Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Preparation of cat states in many-body eigenbasis via non-local measurement

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Periodically missing a chosen state filters a spin chain into a tunable many-body cat state.

desk verdict Solid parameter-free demonstration of measurement-based eigenstate-cat preparation on a scar tower; the generality claims outrun the evidence, but the core mechanism is worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.00199 v1 pith:WH47MXUA submitted 2025-06-30 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech

Ruoyu Yin , Hongzheng Zhao This is my paper
classification quant-phcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords quantumstatepreparationengineereddissipationpost-selectiondarkstatesmany-bodyscarsspectrumgeneratingalgebraGreenberger–Horne–Zeilingermeasurement-induceddynamics
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 tries to establish that repeated non-detection of one chosen many-body Fock state, inserted into unitary evolution at a tuned period, acts as a filter that drives a quantum many-body system into a coherent superposition of selected energy eigenstates. If correct, this yields a route to many-body 'cat' states and other tunable superpositions without solving for the eigenstates or relying on local dissipation. The demonstration is a non-integrable spin-1 XY chain with an exactly solvable tower of eigenstates, where the protocol produces a spin-1 Greenberger–Horne–Zeilinger state and a time-oscillating generalized cat state. The paper also argues that the superpositions survive in a long-lived metastable regime when perturbations break the solvable structure.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the stroboscopic filtration operator $F^\tau_{\psi_r}=(1-|\psi_r\rangle\langle\psi_r|)e^{-iH\tau}$, whose eigenvalues split into unit-modulus dark states and decaying bright states. A dark state for two resonant eigenenergies has the explicit form $|\Phi\rangle\propto\langle\psi_r|E_2\rangle|E_1\rangle-\langle\psi_r|E_1\rangle|E_2\rangle$; for higher degeneracy, the paper constructs $g-1$ dark states by a Gram–Schmidt determinant. The spin-1 XY model supplies a spectrum generating algebra $[H,Q^+]|\Omega\rangle=2hQ^+|\Omega\rangle$ whose tower of exact eigenstates $|B_n\rangle\propto(Q^+)^n|\Omega\rangle$ contains both the initial and removal states, making the resonance engineering analytically transparent.

What would settle it

A direct check is to run the second protocol with $h\tau_2=\pi/(L-1)$ and add $H_2=J_2\sum_i(S^x_iS^x_{i+2}+S^y_iS^y_{i+2})$ at $J_2=0.02$ on $L=10$; the claim predicts the fidelity $Q_n$ for $|\Psi^{(2)}\rangle$ stays near $0.5$ until $n\approx 10^4$, so a decay setting in at $n\approx 10^2$ would rule out the metastable regime. The paper's own random-matrix check offers the complementary test: for a $D=3000$ GOE matrix, the normalized survival probability $\|(F^n)|\psi_0\rangle\|^2$ must converge to $|\langle\Phi_\delta|\psi_0\rangle|^2$ at long times, and any decay to zero would falsify the generic dark-state filtration claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a dark-state filtration mechanism: when the measurement period satisfies $e^{-iE_1\tau}=e^{-iE_2\tau}$ for two eigenenergies, the operator $F^\tau_{\psi_r}=(1-|\psi_r\rangle\langle\psi_r|)U(\tau)$ admits unit-modulus eigenstates orthogonal to the removed state, so the long-time normalized state converges to $N_\infty \sum_\delta e^{-in\tau E_\delta} \langle\Phi_\delta|\psi_0\rangle|\Phi_\delta\rangle$. In the spin-1 XY model, one resonance choice gives the spin-1 GHZ state as a superposition of the two ferromagnetic tower states, and a second choice gives a superposition of four tower states that oscillates with frequency $2h$ and shows tunable spatiotemporal order. The paper claims numerical evidence from a random-matrix Hamiltonian that the mechanism is generic, and that with a perturbation breaking the spectrum generating algebra the first target remains stable while the second survives only as a long-lived metastable plateau.

