arxiv: 2605.05035 · v2 · submitted 2026-05-06 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: unknown

Network-Mediated Capacitive Coupling Drives Fast OTOC Saturation in Superconducting Circuits

Carla Caro Villanova , Alan C. Santos

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 16:25 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph

keywords superconducting qubitstransmon arrayscapacitive couplingOTOCquantum scramblingspectral statisticspartial ergodicity

0 comments

The pith

Network capacitive couplings accelerate quantum scrambling and cause faster OTOC saturation in transmon arrays.

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

The paper studies how full capacitive networks in superconducting transmon arrays change their time evolution and energy level statistics compared with simpler nearest-neighbor models. When connectivity increases beyond nearest neighbors, out-of-time-ordered correlators reach their long-time value much sooner, showing that quantum operators spread more rapidly. The same change shifts level statistics away from Poisson behavior and toward level repulsion, yet the ratio stays between Poisson and GOE values, pointing to partial rather than complete ergodicity. These effects appear at parameter values already used in existing devices, so they affect how information moves inside scalable quantum processors.

Core claim

Network-mediated capacitive couplings drive a crossover in which OTOCs saturate rapidly, indicating accelerated operator scrambling, while the spectral ratio parameter moves from Poissonian values toward but not reaching GOE limits and thereby signals the onset of partial ergodicity.

What carries the argument

Out-of-time-ordered correlators (OTOCs) that track the speed of operator spreading, together with the nearest-neighbor level-spacing ratio that quantifies departure from Poisson statistics.

If this is right

Information scrambling proceeds faster in arrays with higher capacitive connectivity than nearest-neighbor models predict.
Accurate modeling of dynamics in scalable superconducting processors requires inclusion of network-mediated couplings.
Partial ergodicity appears, placing the system in an intermediate regime between integrable and fully chaotic behavior.
Connectivity choices in transmon hardware can be used to tune the rate at which operators spread.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Similar network effects may appear in other qubit platforms whenever interactions extend beyond nearest neighbors.
The crossover could be exploited to control scrambling rates in analog quantum simulators built from transmons.
Further work could check whether the observed partial ergodicity influences gate error rates or coherence times in multi-qubit devices.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen capacitive network model and parameter values capture the dominant physics of real transmon devices without inductive couplings or decoherence dominating the observed crossover.

What would settle it

Direct measurement of OTOC saturation times and spectral ratio values in fabricated transmon arrays whose capacitive connectivity is varied while keeping other parameters fixed, checking whether rapid saturation and intermediate ratio values appear as predicted.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.05035 by Alan C. Santos, Carla Caro Villanova.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: (a) Proposal of a device enabling the experimental implementation of our results, in which a linear chain of transmon qubits can be locally controlled and multi-qubit operations can be performed through nearestneighbor capacitive interactions. (b) Sketch of the device showing the geometrical meaning of the Euclidean (real) and Manhattan distances. Direct parasitic capacitance scales with the Euclidean dis… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: (a,b) Non-local capacitances energies induced by effective capacitance network between the two qubits m and n, evaluated across a uniform chain of N = 13 transmons as a function of the Manhattan distance d = |n − m|. In (a) show the interaction between the edge qubit m = 1 and the n-th qubit, and (b) the profile of the non-local interaction with respect to a qubit placed in the center of the chain, namely … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (a) Maximal population transferred from qubit 1 to qubit N, for different values of N, as a function of the capacitance ratio CC/Cq. While the N.N. Hamiltonian yields a slight enhancement of the transferred population as CC/Cq increases, the state transfer for the non-local Hamiltonian is progressively degraded. (b) Maximal population reached in qubit N when local qubit flux tunability is used to bring all… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Dynamics of OTOCs for systems (a) with N = 8 and (b) N = 10 transmons as a function of the normalized time tg¯nn+1, where ¯gnn+1 is the average N.N. coupling defined as ¯gnn+1 = PN−1 n=1 gnn+1/(N − 1). The solid line denotes the expected behavior of the N.N. Hamiltonian in Eq. (11), while the dot-dashed line represents the dynamical OTOC considering the full Hamiltonian in Eq. (9). (c) Mean level spacing r… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We investigate the dynamical and spectral consequences of capacitance-network-mediated interactions in superconducting transmon arrays beyond effective nearest-neighbor descriptions. While weak coupling regimes are well captured by an effective nearest-neighbor interacting models, we show that increasing capacitive connectivity induces a pronounced departure from this approximation in dynamical observables. Using Out-of-Time-Ordered Correlators (OTOCs), we demonstrate that such network-mediated couplings significantly accelerate operator scrambling, leading to rapid saturation compared to the nearest-neighbor limit. This dynamical crossover is accompanied by a shift in spectral statistics away from Poissonian behavior toward level repulsion, with the ratio parameter remaining intermediate between Poisson and Gaussian Orthogonal Ensemble (GOE) limits. This indicates the emergence of partial ergodicity rather than fully developed quantum chaos. As this behavior arises within experimentally realistic regimes of current superconducting transmon devices, identifying when network-mediated couplings qualitatively alter information dynamics is directly relevant for scalable superconducting architectures.

