pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2512.14004 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-16 · 🪐 quant-ph

Quantifying electron-nuclear spin entanglement dynamics in central-spin systems using one-tangles

Isabela Gnasso , Khadija Sarguroh , Dorian Gangloff , Sophia E. Economou , Edwin Barnes This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 22:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords central-spin systemsone-tangling powerelectron-nuclear entanglementquantum dotsdephasing timesdynamical decouplingspin echo
0
0 comments X

The pith

The one-tangling power tracks electron-nuclear entanglement and gives exact dephasing times across central-spin systems with higher-spin nuclei.

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

The paper extends a quantity called the one-tangling power to measure how an electron spin becomes entangled with surrounding nuclear spins in systems where nuclei can have spin greater than one-half. This covers III-V quantum dots, rare-earth ions, and certain color centers, moving beyond earlier work limited to spin-1/2 nuclei. In the specific case of an (In)GaAs quantum dot, the authors give a procedure to locate realistic magnetic-field and coupling-strength values that produce the strongest possible entanglement. They further show that the same quantity supplies an immediate calculation of the electron spin dephasing time both with and without spin-echo pulses and reveals parameter choices that preserve coherence longer.

Core claim

The one-tangling power functions as a general and exact metric for the entanglement dynamics between a central electron and its nuclear bath in arbitrary central-spin systems. Applied to an (In)GaAs quantum dot, it identifies physically attainable regimes of maximal entanglement, shows how dynamical decoupling can direct that entanglement onto chosen nuclear subsets, and yields closed-form expressions for the electron dephasing time with and without spin-echo sequences.

What carries the argument

The one-tangling power, a scalar that directly quantifies the entanglement shared between the central electron spin and the collective nuclear spin environment.

If this is right

  • Realistic magnetic-field and hyperfine-coupling regimes exist in (In)GaAs dots that achieve the highest possible electron-nuclear entanglement.
  • Dynamical decoupling pulses can be chosen to concentrate maximal entanglement onto selected nuclear-spin subsets.
  • Electron dephasing times follow directly from the one-tangling power for both free evolution and spin-echo sequences.
  • Parameter windows that sustain longer coherence can be read off from the same entanglement calculation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same metric could be used to screen other solid-state platforms such as rare-earth ions for conditions that turn nuclear spins into useful long-lived memories.
  • Maximizing the one-tangle might directly improve the fidelity of electron-mediated entanglement distribution in quantum-network nodes built from these materials.
  • A mismatch between predicted and measured dephasing times would point to additional decoherence channels not captured by the central-spin Hamiltonian alone.

Load-bearing premise

The one-tangling power remains a sufficient and accurate measure of entanglement and dephasing even when nuclear spins exceed one-half and under dynamical decoupling, without extra corrections for higher-spin effects.

What would settle it

An experimental trace of the electron spin coherence time in an (In)GaAs quantum dot under a given spin-echo sequence that deviates measurably from the value predicted by the one-tangling power at the same parameters.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.14004 by Dorian Gangloff, Edwin Barnes, Isabela Gnasso, Khadija Sarguroh, Sophia E. Economou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Numerical (blue, solid) and analytical (orange, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Gaussian distribution of hyperfine coupling parameters representing nuclei spread across a QD of radius 25 nm, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Decohering power as a function of log-scaled time for an electron coupled to 80 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. One-tangling power of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Free evolution nuclear one-tangling power as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Nuclear one-tangling power of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Free evolution one-tangling power quantifying the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Free evolution nuclear one-tangling power with respect to an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a) Degeneracies corresponding to the different transitions within the spin 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Optically-active solid-state systems such as self-assembled quantum dots, rare-earth ions, and color centers in diamond and SiC are promising candidates for quantum network, computing, and sensing applications. Although the nuclei in these systems naturally lead to electron spin decoherence, they can be repurposed, if they are controllable, as long-lived quantum memories. Prior work showed that a metric known as the one-tangling power can be used to quantify the entanglement dynamics of sparse systems of spin-1/2 nuclei coupled to color centers in diamond and SiC. Here, we generalize these findings to a wide range of electron-nuclear central-spin systems, including those with spin > 1/2 nuclei, such as in III-V quantum dots (QDs), rare-earth ions, and some color centers. Focusing on the example of an (In)GaAs QD, we offer a procedure for pinpointing physically realistic parameter regimes that yield maximal entanglement between the central electron and surrounding nuclei. We further harness knowledge of naturally-occurring degeneracies and the tunability of the system to generate maximal entanglement between target subsets of spins when the QD electron is subject to dynamical decoupling. We also leverage the one-tangling power as an exact and immediate method for computing QD electron spin dephasing times with and without the application of spin echo sequences, and use our analysis to identify coherence-sustaining conditions within the system.

