arxiv: 2604.27565 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.mes-hall· physics.comp-ph· physics.optics

Recognition: unknown

Magnonic Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill states

Zi-Xu Lu , Gang Liu , Matteo Fadel , Jie Li

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 09:20 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.comp-phphysics.optics

keywords magnonic GKP statesbosonic quantum error correctionGottesman-Kitaev-Preskill codemagnon-qubit hybrid systemsmicrowave cavityconditional displacementlogical qubit gatesquantum sensing

0 comments

The pith

An ellipsoidal magnetic crystal coupled to a superconducting qubit via a cavity prepares the first magnonic GKP states.

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

The paper establishes a protocol to create magnonic versions of Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill states, which encode a logical qubit in an oscillator with a grid structure in phase space that protects against small displacement errors in both quadratures. The approach relies on an ellipsoidal magnetic crystal whose shape provides intrinsic squeezing to the magnon mode, combined with cavity-mediated interactions that let a superconducting qubit apply conditional displacements. Two such rounds followed by qubit measurements produce three- and four-component GKP-like states. The work further shows how to implement logical Pauli, Hadamard, and phase gates, completing a basic set of operations on the encoded information. This positions hybrid magnon-qubit systems as a route to bosonic quantum error correction without large arrays of physical qubits.

Core claim

Two rounds of conditional-displacement interactions and qubit projective measurements, applied to a geometrically squeezed magnon mode in an ellipsoidal crystal, produce three- and four-component magnonic GKP-like states; the same control allows realization of single logical qubit gates including Pauli, Hadamard, and phase operations on the approximate GKP code.

What carries the argument

The effective conditional-displacement interaction between the qubit and the magnon mode, realized through cavity mediation and acting on the magnon mode that is intrinsically squeezed by the ellipsoidal crystal geometry.

If this is right

Three- and four-component magnonic GKP-like states become available in a hybrid system.
Logical Pauli, Hadamard, and phase gates can be performed on the encoded qubit.
Hybrid magnon-qubit platforms become candidates for bosonic quantum error correction.
Applications open in magnonic fault-tolerant quantum computation and quantum sensing.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The geometric squeezing mechanism suggests the protocol could be adapted to other anisotropic bosonic modes, such as phonons in engineered structures.
Successful preparation would allow direct comparison of magnon coherence times against those in superconducting or photonic GKP implementations.

Load-bearing premise

The cavity-mediated qubit-magnon coupling can be executed with low enough loss and decoherence to preserve the coherence required for the GKP grid structure to form.

What would settle it

A phase-space tomography or quadrature measurement of the magnon mode immediately after the two-round protocol that fails to show discrete peaks arranged in a grid pattern, or that shows excessive broadening due to decoherence, would indicate the states are not formed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.27565 by Gang Liu, Jie Li, Matteo Fadel, Zi-Xu Lu.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Phase-space representation of the stabilizers view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Operation sequence used to generate the GKP view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Magnonic GKP-like states. Wigner function of (a) view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Bosonic quantum error correction encodes a logical qubit in an oscillator, avoiding the hardware overhead of large qubit arrays. Among such encodings, Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill (GKP) states are paticularly powerful because their phase-space grid structure protects against small displacement errors simultaneously in both conjugate quadratures. Here we provide the first protocol for preparing magnonic GKP states, which involves an ellipsoidal magnetic crystal effectively coupled to a superconducting qubit via a microwave cavity. The geometric anisotropy intrinsically squeezes the magnon mode, while the cavity-mediated qubit control realizes an effective conditional-displacement interaction. We show that two rounds of a conditional-displacement interaction and a qubit projective measurement yield three- and four-component magnonic GKP-like states. We also show how to realize single logical qubit gate operations, such as Pauli, Hadamard and phase gates, completing the logical Pauli basis of the approximate GKP code. Our results establish hybrid magnon-qubit systems as a promising platform for preparing bosonic code states, with applications in magnonic fault-tolerant quantum computation and quantum sensing.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a clean proposal for the first magnonic GKP protocol that combines anisotropy squeezing with cavity-mediated conditional displacement, but it needs concrete fidelity estimates to be convincing.

