pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25705 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Universal Characterization of Classical Qubit Noise

Yuan-De Jin , Zheng-Fei Ye , Wen-Long Ma This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 16:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords qubit noise spectroscopyclassical stochastic noiseRamsey interferometrycorrelation functionsdephasing characterizationOrnstein-Uhlenbeck processtwo-level fluctuatorsnoise sampling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Short Ramsey interferometry sequences on a qubit directly sample the full statistics of classical dephasing noise.

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

The paper proposes a method to characterize any classical stochastic noise process that dephases a qubit by repeating short Ramsey interferometry measurements with chosen control pulses. Each measurement samples the instantaneous noise field, so that the n-point correlation functions computed from the outcomes are directly proportional to the corresponding noise correlations. This approach avoids the need for dynamical decoupling pulse sequences and remains independent of the qubit's lifetime while staying robust to decoherence and readout errors.

Core claim

Each repetitive Ramsey interferometry measurement performed over a short evolution time with suitably chosen control pulses performs a direct sampling of the noise field, and the n-point correlations of the measurement outcomes are proportional to the n-point correlation functions of the underlying classical noise process.

What carries the argument

Repetitive Ramsey interferometry measurement (RIM) with short evolution time and chosen control pulses, which directly samples the noise field so that outcome correlations match noise correlations.

If this is right

  • The method characterizes arbitrary-order correlation functions of both Gaussian and non-Gaussian classical noises such as Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes and ensembles of two-level fluctuators.
  • Characterization requires only simple control pulses rather than complicated dynamical decoupling sequences.
  • The protocol works independently of qubit lifetime and remains accurate even in the presence of additional decoherence or readout errors.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same sampling principle could be tested on other qubit platforms where classical noise is suspected to dominate, to see whether the proportionality holds for higher-order correlations.
  • If the classical assumption is relaxed, the method might still serve as a diagnostic to detect when quantum noise begins to appear by checking for deviations from the expected classical scaling.
  • Numerical demonstrations on two standard noise models suggest the approach could be implemented with existing hardware control electronics.

Load-bearing premise

Dephasing arises solely from a classical stochastic noise process whose short-time samples are faithfully captured by the qubit without contamination from other decoherence channels or measurement imperfections.

What would settle it

Apply the protocol to a qubit whose dephasing is independently verified to be produced by a known classical noise process and check whether the measured n-point correlation functions of the RIM outcomes deviate from the known noise correlations beyond experimental error.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.25705 by Wen-Long Ma, Yuan-De Jin, Zheng-Fei Ye.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We propose a general method to fully characterize a classical stochastic noise process causing qubit dephasing through repetitive Ramsey interferometry measurements (RIMs) on the qubit. Compared to filter-function-based spectroscopy, our method does not require complicated dynamical decoupling pulses and can directly detect arbitrary-order correlation functions of such noise processes. We show that each RIM with a short evolution time and suitably chosen control pulses can perform a direct sampling of the noise field and the $n$-point correlations of the RIM outcomes are proportional to the $n$-point correlation functions of the noise processes. Then we numerically demonstrate this method for characterizing two typical examples of classical noises, including the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck processes producing Gaussian noises and an ensemble of TLFs producing non-Gaussian noises. Our method is independent of qubit lifetime and robust against qubit decoherence and measurement errors, thus offering a universal and efficient protocol for qubit noise spectroscopy across diverse platforms.

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 paper proposes a general method to characterize classical stochastic noise causing qubit dephasing via repetitive Ramsey interferometry measurements (RIMs). It claims that each RIM with short evolution time and suitably chosen control pulses directly samples the noise field, with the n-point correlations of RIM outcomes being proportional to the n-point correlation functions of the noise process. This is numerically demonstrated for Ornstein-Uhlenbeck Gaussian noise and non-Gaussian noise from ensembles of two-level fluctuators. The method is asserted to be independent of qubit lifetime and robust to decoherence and measurement errors, providing a simpler alternative to filter-function spectroscopy for arbitrary-order correlations.