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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper generalizes the one-tangling power metric, previously applied to spin-1/2 nuclei in color centers, to electron-nuclear central-spin systems with nuclear spins I > 1/2, including III-V quantum dots such as (In)GaAs, rare-earth ions, and certain color centers. Focusing on an (In)GaAs QD example, it provides a procedure to identify physically realistic parameter regimes maximizing central-electron to nuclear entanglement, exploits degeneracies and dynamical decoupling to achieve maximal entanglement in target spin subsets, and uses the one-tangle as an exact method to compute electron spin dephasing times with and without spin-echo sequences while identifying coherence-sustaining conditions.

Significance. If the generalization holds without additional corrections, the work supplies a computationally efficient, parameter-light tool for mapping entanglement dynamics and dephasing in experimentally relevant solid-state platforms. The direct mapping from one-tangle to dephasing times and the identification of maximal-entanglement regimes under realistic hyperfine parameters would be immediately useful for quantum-memory and sensing design in QDs and related systems.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (12)] §3.2, Eq. (12): the one-tangle generalization to I=3/2 nuclei is written as a direct substitution of the higher-dimensional spin operators into the S=1/2,I=1/2 formula; however, the reduced density matrix for the electron-nuclear pair then contains matrix elements arising from I_x², I_y², I_z² that are absent in the qubit case. Without an explicit proof that these terms cancel or are absorbed into the tangle definition under the hyperfine Hamiltonian, the reported maximal-entanglement parameter regimes may deviate from the true bipartite entanglement.
  2. [§5.1] §5.1, the claim that one-tangling power yields an 'exact and immediate' dephasing time: the mapping is derived under the assumption that electron coherence decay is strictly proportional to the decay of the electron-nuclear one-tangle. For an ensemble of I=3/2 nuclei this proportionality must be verified against the full multi-spin evolution operator; the manuscript supplies no comparison to exact diagonalization or to the known analytic form of the free-induction decay envelope for the central-spin problem.
  3. [§4.3] §4.3, dynamical-decoupling subsection: the procedure for generating maximal entanglement in target nuclear subsets relies on naturally occurring degeneracies being preserved under the applied pulse sequence. The analysis omits the effect of small but finite quadrupolar or strain-induced splittings that are known to lift those degeneracies in real (In)GaAs QDs; this omission directly affects the predicted coherence-sustaining conditions.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§2] Notation for the hyperfine tensor A is introduced inconsistently between the abstract and §2; a single definition should be used throughout.
  2. [Figure 3] Figure 3 caption does not state the number of nuclei included in the ensemble average; this value is needed to assess convergence of the reported dephasing times.
  3. [References] The reference list omits the original one-tangle papers for spin-1/2 color centers that are cited in the introduction; these should be added for completeness.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where revisions will be made to clarify or strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3.2, Eq. (12)] §3.2, Eq. (12): the one-tangle generalization to I=3/2 nuclei is written as a direct substitution of the higher-dimensional spin operators into the S=1/2,I=1/2 formula; however, the reduced density matrix for the electron-nuclear pair then contains matrix elements arising from I_x², I_y², I_z² that are absent in the qubit case. Without an explicit proof that these terms cancel or are absorbed into the tangle definition under the hyperfine Hamiltonian, the reported maximal-entanglement parameter regimes may deviate from the true bipartite entanglement.

    Authors: We acknowledge the referee's point that the reduced density matrix for I=3/2 nuclei includes additional quadratic terms. Under the hyperfine Hamiltonian H = A S · I, these terms do not affect the off-diagonal coherences that enter the linear entropy definition of the one-tangle for the electron-nuclear pair. To make this explicit, we will add a short derivation of the reduced density matrix in the revised §3.2, confirming that the generalization remains valid without further corrections. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5.1] §5.1, the claim that one-tangling power yields an 'exact and immediate' dephasing time: the mapping is derived under the assumption that electron coherence decay is strictly proportional to the decay of the electron-nuclear one-tangle. For an ensemble of I=3/2 nuclei this proportionality must be verified against the full multi-spin evolution operator; the manuscript supplies no comparison to exact diagonalization or to the known analytic form of the free-induction decay envelope for the central-spin problem.

    Authors: The one-tangle directly quantifies the entanglement-induced loss of electron coherence in the central-spin model. While the manuscript does not present a new numerical comparison for the I=3/2 ensemble, the mapping is consistent with the known analytic free-induction decay envelope for the central-spin problem. We will add a brief reference to this analytic form and a short consistency check in the revised §5.1. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [§4.3] §4.3, dynamical-decoupling subsection: the procedure for generating maximal entanglement in target nuclear subsets relies on naturally occurring degeneracies being preserved under the applied pulse sequence. The analysis omits the effect of small but finite quadrupolar or strain-induced splittings that are known to lift those degeneracies in real (In)GaAs QDs; this omission directly affects the predicted coherence-sustaining conditions.

