pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.19115 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 🪐 quant-ph

Wave--particle transition and quantum Zeno effect in which-way experiments with a superconducting quantum processor

Shiyu Wang , Zhiguang Yan , Clemens Gneiting , Rui Li , Franco Nori , Yasunobu Nakamura This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 03:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords wave-particle dualityquantum Zeno effectwhich-way experimentMach-Zehnder interferometersuperconducting quantum processorquantum complementarityinformation leakagefringe visibility
0
0 comments X

The pith

Precise control of which-way measurement strength in a superconducting Mach-Zehnder interferometer demonstrates the wave-to-particle transition of a photon and the quantum Zeno effect under continuous monitoring.

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

The paper implements a Mach-Zehnder interferometer on a two-dimensional superconducting quantum processor to study wave-particle duality through tunable which-way measurements. Varying the measurement strength on one path shows the photon shifting from producing interference fringes to revealing which-path information. State tomography on the path qubits confirms that stronger measurements destroy entanglement and coherence while leaking information to the environment, which the authors quantify through derived relations linking entropy to fringe visibility. Applying the measurement continuously during evolution reveals the quantum Zeno effect, where the path is partially obstructed and purity along with von Neumann entropy display nonmonotonic behavior. These results connect complementarity to quantum information measures in a hardware platform with high controllability.

Core claim

In which-way experiments on a two-dimensional superconducting quantum processor, varying the measurement strength on one path of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer causes a photon to transition from exhibiting wave-like interference to particle-like which-path knowledge. Quantum state tomography on the two path qubits shows that stronger measurements break the entanglement and coherence, leading to information leakage quantified by complementarity relations between entropy and fringe visibility. Continuous application of the which-way measurement during evolution induces the quantum Zeno effect, resulting in nonmonotonic changes in purity and von Neumann entropy as the path is partially blocked.

What carries the argument

The tunable-strength which-way measurement applied to one arm of the Mach-Zehnder interferometer realized with superconducting qubits, which tunes the trade-off between path distinguishability and interference visibility while enabling continuous monitoring for Zeno dynamics.

If this is right

  • Increasing which-way measurement strength reduces interference visibility while increasing path distinguishability according to complementarity.
  • Which-way measurements destroy entanglement between the two paths and cause measurable information leakage to the environment.
  • Continuous which-way monitoring partially obstructs the interferometer path and produces nonmonotonic evolution of purity and von Neumann entropy.
  • The derived entropy-visibility relations quantify how measurement strength controls the wave-particle transition in the tomographic data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The platform's controllability over measurement strength could allow systematic tests of other complementarity scenarios, such as delayed-choice variants, without changing hardware.
  • The observed link between which-way information and entropy leakage suggests using similar qubit readouts to engineer controlled decoherence in quantum information protocols.
  • Nonmonotonic entropy under continuous monitoring points to potential uses in measurement-based state protection schemes where partial obstruction stabilizes certain dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The superconducting qubits and readout faithfully implement ideal photon paths and which-way detectors without dominant uncontrolled decoherence, calibration errors, or tomography inaccuracies that would mimic the reported transitions and Zeno dynamics.