Load-bearing premise

The construction requires an exactly solvable ladder of special eigenstates that contains both the starting state and the removed state; when the perturbation $H_2$ breaks this ladder, the generalized target state loses stability and only a metastable remnant remains.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Tuning $h\tau$ to other rational multiples $\pi p/q$ selects different resonance manifolds, so the number of constituent eigenstates and their relative phases can be chosen in advance.
  • The filtration time for the two main targets grows exponentially in system size $L$, with analytical predictions from the dominant bright eigenvalue; other resonances give the opposite scaling and can prepare targets after a single measurement in the thermodynamic limit.
  • With a perturbation that breaks the spectrum generating algebra, the GHZ target stays stable while the generalized target shows a metastable plateau lasting to $n\approx 10^4$ at $J_2=0.02$, leaving an experimentally visible window for the oscillating string operator.
  • The protocol needs only one ancilla, a multi-body controlled gate, and post-selection, and does not require prior knowledge of the explicit eigenstates; the random-matrix check supports applicability to generic many-body systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: because the resonance condition depends only on phases of the evolution operator, the same filtration should work for Floquet or driven systems, with the driving period replacing the Hamiltonian energy difference as the tunable knob.
  • Beyond the paper: the electrostatic mapping of bright eigenvalues suggests the filtration speed is controlled by how evenly the removal state overlaps the resonant energy subspaces, so choosing removal states with more uniform weights could shorten the exponential preparation time.
  • Beyond the paper: the metastable plateau under perturbations is reminiscent of Floquet prethermalization, and a quantitative comparison of the plateau lifetime with the prethermal time scale would be a natural next test.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a measurement-based state filtration protocol for preparing coherent superpositions of many-body eigenstates. The system evolves under a many-body Hamiltonian U(τ)=e^{-iHτ} and is periodically subjected to a non-detection measurement of a chosen Fock state |ψr⟩, yielding the non-unitary map F = (1-|ψr⟩⟨ψr|)U(τ). Dark eigenstates of F with unit-modulus eigenvalues arise when U(τ) is degenerate; by tuning τ to a resonance condition between two eigenenergies, a dark manifold survives repeated removal while bright components decay, so the long-time state approaches a coherent superposition of the resonant eigenstates (Eq. 4). The protocol is demonstrated on a spin-1 XY chain possessing an exactly solvable tower of eigenstates |B_n⟩ generated by a spectrum-generating algebra. The authors prepare a spin-1 GHZ state and a dynamical cat state with spatiotemporal order, provide analytical expressions for the filtration time that match numerics without fitting parameters, and report a metastable robustness regime under a perturbation that breaks the SGA structure.

Significance. The core mechanism, in which periodic non-detection measurements filter a many-body wavefunction into a dark-state manifold, is rigorously formulated and clearly explained. The analytical predictions for the filtration time (Eqs. S4-S6) are parameter-free and agree with exact numerics for L up to 14, a substantial strength of the paper. The electrostatic analogy for the bright-state eigenvalues (SM Note 1) is elegant and provides quantitative insight into the convergence time. The demonstrated GHZ and dynamical-cat states are notable because they superpose eigenstates that differ macroscopically in bi-magnon number. However, the claimed applicability to generic many-body systems is not established by the evidence presented: the useful targets rely on the exact SGA tower, and the random-matrix example produces only a featureless two-eigenstate cat. The practical cost of post-selection is also not analyzed. These limitations reduce the significance of the protocol as a general state-preparation tool, although the results within the solvable subspace are convincing.