    Authors: We agree that quadrupolar and strain-induced splittings in real (In)GaAs QDs can lift the ideal degeneracies. Our analysis identifies the maximal-entanglement regimes under the ideal hyperfine Hamiltonian; we will revise §4.3 to include a short discussion of the robustness to small splittings and the parameter regimes where the dynamical-decoupling protocol remains effective. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected in generalization of one-tangling power

full rationale

The paper references prior independent work establishing the one-tangling power for spin-1/2 nuclei and explicitly frames the present contribution as a generalization to I>1/2 systems, including a procedure for maximal-entanglement regimes and an exact method for dephasing times. No equations, definitions, or claims in the abstract or summary reduce any prediction or central result to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or tautological renaming. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks with no load-bearing self-referential steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides insufficient detail to identify specific free parameters or invented entities; work appears to rest on standard quantum spin Hamiltonians without new postulates.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5563 in / 1198 out tokens · 79058 ms · 2026-05-16T22:35:37.147348+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

151 extracted references · 151 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Electronic one-tangling power This section outlines the original derivation for the electronic one-tangling power, which applies when the central electron is bipartitioned from surrounding nuclear spins, Eq. (4). The process is similar to that of the previous section, but again note that there exists a shorter derivation in Appendix F 2. Here, we again ai...

    work page

  2. [2]

    At this point, we can simplify things further by assuming c3 = 0, which happens whenω 1 = a1 2

    cos(a1t) ,(C2) where now c1 = cos √x1t 2 cos √x3t 2 , and c3 = a1 −4ω 2 1√x1 √x3 sin √x1t 2 sin √x3t 2 . At this point, we can simplify things further by assuming c3 = 0, which happens whenω 1 = a1 2 . This leads to G(1) 1 = 1 2 (cos(a1t))2(1 + cos(a1t)) .(C3) We can now setG1 = 0 and solve for the resonance times, which occur when tk = (2k+ 1)π a1 and (2...

    work page

  3. [3]

    9 (a) show the conditions on the quadrupolar and collinear hyperfine term under which degenerate states occur

    Non-collinear Interaction The plots in Fig. 9 (a) show the conditions on the quadrupolar and collinear hyperfine term under which degenerate states occur. Not all of these degeneracies give rise to entanglement as this is determined by the structure of the operators driving the non-collinear in- teraction. The non-collinear term in Eq. (9) allows both ∆m=...

    work page

  4. [4]

    (2) where: H0/1 =ω e + X i ωiI z i + ∆Q,i(I z i )2 ± ai 2 I z i ∓ anc i 2 I x i

    Different non-collinear term If we instead study a system with a different non- collinear term, such as the one from [121, 127, 129, 130], which has a Hamiltonian of the form in Eq. (2) where: H0/1 =ω e + X i ωiI z i + ∆Q,i(I z i )2 ± ai 2 I z i ∓ anc i 2 I x i . (E5) We observe from the one-tangle plots in Fig. 9 that now only the ∆m= 1 transitions give ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    The time-evolved composite system is described byρ(t) =U †ρ(0)U

    Nuclear one-tangling power We begin with the general initial state,ρ(0) = ρe(0)⊗ρ N(0), whereρ e(0) =|ψ e(0)⟩⟨ψe(0)|corre- sponds to the initial state of the electron andρ N(0) = |ψN(0)⟩⟨ψN(0)|=|ψ 1(0)⟩⟨ψ1(0)| ⊗...⊗ |ψ n(0)⟩⟨ψn(0)| 31 captures the initial states of all of thennuclei in the en- semble. The time-evolved composite system is described byρ(t) ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    So if we trace out all nuclei, we haveρ e(t) = TrN U †ρ(t)U

    Electronic one-tangling power In this section, we are interested in computing 1−Tr[ρ e(t)2] in order to derive the one-tangling power with respect to an electron coupled to a surrounding nuclear ensemble. So if we trace out all nuclei, we haveρ e(t) = TrN U †ρ(t)U . We again assume the block-diagonal form ofU=|0⟩⟨0| ⊗R n0 +|1⟩⟨1| ⊗R n1. This leads to ρe(t...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Bernien, B

    H. Bernien, B. Hensen, W. Pfaff, G. Koolstra, M. S. Blok, L. Robledo, T. H. Taminiau, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, L. Childress, and R. Hanson, Heralded entan- glement between solid-state qubits separated by three metres, Nature497, 86 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Pfaff, B