What would settle it

If the measured fringe visibility fails to decrease monotonically with increasing which-way measurement strength in agreement with the tomographic entropy values, or if continuous monitoring does not produce the predicted nonmonotonic purity and entropy curves, the claimed wave-particle transition and Zeno obstruction would not hold.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19115 by Clemens Gneiting, Franco Nori, Rui Li, Shiyu Wang, Yasunobu Nakamura, Zhiguang Yan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Experimental setup and quantum circuits. a, False-colored optical image of the 16-qubit superconducting chip. The 16-qubit chip has a 4×4 qubit array composed of four units; each unit contains four frequency-tunable transmons (orange). Each qubit is coupled to an individual λ/4 readout resonator (brown), and the four readout resonators within the same unit are coupled to a common Purcell filter (pink). Nei… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Evolution and interference pattern of the 4-qubit MZ interferometer. a, Evolution of the population ⟨nˆi⟩ in Qi (i = 0, 1, 2) from t = 0 ns to t = 80 ns. The photon initially generated at Q0 propagates to Q1 and Q2. For the subsequent which-way measurement experiments, we decouple the qubits when the population of Q0 reaches its minimum. b, Numerical simulation of the population evolution under the same co… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Quantum Zeno effect in the 12-qubit MZ interferometer. a–d, Evolution of Qi’s population ⟨nˆi⟩ from t = 0 ns to t = 200 ns under the which-way measurement-induced dephasing rate Γm/2π = 0, 5.921, 11.195, and 18.134 MHz, respectively. Path 2 of the MZ interferometer is blocked by the quantum Zeno effect as the which-way measurement strength applied to Q2 increases. e–h, Numerical simulations of the populati… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Relations between quantum information, which-way measurement-induced dephasing rate, and visibility of the MZ interferometers. a–e refer to the 4-qubit MZ interferometer, while f–h correspond to the 12-qubit MZ interferometer. a, Concurrence CQ1Q2 of Q1 and Q2 vs. the average which-way measurement-induced dephasing rate Γm. b, Purity Ps in the single-excitation subspace vs. Γm. c, Von Neumann entropy Ss in… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Wave--particle duality demonstrates the peculiar nature of quantum mechanics. In which-way experiments, depending on the measurement scheme, a particle exhibits either wave-like or particle-like properties, as summarized by Bohr's principle of complementarity. In this work, we implement Mach-Zehnder (MZ) interferometry on a two-dimensional (2D) superconducting quantum processor. With precise control of the which-way measurement strength, we demonstrate the transition of a photon from wave-like to particle-like behavior. Furthermore, by performing quantum state tomography on two qubits located in the two paths, we demonstrate that which-way measurements break the entanglement and coherence between the two paths and cause information leakage from the quantum system to the environment. To capture this behavior quantitatively, we derive complementarity relations between the entropy and the fringe visibility. By applying a continuous which-way measurement during the evolution, we also observe the quantum Zeno effect that partially obstructs the interferometer path, giving rise to nonmonotonic behavior of purity and von Neumann entropy. Our experiments provide a detailed characterization of the full interferometer dynamics, reveal the relation between wave--particle duality and quantum information, and demonstrate the potential of superconducting quantum processors for testing quantum foundations under high precision and controllability.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental implementation of Mach-Zehnder interferometry on a 2D superconducting quantum processor. By tuning the strength of which-way measurements, it demonstrates the transition from wave-like to particle-like photon behavior. Quantum state tomography on the two path qubits shows entanglement breaking and information leakage to the environment. Complementarity relations are derived between entropy and fringe visibility. Continuous which-way measurements are used to observe the quantum Zeno effect, manifested as nonmonotonic behavior in purity and von Neumann entropy.

Significance. If the central claims hold after addressing controls for device noise, the work offers a controlled superconducting-platform demonstration of wave-particle duality, Bohr complementarity, and the Zeno effect, with explicit connections to quantum-information quantities (entropy, entanglement). The ability to tune measurement strength and perform tomography provides a quantitative link between which-way information gain and loss of coherence, which is valuable for foundations experiments. The platform's controllability could enable extensions to more complex interferometric tests.

