pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23999 · v1 · pith:SSFZKTPRnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🪐 quant-ph

Suppressing Self-Discharging of Quantum Batteries by Cavity Interactions

Anass Jad , Abderrahim El Allati , Mohammad B. Arjmandi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 07:42 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum batteriesself-dischargingcavity QEDopen quantum systemsergotropyLindblad dynamicsthermal noise
0
0 comments X

The pith

Coupling a lossy qubit cavity to an auxiliary cavity suppresses self-discharging in quantum batteries at finite temperature.

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

The paper examines a two-cavity setup where N qubits sit in a lossy cavity that is coherently coupled to a second, auxiliary cavity. Within a local Lindblad description at resonance, the coupling reduces the rate at which stored energy leaks into the thermal bath, and this protection holds for every initial state, battery size, and temperature examined. Single-qubit superpositions retain energy better than the fully excited state; Bell states outperform the excited state for two qubits; and the normalized retained ergotropy rises with qubit number under all-to-all Heisenberg coupling. The improvement weakens smoothly as the mean thermal photon number increases but remains positive throughout the explored regime.

Core claim

In the resonant two-cavity architecture the coherent inter-cavity coupling enhances suppression of self-discharging for every initial preparation, battery size, and temperature examined, with the protection degrading smoothly as the mean thermal occupation increases; single-qubit energy-basis coherence outperforms the fully excited state, Bell preparations outperform it for two qubits, and normalized retained ergotropy increases monotonically with qubit number in the symmetric Dicke manifold.

What carries the argument

Two-cavity architecture in which a lossy cavity containing N qubits is coherently coupled to an auxiliary cavity, evolved under a local Lindblad master equation at resonance.

If this is right

  • Normalized retained ergotropy increases monotonically with the number of qubits under collective coupling in the symmetric manifold.
  • Energy-basis coherence in a pure superposition improves long-time energy retention relative to the fully excited state for a single qubit.
  • Bell-state preparations yield higher long-time ergotropy retention than the fully excited state for two-qubit batteries.
  • The protection persists across all examined initial preparations, battery sizes, and temperatures but weakens smoothly with rising mean thermal occupation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same auxiliary-cavity coupling could be tested in circuit-QED or trapped-ion platforms where the auxiliary mode is already present as a readout resonator.
  • If the collective enhancement survives modest detuning, the scheme might extend to non-resonant operation without redesigning the hardware.
  • The observed size dependence suggests that scaling to larger symmetric manifolds could further improve protection even at higher temperatures.

Load-bearing premise

The local Lindblad treatment in the resonant configuration accurately captures the system dynamics for the examined parameters and initial states.

