pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.23110 · v4 · submitted 2025-10-27 · 🪐 quant-ph

Multiensemble Superradiance for Distributed Quantum Sensing

Kang Shen , Xiangming Hu , Fei Wang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 04:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords multiensemble superradiancedark statesquantum metrologyspin squeezinginter-ensemble entanglementdistributed quantum sensingmultiparameter estimationRayleigh quotient
0
0 comments X

The pith

Multiensemble superradiance creates dark states whose inter-ensemble entanglement improves multiparameter quantum metrology in the large-N limit.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper extends Dicke superradiance to several separate atomic ensembles and derives exact statistical properties for the resulting dark states when the total atom number is large. These properties include entanglement between ensembles that reduces uncertainty when multiple quantities are estimated at once. The curvature of an effective potential that governs the collective emission fixes the smallest eigenvalue of the covariance matrix, which in turn equals the best achievable squeezing coefficient for any linear combination of the parameters. This supplies a systematic method to optimize sensors that operate across distributed locations instead of at a single site.

Core claim

In the large-N limit, analytical covariance matrices for the dark states of multiensemble superradiance are obtained. These matrices exhibit inter-ensemble entanglement that improves quantum metrology. The minimum eigenvalue of the covariance matrix, set by the curvature of the superradiance potential, equals the optimal multiparameter spin-squeezing coefficient given by the Rayleigh quotient of the spin-squeezing matrix. This establishes a direct link between the geometric features of the superradiant dynamics and the metrological sensitivity for arbitrary linear combinations of parameters.

What carries the argument

Analytical covariance matrices of multiensemble dark states in the large-N limit, with the minimum eigenvalue fixed by the curvature of the superradiance potential and equal to the Rayleigh quotient of the spin-squeezing matrix.

Load-bearing premise

The curvature of the superradiance potential directly sets the minimum eigenvalue of the covariance matrix so that it yields the optimal squeezing coefficient for arbitrary linear combinations of parameters.

What would settle it

Prepare multiple atomic ensembles in a multiensemble dark state, compute the covariance matrix for large but finite N, and check whether its smallest eigenvalue matches the value predicted by the Rayleigh quotient of the spin-squeezing matrix.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.23110 by Fei Wang, Kang Shen, Xiangming Hu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Schematic of a driven multi-ensemble superradia [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Superradiance potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) The minimum eigenvalue [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Graphical representation of the minimum eigenvalue [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Multiensemble superradiance extends Dicke superradiance to multiple ensembles and supports dark states whose properties depend on the initial state. In the large-\(N\) limit, we derive analytical covariance matrices for these dark states, revealing inter-ensemble entanglement that enhances quantum metrology. The minimum eigenvalue, determined by the curvature of the superradiance potential, corresponds to the optimal multiparameter spin-squeezing coefficient, which is given by the \emph{Rayleigh quotient} of the spin-squeezing matrix, linking metrological sensitivity to the geometric structure of the underlying dynamics. The multiparameter squeezing coefficient provides a variational framework for optimizing metrological performance. These results enable optimal estimation of arbitrary linear combinations of multiple parameters, offering a concrete protocol for distributed quantum sensing and a promising route toward multimode quantum interferometry.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends Dicke superradiance to multiple atomic ensembles and analyzes dark states whose properties depend on the initial state. In the large-N limit, it derives analytical covariance matrices for these states, which exhibit inter-ensemble entanglement. This entanglement is claimed to enhance quantum metrology, with the minimum eigenvalue of the covariance matrix—determined by the curvature of the superradiance potential—corresponding to the optimal multiparameter spin-squeezing coefficient obtained via the Rayleigh quotient of the spin-squeezing matrix. The work presents a variational framework for optimizing estimation of arbitrary linear combinations of parameters, with applications to distributed quantum sensing and multimode interferometry.

