Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Nonlinear Optics Mediated by Chiral Waveguide QED: Generation of Momentum-anticorrelated Photon Pairs

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single chiral transmon converts two independent incoming photons into a photon pair with opposite momentum shifts, and a second chiral transmon suppresses that pair to restore coherent transmission; a local drive tunes the transmitted pho

desk verdict Solid semiclassical core plus a suggestive but under-verified full-quantum two-photon picture; the ad hoc normalizations and the unshown β fit keep it from being fully convincing, but it deserves refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.18562 v1 pith:C2HT7BWX submitted 2026-07-20 quant-ph

Wenqi Tong , Spencer J Walsh , H. Alaeian , F. Robicheaux This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords chiralquantumopticswaveguideQEDtransmontwo-photonscatteringincoherenttransmissionphotonstatisticsg(2)functionmomentumanticorrelation
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

This paper aims to show what happens to light after it passes through superconducting transmons chirally coupled to a one-dimensional waveguide. In the weak-driving limit, the incoherent part of the transmitted light is generated mainly by a two-photon process: one chiral transmon takes two independent incoming photons and converts them into a photon pair with opposite momentum shifts. Because that pair is orthogonal to the incoming wavepacket, it cannot interfere with the drive—which is why a single transmon can completely destroy coherence at a specific Rabi frequency—and a second chiral transmon suppresses the pair, restoring coherent transmission at any driving power. The paper also shows that adding a local drive with tunable phase and amplitude gives a knob to change the photon statistics of the transmitted field from antibunched through coherent and bunched to superbunched.

What carries the argument

The central object is the two-photon wavefunction Ψ_sym_inc(k, k′, t_f), obtained by evolving a two-photon Gaussian wavepacket through the chiral transmon and then orthogonalizing against the freely propagated input wavepacket. Its signature is the anticorrelation line k−k0 = −(k′−k0) in the two-photon momentum density, which encodes the creation of a photon pair with opposite momentum shifts. The chiral coupling (only right-moving photons) and the relative phase between waveguide and local drive act as the controls. The pair's orthogonality to the input is what converts absence of interference into measurable loss of coherence, and its suppression by a second transmon is the mechanism for r

What would settle it

Compute the scattered two-photon wavefunction for wavepacket widths well beyond 8σ (or with a non-Gaussian pulse) and check whether the un-normalised incoherent fraction continues to scale as 1/Δx and whether the anticorrelation line k−k0 = −(k′−k0) persists. If the marginal spectrum only approaches the semiclassical lineshape after the NS ∝ Δx rescaling and the two-photon density stops being anticorrelated, the central claim fails. Experimentally, measuring the cross-correlation between the two sidebands around resonance would directly reveal or refute the anticorrelated pair.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper argues that, for weak coherent drive, the incoherent component of light transmitted through a single chiral transmon is dominated by a two-photon process in which two independent input photons are converted into a photon pair with opposite momentum shifts, satisfying k−k0 = −(k′−k0). This two-photon state is orthogonal to the input wavepacket, so it cannot interfere with the drive—hence the complete loss of coherence at Ω = Γ/√2. A second chiral transmon suppresses the population of this anticorrelated pair, restoring coherent transmission regardless of Rabi frequency. The paper supports this by showing convergence of the two-photon wavepacket power spectra and g^(2)(τ) toward semi

