Towards Nonlinear Quantum Thermodynamics

Avijit Misra; Durga Bhaktavatsala Rao Dasari; Gershon Kurizki; Nilakantha Meher; Tomas Opatrny

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 115 references

Towards Nonlinear Quantum Thermodynamics

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Nonlinear (cross-Kerr) transformations of thermal light can redistribute entropy and energy among modes, turning passively thermal inputs into non-passive, non-Gaussian output modes that can act as coherent heat engines or supersensitive…

desk verdict A well-written self-review of the authors' own nonlinear thermodynamics program, honest about its giant-nonlinearity bottleneck; no new results, so treat it as a perspective rather than a primary research paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.07537 v1 pith:6J4ABBXI submitted 2025-07-10 quant-ph

Gershon Kurizki , Nilakantha Meher , Avijit Misra , Durga Bhaktavatsala Rao Dasari , Tomas Opatrny This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-ph

keywords nonlinearthermodynamicscross-Kerreffectthermalstatesnon-passiveergotropyquantumFisherinformationphaseestimationheatengine

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 argues that thermal light, which consists of maximum-entropy passive states that can do no work, can be converted into a useful thermodynamic resource by coherent nonlinear mixing. The proposed devices feed several uncorrelated thermal modes into interferometers with cross-Kerr nonlinear elements, which redistribute entropy and energy among the modes so that selected output modes become non-passive and non-Gaussian, capable of delivering work or carrying high phase-sensitivity information. On this basis the paper presents a four-mode interferometer acting as a heat engine, a coupled-interferometer phase microscope that beats the standard quantum limit, and a noise sensor that characterises unknown nonlinear couplings by probing output-mode ergotropy. It then surveys the physical platforms that could supply the required giant few-photon nonlinearity, both deterministic and measurement-based. The paper is explicit that the bottleneck is realising lossless cross-Kerr phase shifts of order $\pi$ per photon.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the two-mode cross-Kerr (CK) transformation $\hat{U}_{CK}=e^{i\chi \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a} \hat{b}^\dagger \hat{b}}$, which couples the photon-number operators of two field modes and twists their joint phase-space distribution, converting Gaussian thermal statistics into non-Gaussian, non-passive output statistics. The supporting concepts are the passivity of states and their ergotropy, the Stokes-operator and Poincare-sphere picture of linear mixing, and the quantum Fisher information, which sets the phase-sensitivity bound. For the deterministic implementation, the paper highlights a bath-induced nonlinear term $\Delta_L(t)\hat{J}_z^2$ in a collective spin evolution, which can entangle many atoms into macroscopic superpositions and, via the effective Hamiltonian $\hat{H}=g_{\rm eff}\vec{J}\cdot\vec{S}$, map that entanglement onto two field modes. For probabilistic implementations, the machinery is conditional measurement: photocounting or homodyning a small reflected fraction of the thermal input, or passing resonant atoms through a cavity and post-selecting measurement outcomes.

What would settle it

Measure, in the four-mode interferometer of the paper with two thermal and two empty inputs and a cross-Kerr phase shift $\chi\approx\pi$ per photon, the mean photon number of output mode 1: if it does not exceed the thermal input mean photon number as predicted by Eq. (4) while mode 4 correspondingly drops, the claimed energy steering and the heat-engine functionality are not realised. Equivalently, a coupled-interferometer phase measurement at $\bar{n}>4$ that finds $\Delta\phi$ larger than the bound set by $(F_Q)_T$ would falsify the supersensitive phase-estimation claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a unitary nonlinear transformation, specifically the cross-Kerr coupling $\hat{U}_{CK}=e^{i\chi \hat{a}^\dagger \hat{a} \hat{b}^\dagger \hat{b}}$, applied to a multimode input whose individual modes are each thermal (passive), can make chosen output modes non-passive and non-Gaussian while preserving the overall entropy. The paper demonstrates this in the four-mode Kerr interferometer, where energy from a hot input mode is steered into output mode 1 and the entropy cost is paid by the other modes, and in the coupled Mach–Zehnder setup, where the quantum Fisher information for thermal input obeys $(F_Q)_T = \bar{n}^2 + \bar{n} > (F_Q)_F = \bar{n}^2 > (F_Q)_C = \tfrac{1}{2}\bar{n}^2 + 2\bar{n}$ for $\bar{n}>4$, showing that thermal noise outperforms Fock and coherent states of equal mean photon number after nonlinear filtering. The second law is respected because the unitary evolution conserves the total entropy while allowing entropy to increase in the unused modes, and no net ergotropy is created—it is merely redistributed. These results define an approach to autonomous, dissipationless thermodynamic devices that replace heat baths with nonlinear mode transformations.

Load-bearing premise

The devices require lossless, fully coherent cross-Kerr nonlinearities that shift a field mode's phase by about $\pi$ per photon when cross-coupled to only a few photons in other modes; the paper states this is the bottleneck, with Rydberg polaritons as the sole demonstration and not readily incorporated in practical devices.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If correct, thermal light becomes a viable input for quantum-enhanced metrology: a cross-Kerr filtered thermal state gives a phase-error bound below the standard quantum limit and even below the nominal Heisenberg limit for broad photon-number distributions.
Coherent, dissipationless heat engines are possible in principle: energy and entropy are redistributed among modes by a unitary, so work can be extracted from one output mode while other modes heat up, without any heat bath.
Unknown nonlinear two-mode noise processes can be characterised by a single-mode ergotropy measurement, replacing full quantum tomography of the interaction.
The same nonlinear filtering can be emulated probabilistically by photodetection or homodyne measurements on a small fraction of the input, yielding extractable work at a cost set by the mutual information of the measurement.
The practical reach of this approach rests on engineering giant cross-Kerr phase shifts at the few-photon level; the paper identifies Rydberg polariton interactions as the only demonstrated platform.