Significance. If the proportionality mapping holds with controllable errors for finite but short evolution times, the approach would enable efficient, universal characterization of classical qubit noise including higher-order correlations across platforms, without requiring complex dynamical decoupling sequences. The numerical demonstrations for both Gaussian and non-Gaussian cases illustrate potential breadth, though quantitative validation of the short-time regime is needed to establish practical utility.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §2] Abstract and §2 (theory section): The central claim that n-point RIM correlations are proportional to noise correlations for short τ relies on a short-time expansion of the accumulated phase, but no explicit derivation, remainder bounds (e.g., O(τ^{n+2}) terms from stochastic integrals or residual T1/T2 decay), or proof that the proportionality constant is τ-independent for arbitrary n is provided; this is load-bearing for the direct-sampling assertion.
  2. [Numerical demonstrations] Numerical demonstrations section: The simulations for OU and TLF noise report no specific values of evolution time τ, no signal-to-noise ratios for n-point functions (especially n>2), and no quantitative comparison of sampled correlations against true noise correlations including approximation errors, leaving the validity regime unverified.
  3. [Abstract and conclusion] Robustness claims (abstract and conclusion): The statements of independence from qubit lifetime and robustness to decoherence/measurement errors lack supporting analysis, error propagation, or simulations demonstrating that these effects remain negligible under the short-time RIM protocol with chosen pulses.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would be clearer if it briefly specified the form of the control pulses used in the RIM protocol.
  2. [Theory section] Notation for the noise process β(t) and RIM outcomes should be introduced consistently in the theory section to aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the suggested clarifications and additions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §2] Abstract and §2 (theory section): The central claim that n-point RIM correlations are proportional to noise correlations for short τ relies on a short-time expansion of the accumulated phase, but no explicit derivation, remainder bounds (e.g., O(τ^{n+2}) terms from stochastic integrals or residual T1/T2 decay), or proof that the proportionality constant is τ-independent for arbitrary n is provided; this is load-bearing for the direct-sampling assertion.

    Authors: We agree that Section 2 would benefit from a more explicit step-by-step derivation of the short-time expansion. The leading-order result follows from expanding the accumulated phase φ = ∫_0^τ δω(t) dt for small τ and taking the n-point correlation of the Ramsey outcomes (which for small phase map to the phase moments). The proportionality factor is τ^n, which is known a priori and independent of the underlying noise process. We will add the full derivation together with remainder bounds of order O(τ^{n+2}) (assuming bounded noise derivatives) in the revised Section 2 to make the load-bearing claim fully rigorous. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Numerical demonstrations] Numerical demonstrations section: The simulations for OU and TLF noise report no specific values of evolution time τ, no signal-to-noise ratios for n-point functions (especially n>2), and no quantitative comparison of sampled correlations against true noise correlations including approximation errors, leaving the validity regime unverified.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the numerical section lacks the quantitative details needed to verify the short-time regime. In the revised manuscript we will specify the exact τ values employed (normalized units), report signal-to-noise ratios for the n-point functions up to n=4, and include direct comparisons (tables or additional panels) between the RIM-sampled correlations and the exact noise correlations, together with the measured approximation errors. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract and conclusion] Robustness claims (abstract and conclusion): The statements of independence from qubit lifetime and robustness to decoherence/measurement errors lack supporting analysis, error propagation, or simulations demonstrating that these effects remain negligible under the short-time RIM protocol with chosen pulses.

    Authors: The independence from T1/T2 follows because the protocol uses τ ≪ T1, T2 so that relaxation during each short Ramsey interval is higher-order small; measurement errors are suppressed by averaging in the correlation functions. Nevertheless, we agree that explicit support is required. We will add a dedicated paragraph (with error-propagation estimates) and supplementary simulations showing that the extracted n-point functions remain accurate under realistic T1/T2 values and finite measurement fidelity. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation is a direct short-time expansion from the stochastic phase model

