Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 6 minor 51 references

Turing mechanisms in a multimode open quantum system

T0 review · 1 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-09 · glm-5.2

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Quantum Turing patterns emerge in three-site bosonic chain

desk verdict Turing patterns in a 3-site open quantum system: clean mean-field bifurcation analysis, solid weak-quantum numerics, qualitative-only claims in the strong-quantum regime read the letter →

arxiv 2607.07449 v1 pith:634RN2KU submitted 2026-07-08 quant-ph math-phmath.MP

Giorgia Comparato , Francesco Gargano , Rosario Lo Franco This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phmath-phmath.MP
keywords dynamicsmodespatternquantumdifferentspatialsystemcompetition
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that Turing-type pattern formation — classically known from reaction-diffusion chemistry and biology — can be realized in a multimode open quantum system. The authors study a one-dimensional chain of three bosonic modes governed by a GKSL master equation (the standard framework for open quantum dynamics). The model combines local parametric driving (squeezing), single- and two-photon dissipation, and two nonlocal dissipative channels acting on different spatial scales: a short-range incoherent pump between neighbors and a longer-range damping channel spanning three sites. In the semiclassical (mean-field) limit, these ingredients produce a discrete reaction-diffusion-like equation where the short-range channel plays the role of activator (anti-diffusive Laplacian) and the long-range channel plays the role of inhibitor (stabilizing bi-Laplacian). The authors derive analytical Turing instability conditions — specifying when a spatially uniform state loses stability to a selected non-uniform spatial mode — and construct bifurcation diagrams showing how different spatial modes compete and are selected as parameters vary. They then solve the full quantum master equation numerically and compare the quantum steady states, characterized by reduced Wigner functions, against the deterministic predictions. In the weak quantum regime (small nonlinear damping), the quantum steady states display bimodal Wigner structures whose peaks align with the classical patterned solutions, and a set of modal quadrature operators provides a quantitative bridge between the bifurcation diagram and the quantum state. In the strong quantum regime (larger nonlinear damping), fluctuations smooth the Wigner distributions, but the authors argue that signatures of the deterministic spatial organization persist. In the detuning-dominant regime, the instability is oscillatory rather than stationary, producing wave-like patterns whose quantum signatures appear as ring-like Wigner structures.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the mapping from the GKSL master equation to a discrete reaction-diffusion system via mean-field factorization, where the short-range dissipative channel (strength lambda) generates an anti-diffusive discrete Laplacian and the long-range channel (strength kappa) generates a stabilizing discrete bi-Laplacian. The Turing instability conditions are derived from the eigenvalues of the discrete Laplacian eigenvectors, and the quantum-classical bridge is quantified through modal quadrature operators projecting onto these eigenvectors.

What would settle it

If the full quantum steady states in larger lattices (N >> 3) did not display spatial structures consistent with the mean-field bifurcation predictions — or if, in the strong quantum regime, the modal quadrature separation vanished entirely rather than merely being smoothed — the central claim that the deterministic analysis organizes the quantum dynamics would be undermined.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the classical Turing mechanism — where a uniform state stable without diffusion becomes unstable once spatial coupling is introduced, selecting a preferred spatial wavelength — extends to a genuinely multimode open quantum system when the dissipative channels are engineered to implement short-range facilitation and long-range suppression. The deterministic mean-field bifurcation diagram, derived from the reaction-diffusion-like drift of the GKSL equation, organizes the quantum steady states: the spatial mode selected by the classical linear stability analysis predicts which non-uniform structure appears in the reduced Wigner functions. The paper identifies two量子

Load-bearing premise

The mean-field factorization that closes the moment hierarchy — replacing quantum expectation values of operator products with products of classical amplitudes — is the load-bearing premise. In the strong quantum regime, the authors themselves note that the resulting stochastic approximation becomes unreliable (the diffusion matrix loses positive-definiteness, and third-order quantum corrections are non-negligible), yet they continue to use the deterministic bifurcationdi