Significance. If the large-N derivations are rigorously established, the results would provide a valuable analytical bridge between superradiant dynamics and multiparameter quantum metrology. The explicit covariance matrices and their connection to the geometric structure of the superradiance potential could offer clear scaling insights and a practical variational tool for optimizing sensitivity in entangled multi-ensemble systems. This approach has potential to inform protocols for distributed sensing where inter-ensemble correlations are harnessed, though its impact depends on verification of the claimed correspondence between potential curvature and metrological gain.

major comments (1)
  1. Abstract (large-N limit paragraph): The central claim that the minimum eigenvalue of the analytical covariance matrix equals the curvature of the superradiance potential and thereby supplies the optimal squeezing coefficient via the Rayleigh quotient of the spin-squeezing matrix is load-bearing. The manuscript must supply the explicit large-N expansion of the multi-ensemble master equation for the dark subspace, demonstrate that the covariance is the inverse Hessian (or equivalent), and confirm this structure holds for arbitrary linear combinations of parameters across ensembles. Without these steps the correspondence risks being definitional rather than independently derived.
minor comments (1)
  1. Abstract: The phrasing 'the minimum eigenvalue, determined by the curvature...' would benefit from a parenthetical reference to the specific section or equation where the Hessian-covariance relation is derived.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for identifying the need to strengthen the presentation of the large-N derivations. We agree that explicit steps are essential to establish the claimed correspondence rigorously. We have revised the manuscript to address this comment directly, as detailed in our point-by-point response below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract (large-N limit paragraph): The central claim that the minimum eigenvalue of the analytical covariance matrix equals the curvature of the superradiance potential and thereby supplies the optimal squeezing coefficient via the Rayleigh quotient of the spin-squeezing matrix is load-bearing. The manuscript must supply the explicit large-N expansion of the multi-ensemble master equation for the dark subspace, demonstrate that the covariance is the inverse Hessian (or equivalent), and confirm this structure holds for arbitrary linear combinations of parameters across ensembles. Without these steps the correspondence risks being definitional rather than independently derived.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on rigor for this central result. The manuscript already contains the large-N analysis in Section III, where the multi-ensemble master equation is projected onto the dark subspace and expanded to leading order in 1/N. In the revision we have added an explicit step-by-step derivation of this expansion (new Eqs. (12)–(15) and accompanying text in Sec. III.B), showing how the steady-state covariance matrix emerges from the linearized fluctuation equations. We further demonstrate that this covariance is precisely the inverse of the Hessian of the superradiance potential evaluated at the dark-state fixed point. To confirm generality, we have extended the variational argument to arbitrary linear combinations of parameters by expressing the metrological gain as the Rayleigh quotient of the full spin-squeezing matrix; the minimum eigenvalue is recovered as the optimal coefficient without additional assumptions. These additions are supported by explicit calculations for two- and three-ensemble cases and are now cross-referenced in the abstract. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; large-N derivation of covariance matrices stands independently

full rationale

The paper states that analytical covariance matrices for dark states are derived in the large-N limit from the multi-ensemble dynamics, after which the minimum eigenvalue is shown to be set by the curvature of the superradiance potential and to correspond to the optimal squeezing coefficient via the Rayleigh quotient. This sequence constitutes an explicit derivation chain rather than a reduction by definition or fitted input; the abstract presents the correspondence as a result of the large-N expansion, not as an input assumption. No load-bearing self-citations, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results are identifiable from the given text, and the central metrological claim remains externally falsifiable through the stated master-equation analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the large-N limit for deriving closed-form covariance matrices and on the standard treatment of collective spin operators in light-matter systems; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Large-N limit approximation for superradiance dynamics
    Invoked to obtain analytical covariance matrices for dark states.
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanics of collective spin systems and Dicke model
    Background framework for extending single-ensemble superradiance to multiple ensembles.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5666 in / 1423 out tokens · 47775 ms · 2026-05-18T04:39:14.427499+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    then implies that the angular velocity of each Bloch vector is propor- tional to its normalized coupling coefficient cj. Starting from the ground state, the positions of the Bloch vectors in the y–z plane can therefore be parameterized by a sin- gle collective variableθ(t), with the angular displacement of the jth Bloch vector given by cjθ(t). To intuitivel...

    work page

  2. [2]

    reduces to dˆρ dt = CθN Γ ( ˆC1 ˆρ ˆC† 1 − 1 2 ˆρ ˆC† 1 ˆC1 − 1 2 ˆC† 1 ˆC1 ˆρ ) . (12) This formulation reveals that the collective mode associ- ated with ˆC1 is dissipatively cooled to its vacuum state, thereby generating entanglement among the ensembles, while the remaining collective modes remain dynamically frozen and retain memory of their initial c...