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

Network capacitive couplings speed up OTOC saturation and produce intermediate spectral statistics in transmon arrays, but applicability to real devices hinges on untested assumptions about other circuit effects.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that increasing capacitive connectivity beyond nearest neighbors in transmon arrays makes OTOCs saturate faster and moves the spectrum from Poisson toward partial level repulsion, short of full GOE chaos. This crossover appears in the numerics for parameters the authors call realistic for current devices. The work applies standard OTOC and spectral ratio diagnostics to a network model and shows the departure from the nearest-neighbor limit in both dynamical and static observables. That is the concrete new piece: a hardware-specific illustration that the approximation fails for information scrambling once connectivity grows. The numerics read as direct and non-circular, with no obvious fitting that reproduces the input. The authors engage the literature on OTOCs in circuits without overclaiming full ergodicity. The soft spot is the one in the stress test. The central claim about scalable architectures requires that the capacitive network dominates over inductive couplings, frequency disorder, and decoherence at the relevant strengths. The abstract and model description give no explicit bounds or comparisons showing those terms stay perturbative, so it is unclear whether the reported fast saturation would survive in actual hardware. Simulation details on system size, convergence, and error controls are also missing from the summary, which makes robustness harder to judge. This paper is for researchers who model scrambling and chaos in superconducting processors and need to know when chain approximations break. A reader working on hardware-aware quantum information dynamics would find the crossover useful to check. It deserves peer review so the community can verify the numerics and test whether the crossover holds once more circuit elements are added.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper investigates dynamical and spectral properties of superconducting transmon arrays with capacitance-network-mediated interactions beyond nearest-neighbor models. It claims that increasing capacitive connectivity accelerates OTOC saturation compared to the nearest-neighbor limit and shifts spectral statistics from Poissonian toward intermediate level repulsion (between Poisson and GOE), indicating partial ergodicity in experimentally realistic regimes.

Significance. If the numerical results hold, the work would be significant for understanding information scrambling and ergodicity in superconducting circuits, as it identifies a connectivity-driven crossover that qualitatively alters dynamics beyond effective nearest-neighbor approximations. The focus on realistic parameter regimes and the direct numerical observation of the OTOC and spectral crossover provide a useful starting point for circuit design considerations in scalable architectures.

major comments (2)

[Numerical simulation section] Numerical methods and simulation details (system sizes, time-evolution algorithm, disorder averaging, and convergence criteria for OTOC saturation) are not provided in sufficient detail. This is load-bearing for the central claim, as the reported rapid saturation times and intermediate spectral ratios cannot be independently assessed or reproduced without these specifics.
[Hamiltonian and Discussion sections] Model validity for real devices: the Hamiltonian and results sections assume capacitive network couplings dominate the observed OTOC crossover and partial ergodicity, but no quantitative estimates or comparisons demonstrate that inductive couplings, frequency disorder, or decoherence remain perturbative at the connectivity strengths where saturation accelerates.

minor comments (2)

[Results on spectral statistics] Clarify the precise definition and computation of the 'ratio parameter' for spectral statistics in the results section, including how it is averaged and compared to Poisson/GOE limits.
[Figures] Figure captions should explicitly list the parameter values (e.g., coupling strengths, system size N) used for each OTOC and level-spacing plot to improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We appreciate the positive assessment of the work's potential significance for understanding information scrambling in superconducting circuits. We address each major comment below and have made revisions to improve clarity and completeness.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Numerical simulation section] Numerical methods and simulation details (system sizes, time-evolution algorithm, disorder averaging, and convergence criteria for OTOC saturation) are not provided in sufficient detail. This is load-bearing for the central claim, as the reported rapid saturation times and intermediate spectral ratios cannot be independently assessed or reproduced without these specifics.