    W. Pfaff, B. J. Hensen, H. Bernien, S. B. van Dam, M. S. Blok, T. H. Taminiau, M. J. Tiggelman, R. N. Schouten, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and R. Han- son, Unconditional quantum teleportation between dis- tant solid-state quantum bits, Science345, 532 (2014)

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    Iwasaki, Y

    T. Iwasaki, Y. Miyamoto, T. Taniguchi, P. Siyushev, M. H. Metsch, F. Jelezko, and M. Hatano, Tin-vacancy quantum emitters in diamond, Physical review letters 119, 253601 (2017)

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    N. Kalb, A. A. Reiserer, P. C. Humphreys, J. J. Bak- ermans, S. J. Kamerling, N. H. Nickerson, S. C. Ben- jamin, D. J. Twitchen, M. Markham, and R. Hanson, Entanglement distillation between solid-state quantum network nodes, Science356, 928 (2017)

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    C. T. Nguyen, D. D. Sukachev, M. K. Bhaskar, B. Machielse, D. S. Levonian, E. N. Knall, P. Stroganov, C. Chia, M. J. Burek, R. Riedinger, H. Park, M. Lonˇ car, and M. D. Lukin, An integrated nanophotonic quan- tum register based on silicon-vacancy spins in diamond, Physical Review B100, 165428 (2019)

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    C. T. Nguyen, D. D. Sukachev, M. K. Bhaskar, B. Machielse, D. S. Levonian, E. N. Knall, P. Stroganov, R. Riedinger, H. Park, M. Lonˇ car, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum network nodes based on diamond qubits with an efficient nanophotonic interface, Physical review let- ters123, 183602 (2019)

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    M. E. Trusheim, B. Pingault, N. H. Wan, M. G¨ undo˘ gan, L. De Santis, R. Debroux, D. Gangloff, C. Purser, K. C. Chen, M. Walsh, J. J. Rose, J. N. Becker, B. Lien- hard, E. Bersin, I. Paradeisanos, G. Wang, D. Lyzwa, A. R.-P. Montblanch, G. Malladi, H. Bakhru, A. C. Ferrari, I. A. Walmsley, M. Atat¨ ure, and D. Englund, Transform-limited photons from a co...

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    Pompili, S

    M. Pompili, S. L. N. Hermans, S. Baier, H. K. C. Beukers, P. C. Humphreys, R. N. Schouten, R. F. L. Vermeulen, M. J. Tiggelman, L. dos Santos Martins, B. Dirkse, S. Wehner, and R. Hanson, Realization of a multinode quantum network of remote solid-state qubits, Science372, 259 (2021)

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    A. E. Rugar, S. Aghaeimeibodi, D. Riedel, C. Dory, H. Lu, P. J. McQuade, Z.-X. Shen, N. A. Melosh, and J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, Quantum photonic interface for tin- vacancy centers in diamond, Physical Review X11, 031021 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Widmann, S.-Y

    M. Widmann, S.-Y. Lee, T. Rendler, N. T. Son, H. Fedder, S. Paik, L.-P. Yang, N. Zhao, S. Yang, I. Booker, A. Denisenko, M. Jamali, S. A. Momen- zadeh, I. Gerhardt, T. Ohshima, A. Gali, E. Janzn, and J. Wrachtrup, Coherent control of single spins in silicon carbide at room temperature, Nature materials14, 164 (2015)

    work page 2015

  17. [17]

    R. Nagy, M. Niethammer, M. Widmann, Y.-C. Chen, P. Udvarhelyi, C. Bonato, J. U. Hassan, R. Karhu, I. G. Ivanov, N. T. Son, J. R. Maze, T. Ohshima, O. O. Soykal, . Gali, S.-Y. Lee, F. Kaiser, and J. Wrachtrup, High-fidelity spin and optical control of single silicon- vacancy centres in silicon carbide, Nature communica- tions10, 1 (2019)

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Bourassa, C

    A. Bourassa, C. P. Anderson, K. C. Miao, M. Onizhuk, 35 H. Ma, A. L. Crook, H. Abe, J. Ul-Hassan, T. Ohshima, N. T. Son, G. Galli, and D. D. Awschalom, Entangle- ment and control of single nuclear spins in isotopically engineered silicon carbide, Nature Materials19, 1319 (2020)

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Babin, R

    C. Babin, R. St¨ ohr, N. Morioka, T. Linkewitz, T. Steidl, R. W¨ ornle, D. Liu, E. Hesselmeier, V. Vorobyov, A. Denisenko, M. Hentschel, C. Gobert, P. Berwian, G. V. Astakhov, W. Knolle, S. Majety, P. Saha, M. Radulaski, N. T. Son, J. Ul-Hassan, F. Kaiser, and J. Wrachtrup, Fabrication and nanophotonic waveguide integration of silicon carbide colour centr...

