pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.07797 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · 🪐 quant-ph

Quantum jump unravelings for non-Markovian open system dynamics: a review

Federico Settimo , Jyrki Piilo This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 02:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum jumpsunravelingsnon-Markovian dynamicsopen quantum systemsstochastic processesnumerical simulationdivisibilityquantum trajectories
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quantum jump unravelings can be extended to non-Markovian open quantum systems with trade-offs in efficiency and requirements.

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

This review surveys several quantum jump unraveling techniques that represent non-Markovian open quantum system dynamics as stochastic pure-state trajectories. These generalize the Markovian approaches to handle memory effects that produce temporarily negative decay rates. A reader would care because the methods support numerical simulation of realistic quantum systems in experiments and clarify how such dynamics relate to monitoring and measurements. The paper compares the techniques specifically on numerical efficiency, divisibility requirements, the need for Hilbert space extensions, and their physical measurement interpretations.

Core claim

In this work, we provide an overview of widely used quantum jump unraveling techniques for non-Markovian systems and also discuss them in terms of their numerical efficiency, divisibility requirements, Hilbert space extension, and measurement interpretation.

What carries the argument

Quantum jump unravelings, which are stochastic processes generating ensembles of pure-state trajectories equivalent to the open-system dynamics, now generalized to non-Markovian cases that accommodate negative decay rates.

If this is right

  • Simulations of non-Markovian dynamics become feasible using pure-state trajectories instead of full density matrices for suitable systems.
  • The appropriate unraveling depends on the divisibility properties of the underlying dynamics.
  • Some techniques require auxiliary Hilbert space dimensions to incorporate memory effects.
  • The methods furnish distinct interpretations in terms of continuous measurements or quantum trajectories.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The comparisons may help experimentalists choose an unraveling suited to a particular non-Markovian bath or device.
  • Hybrid methods could be constructed that combine the numerical speed of one approach with the interpretive clarity of another.
  • Benchmark tests on standard models such as the spin-boson system could quantify practical performance differences beyond the review.

Load-bearing premise

The selected techniques are the most widely used ones and the stated comparisons of efficiency, divisibility, and other properties remain accurate and complete.

What would settle it

Identification of a major quantum jump method for non-Markovian dynamics omitted from the review, or a direct numerical comparison demonstrating efficiency rankings different from those presented.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.07797 by Federico Settimo, Jyrki Piilo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Figure from [8]. Panel (a): excited state population for a typical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Figure from [80], showing example realization undergoing a reverse [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Eternally non-Markovian dynamics of Eq. (88). For each method, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Non P divisible phase covariant dynamics of Eq. (89) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Stochastic unravelings provide a useful way to represent open quantum system dynamics in terms of pure state realizations, and have been widely studied both from a fundamental and from a computational point of view. They were initially formulated for Markovian dynamics described by the Gorini-Kossakowski-Sudarshan-Lindblad master equation. However, due to recent technological and experimental development, most physical relevant dynamics present temporal correlations beyond the Markov approximation. Such correlations cause decay rates to turn temporarily negative, thus requiring the generalization of stochastic unravelings from Markovian to non-Markovian scenarios. Indeed, many unraveling techniques have been introduced in this regime, and a comprehensive review of the different jump methods is currently missing. In this work, we provide an overview of widely used quantum jump unraveling techniques for non-Markovian systems and also discuss them in terms of their numerical efficiency, divisibility requirements, Hilbert space extension, and measurement interpretation.

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

0 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a review surveying quantum jump unraveling techniques for non-Markovian open quantum system dynamics. It generalizes stochastic unravelings originally developed for the Markovian Gorini-Kossakowski-Sudarshan-Lindblad master equation to the non-Markovian regime, where temporal correlations can produce temporarily negative decay rates, and compares the methods with respect to numerical efficiency, divisibility requirements, Hilbert-space extension, and measurement interpretation.

Significance. If the selected techniques are representative and the comparative statements are factually accurate, the review would provide a useful consolidated reference for researchers simulating or interpreting non-Markovian open systems. Its value lies in organizing existing literature around practical criteria (efficiency, divisibility, extension, and interpretation) without introducing new parameters or derivations, which is appropriate for a review format.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript and for recommending acceptance. We are pleased that the review is viewed as a useful consolidated reference for researchers working on non-Markovian open quantum systems.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Review paper: no new derivations or self-referential claims

full rationale

This is an explicit review article whose central claim is to compile and compare existing quantum-jump unraveling methods from the literature. No new master equations, unraveling operators, numerical results, or theorems are derived within the manuscript. The load-bearing statements are therefore limited to (i) selection of representative techniques and (ii) factual accuracy of efficiency/divisibility comparisons; neither reduces to a definition in terms of the paper's own outputs nor to a self-citation chain that must be taken on faith. External citations to prior work are independent and do not create internal circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review paper the work introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all content rests on previously published results in the open-quantum-systems literature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5457 in / 979 out tokens · 55411 ms · 2026-05-11T02:39:01.879772+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