major comments (3)
  1. [Zeno-effect results] The reported nonmonotonic purity and von Neumann entropy under continuous which-way measurement (abstract and results on Zeno dynamics) lack error bars, statistical significance tests, or explicit comparison to zero-measurement-strength controls. Without these, it is unclear whether the nonmonotonicity exceeds fluctuations or uncontrolled decoherence.
  2. [Experimental implementation and tomography] No device-specific noise model (T1/T2 times, gate infidelities, readout crosstalk) or numerical simulation is presented showing that the observed visibility transition and entropy changes cannot be reproduced by hardware imperfections alone. This is load-bearing for the claim that the behaviors arise from intended which-way information gain and Zeno obstruction rather than artifacts.
  3. [Complementarity relations] The complementarity relations between entropy and fringe visibility are stated as derived post-experiment, but the manuscript does not show whether they are used to predict or fit the data or remain purely descriptive; this affects the strength of the quantitative link claimed between duality and quantum information.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] The abstract and methods would benefit from explicit reporting of the number of experimental repetitions, tomography reconstruction method, and how measurement strength is calibrated and verified.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions should include error estimation procedures and any averaging over runs to improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major point below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications and additions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Zeno-effect results] The reported nonmonotonic purity and von Neumann entropy under continuous which-way measurement (abstract and results on Zeno dynamics) lack error bars, statistical significance tests, or explicit comparison to zero-measurement-strength controls. Without these, it is unclear whether the nonmonotonicity exceeds fluctuations or uncontrolled decoherence.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee highlighting the need for statistical rigor in the Zeno-effect section. The nonmonotonic behavior was observed experimentally, but error bars and formal tests were omitted from the initial submission. In the revised manuscript we will add error bars from repeated runs, include statistical significance tests (e.g., t-tests against a null hypothesis of monotonic decay), and present zero-measurement-strength control data to confirm that the observed nonmonotonicity in purity and entropy exceeds fluctuations and uncontrolled decoherence. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Experimental implementation and tomography] No device-specific noise model (T1/T2 times, gate infidelities, readout crosstalk) or numerical simulation is presented showing that the observed visibility transition and entropy changes cannot be reproduced by hardware imperfections alone. This is load-bearing for the claim that the behaviors arise from intended which-way information gain and Zeno obstruction rather than artifacts.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative noise model is essential to substantiate the claims. The original manuscript described the device but did not include a comprehensive noise characterization or simulations. The revision will add measured T1/T2 times, gate infidelities, and readout crosstalk values for the qubits involved, together with numerical simulations of the interferometer dynamics that incorporate these parameters. These simulations will demonstrate that the observed visibility transition, entanglement breaking, and Zeno dynamics cannot be reproduced by hardware noise alone. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Complementarity relations] The complementarity relations between entropy and fringe visibility are stated as derived post-experiment, but the manuscript does not show whether they are used to predict or fit the data or remain purely descriptive; this affects the strength of the quantitative link claimed between duality and quantum information.

    Authors: The complementarity relations were derived from quantum-information principles before the experiments and subsequently applied to the data. To make this explicit, the revised manuscript will show the relations used to fit the measured visibility-versus-entropy data points and will include plots comparing the theoretical curves with experimental results, thereby demonstrating their predictive and quantitative role rather than a purely descriptive one. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental data and tomography drive claims; derived relations are post-hoc and independent

full rationale

The paper reports direct implementation of MZ interferometry on a 2D superconducting processor, with tunable which-way measurement strength, quantum state tomography on path qubits, and continuous monitoring to observe Zeno-induced nonmonotonic purity/entropy. Complementarity relations between entropy and fringe visibility are derived to quantify observed behavior but are not inputs to data generation, fitting procedures, or predictions that reduce to the same measurements by construction. No self-definitional loops, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, load-bearing self-citations, uniqueness theorems imported from prior author work, or ansatz smuggling appear in the derivation chain. The central results rest on hardware-controlled experiments and tomography rather than tautological reductions, making the logic self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard quantum mechanics without new free parameters or invented entities; the measurement strength is an experimental control knob rather than a fitted constant.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Bohr complementarity and standard unitary evolution plus projective measurements apply to the superconducting circuit implementation.
    Invoked throughout the description of wave-particle transition and Zeno dynamics.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5531 in / 1189 out tokens · 44373 ms · 2026-05-10T03:05:20.077060+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Scalable Single-Step Generation of W States in 2D Superconducting Qubit Lattices

    quant-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Demonstrates single-step coherent excitation distribution to generate W states in 2D superconducting qubit lattices, achieving 83.9% fidelity for 6 qubits in 99 ns and 79.6% for 7 qubits in 264 ns.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Bohr,Das Quantenpostulat und die neuere En- twicklung der Atomistik, Naturwissenschaften16, 245 (1928)

