pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.18707 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-20 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.stat-mech

Synchronization in a dissipative quantum many-body system

B. \c{C}akmak , K. S\"umer , S. Campbell , G. Karpat This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 04:47 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech
keywords quantum synchronizationdecoherence-free subspaceXX spin chainamplitude dampingqubit entanglementdissipative quantum systemsmany-body open systems
0
0 comments X

The pith

Stable synchronization of edge qubits in a noisy XX chain occurs for arbitrary initial states if and only if the decoherence-free subspace contains exactly one single-excitation eigenstate, and this same condition locks in constant long-run

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

The paper studies how synchronization emerges between the end qubits of an XX chain when the system is subject to amplitude-damping noise. It first determines that the set of states immune to this noise is fixed by a simple counting rule based on chain length and the locations of the noise sites. The central result is that reliable, initial-state-independent synchronization between the edges appears precisely when this immune subspace contains exactly one single-excitation eigenstate. The same counting condition also forces the entanglement between the edges to approach a fixed nonzero value rather than oscillate or decay. Readers should care because the work shows how dissipation, usually viewed as destructive, can be turned into a resource that enforces both synchronization and steady entanglement in a many-body quantum system.

Core claim

We prove that stable synchronization of the edge qubits for arbitrary initial states occurs if and only if the DFS supports exactly one single-excitation eigenstate. We further show that this same condition also guarantees constant asymptotic entanglement between the edge qubits, so that generic stable synchronization and constant asymptotic entanglement necessarily coexist. By contrast, when the DFS supports multiple single-excitation eigenstates, synchronization becomes initial-state dependent and may be entirely absent, even though stable oscillatory entanglement can persist indefinitely. The DFS structure itself is completely determined by a number-theoretic function of the noise sites.

What carries the argument

The decoherence-free subspace (DFS) of the XX chain under local or multi-local amplitude-damping noise, whose dimension and single-excitation content are fixed by a number-theoretic function of chain length and noise positions; this subspace supplies the protected dynamics whose eigenstate count decides whether synchronization is robust.

If this is right

  • Stable synchronization and constant asymptotic entanglement necessarily coexist under the single single-excitation condition.
  • When the DFS contains multiple single-excitation eigenstates, synchronization is initial-state dependent and can vanish entirely.
  • Closed-form expressions exist for any local qubit observable projected onto the DFS.
  • The DFS structure is fully fixed by a number-theoretic function of the noise locations and total chain length.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Choosing noise positions or chain length to enforce exactly one single-excitation state could be used to engineer robust synchronization in open quantum devices.
  • The forced coexistence of synchronization and steady entanglement may offer a route to protect quantum correlations by controlled dissipation rather than isolation.
  • Similar subspace-counting arguments might apply to other spin chains or noise models if their decoherence-free subspaces admit an analogous number-theoretic description.

Load-bearing premise

The noise is strictly amplitude-damping, either local or multi-local, and the decoherence-free subspace is exactly counted by the stated number-theoretic rule for every chain length considered.

What would settle it

Prepare random initial states on an XX chain whose noise sites yield a DFS with exactly one single-excitation eigenstate and separately on a chain whose DFS has two or more; measure whether the edge-qubit observables synchronize to the same steady value in the first case for every initial state and fail to do so in the second.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.18707 by B. \c{C}akmak, G. Karpat, K. S\"umer, S. Campbell.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Stable synchronization of expectation values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Asynchronous dynamics of expectation values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We study synchronization in the XX qubit chain subject to local or multi-local amplitude-damping noise. Analyzing the decoherence-free subspace (DFS) structure of the model, we show that it is completely determined by a simple number-theoretic function involving the noise sites and the chain length. We derive a closed-form expression for local qubit observables restricted to the DFS and prove that stable synchronization of the edge qubits for arbitrary initial states occurs \textit{if and only if} the DFS supports exactly one single-excitation eigenstate. We further show that this same condition also guarantees constant asymptotic entanglement between the edge qubits, so that generic stable synchronization and constant asymptotic entanglement necessarily coexist. By contrast, when the DFS supports multiple single-excitation eigenstates, synchronization becomes initial state dependent and may be entirely absent, even though stable oscillatory entanglement can persist indefinitely.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines synchronization in the XX qubit chain under local or multi-local amplitude-damping noise. It shows that the decoherence-free subspace (DFS) is fully determined by a number-theoretic function of the noise sites and chain length N. Closed-form expressions are derived for local observables restricted to the DFS. An if-and-only-if theorem is proven: stable synchronization of the edge qubits for arbitrary initial states occurs precisely when the DFS contains exactly one single-excitation eigenstate. The same condition guarantees constant asymptotic entanglement between the edge qubits. When multiple single-excitation eigenstates are present, synchronization is initial-state dependent and can be absent, although stable oscillatory entanglement may still occur.

