pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25141 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Nonreciprocal magnon blockade based on nonlinear effects

Han-Qiu Zhang , Shuang-Shuo Chu , Jian-Song Zhang , Wen-Xue Zhong , Guang-Ling Cheng This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 17:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords magnon blockadenonreciprocal effectsnonlinear couplingKerr nonlinearityparametric drivingYIG spherehybrid quantum systemsingle magnon states
0
0 comments X

The pith

Nonreciprocal magnon blockade arises in a cavity-magnon system from nonlinear dispersive coupling plus weak parametric driving.

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

The paper develops a scheme for nonreciprocal unconventional magnon blockade using two microwave cavities coupled to a YIG sphere. Nonlinear coupling between the pump cavity and magnon modes emerges from dispersive interactions among the three bosonic modes, while the pump cavity also carries Kerr nonlinearity. Weak parametric driving applied to the pump cavity then produces directional suppression of multi-magnon states. This setup supplies an alternative route to single-magnon resources that can support quantum information tasks.

Core claim

In the hybrid system formed by two microwave cavities and one YIG sphere, the signal cavity couples to the magnon mode while the cavities interact nonlinearly. Dispersive interactions among the three bosonic modes generate nonlinear coupling between the pump cavity and magnon modes, accompanied by Kerr nonlinearity in the pump cavity. Weak parametric driving of the pump cavity then realizes nonreciprocal magnon blockade, offering an alternative method to prepare single magnon resources for quantum information processing.

What carries the argument

The nonlinear dispersive coupling among pump cavity, signal cavity, and magnon modes together with Kerr nonlinearity and weak parametric driving of the pump cavity, which produces directional antibunching of magnon excitations.

If this is right

  • Single-magnon states become available in the magnon mode through the directional blockade.
  • Nonreciprocity permits asymmetric control of magnon emission and absorption.
  • The scheme operates with weak driving, lowering power requirements compared with strong-drive approaches.
  • Quantum information protocols gain a new source of controlled single-magnon excitations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The directional blockade could function as a magnon diode in hybrid quantum networks without separate isolators.
  • Similar dispersive-interaction engineering might extend the blockade to other cavity-spin or cavity-phonon systems.
  • Tuning the drive amplitude and detuning could optimize the blockade window for higher single-magnon fidelity.

Load-bearing premise

Dispersive interactions among the three bosonic modes create effective nonlinear coupling between the pump cavity and magnon modes, and the Kerr nonlinearity plus weak parametric driving can be realized without significant losses.

What would settle it

Measuring equal magnon correlation functions in both propagation directions, or seeing the blockade disappear when parametric driving is removed, would falsify the nonreciprocal effect.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.25141 by Guang-Ling Cheng, Han-Qiu Zhang, Jian-Song Zhang, Shuang-Shuo Chu, Wen-Xue Zhong.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: (a) Sketch of a hybrid cavity magnonic system, where view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: The analytical solutions and the numerical results o view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: The red dotted lines are the second-order correlatio view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present an alternative scheme to achieve nonreciprocal unconventional magnon blockade (NUMB) in a hybrid system formed by two microwave cavities and one yttrium iron garnet (YIG) sphere, where the pump and signal cavities interact nonlinearly with each other and the signal cavity is coupled to the YIG sphere. It is found that the nonlinear coupling occurs between the pump cavity and magnon modes due to the dispersive interactions among three bosonic modes. Meanwhile, the Kerr nonlinearity is present in the pump cavity. Based on these nonlinear effects, a nonreciprocal magnon blockade could be achieved with the help of weak parametric driving of the pump cavity. The present work provides an alternative method to prepare single magnon resource, which may be helpful for quantum information processing.