    N. Bohr,Das Quantenpostulat und die neuere En- twicklung der Atomistik, Naturwissenschaften16, 245 (1928)

    1928

  2. [2]

    Englert, M

    B.-G. Englert, M. O. Scully, and H. Walther,Comple- mentarity and uncertainty, Nature375, 367 (1995)

    1995

  3. [3]

    W. P. Schleich,Wave-particle dualism in action, Op- tics in Our Time19, 483 (2016)

    2016

  4. [4]

    M. O. Scully and H. Walther,Quantum optical test of observation and complementarity in quantum mechan- ics, Physical Review A39, 5229 (1989)

    1989

  5. [5]

    Sanders and G

    B. Sanders and G. Milburn,Complementarity in a quantum nondemolition measurement, Physical Re- view A39, 694 (1989)

    1989

  6. [6]

    M. O. Scully, B.-G. Englert, and H. Walther,Quan- tum optical tests of complementarity, Nature351, 111 (1991). 7

    1991

  7. [7]

    M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy,Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 1997)

    1997

  8. [8]

    G. S. Agarwal,Quantum Optics(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2012)

    2012

  9. [9]

    Rarity, P

    J. Rarity, P. Tapster, E. Jakeman, T. Larchuk, R. Campos, M. Teich, and B. Saleh,Two-photon in- terference in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Physical Review Letters65, 1348 (1990)

    1990

  10. [10]

    Y.-H. Kim, R. Yu, S. P. Kulik, Y. Shih, and M. O. Scully,Delayed “choice” quantum eraser, Physical Re- view Letters84, 1 (2000)

    2000

  11. [11]

    R. Mir, J. S. Lundeen, M. W. Mitchell, A. M. Stein- berg, J. L. Garretson, and H. M. Wiseman,A double- slit ‘which-way’ experiment on the complementarity– uncertainty debate, New Journal of Physics9, 287 (2007)

    2007

  12. [12]

    Y. Ji, Y. Chung, D. Sprinzak, M. Heiblum, D. Ma- halu, and H. Shtrikman,An electronic Mach–Zehnder interferometer, Nature422, 415 (2003)

    2003

  13. [13]

    C. W. Johnson, A. E. Turner, F. J. García de Abajo, and B. J. McMorran,Inelastic Mach-Zehnder inter- ferometry with free electrons, Physical Review Letters 128, 147401 (2022)

    2022

  14. [14]

    Carnal and J

    O. Carnal and J. Mlynek,Young’s double-slit experi- ment with atoms: A simple atom interferometer,Phys- ical Review Letters66, 2689 (1991)

    1991

  15. [15]

    S. Dürr, T. Nonn, and G. Rempe,Origin of quantum- mechanical complementarity probed by a ‘which-way’ experiment in an atom interferometer, Nature395, 33 (1998)

    1998

  16. [16]

    Englert,Fringe visibility and which-way infor- mation: An inequality, Physical Review Letters77, 2154 (1996)

    B.-G. Englert,Fringe visibility and which-way infor- mation: An inequality, Physical Review Letters77, 2154 (1996)

    1996

  17. [17]

    S. Dürr, T. Nonn, and G. Rempe,Fringe visibility and which-way information in an atom interferome- ter, Physical Review Letters81, 5705 (1998)

    1998

  18. [18]

    Chenet al.,Experimental investigation of wave- particle duality relations in asymmetric beam interfer- ence, npj Quantum Information8, 101 (2022)

    D.-X. Chenet al.,Experimental investigation of wave- particle duality relations in asymmetric beam interfer- ence, npj Quantum Information8, 101 (2022)

    2022

  19. [19]

    Tang, Y.-L

    J.-S. Tang, Y.-L. Li, X.-Y. Xu, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo,Realization of quantum Wheeler’s delayed-choice experiment, Nature Photonics6, 600 (2012)

    2012

  20. [20]

    Auccaise, R

    R. Auccaise, R. Serra, J. Filgueiras, R. Sarthour, I. Oliveira, and L. Céleri,Experimental analysis of the quantum complementarity principle, Physical Review A85, 032121 (2012)

    2012

  21. [21]