Reading between the lines

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

The ordering $(F_Q)_T > (F_Q)_F > (F_Q)_C$ suggests a wider principle: broad photon-number distributions can be an asset in nonlinear metrology, because the nonlinear filter spreads them into a wider superposition of N00N-like states; a reader might test this by applying the same filter to other heavy-tailed distributions such as squeezed-thermal or power-law inputs.
If the bath-induced $\hat{J}_z^2$ mechanism scales as the paper claims, existing cavity-QED or spin-bath experiments could look for GHZ-like correlations emerging at times $t \sim \pi/2\Delta_L(t)$ with $N$ up to about 100, independent of $N$; that prediction is specific enough to check before building a full interferometric device.
The measurement-based schemes quantify a trade-off between success probability and work output; optimising that trade-off at fixed input temperature and photon number, including the information-processing cost of feedforward, is a natural extension the paper leaves open.
The same entropy-redistribution idea likely transfers to non-optical bosonic platforms, where phononic or magnonic modes with Kerr-like couplings are easier to prepare in thermal states than optical modes; the authors do not state this extension.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

This is a review/perspective that consolidates the authors' earlier work on nonlinear thermodynamic devices. The core content — the four-mode Kerr heat engine, the coupled-MZI phase sensor, and the noise sensor — is restated from prior peer-reviewed papers; Eqs. (4), (6), (8), and (22) are quoted, not derived. As a primary research paper, the incremental novelty is low. That is not fatal if the paper is judged as a roadmap, but it should be framed that way. What it does well: it clearly lays out the distinction between linear and nonlinear multimode transformations; it gives a useful quantum-vs-classical comparison, including the honest point that vacuum fluctuations can suppress energy steering (the d term in Eq. (8)) while quantum statistics enable the sensing advantages; and it catalogs a broad set of implementation routes, including measurement-based alternatives, rather than only repeating ideal unitary schemes. The soft spots are real. The deterministic devices rely on a lossless cross-Kerr element with phase shifts of order pi per photon. The paper identifies this as the bottleneck and cites only one few-photon demonstration — Rydberg polaritons — which it admits cannot be readily incorporated in practical devices. There is no quantitative analysis of how finite transmission or dephasing degrades the heat-engine output or the sensor QFI. A sentence in Sec. 2.2 claims the phase sensor remains super-sensitive under high losses, but that is inherited from prior work and not substantiated here. So the 'fully coherent, dissipationless' headline claim is conditional on an element that does not yet exist in practical form. The heavy self-citation is noticeable but not disqualifying: the cited results are peer-reviewed, and the paper is explicitly a survey of the group's own program. I would not call it circular, though external benchmarks would strengthen it. Bottom line: this is a useful entry point for readers interested in nonlinear quantum thermodynamics, and it deserves a serious referee — but as a review/roadmap, with revisions that separate the idealized claims from loss-limited reality and ideally add a loss-tolerance analysis. I would not cite it as a source for a new quantitative result.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a paradigm of 'nonlinear thermodynamics' in which unitary, nonlinear (cross-Kerr) transformations of multimode thermal input redistribute entropy and energy among modes, converting selected output modes into non-passive, non-Gaussian states that can act as coherent heat engines or sub-SQL phase sensors without a heat bath. It surveys three such devices (a four-mode Kerr-nonlinear heat engine, a coupled-MZI phase microscope, and a noise sensor), compares their classical and quantum behavior, and discusses deterministic (Rydberg polaritons, multiatom bath) and probabilistic (photodetection, homodyne, cavity-QED atomic sequences) routes to the required giant nonlinearity. The central claims are explicitly conditional on lossless, few-photon cross-Kerr interactions with phase shifts of order π.

Significance. If the idealized devices are realizable, the paradigm would open a new class of autonomous, fully coherent thermodynamic devices that redistribute thermal noise into work-bearing or information-bearing modes, and would identify thermal light as a resource for sub-SQL phase estimation. The paper's strengths are its clear identification of the experimental bottleneck (Sec. 6), its quantitative treatment of measurement-based work extraction (Eqs. 17, 22, 23), and its explicit admission that the only demonstrated few-photon nonlinearity (Rydberg polaritons) is not readily practical. The manuscript also honestly reports a quantum disadvantage in mean-energy steering (Eq. (8)). However, the absence of any quantitative loss-tolerance analysis for Eqs. (4) and (6) leaves the central claims unqualified for realistic implementations.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 2.1 and Sec. 2.2 (Eqs. (4) and (6))] The predicted energy amplification in Eq. (4) and the sub-SQL phase sensitivity in Eq. (6) are derived under the lossless unitary assumption for cross-Kerr elements with χ ≈ π/2. The manuscript provides no analysis of how these quantities degrade with finite transmission η < 1 or with dephasing in the nonlinear element. Because the only demonstrated few-photon giant nonlinearity (Rydberg polaritons, ref. [83]) suffers from non-negligible loss, the claims as stated are untested for realistic parameters. Please include a loss model and quantify the threshold η above which the advantages persist, or explicitly state that the devices are intended only as ideal proof-of-principle models.
[Sec. 6 (Discussion)] The text acknowledges that 'the bottleneck impeding the realization of such NL thermodynamic devices is the need for giant nonlinearities' and that the sole demonstration, Rydberg polaritons, 'cannot be readily incorporated in practical devices.' This self-acknowledged limitation directly undercuts the abstract's unqualified claim of 'fully coherent, dissipationless' operation. The manuscript should qualify the central claims as ideal-model results or provide the quantitative error analysis requested above, including a discussion of how loss in the cross-Kerr element affects the non-passivity and quantum Fisher information of the output modes.
[Sec. 4.2 (Eqs. (10)-(13))] The multiatom-bath mechanism relies on two strong assumptions stated without sensitivity analysis: the TLS level splitting is switched off (ωx = 0) and all bath couplings ηk are equal. Since this mechanism is presented as a viable deterministic route to the required nonlinearity, please add a discussion of how deviations from ωx = 0 and from uniform ηk affect the MQS fidelity and the condition τ_MQS Γ̄ N² < 1, which currently rests on a single unstated derivation. This is important because the claim that τ_MQS is independent of N (Eq. (13)) is not self-evident and is load-bearing for the feasibility statement N ≤ 100.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. 2.1, Eq. (3)] The expression 'sin(2t²α₁α₄χ cos ϕ − ϕ)' mixes a phase χ with products of field amplitudes, which are not dimensionless in the same way; please clarify the definitions and units of χ, t, and ϕ so that the argument of the sine is unambiguous.
[Sec. 4.2] The notation for the TLS level splitting is inconsistent: Eq. (9) uses ωx in H_S, while a later passage reads 'set ωz = 0'. Please unify the notation.
[Sec. 5.1, Eq. (18)] The formula E_k = ℏω(1+k)t²/(e^{ℏω/k_B T} − t²) has a denominator that mixes a Boltzmann factor with the transmissivity t²; the limiting behavior for t² = 1 does not reduce to the standard thermal energy, so this expression needs clarification or a corrected derivation.
[Sec. 5.3] There is a typo 'Shanon entropy' in the text near Eq. (29); it should read 'Shannon entropy'. Also, 'losses population' should be 'loses population'.
[Fig. 3 and Sec. 2.2] Figure 3 plots minimal phase error in SQL units, but the surrounding text gives QFI expressions (Eq. (6)) without explicitly stating the conversion from F_Q to Δφ_min. Please state the relation used for the curves, including the assumption on the estimator and any prior on ϕ.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a survey whose load-bearing results are explicitly attributed to prior peer-reviewed work, not re-derived from or fitted to their own conclusions.