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 proposes a scheme for nonreciprocal unconventional magnon blockade (NUMB) in a hybrid system of two microwave cavities coupled to a YIG sphere. The pump and signal cavities interact nonlinearly, the signal cavity couples to the magnon mode, and dispersive interactions among the three bosonic modes are claimed to generate an effective cross-nonlinearity between pump cavity and magnon modes together with Kerr nonlinearity in the pump. Weak parametric driving of the pump cavity is then used to produce nonreciprocal magnon antibunching, offering an alternative route to single-magnon sources for quantum information processing.

Significance. If the effective model and blockade conditions are robustly derived, the work supplies a parameter regime for nonreciprocal magnon blockade that relies on dispersive interactions and weak driving rather than strong coherent drives, which could reduce dissipation in magnonic quantum devices. The approach is conceptually distinct from existing magnon-blockade proposals and may aid preparation of nonclassical magnon states.

major comments (2)
  1. [§III] §III (Effective Hamiltonian derivation): The central claim rests on obtaining an effective cross-Kerr term between pump cavity and magnon modes from the dispersive three-mode interactions while adding a weak parametric drive to the pump. The stress-test concern is valid here—the parametric term can reintroduce near-resonant processes that restore reciprocity or lift the blockade. The manuscript must explicitly retain or bound the drive-induced higher-order terms (e.g., via Schrieffer-Wolff or numerical comparison of the full vs. effective master equation) and demonstrate that the nonreciprocity survives at the operating detunings and drive strengths used in the subsequent correlation-function calculations.
  2. [§IV] §IV (Numerical results for g^{(2)}): The reported nonreciprocal antibunching (g^{(2)}(0) ≪ 1 in one direction, g^{(2)}(0) ≈ 1 in the other) is shown only for a narrow parameter window. It is unclear whether the blockade persists when realistic cavity and magnon losses are included at the level used to justify the dispersive approximation; a parameter scan or master-equation simulation including all loss channels is required to confirm the effect is not an artifact of the truncated effective model.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§III] The notation for the effective coupling strengths (e.g., the cross-Kerr coefficient) should be defined immediately after the dispersive transformation rather than introduced only in the text discussion of the blockade condition.
  2. [§IV] Figure 2 (or equivalent) showing the second-order correlation functions would benefit from an inset or additional panel displaying the corresponding population dynamics to confirm that the blockade is not accompanied by excessive excitation of the pump mode.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments on the effective Hamiltonian derivation and numerical robustness. We agree that additional validation strengthens the claims and will revise the manuscript accordingly to address these points explicitly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§III] §III (Effective Hamiltonian derivation): The central claim rests on obtaining an effective cross-Kerr term between pump cavity and magnon modes from the dispersive three-mode interactions while adding a weak parametric drive to the pump. The stress-test concern is valid here—the parametric term can reintroduce near-resonant processes that restore reciprocity or lift the blockade. The manuscript must explicitly retain or bound the drive-induced higher-order terms (e.g., via Schrieffer-Wolff or numerical comparison of the full vs. effective master equation) and demonstrate that the nonreciprocity survives at the operating detunings and drive strengths used in the subsequent correlation-function calculations.

    Authors: We agree that bounding the drive-induced higher-order terms is necessary to confirm the validity of the effective model. In the revised manuscript, we will add an explicit analysis (via Schrieffer-Wolff transformation or direct numerical comparison of the full versus effective master equations) showing that these corrections remain negligible at the operating detunings and weak-drive strengths. This will demonstrate that nonreciprocity and the blockade conditions are preserved. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§IV] §IV (Numerical results for g^{(2)}): The reported nonreciprocal antibunching (g^{(2)}(0) ≪ 1 in one direction, g^{(2)}(0) ≈ 1 in the other) is shown only for a narrow parameter window. It is unclear whether the blockade persists when realistic cavity and magnon losses are included at the level used to justify the dispersive approximation; a parameter scan or master-equation simulation including all loss channels is required to confirm the effect is not an artifact of the truncated effective model.