major comments (3)
  1. [§Measurement-induced state filtration protocol (Eq. 2); §The model] The claim in the Introduction that the protocol 'does not require prior knowledge of the explicit form of the eigenstates, or any symmetry structure' is misleading in the context of the full paper. Equation (2) requires exact knowledge of the eigenenergies to set the resonance condition, and for a generic many-body system obtaining exact eigenenergies is as hard as obtaining the eigenstates themselves. Moreover, the useful target states rely entirely on the exact SGA tower (Eqs. 6-7) and on the fact that both |ψ0⟩ and |ψr⟩ lie in its (L+1)-dimensional span. The random-matrix test in the End Matter only demonstrates the mechanism for a featureless two-eigenstate cat and still requires exact extremal eigenvalues. The abstract and introduction should be scoped to explicitly state this limitation, or additional evidence for preparation of tunable, macroscopically distinct superpositions without an SGA structure must be provided.
  2. [§Stability of the protocol, Fig. 4] The robustness to the SGA-breaking perturbation H2 is demonstrated only for L=10 and a few selected values of J2. For J2=0.02, the quality Qn plateaus near 0.5 until n≈10^4 and then decays, and no scaling law or lower bound for the plateau lifetime is given. Without a quantitative characterization of the metastable regime as a function of J2 and L, the statement that the protocol 'remains robust' under perturbations is an extrapolation from a single system size and a few coupling strengths. Please provide a scaling analysis or explicitly limit the robustness claim to the unperturbed case.
  3. [Eq. (1); §Possible experimental implementation] The post-selection overhead is not analyzed. The probability that a run survives n consecutive non-detection outcomes is ∥(F^τ_ψr)^n|ψ0⟩∥², which tends to |⟨Φ|ψ0⟩|² in the long-time limit. For the spin-chain targets considered, the initial state's overlap with the dark manifold is of order 2^{-L/2}, so the success probability decays exponentially in L while the filtration time n_epsilon also grows exponentially (Fig. 2c,f). The expected number of measurements per successful preparation therefore scales roughly as (2^L)^2, a resource cost that should be quantified and discussed in the experimental implementation section. This omission is consequential for the paper's claim that the protocol can be realized with tools available in current quantum simulators.
minor comments (6)
  1. [End Matter (random-matrix section)] There is a punctuation error: 'The removal state |ψr⟩ is chosen as |2⟩. and the initial state is |ψ0⟩ = |1⟩.' The period before 'and' should be removed or the sentence restructured.
  2. [Fig. 2 caption] The parameter values 'J = 1, D = 0.1' appear detached from the rest of the parameter description; please integrate them into the caption for clarity.
  3. [Eq. (S4)] Equation (S4) has a logarithmic argument that vanishes when the overlap with the dominant bright state is zero (e.g., even L and Lθ0 an odd multiple of π). The text correctly states that the dominant bright state does not contribute in that case, but the domain of validity of (S4) should be stated explicitly to avoid the appearance of a removable singularity.
  4. [End Matter (Fig. 5)] The notation ∥|ψ̃_n⟩∥² is used in Fig. 5 and the surrounding text, but the tilde state is not defined in the main text; please define it as the unnormalized state after n filtration steps.
  5. [Introduction and §The model] The term 'bi-magnon' is used without definition; a brief explanation that Q^+ creates a bound pair of magnon excitations would make the text more accessible to non-specialists.
  6. [§Possible experimental implementation] The term 'non-local measurement' is used in the title and abstract; please define it explicitly as a measurement involving a multi-body controlled gate acting on many system qubits, to distinguish it from Bell-basis or nonlocal joint measurements in quantum information.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central filtration result is derived in-paper from Eq. (1)-(4), the SGA tower is taken from independent literature, and the analytical filtration-time predictions (Eqs. S4-S6) are parameter-free and match numerics.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is self-contained at the level of the main claim. The state after n non-detection measurements is defined by Eq. (1), and dark states are defined as eigenstates of the filtration operator with unit-modulus eigenvalues. The paper then proves, rather than assumes, that the long-time normalized state is the projection onto the dark manifold: Eq. (3) separates bright and dark contributions, and Eq. (4) follows by letting the bright eigenvalues decay. The resonance condition of Eq. (2) is derived inside the paper from the requirement that U(τ) has a degenerate eigenvalue, so the citation [79] is ancillary rather than load-bearing. Similarly, the electrostatic-analogy method that leads to the filtration-time expressions is sketched in SM Note 1 and used to derive the explicit parameter-free formulas of SM Note 2; the theory curves in Fig. 2(c,f) and Fig. S2 contain no fitted parameters beyond the fixed model constants, and the exponential scaling is independently reproduced by exact numerics. The solvable tower |B_n> is not an input invented by the authors for this protocol: it is attributed to external works [71,80], and the decompositions of |ψ_r> and |ψ_0> into this tower are given explicitly. The GHZ and oscillating targets are dark states by construction, but the nontrivial claim—that the filtration drives arbitrary initial states to those targets—is verified analytically and numerically, not imposed. The random-matrix test in the End Matter is another independent check of Eq. (4). The perturbation results of Fig. 4 are numerical and indicate a limitation rather than a circular step. Overall, no prediction in the paper reduces to a fitted value or to an unverified self-citation; score 0.

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

The central derivation leans on the SGA tower structure and the non-degeneracy assumption; no parameters are fitted to data. The protocol itself introduces no new physical entities beyond the dark-state manifold, which is a mathematical construction.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The spin-1 XY Hamiltonian (5) possesses a tower of exact eigenstates |B_n⟩ with energies E_n = E0 + 2nh generated by the SGA operator Q+ (Eqs. 6-7).
    This is the key model-specific structure, imported from Refs. 71 and 80; the protocol's analytic target states are built from these |B_n⟩.
  • domain assumption The spectrum of H is non-degenerate.
    Stated in the main text: 'for simplicity, we always assume the spectrum of H does not have any degeneracy.' If accidental degeneracies exist, the dark-state manifold changes and the target states may be altered.
  • domain assumption The initial and removal states lie in the solvable subspace spanned by |B_n⟩.
    The decompositions of |ψ0⟩ and |ψr⟩ into |B_n⟩ (main text before Eq. 10) restrict the dynamics to the (L+1)-dimensional tower subspace; this is what makes the two-example analysis exact.
  • domain assumption The non-detection measurement is a perfect projector 1 - |ψr⟩⟨ψr| with no measurement backaction on the rest of the system.
    Used in Eq. (1); realistic measurements have finite fidelity, though the perturbation analysis with λ|ν⟩ partially addresses this.
  • ad hoc to paper There exists a period τ satisfying the resonance condition e^{-iE1τ}=e^{-iE2τ} for the intended eigenstates.
    For the specific model, integer spacing of E_n makes this easy (e.g., hτ=π/L); for a generic system, finding such τ requires exact eigenenergies, which the paper notes as difficult.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Preparation of cat states in many-body eigenbasis via non-local measurement." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WH47MXUA

