, Philosophical Transactions of ...

    2016

  31. [39]

    C. M. S´ anchez, R. H. Acosta, P. R. Levstein, H. M. Pastawski, and A. K. Chattah, Clustering and decoher- ence of correlated spins under double quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 90, 042122 (2014). 7

    2014

  32. [40]

    S. W. Provencher, A constrained regularization method for inverting data represented by linear algebraic or inte- gral equations, Computer Physics Communications 27, 213 (1982)

    1982

  33. [41]

    Tikhonov and V

    A. Tikhonov and V. Arsenin, Solutions of Ill-posed Prob- lems, Halsted Press book (Winston, 1977)

    1977

  34. [42]

    P. D. Teal and C. Eccles, Adaptive truncation of matrix decompositions and efficient estimation of NMR relax- ation distributions, Inverse Problems 31, 045010 (2015)

    2015

Pith tools

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