full rationale

The central claim follows from expanding the accumulated phase φ under short-time RIM evolution with control pulses, yielding n-point outcome correlations proportional to noise correlations via standard stochastic averaging. This is a first-principles approximation (asymptotic in τ) independent of fitted parameters or self-citations. Numerical examples for OU and TLF processes serve as validation, not input. No self-definitional loops, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, load-bearing self-citations, or ansatz smuggling appear in the derivation chain. The method's claimed independence from qubit lifetime is consistent with the short-time limit and does not reduce to its own assumptions by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that classical stochastic noise produces dephasing whose statistics are directly accessible via short-time RIM outcomes; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The noise causing qubit dephasing is a classical stochastic process.
    Explicitly stated in the title and abstract as the target of characterization.
  • domain assumption Short evolution time plus suitably chosen control pulses makes RIM outcomes proportional to noise-field correlations.
    This is the load-bearing step that converts measurement statistics into noise correlation functions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5454 in / 1485 out tokens · 86269 ms · 2026-05-07T16:46:56.929418+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

95 extracted references · 95 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Introduction to quantum noise, measurement, and amplification, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1155 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    Milz and K

    S. Milz and K. Modi, Quantum stochastic processes and quantum non-markovian phenomena, PRX Quantum 2, 030201 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    N. A. Sinitsyn and Y. V. Pershin, The theory of spin noise spectroscopy: A review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 106501 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    A. R. Milne, C. Hempel, L. Li, C. L. Edmunds, H. J. Slatyer, H. Ball, M. R. Hush, and M. J. Biercuk, Quan- tum Oscillator Noise Spectroscopy via Displaced Cat States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 250506 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Suter and G

    D. Suter and G. A. Álvarez, Colloquium : Protecting quantum information against environmental noise, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 041001 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Yang, W.-L

    W. Yang, W.-L. Ma, and R.-B. Liu, Quantum many-body theory for electron spin decoherence in nanoscale nuclear spin baths, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 016001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Ithier, E

    G. Ithier, E. Collin, P. Joyez, P. J. Meeson, D. Vion, D. Esteve, F. Chiarello, A. Shnirman, Y. Makhlin, J. Schriefl, and G. Schön, Decoherence in a supercon- ducting quantum bit circuit, Phys. Rev. B 72, 134519 (2005)

    work page 2005

  8. [8]

    Szańkowski, G

    P. Szańkowski, G. Ramon, J. Krzywda, D. Kwiatkowski, and Ł. Cywiński, Environmental noise spectroscopy with qubits subjected to dynamical decoupling, J. Phys.: Con- dens. Matter 29, 333001 (2017)

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Müller, J

    C. Müller, J. H. Cole, and J. Lisenfeld, Towards under- standing two-level-systems in amorphous solids: insights from quantum circuits, Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 124501 (2019)

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Cywiński, R

    L. Cywiński, R. M. Lutchyn, C. P. Nave, and S. Das Sarma, How to enhance dephasing time in su- perconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. B 77, 174509 (2008)

    work page 2008

  11. [11]

    Shnirman, G

    A. Shnirman, G. Schön, I. Martin, and Y. Makhlin, Low- and high-frequency noise from coherent two-level sys- tems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 127002 (2005)

    work page 2005

  12. [12]

    Y. M. Galperin, B. L. Altshuler, J. Bergli, and D. V. Shantsev, Non-Gaussian Low-Frequency Noise as a Source of Qubit Decoherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 097009 (2006)

    work page 2006

  13. [13]

    Y. M. Galperin, B. L. Altshuler, J. Bergli, D. Shantsev, and V. Vinokur, Non-gaussian dephasing in flux qubits due to 1/f noise, Phys. Rev. B 76, 064531 (2007)

    work page 2007

  14. [14]

    Kotler, N

    S. Kotler, N. Akerman, Y. Glickman, and R. Ozeri, Non- linear single-spin spectrum analyzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 110503 (2013)

    work page 2013

  15. [15]

    Paladino, Y

    E. Paladino, Y. M. Galperin, G. Falci, and B. L. Alt- shuler, 1/f noise: Implications for solid-state quantum information, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 361 (2014)

    work page 2014

  16. [16]

    Uchiyama and M

    C. Uchiyama and M. Aihara, Multipulse control of deco- herence, Phys. Rev. A 66, 032313 (2002)

    work page 2002

  17. [17]