@misc{pith2026250700199,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Preparation of cat states in many-body eigenbasis via non-local measurement},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WH47MXUA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.00199}
}
read the original abstract

Engineered dissipation offers a promising route to prepare correlated quantum many-body states that are otherwise difficult to access using purely unitary protocols. However, creating superpositions of multiple many-body eigenstates with tunable properties remains a major challenge. We propose to periodically interrupt the many-body evolution by precisely removing a given many-body Fock state through a non-local post-selected measurement protocol. Upon tuning the measurement period, we show that a dark state manifold survives the removal, allowing us to filter the system and generate a coherent superposition within this manifold at long times. As a testbed, we study a non-integrable spin-1 XY chain featuring a solvable family of eigenstates that can differ macroscopically in quasi-particle excitations. Our protocol generates tunable superpositions of these eigenstates, including the spin-1 Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state and a generalized variant with tunable spatiotemporal order. Under perturbations, the system exhibits an exceptionally long-lived metastable regime where the engineered superpositions remain robust. Our work provides new insight into quantum state preparation via non-local measurements using tools available in current quantum simulators.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.00199 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) The state filtration protocol periodically removes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The filtration quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The oscillatory behavior of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) The filtration quality [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The system is filtered to the target superposition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The modulus of the dominant bright eigenvalue decreases as the system size grows. This indicates that the preparation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

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. Temporal Interference from Topological Transitions in Monitored Quantum Dynamics

    cond-mat.stat-mech 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Near winding-number jumps w→w−2 in monitored quantum dynamics, two quasi-dark modes produce long-lived temporal interference in first-detection probabilities, protected by bipartite symmetry.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

102 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science 273, 1073 (1996)

    S. Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science 273, 1073 (1996)

    1996

  2. [2]

    The Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Uni- versities, Peking University

    (8) The initial state is chosen as |ψ0⟩ = O j |+j⟩ + ei(jπ+θ0) |−j⟩ / √ 2, (9) where we explicitly introduce the parameter θ0 to manipulate the relative phase in the superposition. Also, both the initial and removal states live within the solvable subspace, as one can decompose them as |ψr⟩ = PL n=0 einπ qL n /2L |Bn⟩, and |ψ0⟩ = PL n=0 ei(L−n)θ0 qL n /2L...

    2000

  3. [3]

    J. I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Goals and opportunities in quantum simulation, Nature Physics 8, 264 (2012)

    2012

  4. [4]

    Biamonte, P

    J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, Quantum machine learning, Nature 549, 195 (2017)

    2017

  5. [5]

    Reiher, N

    M. Reiher, N. Wiebe, K. M. Svore, D. Wecker, and M. Troyer, Elucidating reaction mechanisms on quan- tum computers, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 7555 (2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    Y. Cao, J. Romero, J. P. Olson, M. Degroote, P. D. Johnson, M. Kieferov´ a, I. D. Kivlichan, T. Menke, B. Peropadre, N. P. D. Sawaya, S. Sim, L. Veis, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Quantum chemistry in the age of 6 quantum computing, Chemical Reviews 119, 10856 (2019)

    2019

  7. [7]

    McArdle, S

    S. McArdle, S. Endo, A. Aspuru-Guzik, S. C. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, Quantum computational chemistry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 015003 (2020)

    2020

  8. [8]

    Farhi, J

    E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, arXiv preprint arXiv:quant-ph/0001106 (2000)

    arXiv 2000

Show all 102 references
  1. [9]

    Greiner, O

    M. Greiner, O. Mandel, T. Esslinger, T. W. H¨ ansch, and I. Bloch, Quantum phase transition from a superfluid to a mott insulator in a gas of ultracold atoms, Nature415, 39 (2002)

    2002

  2. [10]

    Albash and D

    T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Adiabatic quantum compu- tation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015002 (2018)

    2018

  3. [11]

    P. W. Claeys, M. Pandey, D. Sels, and A. Polkovnikov, Floquet-engineering counterdiabatic protocols in quan- tum many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 090602 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Semeghini, H

    G. Semeghini, H. Levine, A. Keesling, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, D. Bluvstein, R. Verresen, H. Pichler, M. Kali- nowski, R. Samajdar, A. Omran, S. Sachdev, A. Vish- wanath, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Prob- ing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simul...