read the letter

The paper's main contribution is a protocol that uses the geometric anisotropy of an ellipsoidal magnetic crystal to squeeze the magnon mode and a microwave cavity to mediate conditional displacements with a superconducting qubit. Two rounds of that interaction plus qubit measurement are claimed to produce three- and four-component GKP-like states, with additional steps for Pauli, Hadamard, and phase gates. That combination has not appeared in the cited literature, so the claim of being first holds up on the surface. The setup stays within standard quantum-optics modeling of magnon-photon and magnon-qubit couplings, which keeps the proposal grounded rather than speculative. The authors also close the loop by showing how the prepared states support a logical qubit basis, which is a useful addition for anyone thinking about fault-tolerant applications in hybrid systems. The soft spot is the treatment of loss. The protocol requires the conditional-displacement steps to remain coherent across two full rounds, yet the abstract only asserts that the effective interaction occurs without significant losses. No master-equation derivation, no estimates of magnon linewidth versus coupling strength, and no fidelity curves versus crystal size or cavity Q appear in the provided text. If magnon damping is comparable to the interaction rate, the grid structure will degrade before the second measurement, exactly as the stress-test note flags. Without those numbers the practicality remains untested. This paper is aimed at researchers working on magnonic or hybrid bosonic platforms who want new ideas for encoding logical qubits. A reader already familiar with GKP constructions and cavity QED will see the mapping quickly and can judge whether the hardware parameters are realistic. It is coherent on its own terms and engages the relevant literature without circularity, so it deserves a serious referee. I would send it to review with a request for explicit decoherence calculations and parameter scans; the core idea is worth checking in detail.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes the first protocol for preparing approximate magnonic GKP states in an ellipsoidal magnetic crystal coupled to a superconducting qubit via a microwave cavity. Geometric anisotropy is said to provide intrinsic squeezing of the magnon mode, while cavity-mediated interactions realize an effective conditional-displacement gate. Two rounds of conditional displacement followed by qubit projective measurement are claimed to produce three- and four-component GKP-like states; logical gates (Pauli, Hadamard, phase) are also described, completing the logical Pauli basis for the approximate code.

Significance. If the protocol is shown to be robust against realistic damping and hybridization effects, the work would introduce a new physical platform for bosonic quantum error correction. The use of intrinsic geometric squeezing is a notable feature that could simplify state preparation compared to external squeezing resources, with potential implications for magnonic fault-tolerant computation and sensing.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that two rounds of conditional-displacement interaction plus qubit measurement produce GKP-like states with a phase-space grid structure rests on the assumption that the effective interaction remains coherent and that the magnon mode stays in the linear bosonic regime. No master-equation treatment, fidelity estimate, or comparison of coupling strength to magnon decay rate γ_m is supplied to support this for two full rounds.
[Abstract] Abstract: the statement that cavity-mediated qubit control realizes the conditional-displacement interaction 'without significant losses or decoherence' is load-bearing for the protocol's viability, yet no numerical estimates of crystal size, cavity Q, or magnon linewidth are referenced to quantify the regime where this holds.
[Abstract] Abstract: the geometric anisotropy is asserted to 'intrinsically squeeze' the magnon mode, but no value of the resulting squeezing parameter or explicit mapping to the GKP grid spacing is provided, preventing verification that the prepared states approximate the code with useful error-correcting properties.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract contains a typo: 'paticularly' should read 'particularly'.
[Abstract] The abstract states that the gates 'complete the logical Pauli basis', yet lists Pauli, Hadamard, and phase gates; Hadamard and phase are Clifford but not Pauli operators, requiring clarification of the intended logical gate set.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments correctly identify areas where the manuscript would benefit from additional quantitative support and explicit calculations. We address each point below and will incorporate the suggested clarifications and estimates into a revised version of the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that two rounds of conditional-displacement interaction plus qubit measurement produce GKP-like states with a phase-space grid structure rests on the assumption that the effective interaction remains coherent and that the magnon mode stays in the linear bosonic regime. No master-equation treatment, fidelity estimate, or comparison of coupling strength to magnon decay rate γ_m is supplied to support this for two full rounds.