156 extracted references · 156 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Journal of Math- ematical Physics17, 821 (1976)

    work page 1976

  2. [2]

    Lindblad, Communications in Mathematical Physics48, 119 (1976)

    G. Lindblad, Communications in Mathematical Physics48, 119 (1976)

    work page 1976

  3. [3]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Sys- tems(Oxford University PressOxford, Jan. 2007)

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    Rivas and S

    ´A. Rivas and S. F. Huelga,Open Quantum Systems, SpringerBriefs in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012)

    work page 2012

  5. [5]

    Vacchini,Open Quantum Systems, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2024)

    B. Vacchini,Open Quantum Systems, Graduate Texts in Physics (Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Gisin and I

    N. Gisin and I. C. Percival, Journal of Physics A: General Physics25, 5677 (1992). [Author and title]32

    work page 1992

  7. [7]

    Percival,Quantum State Diffusion(Cambridge University Press, 1998), p

    I. Percival,Quantum State Diffusion(Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 198

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    Dalibard, Y

    J. Dalibard, Y. Castin, and K. Mølmer, Physical Review Letters68, 580 (1992)

    work page 1992

  9. [9]

    R. Dum, A. S. Parkins, P. Zoller, and C. W. Gardiner, Physical Review A46, 4382 (1992)

    work page 1992

  10. [10]

    Mølmer, Y

    K. Mølmer, Y. Castin, and J. Dalibard, Journal of the Optical Society of America B10, 524 (1993)

    work page 1993

  11. [11]

    M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, Reviews of Modern Physics70, 101 (1998)

    work page 1998

  12. [12]

    Barchielli and V

    A. Barchielli and V. P. Belavkin, Journal of Physics A: General Physics 24, 1495 (1991)

    work page 1991

  13. [13]

    H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn,Quantum Measurement and Con- trol(Cambridge University Press, Nov. 2009)

    work page 2009

  14. [14]

    Gardiner and P

    C. Gardiner and P. Zoller,Quantum Noise: A Handbook of Markovian and Non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics(Springer Science & Business Media, 2004)

    work page 2004

  15. [15]

    Barchielli and M

    A. Barchielli and M. Gregoratti,Quantum Trajectories and Measure- ments in Continuous Time, Vol. 782, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009)

    work page 2009

  16. [16]

    Albarelli and M

    F. Albarelli and M. G. Genoni, Physics Letters, Section A: General, Atomic and Solid State Physics494, 129260 (2024)

    work page 2024

  17. [17]

    H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn, Physical Review Letters70, 548 (1993)

    work page 1993

  18. [18]

    H. M. Wiseman, Physical Review A49, 2133 (1994)

    work page 1994

  19. [19]

    Zhang, Y

    J. Zhang, Y. xi Liu, R. B. Wu, K. Jacobs, and F. Nori, Physics Reports 679, 1 (2017)

    work page 2017

  20. [20]

    Borah, B

    S. Borah, B. Sarma, M. Kewming, F. Quijandr´ ıa, G. J. Milburn, and J. Twamley, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 033207 (2022)

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    W. P. Livingston, M. S. Blok, E. Flurin, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, and I. Siddiqi, Nature Communications13, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    Gammelmark and K

    S. Gammelmark and K. Mølmer, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molec- ular, and Optical Physics87, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  23. [23]

    Gammelmark and K

    S. Gammelmark and K. Mølmer, Physical Review Letters112, 1 (2014)

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    A. H. Kiilerich and K. Mølmer, Physical Review A94, 1 (2016). [Author and title]33

    work page 2016

  25. [25]

    Guevara and H

    I. Guevara and H. M. Wiseman, Physical Review A102, 052217 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    H. Bao, J. Duan, S. Jin, X. Lu, P. Li, W. Qu, M. Wang, I. Novikova, E. E. Mikhailov, K. F. Zhao, K. Mølmer, H. Shen, and Y. Xiao, Nature 581, 159 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Radaelli, J

    M. Radaelli, J. A. Smiga, G. T. Landi, and F. C. Binder, Quantum 10, 1993 (2026)

    work page 1993

  28. [28]

    Gambetta, A

    J. Gambetta, A. Blais, M. Boissonneault, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, and S. M. Girvin, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics77, 1 (2008)