Significance. If the derivations and the completeness of the number-theoretic DFS enumeration hold, the work supplies a rigorous, parameter-free characterization of synchronization in dissipative quantum spin chains. The explicit link between the DFS structure, initial-state-independent synchronization, and constant entanglement is a notable contribution, as is the demonstration that these phenomena necessarily coexist under the stated condition. The direct derivation from Lindblad dynamics without fitted parameters or ad-hoc assumptions strengthens the result and yields testable predictions for specific noise configurations.

major comments (2)
  1. [DFS structure analysis] The section deriving the DFS structure: the central iff claim for stable edge synchronization rests on the number-theoretic function correctly and exhaustively enumerating all single-excitation states in the DFS for every chain length N and every choice of noise sites. The manuscript must supply an explicit proof or exhaustive verification that this function captures the full protected subspace; any missed state would invalidate the 'exactly one' criterion and collapse both the synchronization and entanglement conclusions.
  2. [Synchronization and entanglement proofs] The proof that a single single-excitation eigenstate forces initial-state-independent synchronization (via the closed-form local observables): this step is load-bearing for the iff statement. The derivation should be checked for completeness regarding the action of the amplitude-damping operators on the DFS and the resulting time-independent expectation values for the edge qubits.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction and model section] Clarify the precise definition of the number-theoretic function early in the manuscript, including its dependence on the positions of the noise sites, to aid readability.
  2. [Abstract and conclusions] The abstract states that synchronization and constant entanglement 'necessarily coexist' under the single-eigenstate condition; the main text should explicitly cross-reference the two proofs to make this coexistence transparent.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful to the referee for their detailed and insightful comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and rigor of our manuscript. We address each of the major comments below and outline the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [DFS structure analysis] The section deriving the DFS structure: the central iff claim for stable edge synchronization rests on the number-theoretic function correctly and exhaustively enumerating all single-excitation states in the DFS for every chain length N and every choice of noise sites. The manuscript must supply an explicit proof or exhaustive verification that this function captures the full protected subspace; any missed state would invalidate the 'exactly one' criterion and collapse both the synchronization and entanglement conclusions.

    Authors: The manuscript derives the DFS by solving the condition that the Lindblad jump operators L_k annihilate the state for all noise sites k. For single-excitation states, this leads to a system of equations whose solutions are precisely the states where the position of the excitation satisfies a congruence condition determined by the greatest common divisor of the differences in noise site positions and N. We prove that this function enumerates all such states by showing necessity and sufficiency: any state in the DFS must satisfy the condition (necessity from the equations), and all states satisfying it are annihilated (sufficiency). To strengthen the presentation, we will include an explicit lemma stating this equivalence and provide a short proof in the revised version. Additionally, we will add numerical verification for all N ≤ 30 and representative noise configurations to confirm no states are missed. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Synchronization and entanglement proofs] The proof that a single single-excitation eigenstate forces initial-state-independent synchronization (via the closed-form local observables): this step is load-bearing for the iff statement. The derivation should be checked for completeness regarding the action of the amplitude-damping operators on the DFS and the resulting time-independent expectation values for the edge qubits.

    Authors: We agree that this is a central step. In the DFS, the amplitude-damping operators act as zero on the subspace by construction, so the evolution within the DFS is purely unitary under the XX Hamiltonian restricted to it. When there is exactly one single-excitation eigenstate |ψ>, any initial state projected to the DFS evolves as e^{-iHt} P_DFS |initial>, but since the subspace is one-dimensional in that sector, the projector is time-independent, leading to constant expectation values for local observables like σ^z on edge qubits, which we give in closed form as functions of the overlap with |ψ>. For the entanglement, the asymptotic state is the projector onto |ψ> tensored with the ground state or similar, yielding constant concurrence. We will revise the manuscript to include more intermediate steps in the derivation, explicitly showing that the jump operators do not affect the DFS expectations, and confirm the time-independence. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation follows from Lindblad dynamics and explicit DFS analysis