Authors: We agree that explicit support for coherence over two rounds is needed. The manuscript derives the effective conditional-displacement Hamiltonian under the linear bosonic approximation and assumes g ≫ γ_m, but does not present a master-equation simulation or fidelity estimate. In the revision we will add a brief master-equation analysis (or perturbative estimate) for two successive rounds, using realistic parameters where the interaction time per round is ≪ 1/γ_m, together with a fidelity lower bound that remains above the threshold for the approximate GKP code. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the statement that cavity-mediated qubit control realizes the conditional-displacement interaction 'without significant losses or decoherence' is load-bearing for the protocol's viability, yet no numerical estimates of crystal size, cavity Q, or magnon linewidth are referenced to quantify the regime where this holds.

Authors: The claim is indeed load-bearing. While the manuscript cites typical magnon-cavity parameters from the literature, it does not supply concrete numerical estimates for the specific ellipsoidal geometry. In the revision we will insert a short paragraph (or table) giving example values—crystal dimensions ~50–200 μm, cavity Q ~ 10^4–10^5, magnon linewidth ~0.5–2 MHz—and show that the required interaction time (set by the conditional-displacement strength) remains well below the combined decoherence time, thereby quantifying the regime of validity. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the geometric anisotropy is asserted to 'intrinsically squeeze' the magnon mode, but no value of the resulting squeezing parameter or explicit mapping to the GKP grid spacing is provided, preventing verification that the prepared states approximate the code with useful error-correcting properties.

Authors: The squeezing arises directly from the ellipsoidal demagnetization factors in the magnon Hamiltonian, which we diagonalize to obtain a squeezed vacuum ground state. The manuscript stops short of quoting the numerical squeezing parameter r or mapping it onto the GKP lattice spacing Δ. We will add the explicit value of r (obtained from the anisotropy) and a short derivation showing how this r sets the quadrature variances that determine the grid spacing, thereby confirming that the prepared states lie within the regime where the approximate GKP code retains its error-correcting capability. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; protocol follows from standard hybrid-system interactions

full rationale

The derivation begins from physical ingredients (geometric anisotropy providing intrinsic squeezing of the magnon mode, cavity-mediated coupling to a qubit realizing conditional displacement) and proceeds to a sequence of two interaction-plus-measurement rounds that produce approximate GKP states. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, a self-citation chain, or a renamed input; the protocol is assembled from independently verifiable magnon-qubit physics without self-referential closure.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so the ledger is necessarily incomplete. No explicit free parameters or new entities are introduced; the protocol relies on standard modeling assumptions of bosonic magnon modes and cavity QED.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Magnon modes in an ellipsoidal crystal can be treated as bosonic oscillators whose squeezing arises intrinsically from geometric anisotropy.
Invoked to justify the initial squeezed magnon mode before the conditional-displacement steps.
domain assumption Cavity-mediated coupling between the magnon mode and superconducting qubit realizes an effective conditional-displacement gate without dominant decoherence.
Central to the two-round protocol that produces the GKP-like states.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5501 in / 1503 out tokens · 88139 ms · 2026-05-07T09:20:09.863701+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Gottesman, A

D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, Encoding a qubit in an oscillator, Phys. Rev. A64, 012310 (2001)

2001
[2]

Knill and R

E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Theory of quantum error- correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A55, 900 (1997)

1997
[3]