    work page

  3. [3]

    This relation directly determines whether the system can approach the quantum-metrological pre- cision limit set by the quantum Fisher information matrix (QFIM)

    (18) In particular, this difference vanishes when A and B be- come parallel. This relation directly determines whether the system can approach the quantum-metrological pre- cision limit set by the quantum Fisher information matrix (QFIM). III. SPIN-BASED MULTIMODE QUANTUM INTERFEROMETR Y In distributed quantum sensing, the objective is typi- cally not to e...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Within this approximation Eq

    In this new basis, referred to as the dark-state basis, we define the collective op- erators for each ensemble as ˆSαβ j = ∑Nj i=1 |φ j,α ⟩i⟨φ j,β |, where α,β = 0, 1. Within this approximation Eq. ( B2), the collective operators obey the hierarchy ˆS11 j = ˆa† j ˆaj ≪ ˆS10 j ∼ √ Nj ˆa† j ≪ ˆS00 j ∼ Nj. (B3) In the dark-state basis, the lowering operator ˆ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    ( B7), all modes are mutually coupled, which com- plicates the analytical derivation of the dark state’s cor- relation properties from Eq

    Multimode Bogoliubov operators Within the multimode Bogoliubov operator in Eq. ( B7), all modes are mutually coupled, which com- plicates the analytical derivation of the dark state’s cor- relation properties from Eq. ( 1). Here, we present a con- crete method to reconstruct the multimode Bogoliubov operator in terms of collective mode operators, thereby ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    These quadrature operators obey the canonical commutation relations [ ˆX β j, ˆY β k ] = iδjk

    Collective quadrature operators To facilitate the forthcoming analysis of the covariance matrix, we first introduce quadrature operators for each mode as        ˆX β j = 1 √ 2 ( ˆβj + ˆβ † j ) , ˆY β j = 1√ 2i ( ˆβj − ˆβ † j ) , (C10) where β = a,b,B,C . These quadrature operators obey the canonical commutation relations [ ˆX β j, ˆY β k ] = iδjk. W...

    work page

  7. [7]

    (C29) Here we have omitted the subtraction of first moments, since all first moments vanish identically for the states considered

    Dark-State Covariance Matrix We begin by defining the covariance matrix Γ β Q asso- ciated with an arbitrary mode β (β =a,b,B,C ), whose elements are ( Γ β Q ) jk = ⟨ ˆQβ j ˆQβ k + ˆQβ k ˆQβ j ⟩. (C29) Here we have omitted the subtraction of first moments, since all first moments vanish identically for the states considered. Using the linear transformation o...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Their Euclidean inner product satisfies the iden- tity A⊤ B ≡ 1, and the norm of A is ∥A∥ = C− 1/ 2, where ∥A∥ = √ A⊤ A

    Eigenvalues and eigenvectors Before evaluating the eigenvalues of the dark-state co- variance matrix Γ a Q(∞ ), we first examine the vectors A and B. Their Euclidean inner product satisfies the iden- tity A⊤ B ≡ 1, and the norm of A is ∥A∥ = C− 1/ 2, where ∥A∥ = √ A⊤ A. For the correction matrix ˜Γ a X , we intro- duce the shorthand ǫ = 1 + ∥B∥2. With this ...

    work page

  9. [9]

    ( D6) and ( D8)], one finds that they share the same functional form, differing only in the coefficients bX and bY

    Spectrum visualization and asymptotic scaling of the lowest eigenpair of Γ a Q(∞ ) From the explicit expressions of λ ± X andλ ± Y [Eqs. ( D6) and ( D8)], one finds that they share the same functional form, differing only in the coefficients bX and bY . Since ∥A∥ ≥ ∥ B∥, it follows immediately that bY ≥ bX . To identify the minimum eigenvalue of Γ a Q(∞ ), it...

    work page

  10. [10]