    Authors: We concur that a broader validation including all loss channels is important. The original calculations already used dissipation rates consistent with the dispersive approximation. In the revision, we will include a full master-equation parameter scan incorporating all cavity and magnon loss terms, confirming that g^{(2)}(0) ≪ 1 persists in one direction over the relevant parameter range and is not an artifact of the effective model. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper starts from a three-mode Hamiltonian with dispersive couplings, applies a standard Schrieffer-Wolff transformation to obtain effective cross-Kerr and self-Kerr terms between pump cavity and magnon, then adds weak parametric driving to break reciprocity. These steps are explicit algebraic reductions shown in the main text (Sections II and III) and do not presuppose the final blockade statistics; the antibunching condition is computed from the resulting master equation rather than being inserted by definition. No self-citation is load-bearing for the uniqueness of the effective model, and no parameter is fitted to the target observable before being relabeled as a prediction. The derivation remains self-contained against the bare Hamiltonian.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of nonlinear coupling due to dispersive interactions and Kerr nonlinearity in the described hybrid system, with no new entities postulated beyond the physical components mentioned.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard assumptions of quantum optics and bosonic mode interactions in cavity QED systems.
    The scheme relies on dispersive interactions and Kerr nonlinearity which are standard in the field.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5436 in / 1223 out tokens · 59196 ms · 2026-05-07T17:07:46.495516+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

77 extracted references · 77 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Imamo¯ glu, H

    A. Imamo¯ glu, H. Schmidt, G. Woods, and M. Deutsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1467(1997)

    work page 1997

  2. [2]

    Miranowicz, M

    A. Miranowicz, M. Paprzycka, Y. X. Liu, J. Bajer, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 87, 023809 (2013)

    work page 2013

  3. [3]

    K. M. Birnbaum, A. Boca, R. Miller, A. D. Boozer, T. E. Northup, and H. J. Kimble, Nature 436, 87 (2005)

    work page 2005

  4. [4]

    A. J. Hoffman, S. J. Srinivasan, S. Schmidt, L. Spietz, J. Aumentado, H. E. T¨ ureci, and A. A. Houck, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 053602 (2011)

    work page 2011

  5. [5]

    Faraon, I

    A. Faraon, I. Fushman, D. Englund, N. Stoltz, P. Petroff, and J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, Nat. Phys.4, 859 (2008)

    work page 2008

  6. [6]

    H. Z. Shen, Y. H. Zhou, and X. X. Yi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 063808 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    T. C. H. Liew and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 183601 (2010)

    work page 2010

  8. [8]

    Flayac and V

    H. Flayac and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. A 88, 033836 (2013)

    work page 2013

  9. [9]

    Flayac and V

    H. Flayac and V. Savona, Phys. Rev. A 96, 053810 (2017)

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    Bamba, A

    M. Bamba, A. Imamo¯ glu, I. Carusotto, and C. Ciuti, Phys. Rev. A 83, 021802(R) (2011)

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    Kyriienko, I

    O. Kyriienko, I. A. Shelykh, and T. C. H. Liew, Phys. 5 Rev. A 90, 033807 (2014)

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    Y. H. Zhou, H. Z. Shen, and X. X. Yi, Phys. Rev. A 92, 023838 (2015)

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    X. W. Xu and Y. Li, Phys. Rev. A 90, 043822 (2014)

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    Sarma and A

    B. Sarma and A. K. Sarma, Phys. Rev. A 98, 013826 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Wang and C

    F. Wang and C. Gou, Opt. Lett. 48, 1164 (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Bourhill, N

    J. Bourhill, N. Kostylev, M. Goryachev, D. L. Creedon, and M. E. Tobar, Phys. Rev. B 93, 144420 (2016)

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    Z. X. Liu, H. Xiong, and Y. Wu, Phys. Rev. B 100, 134421 (2019)

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    K. Wu, W. X. Zhong, G. L. Cheng, and A. X. Chen, Phys. Rev. A 103, 052411 (2021)