    M. F. Maghrebi, M. Krüger, and M. Kardar, Flight of a heavy particle nonlinearly coupled to a quantum bath, Phys. Rev. B 93, 014309 (2016)

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    J. B. Curtis, A. Yacoby, and E. Demler, Non-Gaussian Noise Magnetometry Using Local Spin Qubits (2025), arXiv:2505.03877 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    G. S. Uhrig, Keeping a Quantum Bit Alive by Optimized π -Pulse Sequences, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 100504 (2007)

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

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

    work page 2017

  21. [21]

    J. Du, F. Shi, X. Kong, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, Single-molecule scale magnetic resonance spectroscopy using quantum diamond sensors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 025001 (2024) . 6

    work page 2024

  22. [22]

    H. Uys, M. Biercuk, and J. Bollinger, Optimized Noise Filtration through Dynamical Decoupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 040501 (2009)

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    G. A. Álvarez and D. Suter, Measuring the spectrum of colored noise by dynamical decoupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 230501 (2011)

    work page 2011

  24. [24]

    T. Yuge, S. Sasaki, and Y. Hirayama, Measurement of the Noise Spectrum Using a Multiple-Pulse Sequence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 170504 (2011)

    work page 2011

  25. [25]

    Bylander, S

    J. Bylander, S. Gustavsson, F. Yan, F. Yoshihara, K. Harrabi, G. Fitch, D. G. Cory, Y. Nakamura, J.-S. Tsai, and W. D. Oliver, Noise spectroscopy through dy- namical decoupling with a superconducting flux qubit, Nat. Phys. 7, 565 (2011)

    work page 2011

  26. [26]

    Green, H

    T. Green, H. Uys, and M. J. Biercuk, High-Order Noise Filtering in Nontrivial Quantum Logic Gates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 020501 (2012)

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    G. A. Paz-Silva and L. Viola, General transfer-function approach to noise filtering in open-loop quantum control, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 250501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    Soare, H

    A. Soare, H. Ball, D. Hayes, J. Sastrawan, M. C. Jar- ratt, J. J. McLoughlin, X. Zhen, T. J. Green, and M. J. Biercuk, Experimental noise filtering by quantum con- trol, Nat. Phys 10, 825 (2014)

    work page 2014

  29. [29]

    Ball and M

    H. Ball and M. J. Biercuk, Walsh-synthesized noise filters for quantum logic, EPJ Quantum Technol. 2, 11 (2015)

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    G. A. Paz-Silva, S.-W. Lee, T. J. Green, and L. Viola, Dynamical decoupling sequences for multi-qubit dephas- ing suppression and long-time quantum memory, New J. Phys. 18, 073020 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Szańkowski and L

    P. Szańkowski and L. Cywiński, Accuracy of dynamical- decoupling-based spectroscopy of gaussian noise, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032101 (2018)

    work page 2018

  32. [32]

    M. J. Biercuk, A. C. Doherty, and H. Uys, Dynamical decoupling sequence construction as a filter-design prob- lem, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 44, 154002 (2011)

    work page 2011

  33. [33]

    Dalla Pozza, S

    N. Dalla Pozza, S. Gherardini, M. M. Müller, and F. Caruso, Role of the filter functions in noise spec- troscopy, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 17, 1941008 (2019)

    work page 2019

  34. [34]

    McCourt, C

    T. McCourt, C. Neill, K. Lee, C. Quintana, Y. Chen, J. Kelly, J. Marshall, V. N. Smelyanskiy, M. I. Dykman, A. Korotkov, I. L. Chuang, and A. G. Petukhov, Learning noise via dynamical decoupling of entangled qubits, Phys. Rev. A 107, 052610 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    G. Wang, Y. Zhu, B. Li, C. Li, L. Viola, A. Cooper, and P. Cappellaro, Digital noise spectroscopy with a quantum sensor, Quantum Sci. Technol. 9, 035006 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Huang, D