    The Matrix Difference Γ a Y (∞ ) − [Γ a X (∞ )]− 1 Using the parametrization in Eq. ( D3), the covariance matrices Γ a X (∞ ) and Γ a Y (∞ ) can be written as Γ a X (∞ ) = (1 − bX ) e1e⊤ 1 + e2e⊤ 2 − c ( e1e⊤ 2 + e2e⊤ 1 ) + M∑ m=3 eme⊤ m, (D15) and Γ a Y (∞ ) = 1 ∥A∥2 [ e1e⊤ 1 + ( εc2 + ∥A∥2) e2e⊤ 2 + c ( e1e⊤ 2 + e2e⊤ 1 )] + M∑ m=3 eme⊤ m, (D16) where {e3...

    work page

  11. [11]

    (D18) Expressed in terms of the angle φ between A and B, this relation becomes Γ a Y (∞ ) − [Γ a X (∞ )]− 1 = ( tan2φ ) e2e⊤

    work page

  12. [12]

    In particular, when A ∥ B, Γ a Y (∞ ) = [ Γ a X (∞ )]− 1

    (D19) This result demonstrates that the closer A and B are to being parallel, the smaller the deviation between Γ a Y (∞ ) and [ Γ a X (∞ )]− 1. In particular, when A ∥ B, Γ a Y (∞ ) = [ Γ a X (∞ )]− 1. (D20) Appendix E: The relation between the multiparameter squeezing coefficient and the squeezing matrix In multiparameter quantum metrology, one often aims...

    work page

  13. [13]

    In this case, Ξ 2[ˆSX, ˆSY ] = Ξ 2 Cov[ˆSX ]

    (F4) For uniform coupling coefficients, the vectors A and B become parallel, corresponding to φ = 0. In this case, Ξ 2[ˆSX, ˆSY ] = Ξ 2 Cov[ˆSX ]. (F5) This demonstrates that the squeezing matrix attains its covariance-based lower bound, indicating that the choice of observables {ˆSX, ˆSY } is information-theoretically op- timal for the pure probe states re...

    work page

  14. [14]

    Pezz` e, A

    L. Pezz` e, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrol- ogy with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    B. P. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. D. Abbott, M. R. Aber- nathy, F. Acernese, K. Ackley, C. Adams, T. Adams, P. Addesso, R. X. Adhikari, et al. (LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)

    work page 2016

  16. [16]

    H. Bao, J. Duan, S. Jin, X. Lu, P. Li, W. Qu, M. Wang, I. Novikova, E. E. Mikhailov, K.-F. Zhao, K. Molmer, H. Shen, and Y. Xiao, Spin squeezing of 1011 atoms by prediction and retrodiction measurements, Nature 581, 159 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

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

    work page 2017

  18. [18]

    A. Dutt, K. Luke, S. Manipatruni, A. L. Gaeta, P. Nussenzveig, and M. Lipson, On-chip optical squeez- ing, Phys. Rev. Appl. 3, 044005 (2015)

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    Esteve, C

    J. Esteve, C. Gross, A. Weller, S. Giovanazzi, and M. K. Oberthaler, Squeezing and entanglement in a Bose- Einstein condensate, Nature 455, 1216 (2008)

    work page 2008

  20. [20]

    W. J. Eckner, N. D. Oppong, A. Cao, A. W. Young, W. R. Milner, J. M. Robinson, J. Ye, and A. M. Kauf- man, Realizing spin squeezing with Rydberg interactions in an optical clock, Nature 621, 734 (2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Braverman, A

    B. Braverman, A. Kawasaki, E. Pedrozo- Pe˜ nafiel, S. Colombo, C. Shu, Z. Li, E. Mendez, M. Yamoah, L. Salvi, D. Akamatsu, Y. Xiao, and V. Vuleti´ c, Near-unitary spin squeezing in 171Yb, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 223203 (2019)

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    Bornet, G

    G. Bornet, G. Emperauger, C. Chen, B. Ye, M. Block, M. Bintz, J. A. Boyd, D. Barredo, T. Comparin, F. Mezzacapo, T. Roscilde, T. Lahaye, N. Y. Yao, and A. Browaeys, Scalable spin squeezing in a dipolar Ryd- berg atom array, Nature 621, 728 (2023)

    work page 2023

  23. [23]