A. L. Grimsmo and S. Puri, Quantum error correction with the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill code, PRX Quan- tum2, 020101 (2021)

2021
[4]

P. T. Cochrane, G. J. Milburn, and W. J. Munro, Macroscopically distinct quantum-superposition states as a bosonic code for amplitude damping, Phys. Rev. A59, 2631 (1999)

1999
[5]

M. H. Michael, M. Silveri, R. T. Brierley, V. V. Albert, J. Salmilehto, L. Jiang, and S. M. Girvin, New class of quantum error-correcting codes for a bosonic mode, Phys. Rev. X6, 031006 (2016)

2016
[6]

Fukui, A

K. Fukui, A. Tomita, A. Okamoto, and K. Fujii, High- threshold fault-tolerant quantum computation with ana- log quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. X8, 021054 (2018)

2018
[7]

M. V. Larsen, C. Chamberland, K. Noh, J. S. Neergaard- Nielsen, and U. L. Andersen, A fault-tolerant continuous- variable measurement-based quantum computation ar- chitecture, PRX Quantum2, 030325 (2021)

2021
[8]

Tzitrin, T

I. Tzitrin, T. Matsuura, R. N. Alexander, G. Dauphinais, J. E. Bourassa, K. K. Sabapathy, N.C. Menicucci, and I. Dhand, Fault-tolerant quantum computation with static linear optics, PRX Quantum2, 040353 (2021)

2021
[9]

Fukui, High-threshold fault-tolerant quantum com- putation with the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qubit un- der noise in an optical setup, Phys

K. Fukui, High-threshold fault-tolerant quantum com- putation with the Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qubit un- der noise in an optical setup, Phys. Rev. A107, 052414 (2023)

2023
[10]

B. W. Walshe, B. Q. Baragiola, R. N. Alexander, and N. C. Menicucci, Continuous-variable gate teleportation and bosonic-code error correction, Phys. Rev. A102, 062411 (2020)

2020
[11]

Fukui, R

K. Fukui, R. N. Alexander, and P. van Loock, All-optical long-distance quantum communication with Gottesman- Kitaev-Preskill qubits, Phys. Rev. Res3, 033118 (2021)

2021
[12]

Rozp´ edek, K

F. Rozp´ edek, K. Noh, Q. Xu, S. Guha, and L. Jiang, Quantum repeaters based on concatenated bosonic and discrete-variable quantum codes, npj Quantum Inf.7, 102 (2021)

2021
[13]

Rozp¸ edek, K

F. Rozp¸ edek, K. P. Seshadreesan, P. Polakos, L. Jiang, and S. Guha, All-photonic Gottesman-Kitaev- Preskill–qubit repeater using analog-information-assisted multiplexed entanglement ranking, Phys. Rev. Res5, 043056 (2023)

2023
[14]

Schmidt, D

F. Schmidt, D. Miller, and P. van Loock, Error-corrected quantum repeaters with Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill qu- dits, Phys. Rev. A109, 042427 (2024)

2024
[15]

Wang and L

Z. Wang and L. Jiang, Passive environment-assisted quantum communication with GKP states, Phys. Rev. X15, 021003 (2025)

2025
[16]

Duivenvoorden, B

K. Duivenvoorden, B. M.Terhal, and D. Weigand, Single- mode displacement sensor, Phys. Rev. A95, 012305 (2017)

2017
[17]

A. J. Brady, C. Gao, R. Harnik, Z. Liu, Z. Zhang, and Q. Zhuang, Entangled sensor-networks for dark-matter searches, PRX Quantum3, 030333 (2022)

2022
[18]

Labarca, S

L. Labarca, S. Turcotte, A. Blais, and B. Royer, Quan- tum sensing of displacements with stabilized GKP states, PRX Quantum7, 020301 (2026)

2026
[19]