full rationale

This arXiv manuscript is written as a perspective/review of the authors' prior results rather than as a self-contained derivation. Its central equations are explicitly sourced: Eq. (4) is introduced as 'satisfy [48]', Eq. (6) is presented as 'We have obtained solutions' following the citation to [50], Eq. (8) is accompanied by '[48]', and Eq. (22) is attributed to [98]. These citations point to separately published, peer-reviewed works with their own derivations and assumptions; they are not defined in terms of the present paper's conclusions, nor are any fitted parameters renamed as predictions. The cross-Kerr interaction in Eq. (2) is a standard model, not an ansatz smuggled in by citation. The only load-bearing practical assumption, giant lossless few-photon nonlinearity, is openly acknowledged in Sec. 6 as 'the bottleneck impeding the realization of such NL thermodynamic devices', with the demonstrated Rydberg-polariton platform noted as not readily practical. This is a candid feasibility limitation, not a hidden circular step. Finally, the optimization χ=π/2 in Fig. 3 is parameter optimization, not data fitting. Because the manuscript does not reduce any prediction to its own inputs or to an unverified self-citation chain, no circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard quantum optics plus the idealization that the devices are lossless and coherent, and on the availability of giant cross-Kerr nonlinearity, which is an unproven technology. The free parameters are device settings that would need to be chosen or optimized in an experiment.

free parameters (5)

Cross-Kerr coupling strength chi = pi/2 per photon (optimal in the phase sensor, Fig. 3)
Introduced as the NL phase per photon; chosen to be 'appreciable' in the heat engine and optimal at chi = pi/2 for the phase sensor to maximize the quantum Fisher information.
Beam-splitter transmissivity t = optimized, e.g. 1 - t^2 = 1/sqrt(n_bar) in the homodyne scheme
Controls the interference and mode-mixing in Eqs. (3)-(4) and in the measurement-based schemes; selected to steer energy into the target output mode or to optimize work extraction.
Beam-splitter reflectivity r = r^2 = 1 - t^2
Appears as an overall prefactor in Eq. (4); chosen together with t to satisfy the constructive/destructive interference condition.
Local oscillator amplitude beta = 2 beta^2 = sqrt(n_bar) for optimal work extraction
Optimized in the homodyne conditional-measurement scheme to maximize the extracted work W_max in Eq. (22).
Atom-field coupling-interaction time product g tau = g tau sqrt(n+1) = m pi or (m+1/2) pi
Chosen in Sec. 5.3 to satisfy trapping or erasure conditions for converting a thermal cavity field into a target Fock state.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Thermal states are passive, so input modes individually carry no ergotropy or work resource.
Sec. 1: 'Since each mode is then in a maximal-entropy, passive state, these input modes are neither work nor information resources.' This underpins the claim that the NL device creates work capacity from passive input.
domain assumption The NL-filtering devices are non-dissipative and fully coherent to a good approximation.
Sec. 1: 'NL-filtering thermodynamic (TD) devices are treated here as non-dissipative and fully coherent to a good approximation.' Loss and decoherence are ignored in the central performance formulas.
domain assumption Input modes are thermal and uncorrelated, with at least two different temperatures, including zero-temperature modes.
Sec. 2: 'it is essential that not all input states be at the same temperature' and the simplest example uses empty (zero-temperature) modes along with hot modes. This condition ensures the overall input state is non-passive.
domain assumption The cross-Kerr unitary U_CK = exp(i chi a-dagger a b-dagger b) is the nonlinear element in the devices.
Eq. (2) in Sec. 2: the entire device concept relies on this two-mode number-number coupling to generate non-Gaussian output.
ad hoc to paper For the multiatom model, the TLS level splitting is switched off (omega_x = 0) and all bath couplings eta_k are equal.
Sec. 4.2: 'we switch off the TLS level-splitting omega_x, thereby eliminating H_S' and 'all eta_k taken to be equal.' This makes the model exactly solvable but is an engineered assumption.
domain assumption Dynamical control can make decoherence negligible enough for MQS formation, with N < 100 allowed by tau_MQS Gamma_bar N^2 < 1.
Sec. 4.2 and Fig. 5: the formation of macroscopic quantum superpositions requires that residual decoherence stays small; this is assumed but not experimentally demonstrated in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards Nonlinear Quantum Thermodynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6J4ABBXI