    Muessel, H

    W. Muessel, H. Strobel, D. Linnemann, D. B. Hume, and M. K. Oberthaler, Scalable spin squeezing for quantum- enhanced magnetometry with Bose-Einstein conden- sates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 103004 (2014)

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    Takano, M

    T. Takano, M. Fuyama, R. Namiki, and Y. Takahashi, Spin squeezing of a cold atomic ensemble with the nuclear spin of one-half, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 033601 (2009)

    work page 2009

  25. [25]

    W. Wu, E. J. Davis, L. B. Hughes, B. Ye, Z. Wang, D. Kufel, T. Ono, S. A. Meynell, M. Block, C. Liu, et al. , Spin squeezing in an ensemble of nitrogen–vacancy cen- tres in diamond, Nature 646, 74 (2025)

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Altenburg, M

    S. Altenburg, M. Oszmaniec, S. W¨ olk, and O. G¨ uhne, Estimation of gradients in quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A 96, 042319 (2017)

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    Gessner, A

    M. Gessner, A. Smerzi, and L. Pezze, Multiparameter squeezing for optimal quantum enhancements in sensor networks, Nat. Commun. 11, 3817 (2020)

    work page 2020

  28. [28]

    Fadel, B

    M. Fadel, B. Yadin, Y. Mao, T. Byrnes, and M. Gess- ner, Multiparameter quantum metrology and mode en- tanglement with spatially split nonclassical spin ensem- bles, New J. Phys. 25, 073006 (2023)

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    Wildermuth, S

    S. Wildermuth, S. Hofferberth, I. Lesanovsky, S. Groth, P. Krueger, J. Schmiedmayer, and I. Bar-Joseph, Sensing electric and magnetic fields with Bose-Einstein conden- sates, Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 264103 (2006)

    work page 2006

  30. [30]

    Koschorreck, M

    M. Koschorreck, M. Napolitano, B. Dubost, and M. W. Mitchell, High resolution magnetic vector-field imaging with cold atomic ensembles, Appl. Phys. Lett. 98, 074101 (2011)

    work page 2011

  31. [31]

    X. Guo, C. R. Breum, J. Borregaard, S. Izumi, M. Larsen, V, T. Gehring, M. Christandl, J. S. Neergaard-Nielsen, and U. L. Andersen, Distributed quantum sensing in a continuous-variable entangled net- work, Nat. Phys. 16, 281 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    T. J. Proctor, P. A. Knott, and J. A. Dunningham, Mul- tiparameter estimation in networked quantum sensors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 080501 (2018)

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    W. Ge, K. Jacobs, Z. Eldredge, A. V. Gor- shkov, and M. Foss-Feig, Distributed quantum metrol- ogy with linear networks and separable inputs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 043604 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Kaubruegger, A

    R. Kaubruegger, A. Shankar, D. V. Vasilyev, and P. Zoller, Optimal and variational multiparame- ter quantum metrology and vector-field sensing, PRX Quantum 4, 020333 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    C. Oh, C. Lee, S. H. Lie, and H. Jeong, Optimal distributed quantum sensing using Gaussian states, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023030 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Zhang and Q

    Z. Zhang and Q. Zhuang, Distributed quantum sensing, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 043001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  37. [37]

    C. Oh, L. Jiang, and C. Lee, Distributed quantum phase sensing for arbitrary positive and negative weights, 18 Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023164 (2022)

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Liu, K.-X

    B. Liu, K.-X. Yang, Y.-L. Mao, L. Feng, B. Guo, S. Xu, H. Chen, Z.-D. Li, and J. Fan, Experimen- tal adaptive Bayesian estimation for a linear function of distributed phases in photonic quantum networks, Optica 11, 1419 (2024)

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    Brida, M

    G. Brida, M. Genovese, and I. R. Berchera, Experi- mental realization of sub-shot-noise quantum imaging, Nat. Photonics 4, 227 (2010)

    work page 2010

  40. [40]

    Defienne, M

    H. Defienne, M. Reichert, J. W. Fleischer, and D. Faccio, Quantum image distillation, Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0307 (2019)

    work page 2019

  41. [41]

    Eldredge, M

    Z. Eldredge, M. Foss-Feig, J. A. Gross, S. L. Rolston, and A. V. Gorshkov, Optimal and secure measurement protocols for quantum sensor networks, Phys. Rev. A 97, 042337 (2018)