    2021

  5. [13]

    Cerezo, A

    M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, et al. , Varia- tional quantum algorithms, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 625 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    Tilly, H

    J. Tilly, H. Chen, S. Cao, D. Picozzi, K. Setia, Y. Li, E. Grant, L. Wossnig, I. Rungger, G. H. Booth, and J. Tennyson, The variational quantum eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices, Physics Reports 986, 1 (2022)

    2022

  7. [15]

    D. A. Fedorov, B. Peng, N. Govind, H. Zhang, and et al., Vqe method: a short survey and recent developments, Materials Theory 6, 2 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    J. F. Poyatos, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum reser- voir engineering with laser cooled trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4728 (1996)

    1996

  9. [17]

    Pielawa, G

    S. Pielawa, G. Morigi, D. Vitali, and L. Davidovich, Generation of einstein-podolsky-rosen-entangled radia- tion through an atomic reservoir, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 240401 (2007)

    2007

  10. [18]

    Diehl, A

    S. Diehl, A. Micheli, A. Kantian, B. Kraus, H. P. B¨ uchler, and P. Zoller, Quantum states and phases in driven open quantum systems with cold atoms, Nature Physics 4, 878 (2008)

    2008

  11. [19]

    Verstraete, M

    F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum computation and quantum-state engineering driven by dissipation, Nature Physics 5, 633 (2009)

    2009

  12. [20]

    S. G. Schirmer and X. Wang, Stabilizing open quantum systems by markovian reservoir engineering, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062306 (2010)

    2010

  13. [21]

    C. A. Muschik, E. S. Polzik, and J. I. Cirac, Dissipa- tively driven entanglement of two macroscopic atomic ensembles, Phys. Rev. A 83, 052312 (2011)

    2011

  14. [22]

    Barreiro, M

    J. Barreiro, M. M¨ uller, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, T. Monz, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, C. Roos, P. Zoller, and R. Blatt, An open-system quantum simulator with trapped ions, Nature 470, 486 (2011)

    2011

  15. [23]

    Shankar, M

    S. Shankar, M. Hatridge, Z. Leghtas, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, U. Vool, S. M. Girvin, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret, Autonomously stabi- lized entanglement between two superconducting quan- tum bits, Nature 504, 419 (2013)

    2013

  16. [24]

    Y. Lin, J. P. Gaebler, F. Reiter, T. R. Tan, R. Bowler, A. S. Soerensen, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, Dissi- pative production of a maximally entangled steady state of two quantum bits, Nature 504, 415 (2013)

    2013

  17. [25]

    Morigi, J

    G. Morigi, J. Eschner, C. Cormick, Y. Lin, D. Leibfried, and D. J. Wineland, Dissipative quantum control of a spin chain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 200502 (2015)

    2015

  18. [26]

    Reiter, D

    F. Reiter, D. Reeb, and A. S. Sørensen, Scalable dissi- pative preparation of many-body entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 040501 (2016)

    2016

  19. [27]

    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, Phys. Rev. A 94, 032313 (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    S. Roy, J. T. Chalker, I. V. Gornyi, and Y. Gefen, Measurement-induced steering of quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033347 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    L. Zhou, S. Choi, and M. D. Lukin, Symmetry-protected dissipative preparation of matrix product states, Phys. Rev. A 104, 032418 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    P. Rall, C. Wang, and P. Wocjan, Thermal State Prepa- ration via Rounding Promises, Quantum 7, 1132 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    C.-F. Chen, M. J. Kastoryano, F. G. S. L. Brand˜ ao, and A. Gily´ en, Quantum thermal state preparation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.18224 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Mori, Floquet states in open quantum systems, An- nual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 35 (2023)

    T. Mori, Floquet states in open quantum systems, An- nual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 35 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Shtanko and R

    O. Shtanko and R. Movassagh, Preparing thermal states on noiseless and noisy programmable quantum proces- sors, arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.14688 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    D. A. Puente, F. Motzoi, T. Calarco, G. Morigi, and M. Rizzi, Quantum state preparation via engineered an- cilla resetting, Quantum 8, 1299 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Matthies, M

    A. Matthies, M. Rudner, A. Rosch, and E. Berg, Pro- grammable adiabatic demagnetization for systems with trivial and topological excitations, Quantum 8, 1505 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    Mi et al