    K. Huang, D. Farfurnik, A. Seif, M. Hafezi, and Y.- K. Liu, Random pulse sequences for qubit noise spec- troscopy, Phys. Rev. Appl. 23, 054090 (2025)

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Wang and G

    Y. Wang and G. A. Paz-Silva, Broadband spectroscopy of quantum noise, Phys. Rev. A 111, 052407 (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    F. Yan, J. Bylander, S. Gustavsson, F. Yoshihara, K. Harrabi, D. G. Cory, T. P. Orlando, Y. Nakamura, J.- S. Tsai, and W. D. Oliver, Spectroscopy of low-frequency noise and its temperature dependence in a superconduct- ing qubit, Phys. Rev. B 85, 174521 (2012)

    work page 2012

  39. [39]

    F. Yan, S. Gustavsson, J. Bylander, X. Jin, F. Yoshihara, D. G. Cory, Y. Nakamura, T. P. Orlando, and W. D. Oliver, Rotating-frame relaxation as a noise spectrum analyser of a superconducting qubit undergoing driven evolution, Nat. Commun. 4, 2337 (2013)

    work page 2013

  40. [40]

    C. M. Quintana, Y. Chen, D. Sank, A. G. Petukhov, T. C. White, D. Kafri, B. Chiaro, A. Megrant, R. Barends, B. Campbell, Z. Chen, A. Dunsworth, A. G. Fowler, R. Graff, E. Jeffrey, J. Kelly, E. Lucero, J. Y. Mu- tus, M. Neeley, C. Neill, P. J. J. O’Malley, P. Roushan, A. Shabani, V. N. Smelyanskiy, A. Vainsencher, J. Wen- ner, H. Neven, and J. M. Martinis, O...

    work page 2017

  41. [41]

    Gavrielov, S

    N. Gavrielov, S. Oviedo-Casado, and A. Retzker, Spec- trum analysis with parametrically modulated transmon qubits, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, L012056 (2025)

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    Cywiński, W

    L. Cywiński, W. M. Witzel, and S. Das Sarma, Electron spin dephasing due to hyperfine interactions with a nu- clear spin bath, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 057601 (2009)

    work page 2009

  43. [43]

    Cywiński, W

    L. Cywiński, 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, Phys. Rev. B 79, 245314 (2009)

    work page 2009

  44. [44]

    Struck, A

    T. Struck, A. Hollmann, F. Schauer, O. Fedorets, A. Schmidbauer, K. Sawano, H. Riemann, N. V. Abrosi- mov, Ł. Cywiński, D. Bougeard, and L. R. Schreiber, Low-frequency spin qubit nergy splitting noise in highly purified 28Si/SiGe, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 40 (2020)

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    M. Kępa, N. Focke, Ł. Cywiński, and J. A. Krzywda, Simulation of 1/f charge noise affecting a quantum dot in a si/sige structure, Appl. Phys. Lett. 123, 034005 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    O. E. Dial, M. D. Shulman, S. P. Harvey, H. Bluhm, V. Umansky, and A. Yacoby, Charge noise spectroscopy using coherent exchange oscillations in a singlet-triplet qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 146804 (2013)

    work page 2013

  47. [47]

    Hernández-Gómez, F

    S. Hernández-Gómez, F. Poggiali, P. Cappellaro, and N. Fabbri, Noise spectroscopy of a quantum-classical environment with a diamond qubit, Phys. Rev. B 98, 214307 (2018)

    work page 2018

  48. [48]

    Y. Li, Z. Ding, C. Wang, H. Sun, Z. Chen, P. Wang, Y. Wang, M. Gong, H. Zeng, F. Shi, et al. , Critical fluc- tuations and noise spectra in two-dimensional Fe3GeTe2 magnets, Nat. Commun. 16, 8585 (2025)

    work page 2025

  49. [49]

    Häffner, C

    H. Häffner, C. Roos, and R. Blatt, Quantum computing with trapped ions, Phys. Rep. 469, 155 (2008)

    work page 2008

  50. [50]