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    Rist` e, M

    D. Rist` e, M. Dukalski, C. A. Watson, G. De Lange, M. J. Tiggelman, Y. M. Blanter, K. W. Lehnert, R. N. Schouten, and L. Dicarlo, Nature 502, 350 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    N. Roch, M. E. Schwartz, F. Motzoi, C. Macklin, R. Vijay, A. W. Eddins, A. N. Korotkov, K. B. Whaley, M. Sarovar, and I. Siddiqi, Physical Review Letters112, 1 (2014)

    work page 2014

  31. [31]

    Campagne-Ibarcq, P

    P. Campagne-Ibarcq, P. Six, L. Bretheau, A. Sarlette, M. Mirrahimi, P. Rouchon, and B. Huard, Physical Review X6, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  32. [32]

    S. J. Weber, K. W. Murch, M. E. Kimchi-Schwartz, N. Roch, and I. Siddiqi, Comptes Rendus Physique17, 766 (2016)

    work page 2016

  33. [33]

    Ficheux, S

    Q. Ficheux, S. Jezouin, Z. Leghtas, and B. Huard, Nature Communi- cations9, 1926 (2018)

    work page 1926

  34. [34]

    Z. K. Minev, S. O. Mundhada, S. Shankar, P. Reinhold, R. Guti´ errez- J´ auregui, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, H. J. Carmichael, and M. H. Devoret, Nature570, 200 (2019)

    work page 2019

  35. [35]

    J. C. Bergquist, R. G. Hulet, W. M. Itano, and D. J. Wineland, Phys- ical Review Letters57, 1699 (1986)

    work page 1986

  36. [36]

    Viola and R

    L. Viola and R. Onofrio, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics55, R3291 (1997)

    work page 1997

  37. [37]

    Leibfried, R

    D. Leibfried, R. Blatt, C. Monroe, and D. Wineland, Reviews of Mod- ern Physics75, 281 (2003)

    work page 2003

  38. [38]

    Ozawa, J

    A. Ozawa, J. Davila-Rodriguez, T. W. H¨ ansch, and T. Udem, Scientific Reports8, 1 (2018)

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    W. P. Smith, J. E. Reiner, L. A. Orozco, S. Kuhr, and H. M. Wiseman, Physical Review Letters89, 1336011 (2002)

    work page 2002

  40. [40]

    Gleyzes, S

    S. Gleyzes, S. Kuhr, C. Guerlin, J. Bernu, S. Del´ eglise, U. Busk Hoff, M. Brune, J. M. Raimond, and S. Haroche, Nature446, 297 (2007). [Author and title]34

    work page 2007

  41. [41]

    Sayrin, I

    C. Sayrin, I. Dotsenko, X. Zhou, B. Peaudecerf, T. Rybarczyk, S. Gleyzes, P. Rouchon, M. Mirrahimi, H. Amini, M. Brune, J. M. Rai- mond, and S. Haroche, Nature477, 73 (2011)

    work page 2011

  42. [42]

    Rybarczyk, B

    T. Rybarczyk, B. Peaudecerf, M. Penasa, S. Gerlich, B. Julsgaard, K. Mølmer, S. Gleyzes, M. Brune, J. M. Raimond, S. Haroche, and I. Dot- senko, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 91, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  43. [43]

    Basch´ e, S

    T. Basch´ e, S. Kummer, and C. Br¨ auchle, Nature373, 132 (1995)

    work page 1995

  44. [44]

    Breuer, E.-M

    H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and B. Vacchini, Reviews of Mod- ern Physics88, 021002 (2016)

    work page 2016

  45. [45]

    Rivas, S

    ´A. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Reports on Progress in Physics77, 094001 (2014)

    work page 2014

  46. [46]

    Buscemi and N

    F. Buscemi and N. Datta, Physical Review A93, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  47. [47]

    L. Li, M. J. Hall, and H. M. Wiseman, Physics Reports759, 1 (2018)

    work page 2018

  48. [48]

    De Vega and D

    I. De Vega and D. Alonso, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 1 (2017)

    work page 2017

  49. [49]

    Chru´ sci´ nski, Physics Reports992, 1 (2022)

    D. Chru´ sci´ nski, Physics Reports992, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    H. P. Breuer, E. M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Physical Review Letters103, 1 (2009)

    work page 2009

  51. [51]

    Laine, J

    E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and H.-P. Breuer, Physical Review A81, 062115 (2010)

    work page 2010

  52. [52]

    Chru´ sci´ nski, A

    D. Chru´ sci´ nski, A. Kossakowski, and´A. Rivas, Physical Review A83, 052128 (2011)

    work page 2011

  53. [53]

    Wimann, A

    S. Wimann, A. Karlsson, E. M. Laine, J. Piilo, and H. P. Breuer, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics86,10. 1103/PhysRevA.86.062108(2012)