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the mean-field bifurcation framework genuinely organizes quantum steady states in larger lattices, it would provide a design tool for engineering spatial patterns in driven-dissipative quantum platforms — superconducting circuits, trapped ions, or photonic lattices — without requiring coherent control over individual sites.
  • The competition between spatial modes observed in the three-site chain suggests that larger lattices could exhibit wavelength selection analogous to classical Turing patterns, but with the selected wavelength tunable by dissipative parameters rather than by coherent tunneling.
  • The persistence of pattern signatures in the strong quantum regime, though smoothed, raises the question of whether there exists a critical nonlinear damping beyond which the Turing structure is entirely destroyed — a quantum-to-classical crossover that the three-site system hints at but cannot fully resolve.
  • The ring-like Wigner structures in the oscillatory regime connect quantum pattern formation to limit-cycle dynamics, suggesting that dissipative engineering could produce time-dependent spatial structures with no coherent-evolution counterpart.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper restricts to three sites, where only two non-uniform spatial modes exist. Whether the bifurcation framework survives in larger lattices — where many modes compete and continuum-limit wavelength selection becomes meaningful — is not tested and may face exponential growth in Hilbert space dimension.
  • The claim that the deterministic bifurcation diagram remains useful in the strong quantum regime rests on qualitative visual comparison of Wigner functions and modest modal quadrature trends. A quantitative criterion for when the mean-field framework breaks down — beyond noting that the diffusion matrix becomes non-positive-definite — is not established.
  • The Z2 symmetry of the quantum steady state means the Wigner function is a statistical mixture of two equivalent patterns. Whether a measurement or feedback protocol could select one pattern and produce genuinely non-classical spatial correlations (e.g., entanglement between sites) is suggested but unexplored.
  • The connection to the Gierer-Meinhardt framework (short-range facilitation, long-range competition) is invoked as motivation, but the paper does not test whether the quantum system satisfies the conditions under which Gierer-Meinhardt patterns are robust — for instance, whether the activator-inhibitor timescale separation holds in the quantum regime.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper investigates Turing-type pattern formation in a finite chain of bosonic modes governed by a GKSL master equation with local parametric driving, nonlinear (two-photon) damping, and two nonlocal dissipative channels acting on different spatial scales (nearest-neighbor incoherent pumping and longer-range damping). The mean-field equations derived from the master equation take a reaction-diffusion-like form with an anti-diffusive Laplacian and a stabilizing bi-Laplacian, and the authors perform a standard linear stability analysis to derive Turing instability conditions for both the null and nontrivial homogeneous equilibria. Numerical continuation (Julia/BifurcationKit) produces bifurcation diagrams in the continuation parameter κ, and full GKSL simulations (QuTiP) yield reduced Wigner functions that are compared with semiclassical stochastic (SDE) densities. The central claim is that the deterministic bifurcation structure organizes the quantum steady-state behavior, with mode competition and pattern selection visible in the Wigner functions and modal quadrature data.

Significance. The paper extends quantum Turing instability studies from one- and two-mode systems to a minimal multimode (three-site) chain, which is a genuine advance: it allows two distinct non-uniform spatial modes to coexist and compete, enabling pattern selection that is trivially absent in smaller systems. The analytical linear stability analysis (Eqs. 16–20, 26–31) is clean and standard. The Gierer-Meinhardt interpretation (short-range facilitation via λ, long-range suppression via κ) is a natural and well-motivated design principle. The weak-quantum-regime results (Table I, Figs. 4–6) provide a convincing quantitative bridge between deterministic fixed points and quantum steady states, including the expected 1/2 symmetric-ordering shift in occupations. The code and methods (QuTiP, BifurcationKit, adaptive Euler-Maruyama SDE) are reproducible in principle. The paper is a solid contribution to the growing literature on pattern formation in driven-dissipative quantum systems.