What would settle it

Measure the long-time retained ergotropy of the same initial state with and without the auxiliary-cavity coupling; if the two curves coincide within experimental error across the explored temperature range, the claimed suppression is absent.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23999 by Abderrahim El Allati, Anass Jad, Mohammad B. Arjmandi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Sketch of the cavity-based quantum-battery architecture. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Normalised ergotropy W(t)/W(0) of the single-qubit battery for the two initial states of Eqs. (7a)–(7b) (rows; top: |e⟩, bottom: |ψ+⟩ = (|e⟩ + |g⟩)/ √ 2), for seven values of the inter-cavity coupling J/Γ1 ∈ {0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5} (colour-coded from dark to light). Columns correspond to dimensionless inverse temperatures βω ∈ {1.75, 1, 0.3}, with both reservoirs at the same mean thermal occupation ¯n1 = n… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Normalised ergotropy W(t)/W(0) of a two-qubit battery in cavity C1 coupled to a auxiliary cavity C2, for three initial preparations (rows) and three inverse temperatures (columns). Top row: fully excited state |ee⟩. Middle row: product superposition [(|e⟩ + |g⟩)/ √ 2]⊗2 . Bottom row: Bell state |Φ+ ⟩ = (|ee⟩ + |gg⟩)/ √ 2. Curves correspond to J/Γ1 ∈ {0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5} from dark to light. Parameters: ω… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Robustness of the retained ergotropy W(tf)/W(0) for the Bell state |Φ+ ⟩ = (|ee⟩ + |gg⟩)/ √ 2 in the plane of the inter-cavity coupling J/Γ1 and the auxiliary loss rate Γ2/Γ1, at inverse temperature βω = 1. Panels show three evaluation times tf , 5 tf , and 10 tf , with tf Γ1 = 8.91 chosen as the time at which the uncoupled (J = 0) baseline has relaxed to 1% of its initial amount of extractable energy. Das… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Normalised ergotropy W(t)/W(0) of the multi-qubit battery prepared in the GHZ state of Eq. (10), in the presence of an all-to-all Heisenberg coupling (Eq. (11), g = 0.5 Γ1), for N = 2 (blue solid), N = 3 (green dashed), N = 4 (red dash-dotted), and N = 5 (purple dash-double-dotted). Panels (a)–(d) correspond to J/Γ1 = 0, 1, 2, 3.5 respectively. Parameters: κ = 0.24 Γ1, Γ2 = 0, resonant configuration ω0 = ω… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Composition of the single-excitation dark mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Retained ergotropy W(tf)/W(0) of the diagonal prepara￾tion |ee⟩ in the plane of J/Γ1 and Γ2/Γ1, at βω = 1. Panels show tf , 5 tf , and 10 tf , with tf Γ1 = 7.53. Dashed contours as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We analyse a two-cavity architecture, in which a lossy cavity hosting $N$ qubits is coherently coupled to an auxiliary cavity, as a resource for the storage phase of an open quantum battery at non-zero temperature. Within a local Lindblad treatment in the resonant configuration, we find that the inter-cavity coupling enhances the suppression of self-discharging across every initial preparation, battery size, and temperature we examine, with the protection degrading smoothly as the mean thermal occupation increases. For a single qubit, the energy-basis coherence of a pure superposition leads to better long-time retention than fully excited state, highlighting the beneficial role of quantum coherence in protecting stored energy against thermal degradation. For two-qubit batteries, Bell-state preparations exhibit enhanced long-time ergotropy retention compared with the fully excited state, while the inclusion of qubit-qubit interactions produces only a weak dependence on the interaction type and strength within the parameter regime considered. Extending the analysis to multi-qubit GHZ-charged batteries with all-to-all Heisenberg interactions, we find that the normalized retained ergotropy increases monotonically with the number of qubits. This behavior is consistent with the collective enhancement of the qubit-cavity coupling in the symmetric Dicke manifold, indicating that larger quantum batteries can benefit from improved protection against self-discharge. These findings establish cavity-assisted protection as a promising strategy for mitigating self-discharging and realizing of long-lived quantum batteries in experimentally accessible platforms.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper examines a two-cavity architecture for open quantum batteries at finite temperature, with N qubits in a lossy cavity coherently coupled to an auxiliary cavity. Within a local Lindblad master equation in the resonant regime, numerical results show that increasing the inter-cavity coupling strength improves long-time ergotropy retention for all examined initial states (energy-basis superpositions, Bell states, GHZ), battery sizes N, and temperatures, with the improvement degrading smoothly with mean thermal occupation. Coherence in initial states aids retention, qubit-qubit interactions have weak effect, and normalized retained ergotropy increases monotonically with N, attributed to collective coupling in the Dicke manifold.

Significance. If the local Lindblad approximation remains valid, the work identifies cavity-assisted coherent coupling as a concrete mechanism to mitigate self-discharge in thermal quantum batteries, with explicit scaling benefits for larger N and a role for initial-state coherence. The systematic numerical survey across preparations and parameters supplies falsifiable predictions for cavity-QED platforms.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Methods (local Lindblad master equation, resonant case): The central claim that inter-cavity coupling monotonically enhances retention for every initial state, N, and temperature rests on the local jump operators remaining accurate when a coherent inter-cavity term is present. No validity bounds (e.g., g_cav / κ or thermal occupation thresholds) or comparison to a global master equation are supplied; if non-local dissipators become relevant, the reported protection could be an artifact of the chosen equation rather than a physical effect.
  2. [Results (multi-qubit GHZ)] Results, multi-qubit GHZ section: The monotonic increase of normalized retained ergotropy with N is attributed to collective enhancement in the symmetric Dicke manifold, yet the manuscript provides no explicit scaling of the effective decay rate or ergotropy formula with N that would make this claim parameter-free or analytically derivable; the numerical trend alone does not yet establish the collective mechanism as load-bearing.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figures] Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state the numerical values of all fixed parameters (κ, g, β, etc.) and the integration time used for “long-time” retention.
  2. [Notation] Notation for ergotropy and normalized retained ergotropy should be defined once in the main text with a clear equation reference rather than only in figure legends.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments. We respond to each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods (local Lindblad master equation, resonant case): The central claim that inter-cavity coupling monotonically enhances retention for every initial state, N, and temperature rests on the local jump operators remaining accurate when a coherent inter-cavity term is present. No validity bounds (e.g., g_cav / κ or thermal occupation thresholds) or comparison to a global master equation are supplied; if non-local dissipators become relevant, the reported protection could be an artifact of the chosen equation rather than a physical effect.