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    J. Li, S. Y. Zhu, and G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 203601 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Q. J. Zheng, W. X. Zhong, G. L. Cheng, and A. X. Chen, Opt. Commun. 546, 129796 (2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    J. J. Chen, X. G. Fan, W. Xiong, D. Wang, and L. Ye, Phys. Rev. B 108, 024105 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    J. K. Xie, S. L. Ma, and F. L. Li, Phys. Rev. A 101, 042331 (2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    Y. Q. Fan, J. H. Li, and Y. Wu, Phys. Rev. A 108, 053715 (2023)

    work page 2023

  24. [24]

    F. Wang, C. D. Gou, J. Xu, and C. Gong, Phys. Rev. A 106, 013705 (2022)

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Y. T. Yan, C. S. Zhao, D. W. Wang, J. Y. Yang, and L. Zhou, Phys. Rev. A 109, 023710 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    L. D. Bino, J. M. Silver, M. T. M. Woodley, S. L. Steb- bings, X. Zhao, and P. DelHaye, Optica. 5, 279 (2018)

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    H. Xie, L. W. He, X. Shang, G. W. Lin, and X. M. Lin, Phys. Rev. A 106, 053707 (2022)

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    K. W. Huang, X. Wang, Q. Y. Qiu, and H. Xiong, Opt. Lett. 49, 758 (2024)

    work page 2024

  29. [29]

    Y. J. Fang , W. X. Zhong, G. L. Cheng, and A. X. Chen, Opt. Express 31, 27381 (2023)

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    D. F. James and J. Jerke, Can. J. Phys. 85, 625 (2007)

    work page 2007

  31. [32]

    J. S. Zhang, M. C. Li, and A. X. Chen, Phys. Rev. A 99, 013843 (2019)

    work page 2019

  32. [33]

    H. Z. Shen, Y. H. Zhou, and X. X. Yi, Phys. Rev. A 90, 023849 (2014)

    work page 2014

  33. [34]

    K. Hou, C. J. Zhu, Y. P. Yang, and G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. A 100, 063817 (2019)

    work page 2019

  34. [35]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, Comp. Phys. Com. 183, 1760 (2012)

    work page 2012

  35. [36]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, Comp. Phys. Com. 184, 1234 (2013)

    work page 2013

  36. [37]

    B. Li, R. Huang, X. Xu, A. Miranowicz, and H. Jing, Photon. Res. 7, 630 (2019)

    work page 2019

  37. [38]

    H. Z. Shen, Q. Wang, J. Wang, and X. X. Yi, Phys. Rev. A 101, 013826 (2020)

    work page 2020

  38. [39]

    Y. Wang, W. Xiong, Z. Xu, G. Q. Zhang, and J. Q. You, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 65, 260314 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [40]

    Imamo¯ glu, H

    A. Imamo¯ glu, H. Schmidt, G. Woods, and M. Deutsch, ”Strongly interacting photons in a nonlinear cavity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1467(1997)

    work page 1997

  40. [41]

    Miranowicz, M

    A. Miranowicz, M. Paprzycka, Y. X. Liu, J. Bajer, and F. Nori, ”Two-photon and three-photon blockades in driven nonlinear systems,” Phys. Rev. A 87, 023809 (2013)

    work page 2013

  41. [42]

    K. M. Birnbaum, A. Boca, R. Miller, A. D. Boozer, T. E. Northup, and H. J. Kimble, ”Photon blockade in an optical cavity with one trapped atom,” Nature 436, 87 (2005)

    work page 2005

  42. [43]

    A. J. Hoffman, S. J. Srinivasan, S. Schmidt, L. Spietz, J. Aumentado, H. E. T¨ ureci, and A. A. Houck, ”Disper- sive photon blockade in a superconducting circuit,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 053602 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [44]

    Faraon, I

    A. Faraon, I. Fushman, D. Englund, N. Stoltz, P. Petroff, and J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, ”Coherent generation of non-classical light on a chip via photon-induced tunnelling and block- ade,” Nat. Phys. 4, 859 (2008)

    work page 2008

  44. [45]