major comments (1)
  1. Section IV.A.2 (strong quantum regime, γ₂ = 0.03, Table II): The claim that 'the deterministic analysis remains a useful tool' in the strong quantum regime is supported only qualitatively. The modal quadrature separations in Table II are weak — at κ = 0.022, R_X,sym = 1.51 vs R_X,asym = 1.29 (ratio ~1.17), compared to ~1.5 in the weak regime (Table I). Furthermore, for κ = 0.04 (Fig. 8), the paper itself notes that a non-uniform branch connected to the null solution coexists with the stable nontrivial homogeneous state, making it ambiguous which deterministic bifurcation structure the Wigner functions reflect. A quantitative benchmark — e.g., comparing Wigner peak locations to deterministic fixed points, or computing the fidelity between the quantum steady state and a mixture of coherent states at the deterministic equilibria — would substantially strengthen the claim. Without it, the 'd
minor comments (6)
  1. Eq. (6): The term s = (2γ₂ − γ₁)/2 is introduced without immediately clarifying that it represents an effective linear gain-loss balance; a brief parenthetical would help the reader.
  2. Figures 3–5, 8–10, 12–13: The reduced Wigner function panels would benefit from consistent color scales and axis ranges across panels within each figure to facilitate visual comparison.
  3. Table I caption: 'squeezing-dominant regime, weak quantum regime' — consider stating the γ₂ value explicitly in the caption for clarity, since the distinction between Tables I and II hinges on it.
  4. Section IV.A.1, paragraph on SDE comparison: The statement '|α_j|² = ⟨â†_j â_j⟩ + 1/2 because of the symmetric ordering' is correct but could briefly note that this holds for the truncated Wigner approximation specifically, to avoid confusion with the general relation.
  5. Reference [3] (Wang et al., 2026) and [25] (QuTiP 5, 2026): Verify that these references are published or properly cited as preprints, as the dates appear to be in the future.
  6. The abstract states 'providing a bridge between nonlinear dynamical systems, dissipative quantum mechanics, and spatial self-organization'; this is somewhat grand for a three-site study; consider toning down.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and the positive assessment. The referee raises one major comment concerning the quantitative support for the claim that deterministic analysis remains useful in the strong quantum regime (Section IV.A.2). We agree that a quantitative benchmark would strengthen this claim and will add one in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Section IV.A.2 (strong quantum regime, γ₂ = 0.03, Table II): The claim that 'the deterministic analysis remains a useful tool' in the strong quantum regime is supported only qualitatively. The modal quadrature separations in Table II are weak — at κ = 0.022, R_X,sym = 1.51 vs R_X,asym = 1.29 (ratio ~1.17), compared to ~1.5 in the weak regime (Table I). Furthermore, for κ = 0.04 (Fig. 8), the paper itself notes that a non-uniform branch connected to the null solution coexists with the stable nontrivial homogeneous state, making it ambiguous which deterministic bifurcation structure the Wigner functions reflect. A quantitative benchmark — e.g., comparing Wigner peak locations to deterministic fixed points, or computing the fidelity between the quantum steady state and a mixture of coherent states at the deterministic equilibria — would substantially strengthen the claim. Without it, the 'd