Dhara, L

P. Dhara, L. Jiang, and S. Guha, Interfacing Gottesman- Kitaev-Preskill qubits to quantum memories, Phys. Rev. A112, 012401 (2025)

2025
[20]

Dhara, L

P. Dhara, L. Jiang, and S. Guha, Entangling quantum memories at channel capacity, Optica Quantum3, 480 (2025)

2025
[21]

Walschaers, Non-Gaussian quantum states and where to find them, PRX Quantum2, 030204 (2021)

M. Walschaers, Non-Gaussian quantum states and where to find them, PRX Quantum2, 030204 (2021)

2021
[22]

Encoding a qubit in an oscilla- tor

H. M. Vasconcelos, L. Sanz, and S. Glancy, All-optical generation of states for “Encoding a qubit in an oscilla- tor”, Opt. Lett.35, 3261 (2010)

2010
[23]

M. S. Winnel, J. J. Guanzon, D. Singh, and T. C. Ralph, Deterministic preparation of optical squeezed cat and Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill states, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 230602 (2024). 6

2024
[24]

Eaton, R

M. Eaton, R. Nehra, and O. Pfister, Non-Gaussian and Gottesman–Kitaev–Preskill state preparation by photon catalysis, New J. Phys.21, 113034 (2019)

2019
[25]

Pirandola, S

S. Pirandola, S. Mancini, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Con- structing finite-dimensional codes with optical continu- ous variables, Europhys. Lett.68, 323 (2004)

2004
[26]

Fukui, M

K. Fukui, M. Endo, W. Asavanant, A. Sakaguchi, J. Yoshikawa, and A. Furusawa, Generating the Gottesman- Kitaev-Preskill qubit using a cross-Kerr interaction be- tween squeezed light and Fock states in optics, Phys. Rev. A105, 022436 (2022)

2022
[27]

Boudreault, R

J. Boudreault, R. Shillito, J.-B. Bertrand, and B. Royer, Using a self-kerr nonlinearity for magic state preparation in grid codes, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 120601 (2026)

2026
[28]

Hastrup, K

J. Hastrup, K. Park, J. B. Brask, R. Filip, and U. L. Andersen, Measurement-free preparation of grid states, npj Quantum Inf.7, 17 (2021)

2021
[29]

Hastrup and U

J. Hastrup and U. L. Andersen, Protocol for generat- ing optical Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill states with cavity QED, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 170503 (2022)

2022
[30]

X. C. Kolesnikow, R. W. Bomantara, A. C. Doherty, and A. L. Grimsmo, Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill state preparation using periodic driving, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 130605 (2024)

2024
[31]

Rymarz, S

M. Rymarz, S. Bosco, A. Ciani, and D. P. DiVincenzo, Hardware-encoding grid states in a nonreciprocal super- conducting circuit, Phys. Rev. X11, 011032 (2021)

2021
[32]

Dahan, G

R. Dahan, G. Baranes, A. Gorlach, R. Ruimy, N. Rivera, and I. Kaminer, Creation of optical cat and GKP states using shaped free electrons, Phys. Rev. X13, 031001 (2023)

2023
[33]

Baranes, S

G. Baranes, S. Even-Haim, R. Ruimy, A. Gorlach, R. Da- han, A. A. Diringer, S. Hacohen-Gourgy, and I. Kaminer, Free-electron interactions with photonic GKP states: Universal control and quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. Res5, 043271 (2023)

2023
[34]

K. R. Motes, B. Q. Baragiola, A. Gilchrist, and N. C. Menicucci, Encoding qubits into oscillators with atomic ensembles and squeezed light, Phys. Rev. A95, 053819 (2017)

2017
[35]

Omanakuttan and T

S. Omanakuttan and T. J. Volkoff, Spin-squeezed Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill codes for quantum error cor- rection in atomic ensembles, Phys. Rev. A108, 022428 (2023)

2023
[36]

