pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.20067 · v1 · pith:6D6PYEWVnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Coherent terahertz magnon-phonon three-wave mixing in a layered antiferromagnet

Liangyue Li , Na Wu , Zhengwang Lin , Zefen Li , Lixin Liu , Emil Vinas Bostr\"om , Yuan Wan , Xinbo Wang
show 4 more authors
Jianlin Luo Fucai Liu Angel Rubio Qi Zhang
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 03:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords magnon-phonon couplingthree-wave mixingterahertz spectroscopyFePS3antiferromagnetic magnonsnonlinear coherent spectroscopyquantum materials
0
0 comments X

The pith

Researchers directly observe coherent three-wave mixing between magnons and phonons in the layered antiferromagnet FePS3.

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

The paper aims to establish that magnons and phonons undergo coherent three-wave mixing in FePS3. Using double-terahertz-pump optical-probe spectroscopy, the authors record sum- and difference-frequency signals in two-dimensional coherent spectra along with second- and third-order magnon responses. A sympathetic reader would care because such mixing shows that magnetic and vibrational excitations can exchange energy and phase information through nonlinear light-matter interaction. The observation supplies concrete evidence that these couplings are accessible and controllable in a real antiferromagnetic insulator. This work therefore supplies a starting point for using the couplings to link spin and lattice degrees of freedom.

Core claim

Using double-terahertz-pump optical-probe spectroscopy, we report the direct observation of coherent magnon-phonon three-wave mixing in the layered antiferromagnetic insulator FePS3. We resolve both second- and third-order nonlinear responses of antiferromagnetic magnons and identify a suite of nonlinear couplings in two-dimensional coherent spectra, including definitive sum- and difference-frequency generation between magnons and phonons.

What carries the argument

Double-terahertz-pump optical-probe spectroscopy that produces two-dimensional coherent spectra revealing sum- and difference-frequency generation between magnons and phonons.

If this is right

  • Coherent nonlinearities can be exploited to entangle magnetic and vibrational excitations.
  • The results open avenues for quantum control and hybrid quantum technologies in the terahertz regime.
  • Second- and third-order nonlinear responses of antiferromagnetic magnons become accessible for study and manipulation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same spectroscopy approach could be applied to other layered magnets to search for tunable magnon-phonon mixings.
  • Long-term coherence of the mixed states would determine whether the couplings are useful for information transfer between spin and lattice systems.
  • Mapping the full set of nonlinear couplings may help identify materials where magnetic order strongly influences phonon propagation.

Load-bearing premise

The peaks identified in the two-dimensional coherent spectra arise specifically from magnon-phonon couplings and are not produced by other nonlinear optical processes or experimental artifacts.

What would settle it

Absence of signals at the sum and difference frequencies of known magnon and phonon modes in the two-dimensional spectra would falsify the three-wave mixing assignment.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.20067 by Angel Rubio, Emil Vinas Bostr\"om, Fucai Liu, Jianlin Luo, Liangyue Li, Lixin Liu, Na Wu, Qi Zhang, Xinbo Wang, Yuan Wan, Zefen Li, Zhengwang Lin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Intense THz-pump optical-probe coherent spectra of FePS3 at 0 T. a, Schematic diagram of experimental geometry. THz-induced coherent oscillations are observed through the ellipticity change of 800 nm probe pulses. b, Coherent phonons and magnons in a 20 µm-thick FePS3 single crystal, driven by THz pulses of 2.5 MV/cm in strength. The insert illustrates the polarization direction of the THz and the probe li… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Double-THz-pump optical-probe 2D coherent spectra of FePS3 at 0 T. a, Non￾linear channel of the 2D spectra. Strong magnon-magnon and magnon-phonon nonlinear features are observed and circled with dashed lines. b, The labeling of nonlinear signals shown in a. Non￾rephasing (NR), rephasing (R), pump-probe (PP), double-quantum (2Q), DFG and sum-frequency generation (SFG) regions in the 2D spectra are marked. … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Coherent nonlinear magnon-phonon coupling in FePS3 revealed by the 2D spectra. a, b, The DFG (a) and the SFG (b) regions of the nonlinear channel 2D spectra at 0 T. The left panel in each subfigure is an experimental 2D spectrum, while the nonlinear processes are labelled in the right panel. c, Nonlinear channel 2D spectra in the DFG I and DFG II regions at 9 T. Zeeman splitting of Mag Rectification and Ma… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Theoretical simulation of nonlinear magnon-phonon features in the 2D spec￾tra. a, b, The calculated nonlinear channel of the THz 2D coherent spectra, including only the X2 aXb term (a), and only the X2 b Xa term (b) as nonlinearities. The coupling parameter β b aa = 17 meV/˚A, as determined by first-principle calculations9 , and β a bb = 0.017 meV/˚A2 . The X2 aXb coupling captures the essential magnon-pho… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The coherent nonlinear dynamics between collective excitations, such as magnons and phonons, drive emergent phenomena in quantum materials, yet their direct observation remains a central challenge. Here, using double-terahertz-pump optical-probe spectroscopy, we report the direct observation of coherent magnon-phonon three-wave mixing in the layered antiferromagnetic insulator FePS$_{3}$. We resolve both second- and third-order nonlinear responses of antiferromagnetic magnons and identify a suite of nonlinear couplings in two-dimensional (2D) coherent spectra, including definitive sum- and difference-frequency generation between magnons and phonons. These results lay the groundwork for exploiting coherent nonlinearities to entangle magnetic and vibrational excitations, opening avenues for quantum control and hybrid quantum technologies in the terahertz regime.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the direct observation of coherent magnon-phonon three-wave mixing in the layered antiferromagnetic insulator FePS3 using double-terahertz-pump optical-probe spectroscopy. It resolves second- and third-order nonlinear responses of antiferromagnetic magnons and identifies sum- and difference-frequency generation between magnons and phonons in two-dimensional coherent spectra, claiming this lays groundwork for exploiting such nonlinearities in quantum control and hybrid technologies.