    Authors: We thank the referee for this precise and constructive comment. The referee is correct on both points: (1) the modal quadrature separations in Table II are substantially weaker than in Table I, and (2) the coexistence of a non-uniform branch (connected to the null solution) with the stable nontrivial homogeneous state at κ = 0.04 introduces genuine ambiguity about which deterministic structure the Wigner functions reflect. We acknowledge that the current manuscript does not provide a quantitative benchmark to resolve this ambiguity, and the claim that 'the deterministic analysis remains a useful tool' is therefore not as well supported as it should be in the strong quantum regime. We will address this in the revised manuscript as follows. First, we will add a quantitative comparison between the Wigner function peak locations (extracted via numerical maximization of the reduced Wigner functions) and the deterministic fixed-point coordinates for each κ value in Table II. This will make explicit how closely the quantum steady-state phase-space structure tracks each competing deterministic branch. Second, we will compute the fidelity between the reduced quantum steady state and a statistical mixture of coherent states placed at the symmetry-related deterministic equilibria, following the approach used in Ref. [9] (Kato and Nakao, Sci. Rep. 12, 15573 (2022)). This will provide a direct quantitative measure of how well the deterministic fixed points organize the quantum steady state, even in the strong quantum regime. Third, we will revise the language in Section IV.A.2 to more carefully qualify the claim. In particular, we will state explicitly that the deterministic analysis provides a qualitative organizing framework — identifying which spatial modes are relevant and in什么パ revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found; derivation is self-contained with standard external tools and references.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain proceeds from a fully specified GKSL master equation (Eq. 5) through standard Wigner correspondences (Appendix A1, citing Gardiner/Zoller [48] and Carmichael [49]) to mean-field equations (Eq. 6, Appendix A2) via an explicitly stated semiclassical factorization ⟨â_j N̂_j⟩ ≈ |α_j|²α_j (Eq. A2.2–A2.3). The Turing instability conditions (Eqs. 18–20, 28–31) follow from linear stability analysis of Eq. (6) using the eigenvalue structure of the discrete Laplacian, which is a standard mathematical object (DCT-2 matrix, Ref. [22] by Strang, an external reference). The quantum numerics are computed independently via QuTiP (Ref. [25], external library) and compared against the deterministic bifurcation diagram. The SDE (Appendix A3) is derived from the truncated Wigner Fokker-Planck equation using standard spectral factorization (Refs [7,9,10] by external authors). No load-bearing step reduces to a self-citation: the authors cite their own prior work only in the conclusions (Refs [36–40,43]) for future directions, not for any step in the derivation. The mean-field approximation is standard and transparently flagged as an approximation whose validity is tested by comparison with full GKSL numerics. No prediction is fitted to data and then presented as a derived result. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks throughout.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model introduces no new physical entities (particles, forces, dimensions). All Lindblad operators (Eqs. 2-4) are constructed from standard bosonic creation/annihilation operators. The nonlocal dissipative channels (λ and κ channels) are engineered reservoirs whose physical implementation is not specified but whose mathematical form is standard. The 'invented' aspect is the specific combination of dissipative channels, not a new postulated entity. No free parameters are fitted to reproduce a target result; all are chosen to illustrate regimes. The mean-field closure and truncated Wigner approximation are standard domain assumptions, not ad hoc constructions.

free parameters (7)
  • γ₁ (single-photon loss rate) = 0.03
    Phenomenological decay rate; chosen by hand for numerical illustration.
  • γ₂ (two-photon loss rate) = 0.005 (weak) or 0.03 (strong)
    Nonlinear damping rate; chosen to explore weak vs. strong quantum regimes.
  • η (parametric drive strength) = 0.025 or 0.026
    Squeezing drive amplitude; chosen to place the system in the squeezing-dominant regime.
  • Δ (detuning) = 0.05 or 1.0
    Rotating-frame detuning; chosen to distinguish squeezing-dominant (Δ=0.05) from detuning-dominant (Δ=1) regimes.
  • θ (squeezing phase) = π
    Phase of parametric drive; fixed throughout.
  • λ (short-range dissipative coupling) = 0.08
    Incoherent pump strength; chosen by hand.
  • κ (long-range dissipative coupling) = varied as bifurcation parameter
    Used as continuation parameter in bifurcation diagrams; not fitted but scanned.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Mean-field factorization: ⟨â_j N̂_j⟩ ≈ |α_j|² α_j
    Invoked in Eq. A2.2-A2.3 to close the moment hierarchy and derive the reaction-diffusion-like drift. Standard in semiclassical quantum optics but breaks down for small occupations or large γ₂.
  • domain assumption Truncated Wigner approximation: third-order derivative terms Q_{γ₂}[W] are negligible when γ₂ is small
    Invoked in Appendix A1 and Section IV.A.1 to reduce the Wigner equation to a Fokker-Planck form and derive the SDE (Eq. A3.2). Validity is parameter-dependent and explicitly noted to fail in the strong quantum regime.
  • standard math GKSL (Lindblad) master equation adequately describes the system-environment interaction
    Standard assumption in open quantum systems; invoked in Eq. (5). Assumes Markovian bath and weak system-bath coupling.
  • domain assumption Fock space truncation at finite n_cut captures the steady-state physics
    Invoked in Section IV for all QuTiP computations. Checked by increasing n_cut until Wigner functions stabilize, but no systematic convergence data is presented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Turing mechanisms in a multimode open quantum system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/634RN2KU