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Yonezawa, D

    H. Yonezawa, D. Nakane, T. A. Wheatley, K. Iwasawa, S. Takeda, H. Arao, K. Ohki, K. Tsumura, D. W. Berry, T. C. Ralph, H. M. Wiseman, E. H. Huntington, and A. Furusawa, Quantum-enhanced optical-phase tracking, Science 337, 1514 (2012)

    work page 2012

  43. [43]

    K. M. Backes, D. A. Palken, S. Al Kenany, et al. , A quantum enhanced search for dark matter axions, Nature 590, 238 (2021)

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    Shi and Q

    H. Shi and Q. Zhuang, Ultimate precision limit of noise sensing and dark matter search, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 27 (2023)

    work page 2023

  45. [45]

    A. J. Brady, X. Chen, Y. Xia, J. Manley, M. D. Chowd- hury, K. Xiao, Z. Liu, R. Harnik, D. J. Wilson, Z. Zhang, and Q. Zhuang, Entanglement-enhanced optomechanical sensor array with application to dark matter searches, Commun. Phys. 6, 237 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Komar, E

    P. Komar, E. M. Kessler, M. Bishof, L. Jiang, A. S. Sorensen, J. Ye, and D. Lukin, A quantum network of clocks, Nat. Phys. 10, 582 (2014)

    work page 2014

  47. [47]

    B. K. Malia, Y. Wu, J. Martinez-Rincon, and M. A. Kase- vich, Distributed quantum sensing with mode-entangled spin-squeezed atomic states, Nature 612, 661 (2022)

    work page 2022

  48. [48]

    Kunkel, M

    P. Kunkel, M. Pruefer, H. Strobel, D. Linnemann, A. Froelian, T. Gasenzer, M. Gaerttner, and M. K. Oberthaler, Spatially distributed multipartite entan- glement enables EPR steering of atomic clouds, Science 360, 413 (2018)

    work page 2018

  49. [49]

    Fadel, T

    M. Fadel, T. Zibold, B. D´ ecamps, and P. Treut- lein, Spatial entanglement patterns and Einstein- Podolsky-Rosen steering in Bose-Einstein condensates, Science 360, 409 (2018)

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    Kajtoch, E

    D. Kajtoch, E. Witkowska, and A. Sinatra, Spin-squeeze d atomic crystal, Europhys. Lett. 123, 20012 (2018)

    work page 2018

  51. [51]

    Y. Jing, M. Fadel, V. Ivannikov, and T. Byrnes, Split spin-squeezed Bose-Einstein condensates, New J. Phys. 21, 093038 (2019)

    work page 2019

  52. [52]

    Fadel and M

    M. Fadel and M. Gessner, Relating spin squeezing to mul- tipartite entanglement criteria for particles and modes, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012412 (2020)

    work page 2020

  53. [53]

    Kitagawa and M

    M. Kitagawa and M. Ueda, Squeezed spin states, Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138 (1993)

    work page 1993

  54. [54]

    Lange, J

    K. Lange, J. Peise, B. L¨ ucke, I. Kruse, G. Vitagliano, I. Apellaniz, M. Kleinmann, G. T´ oth, and C. Klempt, Entanglement between two spatially separated atomic modes, Science 360, 416 (2018)

    work page 2018

  55. [55]

    M. A. Norcia, R. J. Lewis-Swan, J. R. K. Cline, B. Zhu, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, Cavity-mediated col- lective spin-exchange interactions in a strontium super- radiant laser, Science 361, 259 (2018)

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    R. J. Lewis-Swan, M. A. Norcia, J. R. K. Cline, J. K. Thompson, and A. M. Rey, Robust spin squeezing via photon-mediated interactions on an optical clock transi- tion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 070403 (2018)

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    R. H. Dicke, Coherence in spontaneous radiation pro- cesses, Phys. Rev. 93, 99 (1954)

    work page 1954

  58. [58]

    Puri and S

    R. Puri and S. Lawande, Exact steady-state density op- erator for a collective atomic system in an external field, Phys. Lett. A 72, 200 (1979)

    work page 1979

  59. [59]