    X. Mi et al. , Stable quantum-correlated many-body states through engineered dissipation, Science383, 1332 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    Lloyd, A

    J. Lloyd, A. A. Michailidis, X. Mi, V. Smelyanskiy, and D. A. Abanin, Quasiparticle cooling algorithms for quantum many-body state preparation, PRX Quantum 6, 010361 (2025)

    2025

  30. [38]

    Kraus, H

    B. Kraus, H. P. B¨ uchler, S. Diehl, A. Kantian, A. Micheli, and P. Zoller, Preparation of entangled states by quantum markov processes, Phys. Rev. A 78, 042307 (2008)

    2008

  31. [39]

    T.-C. Lu, Z. Zhang, S. Vijay, and T. H. Hsieh, Mixed- state long-range order and criticality from measurement and feedback, PRX Quantum 4, 030318 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Lavasani, Z.-X

    A. Lavasani, Z.-X. Luo, and S. Vijay, Monitored quan- tum dynamics and the kitaev spin liquid, Phys. Rev. B 108, 115135 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Ritter, D

    M. Ritter, D. M. Long, Q. Yue, A. Chandran, and A. J. Koll´ ar, Autonomous stabilization of floquet states us- ing static dissipation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.12908 (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    Schnell, C

    A. Schnell, C. Weitenberg, and A. Eckardt, Dissipative preparation of a Floquet topological insulator in an op- tical lattice via bath engineering, SciPost Phys. 17, 052 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    Zhao, L.-N

    W. Zhao, L.-N. Wu, F. Petiziol, and A. Eckardt, Feed- back cooling of fermionic atoms in optical lattices, arXiv 7 preprint arXiv:2501.07293 (2025)

    2025

  36. [44]

    Lin, Dissipative preparation of many-body quantum states: Towards practical quantum advantage, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.21308 (2025)

    L. Lin, Dissipative preparation of many-body quantum states: Towards practical quantum advantage, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.21308 (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    Buˇ ca, J

    B. Buˇ ca, J. Tindall, and D. Jaksch, Non-stationary co- herent quantum many-body dynamics through dissipa- tion, Nature Communications 10, 1730 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    Dogra, M

    N. Dogra, M. Landini, K. Kroeger, L. Hruby, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Dissipation-induced structural insta- bility and chiral dynamics in a quantum gas, Science 366, 1496 (2019)

    2019

  39. [47]

    Buˇ ca, Unified theory of local quantum many- body dynamics: Eigenoperator thermalization theo- rems, Phys

    B. Buˇ ca, Unified theory of local quantum many- body dynamics: Eigenoperator thermalization theo- rems, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031013 (2023)

    2023

  40. [48]

    D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and A. Zeilinger, Bell’s theorem without inequalities, Amer- ican Journal of Physics 58, 1131 (1990)

    1990

  41. [49]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009)

    2009

  42. [50]

    Ben-Ami, M

    T. Ben-Ami, M. Heyl, and R. Moessner, Many-body cages: disorder-free glassiness from flat bands in fock space, and many-body rabi oscillations, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.13086 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    M. D. Reed, L. DiCarlo, S. E. Nigg, L. Sun, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Realization of three- qubit quantum error correction with superconducting circuits, Nature 482, 382 (2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    T´ oth and I

    G. T´ oth and I. Apellaniz, Quantum metrology from a quantum information science perspective, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 47, 424006 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    Bouwmeester, J.-W

    D. Bouwmeester, J.-W. Pan, M. Daniell, H. Wein- furter, and A. Zeilinger, Observation of three-photon greenberger-horne-zeilinger entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1345 (1999)

    1999

  46. [54]

    DiCarlo, M

    L. DiCarlo, M. D. Reed, L. Sun, B. R. Johnson, J. M. Chow, J. M. Gambetta, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Preparation and mea- surement of three-qubit entanglement in a supercon- ducting circuit, Nature 467, 574 (2010)

    2010

  47. [55]

    T. Monz, P. Schindler, J. T. Barreiro, M. Chwalla, D. Nigg, W. A. Coish, M. Harlander, W. H¨ ansel, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt, 14-qubit entanglement: Cre- ation and coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 130506 (2011)

    2011

  48. [56]

    G.-Y. Zhu, N. Tantivasadakarn, A. Vishwanath, S. Trebst, and R. Verresen, Nishimori’s cat: Stable long-range entanglement from finite-depth unitaries and weak measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 200201 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. R. and, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Advances in Physics 65, 239 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    Krovi and T

    H. Krovi and T. A. Brun, Quantum walks with infinite hitting times, Phys. Rev. A 74, 042334 (2006)

    2006

  51. [59]