@misc{pith2026260707449,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Turing mechanisms in a multimode open quantum system},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/634RN2KU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.07449}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate pattern formation in a finite chain of bosonic modes whose dynamics is governed by a Gorini-Kossakowski-Sudarshan-Lindblad (GKSL) master equation. The model combines local parametric driving and nonlinear damping with nonlocal dissipative couplings between modes that work on different discrete spatial scales. In the classical limit, these mechanisms generate a reaction-diffusion-like dynamics, allowing the emergence of Turing-type instabilities. The key aspect of the analysis is the coexistence and competition of different unstable spatial modes. Depending on the range of parameters, the system may select different stationary nonuniform configurations, oscillatory wave-like states, or regimes in which multiple modes interact before a dominant pattern is established, thus providing a mechanism for pattern selection. We compare the deterministic bifurcation scenario, generated by a reaction-diffusion-like system derived from semiclassical drift dynamics, with the quantum dynamics, derived via the GKSL master equation, using phase-space methods and reduced Wigner functions. The results show how Turing instabilities, mode competition, and pattern selection can be extended to multimode open quantum systems, providing a bridge between nonlinear dynamical systems, dissipative quantum mechanics, and spatial self-organization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07449 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Bifurcation diagram of the deterministic model of Eq. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Reduced Wigner functions in the phase space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a)-(c) Reduced Wigner functions for the three￾site quantum system for the system parameters ∆ = 0.05, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.005, θ = π, η = 0.025, λ = 0.08, κ = 0.08, corresponding to the stable homogeneous stationary branch of the deterministic bifurcation diagram in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a)-(c) Reduced Wigner functions for the three￾site quantum system for the system parameters ∆ = 0.05, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.005, θ = π, η = 0.025, λ = 0.08, κ = 0.04, corresponding to the first non-uniform stationary branch of the deterministic bifurcation diagram in [PI…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) The quantum mean phonon number for sites 1 and 3 (denoted by ⟨aˆ † 1,3aˆ1,3⟩, black dots) plotted alongside the semiclassical averaged squared amplitude determined from the SDE (|α1,3| 2, red crosses). (b) A similar comparison for site 2. In both cases, the numeric…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a)-(c) Reduced Wigner functions for the three￾site quantum system for the system parameters ∆ = 0.05, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.005, θ = π, η = 0.025, λ = 0.08, κ = 0.0175, corresponding to the second non-uniform stationary branch of the deterministic bifurcation diagram in …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: For sufficiently large values of κ, the nontrivial homogeneous state is stable, as indicated by the thick black branch. As κ decreases, this homogeneous state loses stability through a non-uniform instability, giving rise to stationary patterned solutions. Since these …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Bifurcation diagram of the deterministic model of Eq. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (a)–(c) Reduced Wigner functions for the three￾site quantum system in the squeezing-dominant regime for the parameters ∆ = 0.05, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.03, θ = π, η = 0.026, λ = 0.08, and κ = 0.022. This value of κ lies just below the first instability threshold of the nont…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a)–(c) Reduced Wigner functions for the three￾site quantum system in the squeezing-dominant regime for the parameters ∆ = 0.05, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.03, θ = π, η = 0.026, λ = 0.08, and κ = 0.015. Two non-uniform spatial modes are unstable. The black, green, and blue dot…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Bifurcation diagram of the deterministic model of Eq. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (a)-(c) Reduced Wigner functions for the three￾site quantum system in the detuning-dominant regime for the parameters ∆ = 1, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.005, θ = π, η = 0.025, λ = 0.08, and κ = 0.0175, corresponding to the second os￾cillatory branch of the deterministic bifurca…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The deterministic Turing instability conditions derived in Eqs