    Authors: The local Lindblad master equation is a standard approximation employed in resonant cavity-QED systems when the coherent coupling remains perturbative relative to the cavity decay. We agree that explicit validity bounds would strengthen the presentation. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph specifying the parameter regime (including typical g_cav/κ ratios used in the numerics) and citing literature on the conditions under which the local versus global master equation is appropriate. A systematic comparison with the global master equation lies outside the present scope but is noted as a natural direction for follow-up work. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results (multi-qubit GHZ)] Results, multi-qubit GHZ section: The monotonic increase of normalized retained ergotropy with N is attributed to collective enhancement in the symmetric Dicke manifold, yet the manuscript provides no explicit scaling of the effective decay rate or ergotropy formula with N that would make this claim parameter-free or analytically derivable; the numerical trend alone does not yet establish the collective mechanism as load-bearing.

    Authors: The manuscript already qualifies the statement as 'consistent with' collective enhancement in the Dicke manifold rather than claiming an exact analytical derivation. The reported numerical survey shows a clear monotonic rise in normalized retained ergotropy with N, which matches the expected √N scaling of the collective qubit-cavity coupling in the fully symmetric subspace. While an explicit closed-form expression for the long-time ergotropy would be desirable, obtaining one for the full open-system dynamics is analytically intractable. We will revise the relevant paragraph to emphasize that the trend is a numerical observation supported by the standard collective-coupling argument, thereby clarifying the evidential basis without overstating the result. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results follow from explicit Lindblad dynamics

full rationale

The paper solves the local Lindblad master equation for a two-cavity qubit system under resonant coupling and reports numerical outcomes for ergotropy retention as functions of coupling strength, N, temperature, and initial states. No parameter is fitted to data and then relabeled as a prediction, no result is defined in terms of itself, and no load-bearing premise reduces to a self-citation chain. The central findings (monotonic improvement with inter-cavity coupling, collective scaling with N) are direct consequences of the stated open-system evolution and therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the applicability of the local Lindblad master equation; no free parameters, new entities, or additional axioms are identifiable from the abstract alone.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Local Lindblad master equation applies in the resonant configuration
    Explicitly invoked in the abstract as the treatment used for the dynamics.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5796 in / 1264 out tokens · 46658 ms · 2026-06-26T07:42:48.709136+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

50 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    The preparationρ (2) B stores half its initial ergotropy as energy-basis coherence; the state |ψ+⟩|0,0 ⟩ has overlapJ/[ √ 2 √ J2 +κ 2] with the dark mode of Eq

    The preparationρ (1) B is fully excited, diagonal in the qubit energy eigenbasis, and stores its initial ergotropy entirely as a population imbalance. The preparationρ (2) B stores half its initial ergotropy as energy-basis coherence; the state |ψ+⟩|0,0 ⟩ has overlapJ/[ √ 2 √ J2 +κ 2] with the dark mode of Eq. (6). Figure 2 showsW(t)/W(0) across the three...

  2. [2]

    Parameters:ω 0 =ω 1 = ω2 =1,κ=0.24Γ 1,Γ 2 =0.1Γ 1, Heisenberg qubit–qubit couplingg=0.1Γ 1

    Curves correspond toJ/Γ 1 ∈ {0,0.5,1,2,3,4,5}from dark to light. Parameters:ω 0 =ω 1 = ω2 =1,κ=0.24Γ 1,Γ 2 =0.1Γ 1, Heisenberg qubit–qubit couplingg=0.1Γ 1. forβω∈ {1.75,1,0.3}respectively. As in the single-qubit case, the protection mechanism weakens gradually as the temperature increases. Forβω= 1.75, couplingsJ≳2Γ 1 retain more than 90% of the ini- tia...

  3. [3]

    In particular,N=5 displays the highest long-time ergotropy, whereasN=2 exhibits the strongest degradation

    Following the initial transient oscillations, the ergotropy curves separate and remain ordered according to the number of qubits, with larger systems consistently retaining a greater fraction of their initial ergotropy. In particular,N=5 displays the highest long-time ergotropy, whereasN=2 exhibits the strongest degradation. This ordering persists through...