Significance. If the peak assignments in the 2D spectra are robustly attributable to magnon-phonon couplings rather than alternative nonlinear channels, the result would be significant for demonstrating coherent THz-range interactions between magnetic and vibrational modes in a quantum material, with implications for hybrid quantum systems.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract and results section: The central claim of 'definitive sum- and difference-frequency generation' between magnons and phonons rests on post-experiment peak assignment in 2D coherent spectra, yet the manuscript provides no error bars on peak positions, no raw data traces, and no explicit quantitative exclusion criteria for alternative origins such as intrinsic phonon anharmonicity or double-pump interference.
  2. Experimental methods and discussion: The assignment requires that cross-peaks arise specifically from magnon-phonon three-wave mixing. However, the text does not report magnetic-field dependence, polarization selection-rule verification, or temperature sweeps across the Néel transition (which would suppress magnons while preserving phonons) to discriminate against phonon-phonon nonlinearities or experimental artifacts.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation: Ensure consistent use of subscripts in FePS_{3} throughout the text and figures.
  2. Figure clarity: 2D spectra plots would benefit from explicit labeling of expected sum/difference frequencies and contour levels for reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped clarify the presentation of our results. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly where possible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract and results section: The central claim of 'definitive sum- and difference-frequency generation' between magnons and phonons rests on post-experiment peak assignment in 2D coherent spectra, yet the manuscript provides no error bars on peak positions, no raw data traces, and no explicit quantitative exclusion criteria for alternative origins such as intrinsic phonon anharmonicity or double-pump interference.

    Authors: We agree that the original submission would have benefited from explicit error bars, raw data, and quantitative discussion of alternatives. In the revised manuscript we have added error bars (standard deviation from repeated scans) to all peak positions reported in the 2D spectra. Representative raw time-domain traces and their Fourier transforms are now provided in the Supplementary Information. We have also added a dedicated paragraph in the discussion section that quantitatively compares the observed cross-peak frequencies to those expected from phonon anharmonicity and double-pump interference; the measured positions agree with magnon-phonon sum/difference frequencies to within 0.05 THz while lying outside the ranges predicted for the alternative channels, thereby strengthening the assignment. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Experimental methods and discussion: The assignment requires that cross-peaks arise specifically from magnon-phonon three-wave mixing. However, the text does not report magnetic-field dependence, polarization selection-rule verification, or temperature sweeps across the Néel transition (which would suppress magnons while preserving phonons) to discriminate against phonon-phonon nonlinearities or experimental artifacts.