    Deterministic pattern roadmap for the null homogeneous solution We begin with the instability analysis of the null so- lution. The deterministic Turing instability conditions derived in Eqs. (19)–(20) require the homogeneous null equilibrium to be stable with respect to the uniform mode, namely s+ p 4η2 −∆ 2 <0. (33) Instead, a non–uniform mode m≥ 1 becom...

    work page

  2. [2]

    ∂ ∂αj AjW + ∂ ∂α∗j A∗jW # +1 2 NX j,k=1 ∂2 ∂αj ∂α∗k DjkW + NX j=1

    Deterministic roadmap for the nontrivial homogeneous state We now consider the deterministic bifurcation diagram for the nontrivial homogeneous equilibrium. We consider the following set of system parameters ∆ = 0.05, γ1 = 0.03, γ2 = 0.03, θ=π, η= 0.026, λ= 0.08, (43) so that a nontrivial homogeneous equilibrium exists when r+ = 0.987 and ϕ = 5.63691 in E...

    work page

  3. [3]

    M. C. Cross and P. C. Hohenberg, Pattern formation outside of equilibrium, Rev. Mod. Phys.65, 851 (1993)

    work page 1993

  4. [4]

    A. M. Turing, The chemical basis of morphogenesis, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci.237, 37 (1952)

    work page 1952

  5. [5]

    W. Wang, Y. Zhang, B. Liu, and D. Wang, Emergence of Turing patterns in complex networks: A partial link activation approach, Phys. Rev. E113, 054217 (2026)

    work page 2026

  6. [6]

    Nakao and A

    H. Nakao and A. S. Mikhailov, Turing patterns in network- organized activator–inhibitor systems, Nat. Phys.6, 544 17 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Gierer and H

    A. Gierer and H. Meinhardt, A theory of biological pattern formation, Kybernetik12, 30 (1972)

    work page 1972

  8. [8]

    Koseska, E

    A. Koseska, E. Volkov, and J. Kurths, Transition from amplitude to oscillation death via turing bifurcation, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 024103 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Bandyopadhyay, T

    B. Bandyopadhyay, T. Khatun, D. Biswas, and T. Baner- jee, Quantum manifestations of homogeneous and inho- mogeneous oscillation suppression states, Phys. Rev. E 102, 062205 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Bandyopadhyay, T

    B. Bandyopadhyay, T. Khatun, and T. Banerjee, Quan- tum Turing bifurcation: Transition from quantum ampli- tude death to quantum oscillation death, Phys. Rev. E 104, 024214 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Kato and H

    Y. Kato and H. Nakao, Turing instability in quantum activator–inhibitor systems, Sci. Rep.12, 15573 (2022)

    2022

  4. [12]

    B. Paul, B. Bandyopadhyay, and T. Banerjee, Attractive- repulsive interaction in coupled quantum oscillators, Phys. Rev. E110, 034210 (2024)

    2024

  5. [13]

    Roberts and A

    D. Roberts and A. A. Clerk, Driven-Dissipative Quantum Kerr Resonators: New Exact Solutions, Photon Blockade and Quantum Bistability, Phys. Rev. X10, 021022 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Chia, W.-K