    W. Qin, A. Miranowicz, G. Long, J. Q. You, and F. Nori,Proposal to test quantum wave-particle super- position on massive mechanical resonators, npj Quan- tum Information5, 58 (2019)

    2019

  22. [22]

    K. Wang, Q. Xu, S. Zhu, and X.-s. Ma,Quantum wave–particle superposition in a delayed-choice exper- iment, Nature Photonics13, 872 (2019)

    2019

  23. [23]

    Mandel,Coherence and indistinguishability, Optics Letters16, 1882 (1991)

    L. Mandel,Coherence and indistinguishability, Optics Letters16, 1882 (1991)

    1991

  24. [24]

    Bagan, J

    E. Bagan, J. A. Bergou, S. S. Cottrell, and M. Hillery, Relations between coherence and path information, Physical Review Letters116, 160406 (2016)

    2016

  25. [25]

    Gao, Z.-Q

    J. Gao, Z.-Q. Jiao, C.-Q. Hu, L.-F. Qiao, R.-J. Ren, H. Tang, Z.-H. Ma, S.-M. Fei, V. Vedral, and X.-M. Jin,Experimental test of the relation between coher- ence and path information, Communications Physics 1, 89 (2018)

    2018

  26. [26]

    P. J. Coles, J. Kaniewski, and S. Wehner,Equivalence of wave–particle duality to entropic uncertainty, Na- ture Communications5, 5814 (2014)

    2014

  27. [27]

    Bagan, J

    E. Bagan, J. A. Bergou, and M. Hillery,Wave-particle- duality relations based on entropic bounds for which- way information, Physical Review A102, 022224 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    A. A. Houck, H. E. Türeci, and J. Koch,On-chip quan- tum simulation with superconducting circuits, Nature Physics8, 292 (2012)

    2012

  29. [29]

    I. M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori,Quantum simulation, Reviews of Modern Physics86, 153 (2014)

    2014

  30. [30]

    Arute, K

    Google AI Quantum and Collaborators, F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, S. Boixo, M. Broughton, B. B. Buckley, et al.,Hartree-Fock on a superconducting qubit quan- tum computer, Science369, 1084 (2020)

    2020

  31. [31]

    Y. Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. X. Wei, E. Van Den Berg, S. Rosenblatt, H. Nayfeh, Y. Wu, M. Zale- tel, K. Temme,et al.,Evidence for the utility of quan- tum computing before fault tolerance, Nature618, 500 (2023)

    2023

  32. [32]

    W. D. Oliver, Y. Yu, J. C. Lee, K. K. Berggren, L. S. Levitov,andT.P.Orlando,Mach-Zehnder interferom- etry in a strongly driven superconducting qubit, Science 310, 1653 (2005)

    2005

  33. [33]

    M. Gong, S. Wang, C. Zha, M.-C. Chen, H.-L. Huang, Y. Wu, Q. Zhu, Y. Zhao, S. Li, S. Guo,et al.,Quantum walks on a programmable two-dimensional 62-qubit su- perconducting processor, Science372, 948 (2021)

    2021

  34. [34]

    Zhang, H

    K. Zhang, H. Li, P. Zhang, J. Yuan, J. Chen, W. Ren, Z. Wang, C. Song, D.-W. Wang, H. Wang,et al., Synthesizing five-body interaction in a superconducting quantum circuit, Physical Review Letters128, 190502 (2022)

    2022

  35. [35]

    Komiyama, O

    S. Komiyama, O. Astafiev, V. Antonov, T. Kutsuwa, and H. Hirai,A single-photon detector in the far- infrared range, Nature403, 405 (2000)

    2000

  36. [36]

    R. H. Hadfield,Single-photon detectors for optical quantum information applications, Nature Photonics 3, 696 (2009)

    2009

  37. [37]

    Moreau, J

    P.-A. Moreau, J. Sabines-Chesterking, R. Whittaker, S. K. Joshi, P. M. Birchall, A. McMillan, J. G. Rar- ity, and J. C. Matthews,Demonstrating an absolute quantum advantage in direct absorption measurement, Scientific Reports7, 6256 (2017)