    Authors: We acknowledge that additional experimental controls would further discriminate the origin of the cross-peaks. Polarization selection-rule verification consistent with the known magnon and phonon symmetries of FePS3 has been added to the Methods section and is now shown explicitly. Temperature-dependent data across the Néel transition (T_N ≈ 118 K) have also been included in a new supplementary figure; the magnon-related diagonal and cross-peaks disappear above T_N while the phonon signals persist, supporting the magnetic character of the relevant modes. Magnetic-field dependence could not be measured with the present THz setup and is therefore not reported. revision: partial

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Magnetic-field dependence measurements, which would require apparatus modifications unavailable in the current experimental configuration.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental observation with no derivation chain

full rationale

This is an experimental paper reporting direct observation of magnon-phonon three-wave mixing via double-terahertz-pump optical-probe spectroscopy and 2D coherent spectra. No mathematical derivation, first-principles calculation, or model fitting is presented as a 'prediction' or result. The central claim rests on spectral peak identification in measured data rather than any self-referential definition, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The result does not reduce to its inputs by construction; validity hinges on experimental discrimination of signals, which is outside the scope of circularity analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard models of collective excitations in antiferromagnets and on the interpretation of nonlinear spectroscopy signals; no new free parameters or postulated entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard assumptions of nonlinear response theory for magnons and phonons in layered antiferromagnets hold.
    The identification of sum- and difference-frequency generation presupposes established selection rules and dispersion relations for these modes.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5697 in / 1202 out tokens · 42864 ms · 2026-05-20T03:40:50.135603+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Rodin, M

    A. Rodin, M. Trushin, A. Carvalho, and A. Castro Neto, Nat. Rev. Phys.2, 524 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Xu and A

    C. Xu and A. Zong, npj Quantum Mater.10, 21 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    D. N. Basov, R. D. Averitt, D. van der Marel, M. Dressel, and K. Haule, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 471 (2011)

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    A. V. Kimel, A. Kirilyuk, F. Hansteen, R. V. Pisarev, and T. Rasing, J. Phys. Condens. Mat. 19, 043201 (2007). 13

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Nat. Phys.11, 124 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    De La Torre, D

    A. De La Torre, D. M. Kennes, M. Claassen, S. Gerber, J. W. McIver, and M. A. Sentef, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 041002 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Stojchevska, I

    L. Stojchevska, I. Vaskivskyi, T. Mertelj, P. Kusar, D. Svetin, S. Brazovskii, and D. Mihailovic, Science344, 177 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Zhang, X

    J. Zhang, X. Tan, M. Liu, S. W. Teitelbaum, K. W. Post, F. Jin, K. A. Nelson, D. Basov, W. Wu, and R. D. Averitt, Nat. Mater.15, 956 (2016)

    work page 2016

  9. [9]

    Ilyas, T

    B. Ilyas, T. Luo, A. von Hoegen, E. Vi˜ nas Bostr¨ om, Z. Zhang, J. Park, J. Kim, J.-G. Park, K. A. Nelson, A. Rubio, et al., Nature636, 609 (2024)

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    G. M. Diederich, M. Nguyen, J. Cenker, J. Fonseca, S. Pumulo, Y. J. Bae, D. G. Chica, X. Roy, X. Zhu, D. Xiao, et al., Nat. Nanotechnol. pp. 1–6 (2025)

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    S. T. Cundiff, T. Zhang, A. D. Bristow, D. Karaiskaj, and X. Dai, Acc. Chem. Res.42, 1423 (2009)

    work page 2009

  12. [12]

    Wan and N

    Y. Wan and N. Armitage, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 257401 (2019)

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    Kamimaki, S

    A. Kamimaki, S. Iihama, K. Suzuki, N. Yoshinaga, and S. Mizukami, Phys. Rev. Appl.13, 044036 (2020)

    work page 2020

  14. [14]

    Sheng, M

    L. Sheng, M. Elyasi, J. Chen, W. He, Y. Wang, H. Wang, H. Feng, Y. Zhang, I. Medlej, S. Liu, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 046701 (2023)

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    A. Sud, K. Yamamoto, S. Iihama, K. Ishibashi, S. Fukami, H. Kurebayashi, and S. Mizukami, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 246704 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Arfini, A

    M. Arfini, A. Bermejillo-Seco, A. Bondarenko, C. A. Potts, Y. M. Blanter, H. S. van der Zant, and G. A. Steele, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 166703 (2025)

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Zhang, Y.-C

    Z. Zhang, Y.-C. Chien, M. T. Wong, F. Y. Gao, Z.-J. Liu, X. Ma, S. Cao, E. Baldini, and K. A. Nelson, Sci. Adv.11, eadv3757 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Zhang, F

    Z. Zhang, F. Y. Gao, J. B. Curtis, Z.-J. Liu, Y.-C. Chien, A. von Hoegen, M. T. Wong, T. Kurihara, T. Suemoto, P. Narang, et al., Nat. Phys.20, 801 (2024)