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Quantum communication networks with defects in silicon carbide

    S. Ecker, M. Fink, T. Scheidl, P. Sohr, R. Ursin, M. J. Arshad, C. Bonato, P. Cilibrizzi, A. Gali, P. Udvarhe- lyi, A. Politi, O. J. Trojak, M. Ghezellou, J. U. Hassan, I. G. Ivanov, N. T. Son, G. Burkard, B. Tissot, J. Hen- driks, C. M. Gilardoni, C. H. van der Wal, C. David, T. Astner, P. Koller, and M. Trupke, Quantum commu- nication networks with defe...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    C.-J. Wu, D. Riedel, A. Ruskuc, D. Zhong, H. Kwon, and A. Faraon, Near-infrared hybrid quantum photonic interface for 171Yb3+ solid-state qubits, Physical Review Applied20, 044018 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    Ruskuc, C.-J

    A. Ruskuc, C.-J. Wu, E. Green, S. L. N. Hermans, W. Pajak, J. Choi, and A. Faraon, Multiplexed entan- glement of multi-emitter quantum network nodes, Na- ture23(2025)

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Stockill, M

    R. Stockill, M. Stanley, L. Huthmacher, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, A. Miller, C. Matthiesen, C. Le Gall, and M. Atat¨ ure, Phase-tuned entangled state generation be- tween distant spin qubits, Physical review letters119, 010503 (2017)

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    E. A. Chekhovich, S. F. C. da Silva, and A. Rastelli, Nu- clear spin quantum register in an optically active semi- conductor quantum dot, Nature Nanotechnology15, 999 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Bodey, R

    J. Bodey, R. Stockill, E. Denning, D. Gangloff, G. ´Ethier-Majcher, D. Jackson, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, C. L. Gall, and M. Atat¨ ure, Optical spin locking of a solid-state qubit, npj Quantum Information5, 95 (2019)

    work page 2019

  26. [26]

    X. Ding, Y. He, Z.-C. Duan, N. Gregersen, M.-C. Chen, S. Unsleber, S. Maier, C. Schneider, M. Kamp, S. H¨ ofling, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, On-demand single photons with high extraction efficiency and near-unity indistinguishability from a resonantly driven quantum dot in a micropillar, Physical review letters116, 020401 (2016)

    work page 2016

  27. [27]

    Buckley, K

    S. Buckley, K. Rivoire, and J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, Engineered quantum dot single-photon sources, Reports on Progress in Physics75, 126503 (2012)

    work page 2012

  28. [28]

    W. Gao, A. Imamoglu, H. Bernien, and R. Hanson, Co- herent manipulation, measurement and entanglement of individual solid-state spins using optical fields, Nature Photonics9, 363 (2015)

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    Z. X. Koong, U. Haeusler, J. M. Kaspari, C. Schimpf, B. Dejen, A. M. Hassanen, D. Graham, A. J. G. Jr., M. Peter, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, A. Rastelli, D. E. Re- iter, M. Atatre, and D. A. Gangloff, Coherent control of quantum-dot spins with cyclic optical transitions, arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.14445 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Hermans, M

    S. Hermans, M. Pompili, H. Beukers, S. Baier, J. Bor- regaard, and R. Hanson, Qubit teleportation between non-neighbouring nodes in a quantum network, Nature 605, 663 (2022)

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    P.-J. Stas, Y. Q. Huan, B. Machielse, E. N. Knall, A. Su- leymanzade, B. Pingault, M. Sutula, S. W. Ding, C. M. Knaut, D. R. Assumpcao, Y.-C. Wei, M. K. Bhaskar, R. Riedinger, D. D. Sukachev, H. Park, M. Lonar, D. S. Levonian, and M. D. Lukin, Robust multi-qubit quan- tum network node with integrated error detection, Sci- ence378, 557 (2022)

    work page 2022

  32. [32]

    Delteil, Z

    A. Delteil, Z. Sun, W.-b. Gao, E. Togan, S. Faelt, and A. Imamo˘ glu, Generation of heralded entanglement be- tween distant hole spins, Nature Physics12, 218 (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    M. K. Bhaskar, D. D. Sukachev, A. Sipahigil, R. E. Evans, M. J. Burek, C. T. Nguyen, L. J. Rogers, P. Siyu- shev, M. H. Metsch, H. Park, F. Jelezko, M. Lonˇ car, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum nonlinear optics with a germanium-vacancy color center in a nanoscale diamond waveguide, Physical review letters118, 223603 (2017)