Z. Lin, S. Li, J. Feng, V. Ivannikov, M. Fadel, and T. Byrnes, Preparing squeezed, cat and GKP states with parity measurements, arXiv:2602.08209

work page arXiv
[37]

Y. Shi, C. Chamberland, and A. Cross, Fault-tolerant preparation of approximate GKP states, New J. Phys. 21, 093007 (2019)

2019
[38]

Y. Zeng, W. Qin, Y.-H. Che, C. Gneiting, and F. Nori, Neural-network-based design of approximate Gottesman- Kitaev-Preskill code, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 060601 (2025)

2025
[39]

Fl¨ uhmann, T

C. Fl¨ uhmann, T. L. Nguyen, M. Marinelli, V. Negnevit- sky, K. Mehta1, and J. P. Home, Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator, Nature (London)566, 513 (2019)

2019
[40]

de Neeve, T.-L

B. de Neeve, T.-L. Nguyen, T. Behrle, and J. P. Home, Error correction of a logical grid state qubit by dissipative pumping, Nat. Phys.18, 296 (2022)

2022
[41]

V. G. Matsos, C. H. Valahu, T. Navickas, A. D. Rao, M. J. Millican, X. C. Kolesnikow, M.J. Biercuk, and T. R. Tan, Robust and deterministic preparation of bosonic logical states in a trapped ion, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 050602 (2024)

2024
[42]

V. G. Matsos, C. H. Valahu, X. C. Kolesnikow, M. J. Mil- lican, T. Navickas, M. J. Biercuk, and T. R. Tan, Uni- versal quantum gate set for Gottesman-Kitaev–Preskill logical qubits, Nat. Phys.21, 1664 (2025)

2025
[43]

Campagne-Ibarcq, A

P. Campagne-Ibarcq, A. Eickbusch, S. Touzard, E. Zalys- Geller, N. E. Frattini, V. V. Sivak, P. Reinhold, S. Puri, S. Shankar, R. J. Schoelkopf, L. Frunzio, M. Mirrahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Quantum error correction of a qubit encoded in grid states of an oscillator, Nature (London) 584, 368 (2020)

2020
[44]

Eickbusch, V

A. Eickbusch, V. Sivak, A. Z. Ding, S. S. Elder, S. R. Jha, J. Venkatraman, B. Royer, S. M. Girvin, Robert J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret, Fast universal control of an oscillator with weak dispersive coupling to a qubit, Nat. Phys.18, 1464 (2022)

2022
[45]

Kudra, M

M. Kudra, M. Kervinen, I. Strandberg, S. Ahmed, M. Scigliuzzo, A. Osman, D. P. Lozano, M. O. Thol´ en, R. Borgani, D. B. Haviland, G. Ferrini, J. Bylander, A. F. Kockum, F. Quijandr´ ıa, P. Delsing, and S. Gasparinetti, Robust preparation of wigner-negative states with opti- mized SNAP-displacement sequences, PRX Quantum3, 030301 (2022)

2022
[46]

V. V. Sivak, A. Eickbusch, B. Royer, S. Singh, I. Tsiout- sios, S. Ganjam, A. Miano, B. L. Brock, A. Z. Ding, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. De- voret, Real-time quantum error correction beyond break- even, Nature (London)616, 50 (2023)

2023
[47]

Lachance-Quirion, M.-A

D. Lachance-Quirion, M.-A. Lemonde, J. O. Simoneau, L. St-Jean, P. Lemieux, S. Turcotte, W. Wright, A. Lacroix, J. Fr´ echette-Viens, R. Shillito, F. Hopfmueller, M. Tremblay, N. E. Frattini, J. C. Lemyre, and P. St-Jean, Autonomous quantum error correction of Gottesman-Kitaev-Preskill states, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 150607 (2024)

2024
[48]