@misc{pith2026250707537,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards Nonlinear Quantum Thermodynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6J4ABBXI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.07537}
}

read the original abstract

We have recently put forth several schemes of unconventional, nonlinearly-enabled thermodynamic (TD) devices that can operate in either the classical or the quantum domain by transforming thermal-state input in multiple uncorrelated modes into non-gaussian state output in selected modes: a four-mode Kerr-nonlinear interferometer that acts as a heat engine; two coupled Kerr-nonlinear Mach-Zehnder interferometers that act as a phase microscope with unprecedented phase resolution; and a noise sensor that can distinguish between unknown nonlinear quantum processes. These schemes reveal the unique merits of nonlinear TD devices: their ability to act in an autonomous, fully coherent, dissipationless fashion, unlike their conventional counterparts. Here we present the opportunities and challenges facing this new paradigm of nonlinear (NL) quantum and classical TD devices along the following lines: A) Linear versus nonlinear multimode transformations in TD devices: what are the principal distinctions between the two types of transformations? B) Classical versus quantum effects in NL TD devices: what are their main differences? Is quantumness an advantage or a disadvantage? C) Deterministic methods of achieving giant nonlinearity at the few-photon level via coherent processes, including multiatom-bath interactions which can paradoxically yield NL Hamiltonian effects: their comparison with probabilistic, measurement-based methods that can achieve similar NL effects in the quantum domain.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages

[83]

Drori, B.C

L. Drori, B.C. Das, T.D. Zohar, G. Winer, E. Poem, A. Poddubny, O. Firsten- berg, Quantum vortices of strongly interacting photons. Science 381(6654), 193–198 (2023)

work page 2023
[1]

Kurizki, A.G

G. Kurizki, A.G. Kofman, Thermodynamics and Control of Open Quan- tum Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/ 9781316798454 21

2022
[2]

Binder, L

F. Binder, L. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, G. Adesso, Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime: Fundamental Aspects and New Directions (Springer, 2018)

2018
[3]

Scovil, E.O

H.E. Scovil, E.O. Schulz-DuBois, Three-level masers as heat engines. Physical Review Letters 2(6), 262 (1959)

1959
[4]

Scully, M.S

M.O. Scully, M.S. Zubairy, G.S. Agarwal, H. Walther, Extracting work from a single heat bath via vanishing quantum coherence. Science 299(5608), 862– 864 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1078955. URL https://science. sciencemag.org/content/299/5608/862

doi:10.1126/science.1078955 2003
[5]

Scully, K.R

M.O. Scully, K.R. Chapin, K.E. Dorfman, M.B. Kim, A. Svidzinsky, Quan- tum heat engine power can be increased by noise-induced coherence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108(37), 15097–15100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1110234108

doi:10.1073/pnas 2011
[6]

Roßnagel, O

J. Roßnagel, O. Abah, F. Schmidt-Kaler, K. Singer, E. Lutz, Nanoscale heat engine beyond the carnot limit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 030602 (2014). https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.030602. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.112.030602

doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.030602 2014
[7]

Niedenzu, V

W. Niedenzu, V. Mukherjee, A. Ghosh, A.G. Kofman, G. Kurizki, Quantum engine efficiency bound beyond the second law of thermodynamics. Nature communications 9(1), 165 (2018)

2018

Show all 115 references

[8]

Cangemi, C

L.M. Cangemi, C. Bhadra, A. Levy, Quantum engines and refrigerators. Physics Reports 1087, 1–71 (2024)

2024
[9]

Ghosh, C.L

A. Ghosh, C.L. Latune, L. Davidovich, G. Kurizki, Catalysis of heat-to-work conversion in quantum machines. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 114(46), 12156–12161 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711381114. URL https://www.pnas.org/content/114/46/12156

2017 doi
[10]

Ghosh, D

A. Ghosh, D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, W. Niedenzu, A.I. Lvovsky, I. Mazets, M.O. Scully, G. Kurizki, Two-level masers as heat-to-work converters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115(40), 9941–9944 (2018). https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1805354115. URL https://www.pn...

2018 doi
[11]

Ferreri, H

A. Ferreri, H. Wang, F. Nori, F.K. Wilhelm, D.E. Bruschi, Quantum heat engine based on quantum interferometry: the su (1, 1) otto cycle. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.13411 (2024)

2024 arXiv
[12]

T. Guff, S. Daryanoosh, B.Q. Baragiola, A. Gilchrist, Power and efficiency of a thermal engine with a coherent bath. Physical Review E 100(3), 032129 (2019)

2019
[13]

Scully, Quantum photocell: Using quantum coherence to reduce radia- tive recombination¡? format?¿ and increase efficiency

M.O. Scully, Quantum photocell: Using quantum coherence to reduce radia- tive recombination¡? format?¿ and increase efficiency. Physical review letters 22 104(20), 207701 (2010)

2010
[14]

Hammam, H

K. Hammam, H. Leitch, Y. Hassouni, G. De Chiara, Exploiting coherence for quantum thermodynamic advantage. New Journal of Physics 24(11), 113053 (2022)

2022
[15]

Klaers, S

J. Klaers, S. Faelt, A. Imamoglu, E. Togan, Squeezed thermal reservoirs as a resource for a nanomechanical engine beyond the carnot limit. Physical Review X 7(3), 031044 (2017)

2017
[16]

Niedenzu, D

W. Niedenzu, D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, G. Kurizki, Performance limits of multi- level and multipartite quantum heat machines. Physical Review E92(4), 042123 (2015)

2015
[17]

Niedenzu, G

W. Niedenzu, G. Kurizki, Cooperative many-body enhancement of quantum thermal machine power. New Journal of Physics 20(11), 113038 (2018)

2018
[18]

Rolandi, P

A. Rolandi, P. Abiuso, M. Perarnau-Llobet, Collective advantages in finite-time thermodynamics. Physical Review Letters 131(21), 210401 (2023)