    F. A. Gr¨ unbaum, L. Vel´ azquez, A. H. Werner, and R. F. Werner, Recurrence for discrete time unitary evo- lutions, Communications in Mathematical Physics 320, 543 (2013)

    2013

  52. [60]

    S. Dhar, S. Dasgupta, A. Dhar, and D. Sen, Detection of a quantum particle on a lattice under repeated pro- jective measurements, Phys. Rev. A 91, 062115 (2015)

    2015

  53. [61]

    Friedman, D

    H. Friedman, D. A. Kessler, and E. Barkai, Quantum walks: The first detected passage time problem, Phys. Rev. E 95, 032141 (2017)

    2017

  54. [62]

    Lahiri and A

    S. Lahiri and A. Dhar, Return to the origin problem for a particle on a one-dimensional lattice with quasi-zeno dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 99, 012101 (2019)

    2019

  55. [63]

    Dubey, C

    V. Dubey, C. Bernardin, and A. Dhar, Quantum dynamics under continuous projective measurements: Non-hermitian description and the continuum-space limit, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032221 (2021)

    2021

  56. [64]

    Tornow and K

    S. Tornow and K. Ziegler, Measurement-induced quan- tum walks on an ibm quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033089 (2023)

    2023

  57. [65]

    Yin and E

    R. Yin and E. Barkai, Restart expedites quantum walk hitting times, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 050802 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    Wang, R.-Y

    Y.-J. Wang, R.-Y. Yin, L.-Y. Dou, A.-N. Zhang, and X.- B. Song, Quantum first detection of a quantum walker on a perturbed ring, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 013202 (2023)

    2023

  59. [67]

    Ni and Y

    Z. Ni and Y. Zheng, First detection and tunneling time of a quantum walk, Entropy 25, 1231 (2023)

    2023

  60. [68]

    R. Yin, Q. Wang, S. Tornow, and E. Barkai, Restart uncertainty relation for monitored quantum dynamics, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 122, e2402912121 (2025)

    2025

  61. [69]

    S. Roy, S. Gupta, and G. Morigi, Causality, localisation, and universality of monitored quantum walks with long- range hopping, arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.12053 (2025)

    2025

  62. [70]

    Schecter and T

    M. Schecter and T. Iadecola, Weak ergodicity breaking and quantum many-body scars in spin-1 xy magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 147201 (2019)

    2019

  63. [71]

    Moudgalya, S

    S. Moudgalya, S. Rachel, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Reg- nault, Exact excited states of nonintegrable models, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235155 (2018)

    2018

  64. [72]

    Moudgalya, N

    S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, η- pairing in hubbard models: From spectrum generating algebras to quantum many-body scars, Phys. Rev. B 102, 085140 (2020)

    2020

  65. [73]

    D. K. Mark, C.-J. Lin, and O. I. Motrunich, Unified structure for exact towers of scar states in the affleck- kennedy-lieb-tasaki and other models, Phys. Rev. B 101, 195131 (2020)

    2020

  66. [74]

    Chandran, T

    A. Chandran, T. Iadecola, V. Khemani, and R. Moess- ner, Quantum many-body scars: A quasiparticle per- spective, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 14, 443 (2023)

    2023

  67. [75]

    Walter, G

    B. Walter, G. Perfetto, and A. Gambassi, Thermody- namic phases in first detected return times of quantum many-body systems, Phys. Rev. A 111, L040202 (2025)

    2025

  68. [76]

    G. Q. AI and Collaborators, Measurement-induced en- tanglement and teleportation on a noisy quantum pro- cessor, Nature 622, 481 (2023)

    2023

  69. [77]

    J. M. Koh, S.-N. Sun, M. Motta, and A. J. Minnich, Measurement-induced entanglement phase transition on a superconducting quantum processor with mid-circuit readout, Nature Physics 19, 1314 (2023)

    2023

  70. [78]

    Thiel, I

    F. Thiel, I. Mualem, D. Meidan, E. Barkai, and D. A. Kessler, Dark states of quantum search cause imperfect detection, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 043107 (2020)

    2020

  71. [79]

    Q. Liu, K. Ziegler, D. A. Kessler, and E. Barkai, Driving quantum systems with periodic conditional measure- ments, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023129 (2022)

    2022

  72. [80]

    R. Yin, K. Ziegler, F. Thiel, and E. Barkai, Large fluctu- ations of the first detected quantum return time, Phys. Rev. Research 1, 033086 (2019). 8

    2019

  73. [81]

    D. K. Mark and O. I. Motrunich, η-pairing states as true scars in an extended hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 102, 075132 (2020)