Konno, W

S. Konno, W. Asavanant, F. Hanamura, H. Nagayoshi, K. Fukui, A. Sakaguchi, R. Ide, F. China, M. Yabuno, S. Miki, H. Terai, K. Takase, M. Endo, P. Marek, R. Filip, P. van Loock, and A. Furusawa, Logical states for fault- tolerant quantum computation with propagating light, Science383, 289 (2024)

2024
[49]

Lachance-Quirion, Y

D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Tabuchi, A. Gloppe, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Hybrid quantum systems based on magnonics, Appl. Phys. Express12, 070101 (2019)

2019
[50]

Y. Li, W. Zhang, V. Tyberkevych, W. Kwok, A. Hoff- mann, and V. Novosad, Hybrid magnonics: Physics, cir- cuits and applications for coherent information process- ing, J. Appl. Phys.128, 130902 (2020)

2020
[51]

H. Yuan, Y. Cao, A. Kamra, R. A. Duine, and P. Yan, Quantum magnonics: When magnon spintronics meets quantum information science, Phys. Rep.965, 1 (2022)

2022
[52]

B. Z. Rameshti, S. V. Kusminskiy, J. A. Haigh, K. Usami, D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Nakamura, C.-M. Hu, H. X. Tang, G. E. Bauer, and Y. M. Blanter, Cavity magnonics, Phys. Rep.979, 1 (2022)

2022
[53]

A. V. Chumaket al., Advances in magnetics roadmap on spin-wave computing, IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 58, 0800172 (2022)

2022
[54]

Flower, J

G. Flower, J. Bourhill, M. Goryachev, and M. E. To- bar, Broadening frequency range of a ferromagnetic ax- ion haloscope with strongly coupled cavity-magnon po- laritons, Physics of the Dark Universe25, 100306 (2019)

2019
[55]

Crescini, D

N. Crescini, D. Alesini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, D. 7 D’Agostino, D. Di Gioacchino, P. Falferi, U. Gam- bardella, C. Gatti, G. Iannone, C. Ligi, A. Lombardi, A. Ortolan, R. Pengo, G. Ruoso, and L. Taffarello, Axion search with a quantum-limited ferromagnetic haloscope, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 171801 (2020)

2020
[56]

Crescini, C

N. Crescini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, A. Ortolan, and G. Ruoso, Cavity magnon polariton based precision magne- tometry, Appl. Phys. Lett.117, 144001 (2020)

2020
[57]

Fl¨ uhmann and J

C. Fl¨ uhmann and J. P. Home, Direct characteristic- function tomography of quantum states of the trapped- ion motional oscillator, Phys. Phys. Lett.125, 043602 (2020)

2020
[58]

[1, 3, 59–64, 68, 70–72, 76]

See Supplementary Material for additional proofs, which includes Refs. [1, 3, 59–64, 68, 70–72, 76]
[59]

Hwang, R

M.-J. Hwang, R. Puebla, and M. B. Plenio, Quantum phase transition and universal dynamics in the Rabi model, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 180404 (2015)

2015
[60]

X. Chen, Z. Wu, M.Jiang, X.-Y. L¨ u, X. Peng, and J. Du, Experimental quantum simulation of superradiant phase transition beyond no-go theorem via antisqueezing, Nat. Commun.12, 6281 (2021)

2021
[61]

Fr¨ ohlich, Theory of the Superconducting State

H. Fr¨ ohlich, Theory of the Superconducting State. I. The Ground State at the Absolute Zero of Temperature, Phys. Rev.79, 845 (1950)

1950
[62]

Nakajima, Perturbation theory in statistical mechan- ics, Adv

S. Nakajima, Perturbation theory in statistical mechan- ics, Adv. Phys.4, 363 (1955)

1955
[63]

Tabuchi, S

Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Ya- mazaki, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Coherent coupling between a ferromagnetic magnon and a superconducting qubit, Science349, 405 (2015)

2015
[64]

Lachance-Quirion, Y

D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, and Y. Nakamura, Resolving quanta of collective spin excitations in a millimeter-sized ferromagnet, Sci. Adv.3, e1603150 (2017)