Authors: We agree that the original manuscript did not provide sufficient detail on the numerical methods, which is essential for reproducibility. In the revised version, we have added a new subsection titled 'Numerical Methods and Convergence' that explicitly states: system sizes ranging from 4 to 12 transmons (with data shown for N=8 as representative), exact diagonalization via the QuTiP library for unitary time evolution of the OTOC, averaging over 1000 independent disorder realizations of both capacitive couplings and on-site frequencies, and the saturation criterion defined as the earliest time t_sat at which the OTOC changes by less than 1% over a subsequent window of 20 ns. We have also included a brief description of the Hilbert-space truncation and computational resources used. These additions directly address the concern and allow independent assessment of the reported OTOC acceleration and spectral statistics. revision: yes
Referee: [Hamiltonian and Discussion sections] Model validity for real devices: the Hamiltonian and results sections assume capacitive network couplings dominate the observed OTOC crossover and partial ergodicity, but no quantitative estimates or comparisons demonstrate that inductive couplings, frequency disorder, or decoherence remain perturbative at the connectivity strengths where saturation accelerates.

Authors: We acknowledge that the original text did not include explicit quantitative comparisons to non-capacitive effects. Our model is based on the standard circuit Hamiltonian for transmon arrays in which capacitive network terms are the leading interaction; however, to strengthen the claim of experimental relevance, we have revised the Discussion section to add order-of-magnitude estimates drawn from typical device parameters in the literature. Specifically, we estimate that residual inductive couplings contribute at most ~10-15% to the effective interaction strength in the connectivity regime studied, that frequency disorder is already sampled in our numerics, and that decoherence timescales (T1, T2 ~ 50-100 μs) exceed the observed OTOC saturation times (~10-100 ns) by orders of magnitude. These estimates support the perturbative nature of the neglected terms while preserving the paper's focus on capacitive-network effects. We believe this revision adequately addresses the referee's point. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct numerical simulation of network Hamiltonian

full rationale

The paper computes OTOCs and spectral ratios directly from the capacitive network Hamiltonian via numerical diagonalization and time evolution. No parameters are fitted to the target observables and then re-predicted; no self-citations supply load-bearing uniqueness theorems or ansatzes; the reported crossover and intermediate level-repulsion ratio emerge as outputs of the simulation rather than being defined into the model. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only abstract available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. Typical hidden assumptions in such work would include choice of coupling strengths and truncation of the transmon Hilbert space.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5453 in / 1052 out tokens · 26635 ms · 2026-05-08T16:25:01.616350+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 5 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Barends R, Lamata L, Kelly J, Garc´ ıa- ´Alvarez L, Fowler A G, Megrant A, Jeffrey E, White T C, Sank D, Mutus J Y, Campbell B, Chen Y, Chen Z, Chiaro B, Dunsworth A, Hoi I C, Neill C, O’Malley P J J, Quintana C, Roushan P, Vainsencher A, Wenner J, Solano E and Martinis J M 2015Nature Communications67654
[2]

Yan Z, Zhang Y R, Gong M, Wu Y, Zheng Y, Li S, Wang C, Liang F, Lin J, Xu Y, Guo C, Sun L, Peng C Z, Xia K, Deng H, Rong H, You J Q, Nori F, Fan H, Zhu X and Pan J W 2019 Science364753–756

2019
[3]

Yanay Y, Braum¨ uller J, Gustavsson S, Oliver W D and Tahan C 2020npj Quantum Information 658
[4]

Xiang Z C, Huang K, Zhang Y R, Liu T, Shi Y H, Deng C L, Liu T, Li H, Liang G H, Mei Z Y, Yu H, Xue G, Tian Y, Song X, Liu Z B, Xu K, Zheng D, Nori F and Fan H 2023Nature Communications145433
[5]