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the equivalence between a finite-duration two-photon wavepacket and a continuous-wave weak coherent drive; the match to semiclassical results is made after rescaling the spectra and g^(2), so if the convergence is not genuine, the two-photon origin claim would not be established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The incoherent part of the transmitted field after one chiral transmon is a nonclassical two-photon entangled state; its orthogonality to the input explains why coherent transmission vanishes at Ω = Γ/√2.
  • Two chiral transmons restore coherent transmission for any Rabi frequency (within the paper's idealization), because the second transmon suppresses the anticorrelated pair population.
  • Adding a local drive with independent phase and amplitude changes only the ratio Ω/Ω_wg and can move g^(2)(0) continuously from 0 to infinity while keeping the total Rabi frequency fixed.
  • Power spectra and g^(2)(τ) from the two-photon wavepacket converge to the semiclassical weak-drive results as the input wavepacket width grows, supporting two-photon dominance in the weak-driving limit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the two-photon mechanism holds, the same setup could act as a built-in source of frequency-anticorrelated photon pairs from an ordinary coherent laser, without a separate nonlinear crystal; the paper already shows a negative Wigner function for the reduced one-photon state.
  • The revival-of-coherence result suggests a more general principle: in cascaded chiral systems, an even number of transmons may leave the field coherent because each pair of transmons generates and then annihilates the same two-photon excitation; this could extend to longer chains and to higher-order processes under stronger driving.
  • Because the analytical g^(2)(0) depends only on the ratio Ω/Ω_wg, one could dynamically modulate the local drive phase to sweep photon statistics in situ, turning a transmon into a fast, electrically tunable photon-statistics valve.
  • A direct experimental probe would be to measure the cross-correlation between the two sidebands around resonance; a positive cross-correlation with opposite detunings would be a clear signature of the momentum-anticorrelated pair.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a chain of two-level transmons chirally coupled to a one-dimensional waveguide. In the semiclassical treatment (Sec. III), it reproduces known resonance-fluorescence results: a single chiral transmon produces incoherent transmitted light with T_inc = 1 at Ω = Γ/√2, a localized spectrum, and bunching, while a second transmon can form a dark dimer state and restore full coherence. In the full-quantum treatment (Sec. IV), a two-photon Gaussian wavepacket is scattered, and the freely propagated input wavepacket is subtracted (Eq. 29) to define an incoherent component. After applying ad hoc normalizations, the computed power spectrum and g^(2)(τ) are compared with weak-drive semiclassical results. The authors conclude that the incoherent light is dominated by a two-photon process producing photon pairs with opposite momentum shifts (Fig. 9), that this component is suppressed by a second transmon as 1/Δx^β with β = 3, and that the Wigner function of the reduced one-photon state is nonclassical. Section V introduces independent local driving and derives a g^(2)(0) expression claimed to range from 0 to ∞, giving anti-bunched, coherent, bunched, and super-bunched outputs.

Significance. If correct, the paper provides a concrete microscopic mechanism for the incoherent resonance fluorescence of a single chiral transmon: generation of momentum-anticorrelated photon pairs from two independent photons. The semiclassical part is standard and internally consistent, and the full-quantum simulation is a nontrivial wavefunction calculation that goes beyond the Markovian master equation. The local-drive tunability of g^(2)(0) is a useful practical prediction. The main novelty is the two-photon-pair interpretation and the connection to the revival of coherence. However, the central inference from the wavefunction calculation is not yet fully supported because the decomposition of the incoherent component and the normalization used in the benchmark are not airtight. The paper does not provide code or data, but the analytical checks in Sec. III are a strength.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV, Eq. (29)] The definition of Ψ_inc subtracts only the free-space wavepacket Ψ0, not the elastic two-photon scattering amplitude. For a chiral two-level system the single-photon transmission amplitude is a nontrivial phase factor, e.g. t(ω)=(ω−ω_a−iΓ/2)/(ω−ω_a+iΓ/2), with t(ω_a)=−1. The coherent two-photon component of a weak coherent drive is t(k1)t(k2)Ψ0, not Ψ0, so the residual Ψ_inc contains a coherent elastic contribution L=(t(k1)t(k2)−1)Ψ0. The paper does not quantify ||L||/||Ψ_inc|| for the wavepacket widths used. If L is not negligible, the PSD and g^(2) in Figs. 7–8, and the momentum anticorrelation in Fig. 9, are not those of the purely incoherent field. Please subtract the full elastic product, or demonstrate numerically that L is negligible at each Δx.
  2. [Sec. IV, Eq. (31)-(33) and Figs. 7-8] The comparisons use NS ∝ Δx for the power spectrum and rescale g^(2)(0) to the semiclassical value. These rescalings remove the absolute photon-number scale, so the agreement tests only shapes (a marginal PSD and a normalized correlation function) for the chosen widths. This does not establish that the calculated two-photon wavefunction reproduces the magnitude of the semiclassical incoherent field. The Ω^4 power-scaling argument shows two-photon scaling of the intensity but not the specific wavefunction structure claimed in Fig. 9. Please provide an absolute comparison, e.g. the ratio of incoherent photon number per incident photon as a function of Δx versus the Ω→0 semiclassical limit, or a photon-number-resolved coherent-state simulation.
  3. [Sec. IV, two-transmon suppression] The suppression by a second transmon is quantified only by 'β=3' with no fit, no Δx range, and no uncertainty. In addition, all full-quantum simulations place the transmons at the same position xn = 0 (Sec. IV), so the second transmon is coincident with the first. This does not represent the cascaded, separated-emitter geometry of the semiclassical revival in Fig. 5. Please provide the fit details and discuss how the same-position idealization maps onto the separated-emitter revival, or perform simulations with finite separation.
  4. [Sec. V, Eq. (38)] Equation (38) as typeset has a squared denominator. This does not reproduce the case-1 value g^(2)(0)=9 quoted immediately below; the value 9 follows only if the denominator is not squared. Since Eq. (38) is the basis for the claimed 0-to-∞ tunability of g^(2)(0), please correct the typesetting and verify the expression dimensionally and against the numerical g^(2) curves in Fig. 12.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 9] The colorbar label contains a data-file name ('wqedc2dt2_1_200_160.txt'); remove this artifact.
  2. [Fig. 12] The inset is nearly unreadable; enlarge it or put it in a separate panel.
  3. [Sec. IV] The statement that the transmon excitation probability is less than 10^-16 should be accompanied by a definition of how this quantity is computed, e.g. the norm of the ψ1 and ψ2 amplitudes at the final time.
  4. [Abstract] The phrase 'regardless of the Rabi frequency' is too strong without the idealizations (perfect chirality, no losses) that are later acknowledged in Sec. VI; suggest qualifying it in the abstract.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