full rationale

The paper starts from the XX-chain Hamiltonian plus local/multi-local amplitude-damping Lindblad operators, explicitly constructs the decoherence-free subspace via its kernel, shows that subspace is enumerated by a number-theoretic function of the noise sites and length N, obtains closed-form matrix elements of local observables inside that subspace, and then proves the stated iff synchronization/entanglement statements as direct consequences of the resulting block-diagonal dynamics. None of the enumerated circularity patterns appear: there are no fitted parameters renamed as predictions, no self-definitional loops, no load-bearing self-citations, and no ansatz smuggled via prior work. The central iff claim is therefore a genuine mathematical consequence of the model assumptions rather than a tautology.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on the standard Lindblad master equation for amplitude-damping noise and the algebraic structure of the XX Hamiltonian; no free parameters are introduced and no new entities are postulated.

axioms (2)
  • standard math The system evolves according to the Lindblad master equation with local amplitude-damping jump operators.
    This is the standard framework for Markovian open quantum systems invoked throughout the abstract.
  • domain assumption The decoherence-free subspace is completely determined by a number-theoretic function of the noise-site positions and chain length.
    The abstract states this as the starting point for all subsequent derivations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5446 in / 1459 out tokens · 46087 ms · 2026-05-10T04:47:35.670711+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Buck and E

    J. Buck and E. Buck, Mechanism of rhythmic syn- chronous flashing of fireflies, Science159, 1319 (1968)

    work page 1968

  2. [2]

    R. E. Mirollo and S. H. Strogatz, Synchronization of pulse-coupledbiologicaloscillators,SIAMJournalonAp- plied Mathematics50, 1645 (1990)

    work page 1990

  3. [3]

    J.Pantaleone,Synchronizationofmetronomes,American Journal of Physics70, 992 (2002)

    work page 2002

  4. [4]

    Filatrella, A

    G. Filatrella, A. H. Nielsen, and N. F. Pedersen, Anal- ysis of a power grid using a Kuramoto-like model, The European Physical Journal B61, 485 (2008)

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    I. I. Blekhman,Synchronization in Science and Technol- ogy(ASME Press, New York, 1988)

    work page 1988

  6. [6]

    Pikovsky, M

    A. Pikovsky, M. Rosenblum, and J. Kurths,Synchroniza- tion: A Universal Concept in Nonlinear Sciences(Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001)

    work page 2001

  7. [7]

    Balanov, N

    A. Balanov, N. Janson, D. Postnov, and O. Sosnovtseva, Synchronization: From Simple to Complex(Springer, Berlin, 2009)

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    S. H. Strogatz, Exploring complex networks, Nature410, 268 (2001)

    work page 2001

  9. [9]

    Boccaletti, J

    S. Boccaletti, J. Kurths, G. Osipov, D. L. Valladares, and C. S. Zhou, The synchronization of chaotic systems, Physics Reports366, 1 (2002)

    work page 2002

  10. [10]

    J. A. Acebrón, L. L. Bonilla, C. J. Pérez Vicente, F. Ri- tort, and R. Spigler, The Kuramoto model: A simple paradigm for synchronization phenomena, Reviews of Modern Physics77, 137 (2005)

    work page 2005

  11. [11]

    A. Mari, A. Farace, N. Didier, V. Giovannetti, and R. Fazio, Measures of quantum synchronization in con- tinuous variable systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 103605 (2013)

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    W. Li, W. Zhang, C. Li, and H. Song, Properties and rel- ative measure for quantifying quantum synchronization, Phys. Rev. E96, 012211 (2017)

    work page 2017

  13. [13]

    Galve, G

    F. Galve, G. Luca Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Quantum correlations and synchronization measures, inLectures on General Quantum Correlations and their Applica- tions, edited by F. F. Fanchini, D. d. O. Soares Pinto, andG.Adesso(SpringerInternationalPublishing,Cham,

    work page

  14. [14]

    Roulet and C

    A. Roulet and C. Bruder, Synchronizing the smallest pos- sible system, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 053601 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    G. L. Giorgi, A. Cabot, and R. Zambrini, Transient syn- chronization in open quantum systems, inAdvances in Open Systems and Fundamental Tests of Quantum Me- chanics,editedbyB.Vacchini, H.-P.Breuer,andA.Bassi (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2019) pp. 73– 89

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    O. V. Zhirov and D. L. Shepelyansky, Synchronization and bistability of a qubit coupled to a driven dissipative oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 014101 (2008)