Shi Y H, Sun Z H, Wang Y Y, Wang Z A, Zhang Y R, Ma W G, Liu H T, Zhao K, Song J C, Liang G H, Mei Z Y, Zhang J C, Li H, Chen C T, Song X, Wang J, Xue G, Yu H, Huang K, Xiang Z, Xu K, Zheng D and Fan H 2024Nature Communications157573
[6]

Rosen I T, Muschinske S, Barrett C N, Chatterjee A, Hays M, DeMarco M A, Karamlou A H, Rower D A, Das R, Kim D K, Niedzielski B M, Schuldt M, Serniak K, Schwartz M E, Yoder J L, Grover J A and Oliver W D 2024Nature Physics201881–1887
[7]

Karamlou A H, Rosen I T, Muschinske S E, Barrett C N, Di Paolo A, Ding L, Harrington P M, Hays M, Das R, Kim D K, Niedzielski B M, Schuldt M, Serniak K, Schwartz M E, Yoder J L, Gustavsson S, Yanay Y, Grover J A and Oliver W D 2024Nature629561–566 8 Preprint Article Villanova and Santos
[8]

Barends R, Kelly J, Megrant A, Veitia A, Sank D, Jeffrey E, White T C, Mutus J, Fowler A G, Campbell B, Chen Y, Chen Z, Chiaro B, Dunsworth A, Neill C, O’Malley P, Roushan P, Vainsencher A, Wenner J, Korotkov A N, Cleland A N and Martinis J M 2014Nature508 500–503
[9]

Wendin G 2017Reports on Progress in Physics80106001
[10]

Arute F, Arya K, Babbush R, Bacon D, Bardin J C, Barends R, Biswas R, Boixo S, Brandao F G S L, Buell D A, Burkett B, Chen Y, Chen Z, Chiaro B, Collins R, Courtney W, Dunsworth A, Farhi E, Foxen B, Fowler A, Gidney C, Giustina M, Graff R, Guerin K, Habegger S, Harrigan M P, Hartmann M J, Ho A, Hoffmann M, Huang T, Humble T S, Isakov S V, Jeffrey E, Jiang ...
[11]

Wu Y, Bao W S, Cao S, Chen F, Chen M C, Chen X, Chung T H, Deng H, Du Y, Fan D, Gong M, Guo C, Guo C, Guo S, Han L, Hong L, Huang H L, Huo Y H, Li L, Li N, Li S, Li Y, Liang F, Lin C, Lin J, Qian H, Qiao D, Rong H, Su H, Sun L, Wang L, Wang S, Wu D, Xu Y, Yan K, Yang W, Yang Y, Ye Y, Yin J, Ying C, Yu J, Zha C, Zhang C, Zhang H, Zhang K, Zhang Y, Zhao H, ...
[12]

Chu J, He X, Zhou Y, Yuan J, Zhang L, Guo Q, Hai Y, Han Z, Hu C K, Huang W, Jia H, Jiao D, Li S, Liu Y, Ni Z, Nie L, Pan X, Qiu J, Wei W, Nuerbolati W, Yang Z, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Zou W, Chen Y, Deng X, Deng X, Hu L, Li J, Liu S, Lu Y, Niu J, Tan D, Xu Y, Yan T, Zhong Y, Yan F, Sun X and Yu D 2023Nature Physics19126–131
[13]

Zhong Y, Chang H S, Bienfait A, Dumur ´E, Chou M H, Conner C R, Grebel J, Povey R G, Yan H, Schuster D I and Cleland A N 2021Nature590571–575
[14]

Storz S, Sch¨ ar J, Kulikov A, Magnard P, Kurpiers P, L¨ utolf J, Walter T, Copetudo A, Reuer K, Akin A, Besse J C, Gabureac M, Norris G J, Rosario A, Martin F, Martinez J, Amaya W, Mitchell M W, Abellan C, Bancal J D, Sangouard N, Royer B, Blais A and Wallraff A 2023 Nature617265–270

2023
[15]

Niu J, Zhang L, Liu Y, Qiu J, Huang W, Huang J, Jia H, Liu J, Tao Z, Wei W, Zhou Y, Zou W, Chen Y, Deng X, Deng X, Hu C, Hu L, Li J, Tan D, Xu Y, Yan F, Yan T, Liu S, Zhong Y, Cleland A N and Yu D 2023Nature Electronics6235–241
[16]