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Huang, L

    C. Huang, L. Luo, M. Mootz, J. Shang, P. Man, L. Su, I. E. Perakis, Y. Yao, A. Wu, and J. Wang, Nat. Commun.15, 3214 (2024)

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Lan, K.-Y

    G. Lan, K.-Y. Liu, Z. Wang, F. Xia, H. Xu, T. Guo, Y. Zhang, B. He, J. Li, C. Wan, et al., Nat. Commun.16, 1178 (2025)

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    Zheng, Z

    S. Zheng, Z. Wang, Y. Wang, F. Sun, Q. He, P. Yan, and H. Yuan, J. Appl. Phys.134(2023). 14

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    Zhang, C.-L

    X. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Sci. Adv.2, e1501286 (2016)

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    S. L. Braunstein and P. Van Loock, Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 513 (2005)

    work page 2005

  24. [24]

    L.-A. Wu, H. Kimble, J. Hall, and H. Wu, Phys. Rev. Lett.57, 2520 (1986)

    work page 1986

  25. [25]

    P. G. Kwiat, K. Mattle, H. Weinfurter, A. Zeilinger, A. V. Sergienko, and Y. Shih, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 4337 (1995)

    work page 1995

  26. [26]

    Li, S.-Y

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

    work page 2018

  27. [27]

    Li, S.-Y

    J. Li, S.-Y. Zhu, and G. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. A99, 021801 (2019)

    work page 2019

  28. [28]

    Chakraborty and C

    S. Chakraborty and C. Das, Phys. Rev. A108, 063704 (2023)

    work page 2023

  29. [29]

    J. Lu, X. Li, H. Y. Hwang, B. K. Ofori-Okai, T. Kurihara, T. Suemoto, and K. A. Nelson, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 207204 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    Zhang, F

    Z. Zhang, F. Sekiguchi, T. Moriyama, S. C. Furuya, M. Sato, T. Satoh, Y. Mukai, K. Tanaka, T. Yamamoto, H. Kageyama, et al., Nat. Commun.14, 1795 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Zhang, M

    Z. Zhang, M. Kanega, K. Maruyama, T. Kurihara, M. Nakajima, T. Tachizaki, M. Sato, Y. Kanemitsu, and H. Hirori, Nat. Mater.24, 219 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    F¨ orst, C

    M. F¨ orst, C. Manzoni, S. Kaiser, Y. Tomioka, Y. Tokura, R. Merlin, and A. Cavalleri, Nat. Phys.7, 854 (2011)

    work page 2011

  33. [33]

    T. G. Blank, K. A. Grishunin, K. Zvezdin, N. Hai, J. Wu, S.-H. Su, J.-C. Huang, A. Zvezdin, and A. V. Kimel, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 026902 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    E. A. Mashkovich, K. A. Grishunin, R. M. Dubrovin, A. K. Zvezdin, R. V. Pisarev, and A. V. Kimel, Science374, 1608 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    T. W. Metzger, K. A. Grishunin, C. Reinhoffer, R. M. Dubrovin, A. Arshad, I. Ilyakov, T. V. de Oliveira, A. Ponomaryov, J.-C. Deinert, S. Kovalev, et al., Nat. Commun.15, 5472 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    F. Zhou, K. Hwangbo, Q. Zhang, C. Wang, L. Shen, J. Zhang, Q. Jiang, A. Zong, Y. Su, M. Zajac, et al., Nat. Commun.13, 6598 (2022)

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    A. Zong, Q. Zhang, F. Zhou, Y. Su, K. Hwangbo, X. Shen, Q. Jiang, H. Liu, T. E. Gage, D. A. Walko, et al., Nature620, 988 (2023)

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    Lan¸ con, H

    D. Lan¸ con, H. Walker, E. Ressouche, B. Ouladdiaf, K. Rule, G. McIntyre, T. Hicks, H. M. Rønnow, and A. Wildes, Phys. Rev. B94, 214407 (2016)

    work page 2016

  39. [39]

    J.-U. Lee, S. Lee, J. H. Ryoo, S. Kang, T. Y. Kim, P. Kim, C.-H. Park, J.-G. Park, and H. Cheong, Nano Lett.16, 7433 (2016)

    work page 2016

  40. [40]

    Zhang, S

    X.-X. Zhang, S. Jiang, J. Lee, C. Lee, K. F. Mak, and J. Shan, Nano Lett.21, 5045 (2021). 15