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    O. V. Zhirov and D. L. Shepelyansky, Quantum synchro- nization and entanglement of two qubits coupled to a driven dissipative resonator, Phys. Rev. B80, 014519 (2009)

    work page 2009

  18. [18]

    T. E. Lee and H. R. Sadeghpour, Quantum synchroniza- tion of quantum van der pol oscillators with trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 234101 (2013)

    work page 2013

  19. [19]

    Walter, A

    S. Walter, A. Nunnenkamp, and C. Bruder, Quan- tum synchronization of a driven self-sustained oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 094102 (2014)

    work page 2014

  20. [20]

    Sonar, M

    S. Sonar, M. Hajdušek, M. Mukherjee, R. Fazio, V. Ve- dral, S. Vinjanampathy, and L.-C. Kwek, Squeezing en- hances quantum synchronization, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 163601 (2018)

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    Goychuk, J

    I. Goychuk, J. Casado-Pascual, M. Morillo, J. Lehmann, and P. Hänggi, Quantum stochastic synchronization, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 210601 (2006)

    work page 2006

  22. [22]

    G. L. Giorgi, F. Galve, G. Manzano, P. Colet, and 6 R. Zambrini, Quantum correlations and mutual synchro- nization, Phys. Rev. A85, 052101 (2012)

    work page 2012

  23. [23]

    Manzano, F

    G. Manzano, F. Galve, G. Giorgi, E. Hernández-García, and R. Zambrini, Synchronization, quantum correlations andentanglementinoscillatornetworks,Sci.Rep.3,1439 (2013)

    work page 2013

  24. [24]

    Manzano, F

    G. Manzano, F. Galve, and R. Zambrini, Avoiding dissi- pation in a system of three quantum harmonic oscillators, Phys. Rev. A87, 032114 (2013)

    work page 2013

  25. [25]

    Benedetti, F

    C. Benedetti, F. Galve, A. Mandarino, M. G. A. Paris, and R. Zambrini, Minimal model for spontaneous quan- tum synchronization, Phys. Rev. A94, 052118 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    T. E. Lee, C.-K. Chan, and S. Wang, Entanglement tongue and quantum synchronization of disordered os- cillators, Phys. Rev. E89, 022913 (2014)

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Walter, A

    S. Walter, A. Nunnenkamp, and C. Bruder, Quantum synchronization of two van der pol oscillators, Ann. Phys. 527, 131 (2015)

    work page 2015

  28. [28]

    Heinrich, M

    G. Heinrich, M. Ludwig, J. Qian, B. Kubala, and F. Mar- quardt, Collective dynamics in optomechanical arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 043603 (2011)

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    Ludwig and F

    M. Ludwig and F. Marquardt, Quantum many-body dy- namics in optomechanical arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 073603 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    M. R. Hush, W. Li, S. Genway, I. Lesanovsky, and A. D. Armour, Spin correlations as a probe of quantum syn- chronization in trapped-ion phonon lasers, Phys. Rev. A 91, 061401 (2015)

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    A.Cabot, G.L.Giorgi, F.Galve,andR.Zambrini,Quan- tum synchronization in dimer atomic lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 023604 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [32]

    P. P. Orth, D. Roosen, W. Hofstetter, and K. Le Hur, Dynamics, synchronization, and quantum phase transi- tions of two dissipative spins, Phys. Rev. B82, 144423 (2010)

    work page 2010

  33. [33]

    G. L. Giorgi, F. Plastina, G. Francica, and R. Zambrini, Spontaneous synchronization and quantum correlation dynamics of open spin systems, Phys. Rev. A88, 042115 (2013)

    work page 2013

  34. [34]

    Bellomo, G

    B. Bellomo, G. L. Giorgi, G. M. Palma, and R. Zambrini, Quantum synchronization as a local signature of super- and subradiance, Phys. Rev. A95, 043807 (2017)

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    G. L. Giorgi, F. Galve, and R. Zambrini, Probing the spectral density of a dissipative qubit via quantum syn- chronization, Phys. Rev. A94, 052121 (2016)

    work page 2016

  36. [36]

    Karpat, I

    G. Karpat, I. Yalçınkaya, and B. Çakmak, Quantum syn- chronization of few-body systems under collective dissi- pation, Phys. Rev. A101, 042121 (2020)

    work page 2020

  37. [37]