2023
[19]

Jaramillo, M

J. Jaramillo, M. Beau, A. del Campo, Quantum supremacy of many-particle thermal machines. New Journal of Physics 18(7), 075019 (2016)

2016
[20]

Hartmann, V

A. Hartmann, V. Mukherjee, W. Niedenzu, W. Lechner, Many-body quantum heat engines with shortcuts to adiabaticity. Physical Review Research 2(2), 023145 (2020)

2020
[21]

Zhang, H

F. Zhang, H. Quan, Work statistics across a quantum critical surface. Physical Review E 105(2), 024101 (2022)

2022
[22]

Fogarty, T

T. Fogarty, T. Busch, A many-body heat engine at criticality. Quantum Science and Technology 6(1), 015003 (2020)

2020
[23]

Souza, G

L.d.S. Souza, G. Manzano, R. Fazio, F. Iemini, Collective effects on the perfor- mance and stability of quantum heat engines. Physical Review E 106(1), 014143 (2022)

2022
[24]

R. B. S, V. Mukherjee, U. Divakaran, A. del Campo, Universal finite-time thermodynamics of many-body quantum machines from kibble-zurek scaling. Physical Review Research 2(4), 043247 (2020)

2020
[25]

Roßnagel, S.T

J. Roßnagel, S.T. Dawkins, K.N. Tolazzi, O. Abah, E. Lutz, F. Schmidt-Kaler, K. Singer, A single-atom heat engine. Science 352(6283), 325–329 (2016)

2016
[26]

Kosloff, A

R. Kosloff, A. Levy, Quantum heat engines and refrigerators: Continuous devices. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 65(1), 365–393 (2014). https://doi. org/10.1146/annurev-physchem-040513-103724. URL https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev-physchem-040513-103724 23

2014 doi
[27]

Uzdin, A

R. Uzdin, A. Levy, R. Kosloff, Equivalence of quantum heat machines, and quantum-thermodynamic signatures. Physical Review X 5(3), 031044 (2015)

2015
[28]

Kosloff, A quantum mechanical open system as a model of a heat engine

R. Kosloff, A quantum mechanical open system as a model of a heat engine. The Journal of chemical physics 80(4), 1625–1631 (1984)

1984
[29]

Allahverdyan, R

A.E. Allahverdyan, R. Balian, T.M. Nieuwenhuizen, Maximal work extraction from finite quantum systems. Europhysics Letters (EPL) 67(4), 565–571 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1209/epl/i2004-10101-2. URL https://doi.org/10.1209/epl/ i2004-10101-2

2004 doi
[30]

Naseem, A

M.T. Naseem, A. Misra, O.E. M ´’uestecaplıo˘ glu, Two-body quantum absorption refrigerators with optomechanical-like interactions. Quantum Science and Tech- nology 5(3), 035006 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ab8d89. URL https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-9565/ab8d89

2020 doi
[31]

Gardas, S

B. Gardas, S. Deffner, Thermodynamic universality of quantum carnot engines. Phys. Rev. E 92, 042126 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.92.042126. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.92.042126

2015 doi
[32]

Misra, U

A. Misra, U. Singh, M.N. Bera, A.K. Rajagopal, Quantum r´ enyi relative entropies affirm universality of thermodynamics. Phys. Rev. E 92, 042161 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.92.042161. URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.92.042161

2015 doi
[33]

Mukherjee, A.G

V. Mukherjee, A.G. Kofman, G. Kurizki, Anti-zeno quantum advantage in fast- driven heat machines. Communications Physics 3(1), 8 (2020)

2020
[34]

M. Xu, J. Stockburger, G. Kurizki, J. Ankerhold, Minimal quantum ther- mal machine in a bandgap environment: non-markovian features and anti-zeno advantage. New journal of physics 24(3), 035003 (2022)

2022
[35]

Kargi, M.T

C. Kargi, M.T. Naseem, T. Opatrn´ y, O.E. M¨ ustecaplıo˘ glu, G. Kurizki, Quantum optical two-atom thermal diode. Phys. Rev. E 99, 042121 (2019). https:// doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.99.042121. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevE.99.042121

2019 doi
[36]

Naseem, A

M.T. Naseem, A. Misra, O.E. M¨ ustecaplio˘ glu, G. Kurizki, Minimal quantum heat manager boosted by bath spectral filtering. Phys. Rev. Research 2, 033285 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033285. URL https://link. aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033285

2020 doi
[37]

Segal, A

D. Segal, A. Nitzan, Spin-boson thermal rectifier. Physical review letters 94(3), 034301 (2005) 24

2005
[38]

Saira, M

O.P. Saira, M. Meschke, F. Giazotto, A.M. Savin, .f.M. M¨ ott¨ onen, J.P. Pekola, Heat transistor: Demonstration of gate-controlled electronic refrigeration. Phys- ical review letters 99(2), 027203 (2007)

2007
[39]

Segal, Single mode heat rectifier: Controlling energy flow between electronic conductors

D. Segal, Single mode heat rectifier: Controlling energy flow between electronic conductors. Physical review letters 100(10), 105901 (2008)

2008
[40]

Y. Shen, M. Bradford, J.T. Shen, Single-photon diode by exploiting the photon polarization in a waveguide. Physical review letters 107(17), 173902 (2011)

2011
[41]

Meher, S

N. Meher, S. Sivakumar, Atomic switch for control of heat transfer in coupled cavities. Journal of the Optical Society of America B 37(1), 138–147 (2019)

2019
[42]

Karimi, J

B. Karimi, J. Pekola, M. Campisi, R. Fazio, Coupled qubits as a quantum heat switch. Quantum Science and Technology 2(4), 044007 (2017)

2017
[43]

Ronzani, B

A. Ronzani, B. Karimi, J. Senior, Y.C. Chang, J.T. Peltonen, C. Chen, J.P. Pekola, Tunable photonic heat transport in a quantum heat valve. Nature Physics 14(10), 991–995 (2018)