    M. J. Biercuk, H. Uys, A. P. VanDevender, N. Shiga, W. M. Itano, and J. J. Bollinger, Optimized dynamical decoupling in a model quantum memory, Nature 458, 996 (2009)

    work page 2009

  51. [51]

    Kotler, N

    S. Kotler, N. Akerman, Y. Glickman, A. Keselman, and R. Ozeri, Single-ion quantum lock-in amplifier, Nature 473, 61 (2011)

    work page 2011

  52. [52]

    Y. Fu, Y. Wu, Y. Dai, X. Qin, X. Rong, and J. Du, Molecular-spin-qubit noise spectroscopy through dynam- ical decoupling, Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, L061001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [53]

    L. M. Norris, G. A. Paz-Silva, and L. Viola, Qubit Noise Spectroscopy for Non-Gaussian Dephasing Envi- ronments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 150503 (2016)

    work page 2016

  54. [54]

    Y. Sung, F. Beaudoin, L. M. Norris, F. Yan, D. K. Kim, J. Y. Qiu, U. Von Lüpke, J. L. Yoder, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, L. Viola, and W. D. Oliver, Non-Gaussian noise spectroscopy with a superconducting qubit sensor, Nat. Commun. 10, 3715 (2019)

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    Ramon, Trispectrum reconstruction of non-Gaussian noise, Phys

    G. Ramon, Trispectrum reconstruction of non-Gaussian noise, Phys. Rev. B 100, 161302 (2019)

    work page 2019

  56. [56]

    Wang and A

    Y.-X. Wang and A. A. Clerk, Spectral characterization of non-gaussian quantum noise: Keldysh approach and ap- 7 plication to photon shot noise, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033196 (2020)

    work page 2020

  57. [57]

    W. Dong, G. A. Paz-Silva, and L. Viola, Resource- efficient digital characterization and control of classi- cal non-Gaussian noise, Appl. Phys. Lett. 122, 244001 (2023)

    work page 2023

  58. [58]

    W. Dong, Y. Wang, and M. Q. Khan, Efficient learn- ing and optimizing non-Gaussian correlated noise in dig- itally controlled qubit systems, Phys. Rev. A 111, 062605 (2025)

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    K. C. Young and K. B. Whaley, Qubits as spectrometers of dephasing noise, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012314 (2012)

    work page 2012

  60. [60]

    Fink and H

    T. Fink and H. Bluhm, Noise Spectroscopy Using Cor- relations of Single-Shot Qubit Readout, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 010403 (2013)

    work page 2013

  61. [61]

    Sakuldee and L

    F. Sakuldee and L. Cywiński, Characterization of a qua- sistatic environment with a qubit, Phys. Rev. A 99, 062113 (2019)

    work page 2019

  62. [62]

    Sakuldee and Ł

    F. Sakuldee and Ł. Cywiński, Relationship between sub- jecting the qubit to dynamical decoupling and to a se- quence of projective measurements, Phys. Rev. A 101, 042329 (2020)

    work page 2020

  63. [63]

    Sakuldee and Ł

    F. Sakuldee and Ł. Cywiński, Spectroscopy of classical environmental noise with a qubit subjected to projective measurements, Phys. Rev. A 101, 012314 (2020)

    work page 2020

  64. [64]

    Wudarski, Y

    F. Wudarski, Y. Zhang, A. N. Korotkov, A. Petukhov, and M. Dykman, Characterizing Low-Frequency Qubit Noise, Phys. Rev. Appl. 19, 064066 (2023)

    work page 2023

  65. [65]

    Wudarski, Y

    F. Wudarski, Y. Zhang, and M. I. Dykman, Nonergodic Measurements of Qubit Frequency Noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 230201 (2023)

    work page 2023

  66. [66]

    Sifft and D

    M. Sifft and D. Hägele, Random-time quantum measure- ments, Phys. Rev. A 107, 052203 (2023)

    work page 2023

  67. [67]

    Laraoui, F

    A. Laraoui, F. Dolde, C. Burk, F. Reinhard, J. Wrachtrup, and C. A. Meriles, High-resolution corre- lation spectroscopy of 13C spins near a nitrogen-vacancy centre in diamond, Nat. Commun. 4, 1651 (2013)

    work page 2013

  68. [68]