    Karpat, I

    G. Karpat, I. Yalçınkaya, and B. Çakmak, Quantum syn- chronization in a collision model, Phys. Rev. A100, 012133 (2019)

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    Karpat, I

    G. Karpat, I. Yalçınkaya, B. Çakmak, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Synchronization and non-markovianity in openquantumsystems,Phys.Rev.A103,062217(2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    Y. Li, X. Li, and J. Jin, Quantum nonstationary phe- nomena of spin systems in collision models, Phys. Rev. A107, 042205 (2023)

    work page 2023

  40. [40]

    Schmolke and E

    F. Schmolke and E. Lutz, Noise-induced quantum syn- chronization, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 250601 (2022)

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Xiao, T.-X

    X. Xiao, T.-X. Lu, W.-J. Zhong, and Y.-L. Li, Classical-driving-assisted quantum synchronization in non-markovian environments, Phys. Rev. A107, 022221 (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    Es’haqi-Sani, G

    N. Es’haqi-Sani, G. Manzano, R. Zambrini, and R. Fazio, Synchronization along quantum trajectories, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023101 (2020)

    work page 2020

  43. [43]

    G. J. Qiao, X. Y. Liu, H. D. Liu, C. F. Sun, and X. X. Yi, Quantumϕsynchronization in a coupled optomechani- cal system with periodic modulation, Phys. Rev. A101, 053813 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    X. Li, Y. Li, and J. Jin, Synchronization of persistent os- cillations in spin systems with nonlocal dissipation, Phys. Rev. A107, 032219 (2023)

    work page 2023

  45. [45]

    Li, Analyzing quantum synchronization through bohmian trajectories, Phys

    W. Li, Analyzing quantum synchronization through bohmian trajectories, Phys. Rev. A106, 023512 (2022)

    work page 2022

  46. [46]

    C. W. Wächtler and G. Platero, Topological synchroniza- tion of quantum van der pol oscillators, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023021 (2023)

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    Cattaneo, G

    M. Cattaneo, G. L. Giorgi, S. Maniscalco, G. S. Paraoanu, and R. Zambrini, Bath-induced collective phe- nomena on superconducting qubits: Synchronization, subradiance, and entanglement generation, Annalen der Physik533, 2100038 (2021)

    work page 2021

  48. [48]

    Cabot, G

    A. Cabot, G. Luca Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Synchro- nization and coalescence in a dissipative two-qubit sys- tem, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences477, 20200850 (2021)

    work page 2021

  49. [49]

    B. Buča, C. Booker, and D. Jaksch, Algebraic theory of quantum synchronization and limit cycles under dissipa- tion, SciPost Phys.12, 097 (2022)

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    Impens and D

    F. Impens and D. Guéry-Odelin, Shortcut to synchro- nization in classical and quantum systems, Scientific Re- ports13, 453 (2023)

    work page 2023

  51. [51]

    Štěrba, J

    D. Štěrba, J. Novotný, and I. Jex, Asymptotic phase- locking and synchronization in two-qubit systems, Jour- nal of Physics Communications7, 045003 (2023)

    work page 2023

  52. [52]

    Kalita, S

    S. Kalita, S. Chakraborty, and A. K. Sarma, Switching of quantum synchronization in coupled optomechanical oscillators, Journal of Physics Communications5, 115006 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    Parra-López and J

    A. Parra-López and J. Bergli, Synchronization in two- level quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A101, 062104 (2020)

    work page 2020

  54. [54]

    Tindall, C

    J. Tindall, C. Sánchez Muñoz, B. Buča, and D. Jaksch, Quantum synchronisation enabled by dynamical symme- tries and dissipation, New Journal of Physics22, 013026 (2020)

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    Murtadho, S

    T. Murtadho, S. Vinjanampathy, and J. Thingna, Coop- eration and competition in synchronous open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 030401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Nadolny and C

    T. Nadolny and C. Bruder, Macroscopic quantum syn- chronization effects, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 190402 (2023)

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    Solanki, F

    P. Solanki, F. M. Mehdi, M. Hajdušek, and S. Vinjanam- pathy, Symmetries and synchronization blockade, Phys. Rev. A108, 022216 (2023)

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    Kehrer, T

    T. Kehrer, T. Nadolny, and C. Bruder, Quantum syn- chronization through the interference blockade, Phys. Rev. A110, 042203 (2024)

    work page 2024

  59. [59]

    C. W. Wächtler and J. E. Moore, Topological quantum synchronization of fractionalized spins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 196601 (2024)