2018
[44]

Joulain, J

K. Joulain, J. Drevillon, Y. Ezzahri, J. Ordonez-Miranda, Quantum thermal transistor. Physical review letters 116(20), 200601 (2016)

2016
[45]

S. Das, A. Misra, A.K. Pal, A. Sen(De), U. Sen, Necessarily transient quantum refrigerator. Euro Phys. Lett. 125(2), 20007 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1209/ 0295-5075/125/20007. URL https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/125/20007

2019 doi
[46]

Mukhopadhyay, A

C. Mukhopadhyay, A. Misra, S. Bhattacharya, A.K. Pati, Quantum speed limit constraints on a nanoscale autonomous refrigerator. Phys. Rev. E 97, 062116 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.97.062116. URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.97.062116

2018 doi
[47]

Breuer, F

H.P. Breuer, F. Petruccione, The theory of open quantum systems (OUP Oxford, 2002)

2002
[48]

Opatrn´ y, ˇSimon Br¨ auer, A.G

T. Opatrn´ y, ˇSimon Br¨ auer, A.G. Kofman, A. Misra, N. Meher, O. Firsten- berg, E. Poem, G. Kurizki, Nonlinear coherent heat machines. Sci- ence Advances 9(1), eadf1070 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv. adf1070. URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/sciadv.adf107...

2023 doi
[49]

Meher, T

N. Meher, T. Opatrn´ y, G. Kurizki, Thermodynamic sensing of quantum nonlinear noise correlations. Quantum Science and Technology (2024)

2024
[50]

Meher, E

N. Meher, E. Poem, T. Opatrn´ y, O. Firstenberg, G. Kurizki, Supersensitive phase estimation by thermal light in a kerr-nonlinear interferometric setup. Physical Review A 110(1), 013715 (2024) 25

2024
[51]

Kurizki, N

G. Kurizki, N. Meher, T. Opatrn´ y, Nonlinearity and quantumness in thermody- namics: From principles to technologies. APL Quantum 2(1) (2025)

2025
[52]

Pusz, S.L

W. Pusz, S.L. Woronowicz, Passive states and kms states for general quantum systems. Communications in Mathematical Physics 58, 273–290 (1978)

1978
[53]

Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, G

D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, G. Kurizki, Heat-machine control by quantum-state preparation: From quantum engines to refrigerators. Phys. Rev. E 90, 022102 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.90.022102. URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.90.022102

2014 doi
[54]

Carnot, R´ eflexions sur la puissance motrice du feu et sur les machines propres ` a d´ evelopper cette puissance(Bachelier Libraire, Paris, 1824)

S. Carnot, R´ eflexions sur la puissance motrice du feu et sur les machines propres ` a d´ evelopper cette puissance(Bachelier Libraire, Paris, 1824)
[55]

Clausius, The mechanical theory of heat (Macmillan, 1879)

R. Clausius, The mechanical theory of heat (Macmillan, 1879)
[56]

C. Han, D. Cohen, E. Sela, Quantum limitation on experimental testing of nonequilibrium fluctuation theorems. Physical Review B 110(11), 115153 (2024)

2024
[57]

C. Han, N. Katz, E. Sela, Prospect for measuring work statistics in quantum coherent systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20729 (2025)

2025 arXiv
[58]

Gerry, P.L

C. Gerry, P.L. Knight, Introductory Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 2004)

2004
[59]

Hofmann, All path-symmetric pure states achieve their maximal phase sensitivity in conventional two-path interferometry

H.F. Hofmann, All path-symmetric pure states achieve their maximal phase sensitivity in conventional two-path interferometry. Phys. Rev. A 79, 033822 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.79.033822. URL https://link.aps. org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.79.033822

2009 doi
[60]

Kitagawa, M

M. Kitagawa, M. Ueda, Squeezed spin states. Physical Review A 47(6), 5138 (1993)

1993
[61]

Opatrn´ y, Twisting tensor and spin squeezing

T. Opatrn´ y, Twisting tensor and spin squeezing. Physical Review A 91(5), 053826 (2015)

2015
[62]

Opatrn´ y, Squeezing with classical hamiltonians

T. Opatrn´ y, Squeezing with classical hamiltonians. Physical Review A 92(3), 033801 (2015)

2015
[63]

Cottet, S

N. Cottet, S. Jezouin, L. Bretheau, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, Q. Ficheux, J. Anders, A. Auff` eves, R. Azouit, P. Rouchon, B. Huard, Observing a quantum maxwell demon at work. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114(29), 7561–7564 (2017)

2017
[64]

Carmichael, Statistical Methods in Quantum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 1999)

H. Carmichael, Statistical Methods in Quantum Optics (Springer, Berlin, 1999)

1999
[65]

Gardiner, P

C.W. Gardiner, P. Zoller, Quantum Noise (Springer, Berlin, 2000) 26

2000
[66]

Scully, M.S

M.O. Scully, M.S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 2012)

2012
[67]

I. Afek, O. Ambar, Y. Silberberg, Classical bound for mach-zehnder super- resolution. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 123602 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.104.123602. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 104.123602

2010 doi
[68]

Monras, Optimal phase measurements with pure gaussian states

A. Monras, Optimal phase measurements with pure gaussian states. Phys. Rev. A 73, 033821 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.73.033821. URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.73.033821

2006 doi
[69]

Pinel, P

O. Pinel, P. Jian, N. Treps, C. Fabre, D. Braun, Quantum parameter estimation using general single-mode gaussian states. Phys. Rev. A 88, 040102 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.88.040102. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.88.040102

2013 doi
[70]

Boixo, S.T

S. Boixo, S.T. Flammia, C.M. Caves, J. Geremia, Generalized limits for single- parameter quantum estimation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 090401 (2007). https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.090401. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.98.090401

2007 doi
[71]