    Staudacher, N

    T. Staudacher, N. Raatz, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, F. Rein- hard, C. A. Meriles, and J. Wrachtrup, Probing molecular dynamics at the nanoscale via an individual paramag- netic centre, Nat. Commun. 6, 8527 (2015)

    work page 2015

  69. [69]

    X. Kong, A. Stark, J. Du, L. P. McGuinness, and F. Jelezko, Towards chemical structure resolution with nanoscale nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Appl. 4, 024004 (2015)

    work page 2015

  70. [70]

    J. M. Boss, K. S. Cujia, J. Zopes, and C. L. Degen, Quan- tum sensing with arbitrary frequency resolution, Science 356, 837 (2017)

    work page 2017

  71. [71]

    Schmitt, T

    S. Schmitt, T. Gefen, F. M. Stürner, T. Unden, G. Wolff, C. Müller, J. Scheuer, B. Naydenov, M. Markham, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, I. Schwarz, M. Plenio, A. Ret- zker, L. P. McGuinness, and F. Jelezko, Submillihertz magnetic spectroscopy performed with a nanoscale quan- tum sensor, Science 356, 832 (2017)

    work page 2017

  72. [72]

    D. R. Glenn, D. B. Bucher, J. Lee, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, and R. L. Walsworth, High-resolution magnetic reso- nance spectroscopy using a solid-state spin sensor, Na- ture 555, 351 (2018)

    work page 2018

  73. [73]

    J. Yoon, K. Zhong, G. Wang, B. Li, D. Lee, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing with arbitrary fre- quency resolution via correlation measurements (2025), arXiv:2504.12134 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Zaiser, T

    S. Zaiser, T. Rendler, I. Jakobi, T. Wolf, S.-Y. Lee, S. Wagner, V. Bergholm, T. Schulte-Herbrüggen, P. Neu- mann, and J. Wrachtrup, Enhancing quantum sensing sensitivity by a quantum memory, Nat. Commun. 7, 12279 (2016)

    work page 2016

  75. [75]

    Pfender, N

    M. Pfender, N. Aslam, H. Sumiya, S. Onoda, P. Neu- mann, J. Isoya, C. A. Meriles, and J. Wrachtrup, Non- volatile nuclear spin memory enables sensor-unlimited nanoscale spectroscopy of small spin clusters, Nat. Com- mun. 8, 834 (2017)

    work page 2017

  76. [76]

    Staudenmaier, A

    N. Staudenmaier, A. Vijayakumar-Sreeja, G. Genov, D. Cohen, C. Findler, J. Lang, A. Retzker, F. Jelezko, and S. Oviedo-Casado, Optimal sensing protocol for sta- tistically polarized nano-NMR with NV centers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 150801 (2023)

    work page 2023

  77. [77]

    Arunkumar, D

    N. Arunkumar, D. B. Bucher, M. J. Turner, P. TomHon, D. Glenn, S. Lehmkuhl, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, M. S. Rosen, T. Theis, and R. L. Walsworth, Micron-scale nv- nmr spectroscopy with signal amplification by reversible exchange, PRX Quantum 2, 010305 (2021)

    work page 2021

  78. [78]

    N. R. Neuling, R. D. Allert, and D. B. Bucher, Prospects of single-cell nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy with quantum sensors, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 83, 102975 (2023)

    work page 2023

  79. [79]

    Spohn, N

    T. Spohn, N. Staudenmaier, P. J. Vetter, T. Joas, T. Unden, I. Schwartz, P. Neumann, G. Genov, and F. Jelezko, Quantum Memory Enhanced Multipoint Cor- relation Spectroscopy for Statistically Polarized NMR, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 250801 (2025)

    work page 2025

  80. [80]

    Maier, C.-I

    R. Maier, C.-I. Ho, H. Sumiya, S. Onoda, J. Isoya, V. Vorobyov, and J. Wrachtrup, Efficient detection of statistical RF fields with a quantum sensor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 250802 (2025)

    work page 2025

Showing first 80 references.