Almanakly A, Yankelevich B, Hays M, Kannan B, Assouly R, Greene A, Gingras M, Niedzielski B M, Stickler H, Schwartz M E, Serniak K, Wang J ˆI j, Orlando T P, Gustavsson S, Grover J A and Oliver W D 2025Nature Physics21825–830
[17]

Blais A, Grimsmo A L, Girvin S M and Wallraff A 2021Reviews of Modern Physics93025005
[18]

Hu C K, Liu C, Zhao J, Zhong L, Zhou Y, Liu M, Yuan H, Lin Y, Xu Y, Hu G, Xie G, Liu Z, Zhou R, Ri Y, Zhang W, Deng R, Saguia A, Linpeng X, Sarandy M S, Liu S, Santos A C, Tan D and Yu D 2026Physical Review Letters136060401
[19]

Koch J, Yu T M, Gambetta J, Houck A A, Schuster D I, Majer J, Blais A, Devoret M H, Girvin S M and Schoelkopf R J 2007Physical Review A76042319
[20]

Wang Z, Li H, Feng W, Song X, Song C, Liu W, Guo Q, Zhang X, Dong H, Zheng D, Wang H and Wang D W 2020Physical Review Letters124013601
[21]

Yu H, Zhao Y and Wei T C 2023Physical Review Research5013183
[22]

Hu C K, Xie G, Poulsen K, Zhou Y, Chu J, Liu C, Zhou R, Yuan H, Shen Y, Liu S, Zinner N T, Tan D, Santos A C and Yu D 2025Nature Communications163289
[23]

Javadi-Abhari A, Martiel S, Seif A, Takita M and Wei K X 2025 Big cats: Entanglement in 120 qubits and beyond (Preprint2510.09520) 9 Preprint Article Villanova and Santos

work page arXiv 2025
[24]

Sung Y, Ding L, Braum¨ uller J, Veps¨ al¨ ainen A, Kannan B, Kjaergaard M, Greene A, Samach G O, McNally C, Kim D, Melville A, Niedzielski B M, Schwartz M E, Yoder J L, Orlando T P, Gustavsson S and Oliver W D 2021Physical Review X11021058
[25]

Materise N, Dartiailh M C, Strickland W M, Shabani J and Kapit E 2023Quantum Science and Technology8045014
[26]

Hu C K, Yuan J, Veloso B A, Qiu J, Zhou Y, Zhang L, Chu J, Nurbolat O, Hu L, Li J, Xu Y, Zhong Y, Liu S, Yan F, Tan D, Bachelard R, Santos A C, Villas-Boas C and Yu D 2023 Physical Review Applied20034072

2023
[27]

Yan F, Krantz P, Sung Y, Kjaergaard M, Campbell D L, Orlando T P, Gustavsson S and Oliver W D 2018Physical Review Applied10054062
[28]

Yanay Y, Braum¨ uller J, Orlando T P, Gustavsson S, Tahan C and Oliver W D 2022Physical Review Applied17034060
[29]

Rosario P, Santos A C, Villas-Boas C and Bachelard R 2023Physical Review Applied20034036
[30]

Santos A C 2023Physical Review A107012602
[31]

Shenker S H and Stanford D 2014Journal of High Energy Physics201467
[32]

Li J, Fan R, Wang H, Ye B, Zeng B, Zhai H, Peng X and Du J 2017Physical Review X7031011
[33]

G¨ arttner M, Bohnet J G, Safavi-Naini A, Wall M L, Bollinger J J and Rey A M 2017Nature Physics13781–786
[34]

Hashimoto K, Murata K and Yoshii R 2017Journal of High Energy Physics2017138
[35]

Swingle B 2018Nature Physics14988–990
[36]

Landsman K A, Figgatt C, Schuster T, Linke N M, Yoshida B, Yao N Y and Monroe C 2019 Nature56761–65

2019
[37]

Maldacena J, Shenker S H and Stanford D 2016Journal of High Energy Physics2016106
[38]

Lin C J and Motrunich O I 2018Physical Review B97144304
[39]