Giovannetti, S

V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, Quantum measurement bounds beyond the uncertainty relations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 260405 (2012). https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.260405. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.108.260405

2012 doi
[72]

Cram´ er, Mathematical methods of statistics , vol

H. Cram´ er, Mathematical methods of statistics , vol. 43 (Princeton university press, 1999)

1999
[73]

Birrittella, P.M

R.J. Birrittella, P.M. Alsing, C.C. Gerry, The parity operator: Applications in quantum metrology. A VS Quantum Science 3(1) (2021). https://doi.org/10. 1116/5.0026148. URL https://doi.org/10.1116/5.0026148

2021 doi
[74]

Chuang, M.A

I.L. Chuang, M.A. Nielsen, Prescription for experimental determination of the dynamics of a quantum black box. Journal of Modern Optics 44(11-12), 2455– 2467 (1997)

1997
[75]

Goldman, J

N. Goldman, J. Dalibard, Periodically driven quantum systems: Effective hamil- tonians and engineered gauge fields. Phys. Rev. X 4, 031027 (2014). https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.4.031027. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevX.4.031027

2014 doi
[76]

Del Pino, O

J. Del Pino, O. Zilberberg, Dynamical gauge fields with bosonic codes. Physical Review Letters 130(17), 171901 (2023)

2023
[77]

Mohseni, A.T

M. Mohseni, A.T. Rezakhani, D.A. Lidar, Quantum-process tomography: Resource analysis of different strategies. Phys. Rev. A 77, 032322 (2008). 27 https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032322. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032322

2008 doi
[78]

Lvovsky, M.G

A.I. Lvovsky, M.G. Raymer, Continuous-variable optical quantum-state tomog- raphy. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 299–332 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/ RevModPhys.81.299. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.81. 299

2009 doi
[79]

Uzdin, S

R. Uzdin, S. Rahav, Global passivity in microscopic thermodynamics. Physical Review X 8(2), 021064 (2018)

2018
[80]

Varshalovich, Quantum theory of angular momentum

D. Varshalovich, Quantum theory of angular momentum
[81]

Leonhardt, Measuring the quantum state of light , vol

U. Leonhardt, Measuring the quantum state of light , vol. 22 (Cambridge university press, 1997)

1997
[82]

Friedler, D

I. Friedler, D. Petrosyan, M. Fleischhauer, G. Kurizki, Long-range interactions and entanglement of slow single-photon pulses. Phys. Rev. A 72, 043803 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.72.043803. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevA.72.043803

2005 doi
[84]

Bhaktavatsala Rao, N

D. Bhaktavatsala Rao, N. Bar-Gill, G. Kurizki, Generation of macroscopic super- positions of quantum states by linear coupling to a bath. Physical review letters 106(1), 010404 (2011)

2011
[85]

Cohen-Tannoudji, J

C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Roc, G. Grynberg, Atom-photon interactions: basic processes and applications (John Wiley & Sons, 1998)

1998
[86]

Yurke, D

B. Yurke, D. Stoler, Generating quantum mechanical superpositions of macro- scopically distinguishable states via amplitude dispersion. Physical review letters 57(1), 13 (1986)

1986
[87]

Schuster, A

I. Schuster, A. Kubanek, A. Fuhrmanek, T. Puppe, P.W. Pinkse, K. Murr, G. Rempe, Nonlinear spectroscopy of photons bound to one atom. Nature Physics 4(5), 382–385 (2008)

2008
[88]

Braun, Creation of entanglement by interaction with a common heat bath

D. Braun, Creation of entanglement by interaction with a common heat bath. Physical Review Letters 89(27), 277901 (2002)

2002
[89]

Clausen, G

J. Clausen, G. Bensky, G. Kurizki, Bath-optimized minimal-energy protection of quantum operations from decoherence. Physical review letters 104(4), 040401 (2010) 28

2010
[90]

Walther, B.T

H. Walther, B.T. Varcoe, B.G. Englert, T. Becker, Cavity quantum electrody- namics. Reports on Progress in Physics 69(5), 1325 (2006)

2006
[91]

Reiserer, G

A. Reiserer, G. Rempe, Cavity-based quantum networks with single atoms and optical photons. Reviews of Modern Physics 87(4), 1379–1418 (2015)

2015
[92]

Meher, S

N. Meher, S. Sivakumar, A review on quantum information processing in cav- ities. The European Physical Journal Plus 137(8), 985 (2022). https:// doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-03172-x. URL https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/ s13360-022-03172-x

2022 doi
[93]

Dantan, M

A. Dantan, M. Pinard, Quantum-state transfer between fields and atoms in elec- tromagnetically induced transparency. Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 69(4), 043810 (2004)

2004
[94]

Dasari, S

D.B.R. Dasari, S. Yang, A. Chakrabarti, A. Finkler, G. Kurizki, J. Wrachtrup, Anti-zeno purification of spin baths by quantum probe measurements. Nature communications 13(1), 7527 (2022)

2022
[95]

Kofman, G

A. Kofman, G. Kurizki, Acceleration of quantum decay processes by frequent observations. Nature 405(6786), 546–550 (2000)

2000
[96]

Virz ` ı, A

S. Virz ` ı, A. Avella, F. Piacentini, M. Gramegna, T. Opatrn` y, A.G. Kofman, G. Kurizki, S. Gherardini, F. Caruso, I.P. Degiovanni, et al., Quantum zeno and anti-zeno probes of noise correlations in photon polarization. Physical review letters 129(3), 030401 (2022)

2022
[97]

Misra, T.c.v

A. Misra, T.c.v. Opatrn´ y, G. Kurizki, Work extraction from single-mode thermal noise by measurements: How important is information? Phys. Rev. E 106, 054131 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.106.054131. URL https:// link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.106.054131

2022 doi
[98]

Opatrn´ y, A

T. Opatrn´ y, A. Misra, G. Kurizki, Work generation from thermal noise by quantum phase-sensitive observation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 040602 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.040602. URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.040602