  4. [4]

    Pusz and S

    W. Pusz and S. L. Woronowicz,Passive states and KMS states for general quantum systems, Commun. Math. Phys.58, 273 (1978). doi:10.1007/BF01614224

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01614224 1978

  5. [5]

    Lenard,Thermodynamical proof of the Gibbs formula for elementary quantum systems, J

    A. Lenard,Thermodynamical proof of the Gibbs formula for elementary quantum systems, J. Stat. Phys.19, 575 (1978). doi:10.1007/BF01011769

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01011769 1978

  6. [6]

    A. E. Allahverdyan, R. Balian, and Th. M. Nieuwenhuizen, Maximal work extraction from finite quantum systems, Euro- phys. Lett.67, 565 (2004). doi:10.1209/epl/i2004-10101-2

    work page doi:10.1209/epl/i2004-10101-2 2004

  7. [7]

    Carrega, A

    M. Carrega, A. Crescente, D. Ferraro, and M. Sassetti,Dissi- pative dynamics of an open quantum battery, New J. Phys.22, 083085 (2020). doi:10.1088/1367-2630/abaa01

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/abaa01 2020

  8. [8]

    A. C. Santos,Quantum advantage of two-level batteries in the self-discharging process, Phys. Rev. E103, 042118 (2021). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.103.042118

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.103.042118 2021

  9. [9]

    L. P. Garc ´ıa-Pintos, A. Hamma, and A. del Campo,Fluc- tuations in Extractable Work Bound the Charging Power of Quantum Batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 040601 (2020). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.040601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.040601 2020

  10. [10]

    F. H. Kamin, F. T. Tabesh, S. Salimi, F. Kheirandish, and A. C. Santos,Non-Markovian effects on charging and self- discharging process of quantum batteries, New J. Phys.22, 083007 (2020). doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aba29e

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aba29e 2020

  11. [11]

    Farina, G

    D. Farina, G. M. Andolina, A. Mari, M. Polini, and V . Gio- vannetti,Charger-mediated energy transfer for quantum batter- ies: An open-system approach, Phys. Rev. B99, 035421 (2019). doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.99.035421

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.99.035421 2019

  12. [12]

    M. B. Arjmandi, H. Mohammadi, and A. C. Santos, Enhancing self-discharging process with disordered quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E105, 054115 (2022). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.105.054115

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.105.054115 2022

  13. [13]

    Alicki and M

    R. Alicki and M. Fannes,Entanglement boost for extractable work from ensembles of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E87, 042123 (2013). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.87.042123

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.87.042123 2013

  14. [14]

    Vinjanampathy, J

    S. Vinjanampathy and J. Anders,Quantum ther- modynamics, Contemp. Phys.57, 545 (2016). doi:10.1080/00107514.2016.1201896

    work page doi:10.1080/00107514.2016.1201896 2016

  15. [15]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. A. Pollock, and S. Vinjanampathy,Quantum batteries, inThermodynamics in the Quantum Regime: Funda- mental Aspects and New Directions, Fundam. Theor. Phys.195, 207 (Springer, Cham, 2018). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99046- 0 8

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99046- 2018

  16. [16]

    and Polini, Marco and Andolina, Gian Marcello , year = 2024, month = jul, journal =

    F. Campaioli, S. Gherardini, J. Q. Quach, M. Polini, and G. M. Andolina,Colloquium: Quantum bat- teries, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 031001 (2024). doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.96.031001

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.96.031001 2024

  17. [17]

    J. Q. Quach, G. Cerullo, and T. Virgili,Quantum batter- ies: The future of energy storage?, Joule7, 2195 (2023). doi:10.1016/j.joule.2023.09.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.joule.2023.09.003 2023

  18. [18]

    S. Y . Bai and J. H. An,Floquet engineering to reactivate a dis- sipative quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A102, 060201(R) (2020). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.102.060201

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.102.060201 2020

  19. [19]

    M. T. Mitchison, J. Goold, and J. Prior,Charging a quantum battery with linear feedback control, Quantum5, 500 (2021). doi:10.22331/q-2021-07-13-500

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2021-07-13-500 2021

  20. [20]