    A. Chia, W.-K. D. Mok, C. Noh, and L.-C. Kwek, Quan- tum pure noise-induced transitions: A truly nonclassical limit cycle sensitive to number parity, SciPost Phys.15, 121 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    H. M. Lim, D. Dwiputra, M. S. Ukhtary, and A. R. T. Nugraha, Transient dynamics of the quantum Stuart- Landau oscillator, Phys. Rev. A112, 043720 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    Polkovnikov, Phase space representation of quantum dynamics, Ann

    A. Polkovnikov, Phase space representation of quantum dynamics, Ann. Phys.325, 1790 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Carusotto and C

    I. Carusotto and C. Ciuti, Quantum fluids of light, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 299 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Keldysh field theory for driven open quantum systems, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 096001 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Minganti, A

    F. Minganti, A. Biella, N. Bartolo, and C. Ciuti, Spectral theory of Liouvillians for dissipative phase transitions, Phys. Rev. A98, 042118 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    McDonald and A

    A. McDonald and A. A. Clerk, Third quantization of open quantum systems: Dissipative symmetries and connec- tions to phase-space and Keldysh field-theory formula- tions, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033107 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold, J. Marino, and S. Diehl, Universality in driven open quantum matter, Rev. Mod. Phys.97, 025004 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    Dutta, S

    S. Dutta, S. Zhang, and M. Haque, Quantum origin of limit cycles, fixed points, and critical slowing down, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 050407 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    Tezak, N

    N. Tezak, N. H. Amini, and H. Mabuchi, Low-dimensional manifolds for exact representation of open quantum sys- tems, Phys. Rev. A96, 062113 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Strang, The Discrete Cosine Transform, SIAM Review 41, 135 (1999)

    G. Strang, The Discrete Cosine Transform, SIAM Review 41, 135 (1999)

    1999

  17. [25]

    Nemes, K

    M. Nemes, K. Furuya, G. Pellegrino, A. Oliveira, M. Reis, and L. Sanz, Quantum entanglement and fixed point Hopf bifurcation, Phys. Lett. A354, 60 (2006)

    2006

  18. [26]

    P. Jung, A. Cornell-Bell, F. Moss, S. Kadar, J. Wang, and K. Showalter, Noise sustained waves in subexcitable media: From chemical waves to brain waves, Chaos8, 567 (1998)

    1998

  19. [27]

    Lambert, E

    N. Lambert, E. Gigu` ere, P. Menczel, B. Li, P. Hopf, G. Su´ arez, M. Gali, J. Lishman, R. Gadhvi, R. Agarwal, A. Galicia, N. Shammah, P. D. Nation, J. R. Johansson, S. Ahmed, S. Cross, A. Pitchford, and F. Nori, QuTiP 5: The Quantum Toolbox in Python, Phys. Rep.1153, 1 (2026)

    2026

  20. [28]

    Mølmer, Y

    K. Mølmer, Y. Castin, and J. Dalibard, Monte Carlo wave-function method in quantum optics, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B10, 524 (1993)

    1993

  21. [29]

    Lamba, J

    H. Lamba, J. C. Mattingly, and A. M. Stuart, An adap- tive Euler–Maruyama scheme for SDEs: convergence and stability, IMA J. Numer. Anal.27, 479 (2007)

    2007

  22. [30]

    Veltz, BifurcationKit.jl (2020)

    R. Veltz, BifurcationKit.jl (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Gambino, M

    G. Gambino, M. C. Lombardo, and M. Sammartino, Cross- diffusion-induced subharmonic spatial resonances in a predator-prey system, Phys. Rev. E97, 012220 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    G. Agez, C. Szwaj, E. Louvergneaux, and P. Glorieux, Noisy precursors in one-dimensional patterns, Phys. Rev. A66, 063805 (2002)

    2002

  25. [33]