2017
[65]

Lachance-Quirion, S

D. Lachance-Quirion, S. P. Wolski, Y. Tabuchi, S. Kono, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Entanglement-based single- shot detection of a single magnon with a superconducting qubit, Science367, 425 (2020)

2020
[66]

Xu, X.-K

D. Xu, X.-K. Gu, H.-K. Li, Y.-C. Weng, Y.-P. Wang, J. Li, H. Wang, S.-Y. Zhu, and J. You, Quantum control of a single magnon in a macroscopic spin system, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 193603 (2023)

2023
[67]

Y.-C. Weng, D. Xu, Z. Chen, L.-Z. Tan, X.-K. Gu, J. Li, H.-F. Yu, S.-Y. Zhu, X. Hu, F. Nori, and J. Q. You, Magnon squeezing in the quantum regime, Nat. Com- mun.17, 2679 (2026)

2026
[68]

Kittel, Interaction of spin waves and ultrasonic waves in ferromagnetic crystals, Phys

C. Kittel, Interaction of spin waves and ultrasonic waves in ferromagnetic crystals, Phys. Rev.110, 836 (1958)

1958
[69]

Kamra and W

A. Kamra and W. Belzig, Super-Poissonian shot noise of squeezed-magnon mediated spin transport, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 146601 (2016)

2016
[70]

J. A. Osborn, Demagnetizing factors of the general ellip- soid, Phys. Rev.67, 351 (1945)

1945
[71]

D. D. Stancil and A. Prabhakar, Spin Waves: Theory and Applications (Springer, New York, 2009)

2009
[72]

Holstein and H

T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, Phys. Rev.58, 1098 (1940)

1940
[73]

Li, S.-Y

J. Li, S.-Y. Zhu, and G. S. Agarwal, Squeezed states of magnons and phonons in cavity magnomechanics, Phys. Rev. A99, 021801(R) (2019)

2019
[74]

Q. Guo, J. Cheng, H. Tan, and J. Li, Magnon squeezing by two-tone driving of a qubit in cavity-magnon-qubit systems, Phys. Rev. A108, 063703 (2023)

2023
[75]

G. Liu, G. Li, R.-C. Yang, W. Xiong, and J. Li, Magnon squeezing near a quantum critical point in a cavity- magnon-qubit system, Phys. Rev. A113, 033707 (2026)

2026
[76]

N. N. Bogoliubov, On a new method in the theory of superconductivity, Nuovo Cim7, 794 (1958)

1958
[77]

Shukla, S

M. Shukla, S. Nimmrichter, and B. C. Sanders, Squeezed comb states, Phys. Rev. A.103, 012408 (2021)

2021
[78]

W. Ren, W. Li, S. Xu, K. Wang, W. Jiang, F. Jin, X. Zhu, J. Chen, Z. Song, P. Zhang, H. Dong, X. Zhang, J. Deng, Y. Gao, C. Zhang, Y. Wu, B. Zhang, Q. Guo, H. Li, Z. Wang, J. Biamonte, C. Song, D.-L. Deng, and H. Wang, Experimental quantum adversarial learning with programmable superconducting qubits, Nat. Com- put. Sci.,2, 711 (2022)

2022
[79]

R. O. Serha, K. H. McAllister, F. Majcen, S. Knauer, T. Reimann, C. Dubs, G. A. Melkov, A. A. Serga, V. S. Ty- berkevych, A. V. Chumak, and D. A. Bozhko, Ultra-long- living magnons in the quantum limit, arXiv:2505.22773

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv
[80]

Z.-X. Lu, X. Zuo, Z.-Y. Fan, and J. Li, Optomagnonic continuous-variable quantum teleportation enhanced by non-Gaussian distillation, Phys. Rev. Res7, 043148 (2025)

2025

Showing first 80 references.