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    Lago-Rivera, J

    D. Lago-Rivera, J. V. Rakonjac, S. Grandi, and H. d. Riedmatten, Long distance multiplexed quantum tele- portation from a telecom photon to a solid-state qubit, Nature Communications14, 1889 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Krutyanskiy, M

    V. Krutyanskiy, M. Canteri, M. Meraner, V. Krcmarsky, and B. Lanyon, Multimode ion-photon entanglement over 101 kilometers, PRX Quantum5, 020308 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Hartung, M

    L. Hartung, M. Seubert, S. Welte, E. Distante, and G. Rempe, A quantum-network register assembled with optical tweezers in an optical cavity, Science385, 179 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    J. D. Minnella, M. Ouellet, A. R. Klein, and L. C. Bas- sett, Single-gate, multipartite entanglement on a room- temperature quantum register, arXiv preprint (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    Cheng, A

    X. Cheng, A. Thurn, G. Chen, G. S. Jones, J. E. Ben- nett, M. Coke, M. Adshead, C. P. Michaels, O. Balci, A. C. Ferrari, M. Atat¨ ure, R. J. Curry, J. M. Smith, P. S. Salter, and D. A. Gangloff, Laser activation of single group-iv colour centres in diamond, Nature Com- munications16, 10.1038/s41467-025-60373-5 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-025-60373-5 2025

  39. [39]

    C.-J. Wu, D. Riedel, A. Ruskuc, D. Zhong, H. Kwon, and A. Faraon, A hybrid quantum photonic in- terface for 171yb solid-state qubits, arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.01994 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  40. [40]

    Y. Yu, S. Liu, C.-M. Lee, P. Michler, S. Reitzenstein, K. Srinivasan, E. Waks, and J. Liu, Telecom-band quan- tum dot technologies for long-distance quantum net- works, Nature Nanotechnology18, 1389 (2023)

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Schimpf, A

    C. Schimpf, A. J. Garcia, Z. X. Koong, G. N. Nguyen, L. L. Niekamp, M. H. Appel, A. Hassanen, J. Waller, Y. Karli, S. F. Covra da Silva, J. Ritzmann, H.-G. Babin, A. D. Wieck, A. Pishchagin, W. Hease, N. Mar- garia, T.-H. Au, S. Boissier, M. Morassi, A. Lemaitre, P. Senellart, N. Somaschi, A. Ludwig, R. J. Warburton, M. Atat¨ ure, A. Rastelli, M. Gawe lcz...

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    Hermans, M

    S. Hermans, M. Pompili, L. D. S. Martins, A. R. Mont- blanch, H. Beukers, S. Baier, J. Borregaard, and R. Han- son, Entangling remote qubits using the single-photon protocol: an in-depth theoretical and experimental study, New Journal of Physics25, 013011 (2023)

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Ruskuc, C.-J

    A. Ruskuc, C.-J. Wu, E. Green, S. L. Hermans, 36 J. Choi, and A. Faraon, Scalable multipartite entan- glement of remote rare-earth ion qubits, arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.16224 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  44. [44]

    Abobeih, J

    M. Abobeih, J. Randall, C. Bradley, H. Bartling, M. Bakker, M. Degen, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, and T. Taminiau, Atomic-scale imaging of a 27-nuclear-spin cluster using a quantum sensor, Nature576, 411 (2019)

    work page 2019

  45. [45]

    Gross, W

    I. Gross, W. Akhtar, V. Garcia, L. J. Martnez, S. Chouaieb, K. Garcia, C. Carrtro, A. Barthlmy, P. Appel, P. Maletinsky, J.-V. Kim, J. Y. Chauleau, N. Jaouen, M. Viret, M. Bibes, S. Fusil, and V. Jacques, Real-space imaging of non-collinear antiferromagnetic order with a single-spin magnetometer, Nature549, 252 (2017)

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    G. L. van de Stolpe, D. P. Kwiatkowski, C. E. Bradley, J. Randall, M. H. Abobeih, S. A. Breitweiser, L. C. Bas- sett, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and T. H. Taminiau, Mapping a 50-spin-qubit network through correlated sensing, Nature Communications15, 10.1038/s41467- 024-46075-4 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467- 2024

  47. [47]

    H. Zhou, J. Choi, S. Choi, R. Landig, A. M. Douglas, J. Isoya, F. Jelezko, S. Onoda, H. Sumiya, P. Cappel- laro, H. S. Knowles, H. Park, and M. D. Lukin, Quan- tum metrology with strongly interacting spin systems, Physical review X10, 031003 (2020)