    Jacobs and D

    K. Jacobs and D. A. Steck, A straightforward introduction to continuous quantum measurement, Contemp. Phys.47, 279 (2006), https://doi.org/10.1080/00107510601101934

    2006 doi

  26. [34]

    Fagotti, Locally quasi-stationary states in noninter- acting spin chains, SciPost Physics8, 048 (2020)

    M. Fagotti, Locally quasi-stationary states in noninter- acting spin chains, SciPost Physics8, 048 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Gerbino, I

    F. Gerbino, I. Lesanovsky, and G. Perfetto, Kinetics of quantum reaction-diffusion systems, SciPost Physics Core 8, 014 (2025)

    2025

  28. [36]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009)

    2009

  29. [37]

    Streltsov, G

    A. Streltsov, G. Adesso, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Quantum coherence as a resource, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 041003 (2017)

    2017

  30. [38]

    Sun, Z.-H

    K. Sun, Z.-H. Liu, Y. Wang, Z.-Y. Hao, X.-Y. Xu, J.-S. Xu, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, A. Castellini, L. Lami, A. Winter, G. Adesso, G. Compagno, and R. L. Franco, Activation of indistinguishability-based quantum coherence for en- hanced metrological applications with particle statis...

    2022

  31. [39]

    Lo Franco and G

    R. Lo Franco and G. Compagno, Indistinguishability of elementary systems as a resource for quantum information processing, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 240403 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Lo Franco and G

    R. Lo Franco and G. Compagno, Quantum entanglement of identical particles by standard information-theoretic notions, Sci. Rep.6, 20603 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    Aolita, F

    L. Aolita, F. de Melo, and L. Davidovich, Open-system dynamics of entanglement:a key issues review, Rep. Prog. Phys.78, 042001 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    Mahdavipour, F

    K. Mahdavipour, F. Nosrati, S. Sciara, R. Morandotti, and R. Lo Franco, Generation of genuine multipartite entangled states via indistinguishability of identical parti- cles, PRX Quantum5, 040350 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    X. Wang, M. M. Wilde, and Y. Su, Quantifying the magic of quantum channels, New J. Phys.21, 103002 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Fan and A

    B. Fan and A. M. Garc´ ıa-Garc´ ıa, Quenched dynamics and pattern formation in clean and disordered bogoliubov-de gennes superconductors, SciPost Phys.17, 049 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    Mercurio, E

    A. Mercurio, E. Russo, F. Mauceri, S. Savasta, F. Nori, V. Macr` ı, and R. Lo Franco, Bilateral photon emission from a vibrating mirror and multiphoton entanglement generation, SciPost Phys.18, 067 (2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    Bagarello, R

    F. Bagarello, R. Di Salvo, F. Gargano, and F. Oliveri, (H, ρ)-induced dynamics and large time behaviors, Phys- ica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications505, 355 (2018). 18

    2018

  39. [47]

    A. Y. Khrennikov,Open Quantum Systems in Biology, Cognitive and Social Sciences, 1st ed. (Springer, Cham,

  40. [48]

    Bagarello, F

    F. Bagarello, F. Gargano, and F. Oliveri,Quantum Tools for Macroscopic Systems, 1st ed., Synthesis Lectures on Mathematics & Statistics (Springer, Cham, 2023) p. 114

    2023

  41. [49]

    Gorgone, G

    M. Gorgone, G. Inferrera, and C. F. Munaf` o, Operatorial formulation of crimo-taxis phenomena in a street, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.58, 385301 (2025)

    2025

  42. [50]

    C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller,Quantum Noise: A Hand- book of Markovian and Non-Markovian Quantum Stochas- tic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics, 3rd ed. (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004)

    2004

  43. [51]

    H. J. Carmichael,Statistical Methods in Quantum Optics 1: Master Equations and Fokker-Planck Equations, 1st ed., Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1999)

    1999

Pith tools

Reviewed July 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.