    Yao and X

    Y . Yao and X. Q. Shao,Optimal charging of open spin-chain quantum batteries via homodyne-based feedback control, Phys. Rev. E106, 014138 (2022). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.106.014138

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.106.014138 2022

  21. [21]

    Barra,Dissipative Charging of a Quantum 11 Battery, Phys

    F. Barra,Dissipative Charging of a Quantum 11 Battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 210601 (2019). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.210601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.122.210601 2019

  22. [22]

    Lemou, A

    A. Lemou, A. El Allati, K. El Anouz, A. Ali, S. Al-Kuwari, and A. Belfakir,Quantum speed limit time in thermodynamic contexts: Linking CPTP dynamics and repetitive interaction, A VS Quantum Sci.8, 022001 (2026). doi:10.1116/5.0322372

    work page doi:10.1116/5.0322372 2026

  23. [23]

    F. H. Kamin, S. Salimi, and M. B. Arjmandi,Steady- state charging of quantum batteries via dissipa- tive ancillas, Phys. Rev. A109, 022226 (2024). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.109.022226

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.109.022226 2024

  24. [24]

    Khoudiri, A

    A. Khoudiri, A. Oularabi, K. El Anouz, ˙I. Demir, and A. El Allati,Coherence-driven quantum battery charging via autonomous thermal machines: Energy transfer, memory ef- fects, and ergotropy enhancement, Phys. Lett. A565, 131178 (2026). doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2025.131178

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2025.131178 2026

  25. [25]

    F. T. Tabesh, F. H. Kamin, and S. Salimi,Environment-mediated charging process of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. A102, 052223 (2020). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.102.052223

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.102.052223 2020

  26. [26]

    M. B. Arjmandi,Frozen and growing quantum work under noise: Coherence and correlations as key resources, Phys. Rev. A113, 032220 (2026). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.113.032220

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.113.032220 2026

  27. [27]

    Xu, H.-G

    K. Xu, H.-G. Li, H.-J. Zhu, and W.-M. Liu,Inhibit- ing the self-discharging process of quantum batteries in non-Markovian noises, Phys. Rev. E109, 054132 (2024). doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.109.054132

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.109.054132 2024

  28. [28]

    Imara, K

    Z. Imara, K. El Anouz, ˙I. Demir, and A. El Allati,Nonre- ciprocal macroscopic entanglement through magnon squeezing in cavity magnomechanics, Phys. Rev. A113, 053717 (2026). doi:10.1103/rl1p-vgj1

    work page doi:10.1103/rl1p-vgj1 2026

  29. [29]

    Hadipour, S

    M. Hadipour, S. Haseli, D. Wang, and S. Haddadi,Proposed scheme for a cavity-based quantum battery, Adv. Quantum Technol.7, 2400115 (2024). doi:10.1002/qute.202400115

    work page doi:10.1002/qute.202400115 2024

  30. [30]

    Xu, H.-J

    K. Xu, H.-J. Zhu, H. Zhu, G.-F. Zhang, and W.-M. Liu, Charging and self-discharging process of a quantum battery in composite environments, Front. Phys.18, 31301 (2023). doi:10.1007/s11467-022-1230-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s11467-022-1230-x 2023

  31. [31]

    Cavaliere, G

    F. Cavaliere, G. Gemme, G. Benenti, D. Ferraro, and M. Sas- setti,Dynamical blockade of a reservoir for optimal perfor- mances of a quantum battery, Commun. Phys.8, 76 (2025). doi:10.1038/s42005-025-01993-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-025-01993-7 2025

  32. [32]

    Man, Y .-J

    Z.-X. Man, Y .-J. Xia, and R. Lo Franco,Cavity-based archi- tecture to preserve quantum coherence and entanglement, Sci. Rep.5, 13843 (2015). doi:10.1038/srep13843

    work page doi:10.1038/srep13843 2015

  33. [33]

    Canzio, V

    A. Canzio, V . Cavina, M. Polini, and V . Giovannetti, Single-atom dissipation and dephasing in Dicke and Tavis– Cummings quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. A111, 022222 (2025). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.111.022222

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.111.022222 2025

  34. [34]

    Pokhrel and J

    S. Pokhrel and J. Gea-Banacloche,Large collective power enhancement in dissipative charging of a quan- tum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 130401 (2025). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.130401

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.134.130401 2025

  35. [35]

    Reviews of Modern Physics , volume=

    A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff,Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 025005 (2021). doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025005