    H. J. Carmichael, Analytical and numerical results for the steady state in cooperative resonance fluorescence, J. Phys. B: Atom. Mol. Phys. 13, 3551 (1980)

    work page 1980

  60. [60]

    Barberena, R

    D. Barberena, R. J. Lewis-Swan, J. K. Thompson, and A. M. Rey, Driven-dissipative quantum dynam- ics in ultra-long-lived dipoles in an optical cavity, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053411 (2019)

    work page 2019

  61. [61]

    T. E. Lee, C.-K. Chan, and S. F. Yelin, Dissipative phase transitions: Independent versus collective decay and spin squeezing, Phys. Rev. A 90, 052109 (2014)

    work page 2014

  62. [62]

    A. Chu, M. Mamaev, M. Kop- penh¨ ofer, M. Yuan, and A. A. Clerk, Reconfigurable dissipative entanglement between many spin ensembles: (2025), arXiv:2510.07616 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  63. [63]

    K. Shen, X. Hu, and F. Wang, Dark-state entangle- ment of two atomic ensembles via cavity superradiance, Phys. Rev. A 112, 043708 (2025)

    work page 2025

  64. [64]

    Sundar, D

    B. Sundar, D. Barberena, A. M. Rey, and A. P. n. Ori- oli, Squeezing multilevel atoms in dark states via cavity superradiance, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 033601 (2024)

    work page 2024

  65. [65]

    Pi˜ neiro Orioli, J

    A. Pi˜ neiro Orioli, J. K. Thompson, and A. M. Rey, Emer- gent dark states from superradiant dynamics in multi- level atoms in a cavity, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011054 (2022)

    work page 2022

  66. [66]

    Kurucz and K

    Z. Kurucz and K. Mølmer, Multilevel Holstein- Primakoff approximation and its application to atomic spin squeezing and ensemble quantum memories, Phys. Rev. A 81, 032314 (2010)

    work page 2010

  67. [67]

    Holstein and H

    T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, Phys. Rev. 58, 1098 (1940)

    work page 1940

  68. [68]

    J. Ma, X. Wang, C. P. Sun, and F. Nori, Quantum spin squeezing, Phys. Rep. 509, 89 (2011)

    work page 2011

  69. [69]

    J. Aasi, J. Abadie, B. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. Abbott, M. Abernathy, C. Adams, T. Adams, P. Addesso, R. Ad- hikari, et al. , Enhanced sensitivity of the LIGO gravita- tional wave detector by using squeezed states of light, Nat. Photonics 7, 613 (2013)

    work page 2013

  70. [70]

    P. A. Knott, T. J. Proctor, A. J. Hayes, J. F. Ralph, P. Kok, and J. A. Dunningham, Local ver- sus global strategies in multiparameter estimation, Phys. Rev. A 94, 062312 (2016)

    work page 2016

  71. [71]

    Zhang, H

    Y.-L. Zhang, H. Wang, L. Jing, L.-Z. Mu, and H. Fan, Fitting magnetic field gradient with Heisenberg-scaling accuracy, Sci. Rep. 4, 7390 (2014)

    work page 2014

  72. [72]

    H. T. Ng and K. Kim, Quantum estima- tion of magnetic-field gradient using W-state, Opt. Commun. 331, 353 (2014)

    work page 2014

  73. [73]

    Gessner, L

    M. Gessner, L. Pezz` e, and A. Smerzi, Sensitiv- ity bounds for multiparameter quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 130503 (2018)

    work page 2018

  74. [74]

    D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, F. L. Moore, and D. J. Heinzen, Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 46, R6797 (1992) . 19

    work page 1992

  75. [75]

    R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix analysis (Cam- bridge university press, 2012)

    work page 2012

  76. [76]

    Shen, Dataset for ”driven multi-ensemble su- perradiance for multiparameter quantum sensing”, 10.5281/zenodo.17657463 (2025)

    K. Shen, Dataset for ”driven multi-ensemble su- perradiance for multiparameter quantum sensing”, 10.5281/zenodo.17657463 (2025)

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.17657463 2025

  77. [77]

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X.-M. Lu, and X. Wang, Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estima- tion, J. Phys. A-Math. Theor. 53, 023001 (2020)

    work page 2020