    2017

  38. [38]

    Wallraff, D

    A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, R.-S. Huang, J. Majer, S. Kumar, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf,Strong coupling of a single photon to a superconducting qubit using circuit quantum electrody- namics, Nature431, 162 (2004)

    2004

  39. [39]

    S. Kono, K. Koshino, Y. Tabuchi, A. Noguchi, and Y. Nakamura,Quantum non-demolition detection of an itinerant microwave photon,NaturePhysics14,546 (2018)

    2018

  40. [40]

    Gusenkova, M

    D. Gusenkova, M. Spiecker, R. Gebauer, M. Willsch, D. Willsch, F. Valenti, N. Karcher, L. Grünhaupt, I. Takmakov, P. Winkel,et al.,Quantum nondemo- lition dispersive readout of a superconducting artificial atom using large photon numbers,PhysicalReviewAp- plied15, 064030 (2021)

    2021

  41. [41]

    Hatridge, S

    M. Hatridge, S. Shankar, M. Mirrahimi, F. Schackert, K.Geerlings, T.Brecht, K.Sliwa, B.Abdo, L.Frunzio, S. M. Girvin,et al.,Quantum back-action of an in- dividual variable-strength measurement, Science339, 178 (2013)

    2013

  42. [42]

    K. W. Murch, S. Weber, C. Macklin, and I. Siddiqi, Observing single quantum trajectories of a supercon- ducting quantum bit, Nature502, 211 (2013)

    2013

  43. [43]

    Yan, Z.-Y

    Z. Yan, Z.-Y. Ge, R. Li, Y.-R. Zhang, F. Nori, and Y. Nakamura,Characterizing many-body dynamics with projected ensembles on a superconducting quan- 8 tum processor, Science Advances12, eaeb8213 (2026)

    2026

  44. [44]

    P. A. Spring, L. Milanovic, Y. Sunada, S. Wang, A. F. Van Loo, S. Tamate, and Y. Nakamura,Fast mul- tiplexed superconducting-qubit readout with intrinsic Purcell filtering using a multiconductor transmission line, PRX Quantum6, 020345 (2025)

    2025

  45. [45]

    Yanay, J

    Y. Yanay, J. Braumüller, S. Gustavsson, W. D. Oliver, and C. Tahan,Two-dimensional hard-core Bose–Hubbard model with superconducting qubits, npj Quantum Information6, 58 (2020)

    2020

  46. [46]

    A. H. Karamlou, I. T. Rosen, S. E. Muschinske, C. N. Barrett, A. Di Paolo, L. Ding, P. M. Harrington, M. Hays, R. Das, D. K. Kim,et al.,Probing entangle- ment in a 2D hard-core Bose–Hubbard lattice, Nature 629, 561 (2024)

    2024

  47. [47]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori,QuTiP: An open-source Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Computer Physics Communi- cations183, 1760 (2012)

    2012

  48. [48]

    Lambert, E

    N. Lambert, E. Giguère, P. Menczel, B. Li, P. Hopf, G. Suárez, M. Gali, J. Lishman, R. Gadhvi, R. Agar- wal, A. Galicia, N. Shammah, P. Nation, J. Johansson, S. Ahmed,et al.,QuTiP 5: The Quantum Toolbox in Python, Physics Reports1153, 1 (2026)

    2026

  49. [49]

    See Supplemental Material for materials and methods

  50. [50]

    W. K. Wootters,Entanglement of formation of an ar- bitrary state of two qubits, Physical Review Letters80, 2245 (1998)

    1998

  51. [51]

    W. H. Zurek, S. Habib, and J. P. Paz,Coherent states via decoherence, Physical Review Letters70, 1187 (1993)

    1993

  52. [52]

    A. Isar, A. Sandulescu, and W. Scheid,Purity and decoherence in the theory of a damped harmonic oscil- lator, Physical Review E60, 6371 (1999)

    1999

  53. [53]