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.93.025005 2021

  36. [36]

    Ferraro, M

    D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V . Pellegrini, and M. Polini,High-Power Collective Charging of a Solid- State Quantum Battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 117702 (2018). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.117702

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.117702 2018

  37. [37]

    Correlation Enhanced Autonomous Quantum Battery Charging via Structured Reservoirs

    A. Khoudiri, A. El Allati, Y . Khlifi, K. El Anouz, and ¨O. E. M ¨ustecaplıo˘glu,Correlation enhanced autonomous quantum battery charging via structured reservoirs, arXiv:2508.18086 (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2508.18086

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.18086 2025

  38. [38]

    Crescente, M

    A. Crescente, M. Carrega, M. Sassetti, and D. Ferraro,Ultrafast charging in a two-photon Dicke quantum battery, Phys. Rev. B 102, 245407 (2020). doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.102.245407

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.102.245407 2020

  39. [39]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. A. Pollock, F. C. Binder, L. C ´eleri, J. Goold, S. Vinjanampathy, and K. Modi,Enhancing the Charging Power of Quantum Batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 150601 (2017). doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.150601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.150601 2017

  40. [40]

    Jad and A

    A. Jad and A. El Allati,Quantum speed limit for ergotropy charging in the N-qubit Dicke battery, arXiv:2508.10415 (2026). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2603.10415

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.10415 2026

  41. [41]

    P. P. Hofer, M. Perarnau-Llobet, L. D. M. Miranda, G. Haack, R. Silva, J. B. Brask, and N. Brunner,Markovian master equa- tions for quantum thermal machines: local versus global ap- proach, New J. Phys.19, 123037 (2017). doi:10.1088/1367- 2630/aa964f

    work page doi:10.1088/1367- 2017

  42. [42]

    Cattaneo, G

    M. Cattaneo, G. L. Giorgi, S. Maniscalco, and R. Zam- brini,Local versus global master equation with common and separate baths: superiority of the global approach in par- tial secular approximation, New J. Phys.21, 113045 (2019). doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ab54ac

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ab54ac 2019

  43. [43]

    De Chiara, G

    G. De Chiara, G. Landi, A. Hewgill, B. Reid, A. Ferraro, A. J. Roncaglia, and M. Antezza,Reconciliation of quantum local master equations with thermodynamics, New J. Phys.20, 113024 (2018). doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aaecee

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aaecee 2018

  44. [44]

    Tavis and F

    M. Tavis and F. W. Cummings,Exact Solution for an N- Molecule–Radiation-Field Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev.170, 379 (1968). doi:10.1103/PhysRev.170.379

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.170.379 1968

  45. [45]

    Parts and Wholes: Implicative Patterns in Inflectional Paradigms

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Systems(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002). doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199213900.001.0001

    work page doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199213900.001.0001 2002

  46. [46]

    C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller,Quantum Noise, 3rd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2004)

    2004

  47. [47]

    C. Luo, H. Zhang, A. Chu, C. Maruko, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson,Hamiltonian engineering of collective XYZ spin models in an optical cavity, Nat. Phys.21, 916 (2025). doi:10.1038/s41567-025-02866-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-025-02866-0 2025

  48. [48]

    C.-K. Hu, J. Qiu, P. J. P. Souza, J. Yuan, Y . Zhou, L. Zhang, J. Chu, X. Pan, L. Hu, J. Li, Y . Xu, Y . Zhong, S. Liu, F. Yan, D. Tan, R. Bachelard, C. J. Villas-Boas, A. C. Santos, and D. Yu,Optimal charging of a superconducting quantum battery, Quantum Sci. Technol.7, 045018 (2022). doi:10.1088/2058- 9565/ac8444

    work page doi:10.1088/2058- 2022

  49. [49]

    J. Q. Quach, K. E. McGhee, L. Ganzer, D. M. Rouse, B. W. Lovett, E. M. Gauger, J. Keeling, G. Cerullo, D. G. Lidzey, and T. Virgili,Superabsorption in an organic mi- crocavity: Toward a quantum battery, Sci. Adv.8, eabk3160 (2022). doi:10.1126/sciadv.abk3160

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abk3160 2022

  50. [50]

    Joshi and T

    J. Joshi and T. S. Mahesh,Experimental investigation of a quan- tum battery using star-topology NMR spin systems, Phys. Rev. A106, 042601 (2022). doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.106.042601

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.106.042601 2022