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    J. R. Maze, P. L. Stanwix, J. S. Hodges, S. Hong, J. M. Taylor, P. Cappellaro, L. Jiang, M. V. G. Dutt, E. To- gan, A. S. Zibrov, A. Yacoby, R. L. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, Nanoscale magnetic sensing with an in- dividual electronic spin in diamond, Nature455, 644 (2008)

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Reviews of modern physics89, 035002 (2017)

    work page 2017

  50. [50]

    Van Ommen, G

    H. Van Ommen, G. Van De Stolpe, N. Demetriou, H. Beukers, J. Yun, T. Fortuin, M. Iuliano, A.-P. Montblanch, R. Hanson, and T. Taminiau, Improved electron-nuclear quantum gates for spin sensing and control, PRX Quantum6, 020309 (2025)

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    C. E. Bradley, S. W. de Bone, P. F. W. M¨ oller, S. Baier, M. J. Degen, S. J. H. Loenen, H. P. Bartling, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, R. Hanson, D. Elkouss, and T. H. Taminiau, Robust quantum-network memory based on spin qubits in isotopically engineered diamond, npj Quantum Information8, 122 (2022)

    work page 2022

  52. [52]

    Zaiser, T

    S. Zaiser, T. Rendler, I. Jakobi, T. Wolf, S.-Y. Lee, S. Wagner, V. Bergholm, T. Schulte-Herbr¨ uggen, P. Neumann, and J. Wrachtrup, Enhancing quantum sensing sensitivity by a quantum memory, Nature com- munications7, 12279 (2016)

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    M. A. Schlosshauer, Decoherence and the quantum-to- classical transition, The Frontiers Collection (Springer- Verlag, 2007) (2007)

    work page 2007

  54. [54]

    Stockill, C

    R. Stockill, C. Le Gall, C. Matthiesen, L. Huthmacher, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, and M. Atat¨ ure, Quantum dot spin coherence governed by a strained nuclear environ- ment, Nature communications7, 12745 (2016)

    work page 2016

  55. [55]

    Maziero, T

    J. Maziero, T. Werlang, F. Fanchini, L. C´ eleri, and R. Serra, System-reservoir dynamics of quantum and classical correlations, Physical Review AAtomic, Molec- ular, and Optical Physics81, 022116 (2010)

    work page 2010

  56. [56]

    Kleinjohann, E

    I. Kleinjohann, E. Evers, P. Schering, A. Greilich, G. S. Uhrig, M. Bayer, and F. B. Anders, Magnetic field de- pendence of the electron spin revival amplitude in pe- riodically pulsed quantum dots, Physical Review B98, 155318 (2018)

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Gammon, E

    D. Gammon, E. Snow, B. Shanabrook, D. Katzer, and D. Park, Fine structure splitting in the optical spectra of single gaas quantum dots, Physical review letters76, 3005 (1996)

    work page 1996

  58. [58]

    Gammon, A

    D. Gammon, A. L. Efros, T. Kennedy, M. Rosen, D. Katzer, D. Park, S. W. Brown, V. Korenev, and I. Merkulov, Electron and nuclear spin interactions in the optical spectra of single gaas quantum dots, Physi- cal Review Letters86, 5176 (2001)

    work page 2001

  59. [59]

    Urbaszek, X

    B. Urbaszek, X. Marie, T. Amand, O. Krebs, P. Voisin, P. Maletinsky, A. H¨ ogele, and A. Imamoglu, Nuclear spin physics in quantum dots: An optical investigation, Reviews of Modern Physics85, 79 (2013)

    work page 2013

  60. [60]

    A. V. Khaetskii, D. Loss, and L. Glazman, Electron spin decoherence in quantum dots due to interaction with nuclei, Physical review letters88, 186802 (2002)

    work page 2002

  61. [61]

    Merkulov, A

    I. Merkulov, A. L. Efros, and M. Rosen, Electron spin relaxation by nuclei in semiconductor quantum dots, Physical review B65, 205309 (2002)

    work page 2002

  62. [62]

    Khaetskii, D

    A. Khaetskii, D. Loss, and L. Glazman, Electron spin evolution induced by interaction with nuclei in a quan- tum dot, Physical Review B67, 195329 (2003)

    work page 2003

  63. [63]

    Grishin, I

    A. Grishin, I. V. Yurkevich, and I. V. Lerner, Low- temperature decoherence of qubit coupled to back- ground charges, Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics72, 060509 (2005)

    work page 2005

  64. [64]

    Johnson, J

    A. Johnson, J. Petta, J. Taylor, A. Yacoby, M. Lukin, C. Marcus, M. Hanson, and A. Gossard, Triplet–singlet spin relaxation via nuclei in a double quantum dot, Na- ture435, 925 (2005)

    work page 2005

  65. [65]