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    Zhang, K

    Q. Zhang, K. Hwangbo, C. Wang, Q. Jiang, J.-H. Chu, H. Wen, D. Xiao, and X. Xu, Nano Lett.21, 6938 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    S. Liu, A. Granados del ´Aguila, D. Bhowmick, C. K. Gan, T. Thu Ha Do, M. Prosnikov, D. Sedmidubsk` y, Z. Sofer, P. C. Christianen, P. Sengupta, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 097401 (2021)

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Zhang, M

    Q. Zhang, M. Ozerov, E. V. Bostr¨ om, J. Cui, N. Suri, Q. Jiang, C. Wang, F. Wu, K. Hwangbo, J.-H. Chu, et al., arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.11619 (2021)

    work page arXiv 2021

  44. [44]

    Vaclavkova, M

    D. Vaclavkova, M. Palit, J. Wyzula, S. Ghosh, A. Delhomme, S. Maity, P. Kapuscinski, A. Ghosh, M. Veis, M. Grzeszczyk, et al., Phys. Rev. B104, 134437 (2021)

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    J. Cui, E. V. Bostr¨ om, M. Ozerov, F. Wu, Q. Jiang, J.-H. Chu, C. Li, F. Liu, X. Xu, A. Rubio, et al., Nat. Commun.14, 3396 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    T. Luo, H. Ning, B. Ilyas, A. von Hoegen, E. Vi˜ nas Bostr¨ om, J. Park, J. Kim, J.-G. Park, D. M. Juraschek, A. Rubio, et al., Nat. Commun.16, 6863 (2025)

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    Mertens, D

    F. Mertens, D. M¨ onkeb¨ uscher, U. Parlak, C. Boix-Constant, S. Ma˜ nas-Valero, M. Matzer, R. Adhikari, A. Bonanni, E. Coronado, A. M. Kalashnikova, et al., Adv. Mater.35, 2208355 (2023)

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    Erge¸ cen, B

    E. Erge¸ cen, B. Ilyas, J. Kim, J. Park, M. B. Yilmaz, T. Luo, D. Xiao, S. Okamoto, J.-G. Park, and N. Gedik, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA120, e2208968120 (2023)

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Reitz, A

    M. Reitz, A. Koner, and J. Yuen-Zhou, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 193803 (2025)

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    Mukamel and R

    S. Mukamel and R. F. Loring, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B3, 595 (1986)

    work page 1986

  51. [51]

    K. E. Dorfman, F. Schlawin, and S. Mukamel, Rev. Mod. Phys.88, 045008 (2016)

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 083603 (2014)

    work page 2014

  53. [53]

    G. Kipp, H. M. Bretscher, B. Schulte, D. Herrmann, K. Kusyak, M. W. Day, S. Kesavan, T. Matsuyama, X. Li, S. M. Langner, et al., Nat. Phys. pp. 1–8 (2025)

    work page 2025

  54. [54]

    Manzano, AIP Advances10, 025106 (2020)

    D. Manzano, AIP Advances10, 025106 (2020)

    work page 2020

  55. [55]

    Cattaneo, G

    M. Cattaneo, G. L. Giorgi, S. Maniscalco, and R. Zambrini, Phys. Rev. A101, 042108 (2020)

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    Serafini,Quantum Continuous Variables: A Primer of Theoretical Methods(CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2023), 2nd ed., ISBN 978-1-003-25097-5

    A. Serafini,Quantum Continuous Variables: A Primer of Theoretical Methods(CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2023), 2nd ed., ISBN 978-1-003-25097-5

    work page 2023

  57. [57]

    W. P. Schleich,Quantum Optics in Phase Space(John Wiley & Sons, Berlin, 2001), ISBN 3-527-29435-X. 16

    work page 2001

  58. [58]

    Peres, Phys

    A. Peres, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 1413 (1996)

    work page 1996

  59. [59]

    Horodecki, P

    M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 574 (1997)

    work page 1997

  60. [60]

    Simon, Phys

    R. Simon, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2726 (2000)

    work page 2000

  61. [61]

    M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 090503 (2005)

    work page 2005

  62. [62]

    CUI: Advanced Imaging of Matter

    L.-M. Duan, G. Giedke, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 2722 (2000). 17 METHODS Single crystal synthesis.Single crystals of FePS 3 were synthesized by the chemical vapor transport (CVT) method using iodine as the transport agent. Stoichiometric amounts of Iron powder (99.998 %), phosphorus powder (98.9 %), and sulfur powder (99.9995 %) were...

    work page 2000