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    Smirne, N

    A. Smirne, N. Megier, and B. Vacchini, Physical Review A106, 012205 (2022)

    work page 2022

  55. [55]

    Settimo, H.-P

    F. Settimo, H.-P. Breuer, and B. Vacchini, Physical Review A106, 042212 (2022)

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    Rivas, S

    ´A. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Physical Review Letters 105, 050403 (2010)

    work page 2010

  57. [57]

    B. H. Liu, L. Li, Y. F. Huang, C. F. Li, G. C. Guo, E. M. Laine, H. P. Breuer, and J. Piilo, Nature Physics7, 931 (2011)

    work page 2011

  58. [58]

    B. H. Liu, D. Y. Cao, Y. F. Huang, C. F. Li, G. C. Guo, E. M. Laine, H. P. Breuer, and J. Piilo, Scientific Reports3, 1 (2013). [Author and title]35

    work page 2013

  59. [59]

    Z. D. Liu, H. Lyyra, Y. N. Sun, B. H. Liu, C. F. Li, G. C. Guo, S. Maniscalco, and J. Piilo, Nature Communications9,10 . 1038 / s41467-018-05817-x(2018)

    work page 2018

  60. [60]

    Cialdi, C

    S. Cialdi, C. Benedetti, D. Tamascelli, S. Olivares, M. G. Paris, and B. Vacchini, Physical Review A100,10.1103/PhysRevA.100.052104 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.100.052104 2019

  61. [61]

    G. A. L. White, C. D. Hill, F. A. Pollock, L. C. L. Hollenberg, and K. Modi, Nature Communications11, 6301 (2020)

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    Goswami, C

    K. Goswami, C. Giarmatzi, C. Monterola, S. Shrapnel, J. Romero, and F. Costa, Physical Review A104, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  63. [63]

    Kossakowski, Bull

    A. Kossakowski, Bull. Acad. Sci. Math20, 1021 (1972)

    work page 1972

  64. [64]

    M. J. Hall, J. D. Cresser, L. Li, and E. Andersson, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics89, 1 (2014)

    work page 2014

  65. [65]

    M. Xu, V. Vadimov, J. T. Stockburger, and J. Ankerhold,Simulating non-markovian dynamics in open quantum systems, Jan. 2026

    work page 2026

  66. [66]

    Di´ osi, N

    L. Di´ osi, N. Gisin, and W. T. Strunz, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics58, 1699 (1998)

    work page 1998

  67. [67]

    Caiaffa, A

    M. Caiaffa, A. Smirne, and A. Bassi, Physical Review A95, 062101 (2017)

    work page 2017

  68. [68]

    Luoma, W

    K. Luoma, W. T. Strunz, and J. Piilo, Physical Review Letters125, 150403 (2020)

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    Alicki and K

    R. Alicki and K. Lendi,Quantum Dynamical Semigroups and Applica- tions, Vol. 717, Lecture Notes in Physics (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007)

    work page 2007

  70. [70]

    Steinbach, B

    J. Steinbach, B. M. Garraway, and P. L. Knight, Physical Review A 51, 3302 (1995)

    work page 1995

  71. [71]

    C. W. Gardiner, A. S. Parkins, and P. Zoller, Physical Review A46, 4363 (1992)

    work page 1992

  72. [72]

    Luoma, K

    K. Luoma, K. H¨ ark¨ onen, S. Maniscalco, K.-A. Suominen, and J. Piilo, Physical Review A86, 022102 (2012)

    work page 2012

  73. [73]

    Radaelli, G

    M. Radaelli, G. T. Landi, and F. C. Binder, Physical Review A110, 062212 (2024)

    work page 2024

  74. [74]

    Wißmann, H.-P

    S. Wißmann, H.-P. Breuer, and B. Vacchini, Physical Review A92, 042108 (2015)

    work page 2015

  75. [75]

    A. A. Budini, Entropy24, 1 (2022). [Author and title]36

    work page 2022

  76. [76]

    B. M. Garraway, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics55, 4636 (1997)

    work page 1997

  77. [77]

    B. M. Garraway, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics55, 2290 (1997)

    work page 1997

  78. [78]

    B. J. Dalton, S. M. Barnett, and B. M. Garraway, Physical Review A. Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics64, 538131 (2001)

    work page 2001

  79. [79]

    Imamoglu, Physical Review A50, 3650 (1994)

    A. Imamoglu, Physical Review A50, 3650 (1994)

    work page 1994

  80. [80]

    Piilo, S

    J. Piilo, S. Maniscalco, K. H¨ ark¨ onen, and K.-A. Suominen, Physical Review Letters100, 180402 (2008)

    work page 2008

Showing first 80 references.