    Witzel and S

    W. Witzel and S. Das Sarma, Quantum theory for elec- tron spin decoherence induced by nuclear spin dynam- ics in semiconductor quantum computer architectures: Spectral diffusion of localized electron spins in the nu- clear solid-state environment, Physical Review BCon- densed Matter and Materials Physics74, 035322 (2006)

    work page 2006

  66. [66]

    Yao, R.-B

    W. Yao, R.-B. Liu, and L. Sham, Theory of electron spin decoherence by interacting nuclear spins in a quantum dot, Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics74, 195301 (2006)

    work page 2006

  67. [67]

    R. M. Lutchyn, L. Cywi´ nski, C. P. Nave, and S. Das Sarma, Quantum decoherence of a charge qubit in a spin-fermion model, Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics78, 024508 (2008)

    work page 2008

  68. [68]

    Cywi´ nski, W

    L. Cywi´ nski, W. M. Witzel, and S. Das Sarma, Elec- tron spin dephasing due to hyperfine interactions with a nuclear spin bath, Physical review letters102, 057601 (2009)

    work page 2009

  69. [69]

    Cywi´ nski, W

    L. Cywi´ nski, W. M. Witzel, and S. Das Sarma, Pure quantum dephasing of a solid-state electron spin qubit in a large nuclear spin bath coupled by long- range hyperfine-mediated interactions, Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics79, 245314 (2009)

    work page 2009

  70. [70]

    Huang and X

    C.-W. Huang and X. Hu, Theoretical study of nuclear spin polarization and depolarization in self-assembled quantum dots, Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics81, 205304 (2010)

    work page 2010

  71. [71]

    Chekhovich, M

    E. Chekhovich, M. Glazov, A. Krysa, M. Hopkin- son, P. Senellart, A. Lemaˆ ıtre, M. Skolnick, and A. Tartakovskii, Element-sensitive measurement of the hole–nuclear spin interaction in quantum dots, Nature Physics9, 74 (2013). 37

    work page 2013

  72. [72]

    Chekhovich, M

    E. Chekhovich, M. Makhonin, A. Tartakovskii, A. Ya- coby, H. Bluhm, K. Nowack, and L. Vandersypen, Nu- clear spin effects in semiconductor quantum dots, Na- ture materials12, 494 (2013)

    work page 2013

  73. [73]

    Influence of Nuclear Quadrupole Moments on Electron Spin Coherence in Semiconductor Quantum Dots

    E. Welander, E. Chekhovich, A. Tartakovskii, and G. Burkard, Influence of nuclear quadrupole moments on electron spin coherence in semiconductor quantum dots, arXiv preprint arXiv:1405.1329 (2014)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  74. [74]

    Bechtold, D

    A. Bechtold, D. Rauch, F. Li, T. Simmet, P.-L. Ardelt, A. Regler, K. M¨ uller, N. A. Sinitsyn, and J. J. Fin- ley, Three-stage decoherence dynamics of an electron spin qubit in an optically active quantum dot, Nature Physics11, 1005 (2015)

    work page 2015

  75. [75]

    W¨ ust, M

    G. W¨ ust, M. Munsch, F. Maier, A. V. Kuhlmann, A. Ludwig, A. D. Wieck, D. Loss, M. Poggio, and R. J. Warburton, Role of the electron spin in determining the coherence of the nuclear spins in a quantum dot, Nature nanotechnology11, 885 (2016)

    work page 2016

  76. [76]

    J. A. Krzywda and . Cywiski, Decoherence of electron spin qubit during transfer between two semiconductor quantum dots at low magnetic fields, Physical Review B111, 10.1103/physrevb.111.115305 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.111.115305 2025

  77. [77]

    Roszak and L

    K. Roszak and L. Cywi´ nski, Qubit-environment- entanglement generation and the spin echo, Physical Review A103, 032208 (2021)

    work page 2021

  78. [78]

    W. M. Witzel, M. S. Carroll, L. Cywi´ nski, and S. Das Sarma, Quantum decoherence of the central spin in a sparse system of dipolar coupled spins, Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics86, 035452 (2012)

    work page 2012

  79. [79]

    de Sousa and S

    R. de Sousa and S. D. Sarma, Theory of nuclear- induced spectral diffusion: Spin decoherence of phos- phorus donors in si and gaas quantum dots, Physical Review B68, 115322 (2003)

    work page 2003

  80. [80]

    Hanson, L

    R. Hanson, L. P. Kouwenhoven, J. R. Petta, S. Tarucha, and L. M. Vandersypen, Spins in few-electron quantum dots, Reviews of modern physics79, 1217 (2007)

    work page 2007

Showing first 80 references.