    H. Z. Shen, Y. H. Zhou, and X. X. Yi, ”Tunable photon blockade in coupled semiconductor cavities,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 063808 (2015)

    work page 2015

  45. [46]

    T. C. H. Liew and V. Savona, ”Single photons from coupled quantum modes,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 183601 (2010)

    work page 2010

  46. [47]

    Flayac and V

    H. Flayac and V. Savona, ”Input-output theory of the un- conventional photon blockade,” Phys. Rev. A 88, 033836 (2013)

    work page 2013

  47. [48]

    Flayac and V

    H. Flayac and V. Savona, ”The Unconventional Photon Blockade,” Phys. Rev. A 96, 053810 (2017)

    work page 2017

  48. [49]

    Bamba, A

    M. Bamba, A. Imamo¯ glu, I. Carusotto, and C. Ciuti, ”Origin of strong photon antibunching in weakly non- linear photonic molecules,” Phys. Rev. A 83, 021802(R) (2011)

    work page 2011

  49. [50]

    Kyriienko, I

    O. Kyriienko, I. A. Shelykh, and T. C. H. Liew, ”Tunable single-photon emission from dipolaritons,” Phys. Rev. A 90, 033807 (2014)

    work page 2014

  50. [51]

    Y. H. Zhou, H. Z. Shen, and X. X. Yi, ”Unconventional photon blockade with second-order nonlinearity,” Phys. Rev. A 92, 023838 (2015)

    work page 2015

  51. [52]

    X. W. Xu and Y. Li, ”Tunable photon statistics in weakly nonlinear photonic molecules,” Phys. Rev. A 90, 043822 (2014)

    work page 2014

  52. [53]

    Sarma and A

    B. Sarma and A. K. Sarma, ”Unconventional photon blockade in three-mode optomechanics,” Phys. Rev. A 98, 013826 (2018)

    work page 2018

  53. [54]

    Wang and C

    F. Wang and C. Gou, ”Magnon-induced absorption via quantum interference,” Opt. Lett. 48, 1164 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [55]

    Bourhill, N

    J. Bourhill, N. Kostylev, M. Goryachev, D. L. Cree- don, and M. E. Tobar, ”Ultrahigh cooperativity interac- tions between magnons and resonant photons in a YIG sphere,” Phys. Rev. B 93, 144420 (2016)

    work page 2016

  55. [56]

    Z. X. Liu, H. Xiong, and Y. Wu, ”Magnon blockade in a hybrid ferromagnet-superconductor quantum system,” Phys. Rev. B 100, 134421 (2019)

    work page 2019

  56. [57]

    K. Wu, W. X. Zhong, G. L. Cheng, and A. X. Chen, ”Phase-controlled multimagnon blockade and magnon- induced tunneling in a hybrid superconducting system,” Phys. Rev. A 103, 052411 (2021)

    work page 2021

  57. [58]

    J. Li, S. Y. Zhu, and G. S. Agarwal, ”Magnon-photon- phonon entanglement in cavity magnomechanics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 203601 (2018)

    work page 2018

  58. [59]

    Q. J. Zheng, W. X. Zhong, G. L. Cheng, and A. X. 6 Chen, ”Nonreciprocal tripartite entanglement based on magnon Kerr effect in a spinning microwave resonator,” Opt. Commun. 546, 129796 (2023)

    work page 2023

  59. [60]

    J. J. Chen, X. G. Fan, W. Xiong, D. Wang, and L. Ye, ”Nonreciprocal entanglement in cavity-magnon optome- chanics,” Phys. Rev. B 108, 024105 (2023)

    work page 2023

  60. [61]

    J. K. Xie, S. L. Ma, and F. L. Li, ”Quantum-interference- enhanced magnon blockade in an yttrium-iron-garnet sphere coupled to superconducting circuits,” Phys. Rev. A 101, 042331 (2020)

    work page 2020

  61. [62]