2021 doi
[99]

Sagawa, M

T. Sagawa, M. Ueda, Second law of thermodynamics with discrete quantum feedback control. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(8), 080403 (2008)

2008
[100]

Vidrighin, O

M.D. Vidrighin, O. Dahlsten, M. Barbieri, M.S. Kim, V. Vedral, I.A. Walmsley, Photonic Maxwell’s demon. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 050401 (2016). https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.050401. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.116.050401

2016 doi
[101]

Nielsen, I

M. Nielsen, I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000) 29

2000
[102]

Niedenzu, V

W. Niedenzu, V. Mukherjee, A. Ghosh, A.G. Kofman, G. Kurizki, Quantum engine efficiency bound beyond the second law of thermodynamics. Nature Communications 9(1), 165 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01991-6. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01991-6

2018 doi
[103]

J. Yi, P. Talkner, Y.W. Kim, Single-temperature quantum engine without feedback control. Phys. Rev. E 96, 022108 (2017). https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevE.96.022108. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE. 96.022108

2017 doi
[104]

N. Erez, G. Gordon, M. Nest, G. Kurizki, Thermodynamic control by frequent quantum measurements. Nature 452(7188), 724–727 (2008). https://doi.org/ 10.1038/nature06873. URL https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06873

2008 doi
[105]

Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, N

D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, N. Erez, R. Alicki, G. Kurizki, Work extraction via quantum nondemolition measurements of qubits in cavities: Non-markovian effects. Phys. Rev. A 88, 022112 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA. 88.022112. URL http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev...

2013 doi
[106]

Landauer, Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process

R. Landauer, Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM Journal of Research and Development 5(3), 183–191 (1961)

1961
[107]

Harel, G

G. Harel, G. Kurizki, Fock-state preparation from thermal cavity fields by measurements on resonant atoms. Physical Review A 54(6), 5410 (1996)

1996
[108]

Kozhekin, G

A. Kozhekin, G. Kurizki, B. Sherman, Quantum-state control by a single conditional measurement: The periodically switched jaynes-cummings model. Physical Review A 54(4), 3535 (1996)

1996
[109]

Harel, G

G. Harel, G. Kurizki, J. McIver, E. Coutsias, Optimized preparation of quantum states by conditional measurements. Physical Review A 53(6), 4534 (1996)

1996
[110]

Garraway, B

B.M. Garraway, B. Sherman, H. Moya-Cessa, P.L. Knight, G. Kurizki, Gen- eration and detection of nonclassical field states by conditional measurements following two-photon resonant interactions. Phys. Rev. A 49, 535–547 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.49.535. URL http...

1994 doi
[111]

Mukherjee, A

V. Mukherjee, A. Zwick, A. Ghosh, X. Chen, G. Kurizki, Enhanced preci- sion bound of low-temperature quantum thermometry via dynamical control. Communications Physics 2(1), 162 (2019)

2019
[112]

Miller, Nonlinear optical computing doesn’t need nonlinear optics

J.L. Miller, Nonlinear optical computing doesn’t need nonlinear optics. Physics Today 77(10), 12–14 (2024)

2024
[113]

Briegel, D.E

H.J. Briegel, D.E. Browne, W. D¨ ur, R. Raussendorf, M. Van den Nest, Measurement-based quantum computation. Nature Physics 5(1), 19–26 (2009) 30

2009
[114]

Kurizki, D

G. Kurizki, D. Petrosyan, T. Opatrny, M. Blaauboer, B. Malomed, Nonlinear optics of photonic crystals-enhanced nonlinear optics with photonic crystals-self- induced transparency and giant nonlinearity in doped photonic crystals. Journal of the Optical Society of America-B-Opti...

2002
[115]

Misra, P

A. Misra, P. Chattopadhyay, A. Svidzinsky, M.O. Scully, G. Kurizki, Black-hole powered quantum coherent amplifier. npj Quantum Information10(1), 34 (2024) 31

2024

Pith tools

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

[1] [83]

Drori, B.C

L. Drori, B.C. Das, T.D. Zohar, G. Winer, E. Poem, A. Poddubny, O. Firsten- berg, Quantum vortices of strongly interacting photons. Science 381(6654), 193–198 (2023)

work page 2023

[2] [1]

Kurizki, A.G

G. Kurizki, A.G. Kofman, Thermodynamics and Control of Open Quan- tum Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2022). https://doi.org/10.1017/ 9781316798454 21

2022

[3] [2]

Binder, L

F. Binder, L. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, G. Adesso, Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime: Fundamental Aspects and New Directions (Springer, 2018)

2018

[4] [3]

Scovil, E.O

H.E. Scovil, E.O. Schulz-DuBois, Three-level masers as heat engines. Physical Review Letters 2(6), 262 (1959)

1959

[5] [4]

Scully, M.S

M.O. Scully, M.S. Zubairy, G.S. Agarwal, H. Walther, Extracting work from a single heat bath via vanishing quantum coherence. Science 299(5608), 862– 864 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1078955. URL https://science. sciencemag.org/content/299/5608/862

doi:10.1126/science.1078955 2003

[6] [5]

Scully, K.R

M.O. Scully, K.R. Chapin, K.E. Dorfman, M.B. Kim, A. Svidzinsky, Quan- tum heat engine power can be increased by noise-induced coherence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108(37), 15097–15100 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 1110234108

doi:10.1073/pnas 2011

[7] [6]

Roßnagel, O

J. Roßnagel, O. Abah, F. Schmidt-Kaler, K. Singer, E. Lutz, Nanoscale heat engine beyond the carnot limit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 030602 (2014). https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.030602. URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.112.030602

doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.030602 2014

[8] [7]

Niedenzu, V

W. Niedenzu, V. Mukherjee, A. Ghosh, A.G. Kofman, G. Kurizki, Quantum engine efficiency bound beyond the second law of thermodynamics. Nature communications 9(1), 165 (2018)

2018