    Schuster, and S

    J.Gambetta, A.Blais, M.Boissonneault, A.A.Houck, D. Schuster, and S. M. Girvin,Quantum trajectory ap- proach to circuit QED: Quantum jumps and the Zeno effect, Physical Review A77, 012112 (2008)

    2008

  54. [54]

    Matsuzaki, S

    Y. Matsuzaki, S. Saito, K. Kakuyanagi, and K. Semba, Quantum Zeno effect with a superconducting qubit, Physical Review B82, 180518 (2010)

    2010

  55. [55]

    S. Dhar, S. Dasgupta, A. Dhar, and D. Sen,Detection of a quantum particle on a lattice under repeated pro- jective measurements, Physical Review A91, 062115 (2015)

    2015

  56. [56]

    Patil, S

    Y. Patil, S. Chakram, and M. Vengalattore, Measurement-induced localization of an ultracold lat- tice gas, Physical Review Letters115, 140402 (2015)

    2015

  57. [57]

    Aharonov, J

    Y. Aharonov, J. Oppenheim, S. Popescu, B. Reznik, and W. Unruh,Measurement of time of arrival in quantum mechanics, Physical Review A57, 4130 (1998)

    1998

  58. [58]

    J. G. Muga and C. R. Leavens,Arrival time in quan- tum mechanics, Physics Reports338, 353 (2000)

    2000

  59. [59]

    Dubey, C

    V. Dubey, C. Bernardin, and A. Dhar,Quantum dynamics under continuous projective measurements: Non-Hermitian description and the continuum-space limit, Physical Review A103, 032221 (2021)

    2021

  60. [60]

    J. A. Wheeler, inMathematical Foundations of Quan- tum Theory(Elsevier, 1978) pp. 9–48

    1978

  61. [61]

    Hellmuth, H

    T. Hellmuth, H. Walther, A. Zajonc, and W. Schleich, Delayed-choice experiments in quantum interference, Physical Review A35, 2532 (1987)

    1987

  62. [62]

    Peruzzo, P

    A. Peruzzo, P. Shadbolt, N. Brunner, S. Popescu, and J. L. O’Brien,A quantum delayed-choice experiment, Science338, 634 (2012)

    2012

  63. [63]

    Dong, D.-S

    M.-X. Dong, D.-S. Ding, Y.-C. Yu, Y.-H. Ye, W.-H. Zhang, E.-Z. Li, L. Zeng, K. Zhang, D.-C. Li, G.- C. Guo,et al.,Temporal Wheeler’s delayed-choice ex- periment based on cold atomic quantum memory, npj Quantum Information6, 72 (2020)

    2020

  64. [64]

    J. D. Franson,Bell inequality for position and time, Physical Review Letters62, 2205 (1989)

    1989

  65. [65]

    Aerts, P

    S. Aerts, P. Kwiat, J.-Å. Larsson, and M. Zukowski, Two-photon Franson-type experiments and local real- ism, Physical Review Letters83, 2872 (1999)

    1999

  66. [66]

    Marquardt,Efficient on-chip source of microwave photon pairs in superconducting circuit QED, Physical Review B76, 205416 (2007)

    F. Marquardt,Efficient on-chip source of microwave photon pairs in superconducting circuit QED, Physical Review B76, 205416 (2007)

    2007

  67. [67]

    Gneiting and K

    C. Gneiting and K. Hornberger,Bell test for the free motion of material particles, Physical Review Letters 101, 260503 (2008)

    2008

  68. [68]

    Cabello, A

    A. Cabello, A. Rossi, G. Vallone, F. De Martini, and P. Mataloni,Proposed Bell experiment with gen- uine energy-time entanglement, Physical Review Let- ters102, 040401 (2009)

    2009

  69. [69]

    Tillmann, S.-H

    M. Tillmann, S.-H. Tan, S. E. Stoeckl, B. C. Sanders, H. De Guise, R. Heilmann, S. Nolte, A. Szameit, and P. Walther,Generalized multiphoton quantum inter- ference, Physical Review X5, 041015 (2015)

    2015

  70. [70]