    2020

  74. [82]

    Senko, P

    C. Senko, P. Richerme, J. Smith, A. Lee, I. Cohen, A. Retzker, and C. Monroe, Realization of a quantum integer-spin chain with controllable interactions, Phys. Rev. X 5, 021026 (2015)

    2015

  75. [83]

    O’Dea, F

    N. O’Dea, F. Burnell, A. Chandran, and V. Khemani, From tunnels to towers: Quantum scars from lie alge- bras and q-deformed lie algebras, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043305 (2020)

    2020

  76. [84]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Probing many- body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Na- ture 551, 579 (2017)

    2017

  77. [85]

    Barenco, C

    A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. P. DiVincenzo, N. Margolus, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. A. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter, Elementary gates for quantum compu- tation, Phys. Rev. A 52, 3457 (1995)

    1995

  78. [86]

    Shi, Both toffoli and controlled-not need little help to do universal quantum computing, Quantum Info

    Y. Shi, Both toffoli and controlled-not need little help to do universal quantum computing, Quantum Info. Com- put. 3, 84–92 (2003)

    2003

  79. [87]

    V. V. Shende and I. L. Markov, On the cnot-cost of toffoli gates, Quantum Info. Comput.9, 461–486 (2009)

    2009

  80. [88]

    R. Wu, B. Yang, P. W. Claeys, and H. Zhao, Engineer- ing long-range and multi-body interactions via global kinetic constraints, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.08390 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  81. [89]

    T. Monz, K. Kim, W. H¨ ansel, M. Riebe, A. S. Villar, P. Schindler, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, and R. Blatt, Realization of the quantum toffoli gate with trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 040501 (2009)

    2009

  82. [90]

    S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, M. Kalinowski, S. Ebadi, T. Manovitz, H. Zhou, S. H. Li, A. A. Geim, T. T. Wang, N. Maskara, H. Levine, G. Semeghini, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral-atom quantum computer, Nature 622, ...

    2023

  83. [91]

    A. Cao, W. J. Eckner, T. Lukin Yelin, A. W. Young, S. Jandura, L. Yan, K. Kim, G. Pupillo, J. Ye, N. Dark- wah Oppong, et al. , Multi-qubit gates and schr¨ odinger cat states in an optical clock, Nature 634, 315 (2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    J. Nie, W. Zi, and X. Sun, Quantum circuit for multi- qubit toffoli gate with optimal resource, arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.05053 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Z. Bao, S. Xu, Z. Song, K. Wang, L. Xiang, Z. Zhu, J. Chen, F. Jin, X. Zhu, Y. Gao, et al. , Creating and controlling global greenberger–horne–zeilinger entangle- ment on quantum processors, Nature Communications 15, 8823 (2024)

    2024

  86. [94]

    Iadecola, J

    T. Iadecola, J. H. Wilson, and J. Pixley, Concomitant entanglement and control criticality driven by collective measurements, PRX Quantum 6, 010351 (2025)

    2025

  87. [95]

    H. Zhao, A. Smith, F. Mintert, and J. Knolle, Orthog- onal quantum many-body scars, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 150601 (2021)

    2021

  88. [96]

    C. M. Langlett, Z.-C. Yang, J. Wildeboer, A. V. Gor- shkov, T. Iadecola, and S. Xu, Rainbow scars: From area to volume law, Phys. Rev. B 105, L060301 (2022)

    2022

  89. [97]

    Mukherjee, C

    B. Mukherjee, C. J. Turner, M. Szyniszewski, and A. Pal, Symmetric tensor scars with tunable entan- glement from volume to area law, arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.14024 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  90. [98]

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

    2023

  91. [99]

    H. Zhao, F. Mintert, R. Moessner, and J. Knolle, Ran- dom multipolar driving: Tunably slow heating through spectral engineering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 040601 (2021)

    2021

  92. [100]

    Pilatowsky-Cameo, S

    S. Pilatowsky-Cameo, S. Choi, and W. W. Ho, Criti- cally slow hilbert-space ergodicity in quantum morphic drives, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.06936 (2025)

    2025

  93. [101]

    Pocklington and A

    A. Pocklington and A. A. Clerk, Accelerating dissipative state preparation with adaptive open quantum dynam- ics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 050603 (2025)

    2025

  94. [102]

    Sinkovicz, Z

    P. Sinkovicz, Z. Kurucz, T. Kiss, and J. K. Asb´ oth, Quantized recurrence time in unital iterated open quan- tum dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042108 (2015). 9 End matter Dark states in random matrices.— Many-body inter- acting systems exhibit spectral and dynamical features tha...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.