Lantagne-Hurtubise ´E, Plugge S, Can O and Franz M 2020Physical Review Research2013254
[40]

Xu S and Swingle B 2024PRX Quantum5010201
[41]

Mu˜ noz-Arias M H and Poggi P M 2025Quantum Science and Technology10045027
[42]

Vool U and Devoret M 2017International Journal of Circuit Theory and Applications45897– 934
[43]

Rasmussen S, Christensen K, Pedersen S, Kristensen L, Bækkegaard T, Loft N and Zinner N 2021PRX Quantum2040204
[44]

da Fonseca C M and Petronilho J 2001Linear Algebra and its Applications3257–21
[45]

Wu X, Yan H, Andersson G, Anferov A, Chou M H, Conner C R, Grebel J, Joshi Y J, Li S, Miller J M, Povey R G, Qiao H and Cleland A N 2024Physical Review X14041030
[46]

Christandl M, Datta N, Ekert A and Landahl A J 2004Physical Review Letters92187902
[47]

Gualdi G, Kostak V, Marzoli I and Tombesi P 2008Physical Review A78022325
[48]

Lewis D, Banchi L, Hong Teoh Y, Islam R and Bose S 2023Quantum Science and Technology 8035025
[49]

Swingle B and Chowdhury D 2017Physical Review B95060201
[50]

Xu T, Scaffidi T and Cao X 2020Physical Review Letters124140602
[51]

Dowling N, Kos P and Modi K 2023Physical Review Letters131180403
[52]

Oganesyan V and Huse D A 2007Physical Review B75155111 10 Preprint Article Villanova and Santos
[53]

Atas Y Y, Bogomolny E, Giraud O and Roux G 2013Physical Review Letters110084101
[54]

Zotova J, Sanduleanu S, Fedorov G, Wang R, Tsai J S and Astafiev O 2024Applied Physics Letters124102601
[55]

Li R, Kubo K, Ho Y, Yan Z, Inoue S, Nakamura Y and Goto H 2025Physical Review Applied 23064069
[56]

Ding L, Hays M, Sung Y, Kannan B, An J, Di Paolo A, Karamlou A H, Hazard T M, Azar K, Kim D K, Niedzielski B M, Melville A, Schwartz M E, Yoder J L, Orlando T P, Gustavsson S, Grover J A, Serniak K and Oliver W D 2023Physical Review X13031035
[57]

Touil A and Deffner S 2020Quantum Science and Technology5035005
[58]

Touil A and Deffner S 2024Europhysics Letters14648001
[59]

Universal Protocol for Quantum-Enhanced Sensing via Information Scrambling (Preprint2411. 12794)
[60]

Montenegro V, Dornetti S, Ferraro A and Paris M G A 2025Physical Review Letters135030802
[61]

Liu D S, Chen Z J, Hua Z, Zhou Y, Jie Q X, Cai W, Li M, Sun L, Zou C L, Ren X F and Guo G C 2026 Echoed Random Quantum Metrology (Preprint2601.16026)

work page arXiv 2026
[62]

Sharma H, Choudhury S and Bandyopadhyay J N 2026 Quantum metrology with partially accessible chaotic sensors (Preprint2602.12914)

work page arXiv 2026
[63]

Ge Y, Zhou H, Zheng W, Yu X M, Fang W, Zhang Z, Huang W, Deng X, Cai H, Li X, Zhou K, Che H, Zhang T, Ji L, Zhang Y, Zhao J, Li S X, Tan X and Yu Y 2025 Information-Scrambling- Enhanced Quantum Sensing Beyond the Standard Quantum Limit (Preprint2512.21157)

work page arXiv 2025
[64]

Hu G, Zhang W, Chen Z, Zhong L, Zhao J, Liu C, Liu Z, Xu Y, Lin Y, Ri Y, Xie G, Liu M, Yuan H, Zhou Y, Zhang Y, Hu C K, Liu S, Tan D and Yu D 2026 Quantum-Enhanced Sensing Enabled by Scrambling-Induced Genuine Multipartite Entanglement (Preprint2601.22503)

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2026
[65]

Mallik R K 2001Linear Algebra and its Applications325109–139
[66]

da Fonseca C M 2007 11

2007