    Peropadre, G

    B. Peropadre, G. G. Guerreschi, J. Huh, and A. Aspuru-Guzik,Proposal for microwave boson sam- pling, Physical Review Letters117, 140505 (2016)

    2016

  71. [71]

    Wave–particle transition and quantum Zeno effect in which-way experiments with a superconducting quantum processor

    S. Agne, T. Kauten, J. Jin, E. Meyer-Scott, J. Z. Sal- vail, D. R. Hamel, K. J. Resch, G. Weihs, and T. Jen- newein,Observation of genuine three-photon interfer- ence, Physical Review Letters118, 153602 (2017). Acknowledgements- S.W., Z.Y., R.L. and Y.N. are partially supported by Ministry of Education, Cul- ture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) Qua...

    2017

  72. [72]

    As shown in Fig

    The average measurement-induced dephasing rate of Q2 is then given by Γm =− 1 tm ln |ρm 01| |ρref 01 | ,(S5) wheret m is the measurement time. As shown in Fig. S5b,Γm/2πincreases linearly withA 2. In our readout model, the cavity photon numbern(t)follows a driven-dissipative evolution: during the readout pulse (t= 0–100 ns) the intra-cavity population app...

  73. [73]

    This choice ensures that the system does not overheat while leaving sufficient range to further bias each qubit to the working and idle points usingZpulses

    Measure the DC-bias-dependent spectrum of each qubit and choose a modest DC bias that places each qubit at a suitable frequency. This choice ensures that the system does not overheat while leaving sufficient range to further bias each qubit to the working and idle points usingZpulses

  74. [74]

    Then perform Ramsey measurements to finely tune theZ-pulse amplitudeAidle so that each qubit sits at its idle point

    Precisely measure theZ-pulse-dependent spectroscopy of each qubit at the chosen DC-bias point with using Zpulses to bias each qubit to its idle frequency and correctZ-pulse distortion. Then perform Ramsey measurements to finely tune theZ-pulse amplitudeAidle so that each qubit sits at its idle point. For qubits that are not used in the experiment, we bias...

  75. [75]

    ApplyZ-pulsebiasestoallqubitssimultaneouslyand, foreachqubitinturn, performRamseymeasurements to finely adjust theZ-pulse amplitudeA′ idle to removeZ-pulse crosstalk

  76. [76]

    ApplyZpulses to all qubits simultaneously to bias them to the working point for evolution. Compare the experimental evolution with numerical simulation and optimize theZ-pulse amplitudesAworking using the Nelder–Mead algorithm to minimize the effect ofZ-pulse crosstalk and achieve precise frequency alignment for all qubits

  77. [77]

    During the experiments, magnetic-field changes or DC drift can shift qubit frequencies

    After completing calibration steps 1–4, we begin the experiments. During the experiments, magnetic-field changes or DC drift can shift qubit frequencies. We perform a qubit-frequency calibration approximately every2 hours. For each qubit we apply aZpulse to bias it to its idle point and perform a Ramsey experiment. If a frequency shift is observed, we cor...

  78. [78]

    We can obtain the expression for the visibility: V= 2|c ′|.(S19) For a general2×2density matrix of this form, letδp ′ ≡p ′ 1 −p ′

  79. [79]

    The eigenvalues ofρs read λ± = 1 2 1±R ,(S20) 8 whereR≡ p δp′2 +V 2 (0≤R≤1). The purityP s in the single-excitation subspace is given as Ps = Tr(ρ2 s) =λ 2 + +λ 2 − = 1 +R 2 2 .(S21) Thus, we can obtain the complementarity relation 2(1−P s) +V 2 = 1−R 2 +V 2 = 1−(δp ′2 +V 2) +V 2 (S22) = 1−δp ′2 ≤1,(S23) where equality holds if and only ifδp′ = 0(i.e. the...

  80. [80]

    Yan, Z.-Y

    Z. Yan, Z.-Y. Ge, R. Li, Y.-R. Zhang, F. Nori, and Y. Nakamura,Characterizing many-body dynamics with projected ensembles on a superconducting quantum processor, Science Advances12, eaeb8213 (2026)

    2026

Showing first 80 references.