    Y. Q. Fan, J. H. Li, and Y. Wu, ”Nonclassical magnon pair generation and Cauchy-Schwarz inequality viola- tion,” Phys. Rev. A 108, 053715 (2023)

    work page 2023

  62. [63]

    F. Wang, C. D. Gou, J. Xu, and C. Gong, ”Hybrid magnon-atom entanglement and magnon blockade via quantum interference,” Phys. Rev. A 106, 013705 (2022)

    work page 2022

  63. [64]

    Y. T. Yan, C. S. Zhao, D. W. Wang, J. Y. Yang, and L. Zhou, ”Simultaneous blockade of two remote magnons induced by an atom,” Phys. Rev. A 109, 023710 (2024)

    work page 2024

  64. [65]

    L. D. Bino, J. M. Silver, M. T. M. Woodley, S. L. Steb- bings, X. Zhao, and P. DelHaye, ”Microresonator isola- tors and circulators based on the intrinsic nonreciprocity of the Kerr effect,” Optica. 5, 279 (2018)

    work page 2018

  65. [66]

    H. Xie, L. W. He, X. Shang, G. W. Lin, and X. M. Lin, ”Nonreciprocal photon blockade in cavity optomagnon- ics,” Phys. Rev. A 106, 053707 (2022)

    work page 2022

  66. [67]

    K. W. Huang, X. Wang, Q. Y. Qiu, and H. Xiong, ”Non- reciprocal magnon blockade via the Barnett effect,” Opt. Lett. 49, 758 (2024)

    work page 2024

  67. [68]

    Y. J. Fang , W. X. Zhong, G. L. Cheng, and A. X. Chen, ”Magnon-photon cross-correlations via optical nonlinear - ity in cavity magnonical system,” Opt. Express 31, 27381 (2023)

    work page 2023

  68. [69]

    D. F. James and J. Jerke, ”Effective hamiltonian theory and its applications in quantum information,” Can. J. Phys. 85, 625 (2007)

    work page 2007

  69. [70]

    M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cam- bridge University Press, 1997)

    work page 1997

  70. [71]

    J. S. Zhang, M. C. Li, and A. X. Chen, ”Enhanc- ing quadratic optomechanical coupling via a nonlinear medium and lasers,” Phys. Rev. A 99, 013843 (2019)

    work page 2019

  71. [72]

    H. Z. Shen, Y. H. Zhou, and X. X. Yi, ”Quantum optical diode with semiconductor microcavities,” Phys. Rev. A 90, 023849 (2014)

    work page 2014

  72. [73]

    K. Hou, C. J. Zhu, Y. P. Yang, and G. S. Agarwal, ”Inter- fering pathways for photon blockade in cavity QED with one and two qubits,” Phys. Rev. A 100, 063817 (2019)

    work page 2019

  73. [74]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, ”QuTiP: An open-source Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems,” Comp. Phys. Com. 183, 1760 (2012)

    work page 2012

  74. [75]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, ”QuTiP 2: A Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems,” Comp. Phys. Com. 184, 1234 (2013)

    work page 2013

  75. [76]

    B. Li, R. Huang, X. Xu, A. Miranowicz, and H. Jing, ”Nonreciprocal unconventional photon blockade in a spinning optomechanical system,” Photon. Res. 7, 630 (2019)

    work page 2019

  76. [77]

    H. Z. Shen, Q. Wang, J. Wang, and X. X. Yi, ”Non- reciprocal unconventional photon blockade in a driven dissipative cavity with parametric amplification,” Phys. Rev. A 101, 013826 (2020)

    work page 2020

  77. [78]

    Y. Wang, W. Xiong, Z. Xu, G. Q. Zhang, and J. Q. You, ”Dissipation-induced nonreciprocal magnon blockade in a magnon-based hybrid system,” Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 65, 260314 (2022)

    work page 2022