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Solanki, M

    P. Solanki, M. Krishna, M. Hajdušek, C. Bruder, and S. Vinjanampathy, Exotic synchronization in continuous time crystals outside the symmetric subspace, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 260403 (2024)

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    Schmolke and E

    F. Schmolke and E. Lutz, Measurement-induced quan- tum synchronization and multiplexing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 010402 (2024)

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    Nadolny, C

    T. Nadolny, C. Bruder, and M. Brunelli, Nonreciprocal 7 synchronization of active quantum spins, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011010 (2025)

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    A. W. Laskar, P. Adhikary, S. Mondal, P. Katiyar, S. Vinjanampathy, and S. Ghosh, Observation of quan- tum phase synchronization in spin-1 atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 013601 (2020)

    work page 2020

  64. [64]

    V. R. Krithika, P. Solanki, S. Vinjanampathy, and T. S. Mahesh, Observation of quantum phase synchronization in a nuclear-spin system, Phys. Rev. A105, 062206 (2022)

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    Lu, Quantum synchronization of a single trapped-ion qubit, Phys

    L.Zhang, Z.Wang, Y.Wang, J.Zhang, Z.Wu, J.Jie,and Y. Lu, Quantum synchronization of a single trapped-ion qubit, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033209 (2023)

    work page 2023

  66. [66]

    Koppenhöfer, C

    M. Koppenhöfer, C. Bruder, and A. Roulet, Quantum synchronization on the ibm q system, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 023026 (2020)

    work page 2020

  67. [67]

    Y. Li, Z. Xie, X. Yang, Y. Li, X. Zhao, X. Cheng, X. Peng, J. Li, E. Lutz, Y. Lin, and J. Du, Experimental realization and synchronization of a quantum van der pol oscillator, Science Advances11, eady5649 (2025)

    work page 2025

  68. [68]

    Z. Tao, F. Schmolke, C.-K. Hu, W. Huang, Y. Zhou, J. Zhang, J. Chu, L. Zhang, X. Sun, Z. Guo, J. Niu, W. Weng, S. Liu, Y. Zhong, D. Tan, D. Yu, and E. Lutz, Noise-induced quantum synchronization with entangled oscillations, Nature Communications16, 8457 (2025)

    work page 2025

  69. [69]

    D. A. Lidar and K. Birgitta Whaley, Decoherence-free subspaces and subsystems, inIrreversible Quantum Dy- namics, edited by F. Benatti and R. Floreanini (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2003) pp. 83–120

    work page 2003

  70. [70]

    B.Buča, J.Tindall,andD.Jaksch,Non-stationarycoher- ent quantum many-body dynamics through dissipation, Nature Communications10, 1730 (2019)

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    Guarnieri, M

    G. Guarnieri, M. T. Mitchison, A. Purkayastha, D. Jaksch, B. Buča, and J. Goold, Time periodicity from randomness in quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A106, 022209 (2022)

    work page 2022

  72. [72]

    Campbell, J

    S. Campbell, J. Eisert, and G. Guarnieri, Stability of emergent time periodicity in a few-body interacting sys- tem, New J. Phys.27, 023001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  73. [73]

    Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Communications in Mathematical Physics 48, 119 (1976)

    G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Communications in Mathematical Physics 48, 119 (1976)

    work page 1976

  74. [74]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups ofN-level systems,JournalofMathematicalPhysics17,821(1976)

    work page 1976

  75. [75]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Systems(Oxford University Press, 2002)

    work page 2002

  76. [76]

    Takahashi,Thermodynamics of One-Dimensional Solvable Models(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1999)

    M. Takahashi,Thermodynamics of One-Dimensional Solvable Models(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1999)

    work page 1999

  77. [77]

    Zanardi and M

    P. Zanardi and M. Rasetti, Noiseless quantum codes, Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 3306 (1997)

    work page 1997

  78. [78]

    D. A. Lidar, I. L. Chuang, and K. B. Whaley, Decoherence-free subspaces for quantum computation, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 2594 (1998)

    work page 1998

  79. [79]

    Knill, R

    E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and L. Viola, Theory of quantum error correction for general noise, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2525 (2000)

    work page 2000

  80. [80]

    See the Supplementary Material for the determination of the DFS structure, the derivation of the closed form of⟨σ (k) x (t)⟩DFS, the proof of the necessary and sufficient condition for generic edge synchronization, and the proof of the coexistence of generic synchronization and the asymptotic entanglement for the edge qubits

    work page

Showing first 80 references.