One definitional tautology around the incoherent-component orthogonalization; no load-bearing circularity otherwise.

  1. self definitional [Sec. IV, Eq. (29) and following paragraph]
    "By definition, this component can interfere with itself, i.e., the incoming photon after free propagation, and is considered as the coherent component. To find the incoherent component for comparison with the semi-classical results in the weak-driving regime, an orthogonalization process can be used to remove Ψ 0: |Ψinc⟩ = |Ψ⟩ − |Ψ0⟩ ⟨Ψ0|Ψ⟩. ... By Eq. (29), Ψinc is orthogonal to the input wavepacket Ψ0 and hence cannot interfere with it. This accounts for the emergence of incoherent transmission in the coherent driving case."

    The orthogonality used to explain loss of coherence is imposed by Eq. (29): Ψinc is defined as the component obtained by subtracting the input wavepacket, so the statement that it cannot interfere with the input is true by construction, not a derived dynamical result. The semiclassical incoherent component is instead defined through Tinc = Ttot − |tcoh|^2 (Eq. 13), so the identity of the two notions requires the wavepacket benchmarks; the orthogonality statement alone does not independently account for incoherent transmission.

full rationale

The semiclassical results (Eqs. 15, 36, 38) are direct steady-state calculations, not fits disguised as predictions. The two-transmon revival is attributed to the dimer dark state via external references [53–55], not to a self-citation chain. The full-quantum calculation is a genuine two-photon wavepacket simulation, and its power-spectrum and g(2)(τ) shapes are compared to the semiclassical results rather than manufactured by the comparison. The normalizations used in Figs. 7 and 8 (NS ∝ Δx and matching g(2)(0)) do affect the absolute magnitude, so the agreement tests shape rather than total weight, but this is an acknowledged, explicit scaling choice and not a circular derivation of the shape. The independent Ω^4 power-scaling argument also supports the two-photon-process conclusion independently of the orthogonalization. The main circular flavor is the definitional statement that the orthogonally projected Ψinc cannot interfere with the input, which is true by construction. This does not undermine the central momentum-anticorrelation claim, which is a nontrivial feature of the simulated wavefunction. Overall, no load-bearing circularity rises above a minor definitional tautology.

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

The paper introduces no new particles or entities. Its free parameters are mainly the normalization factors and the numerically claimed scaling exponents, plus the hand-chosen wavepacket reference width. The axioms are standard approximations in waveguide QED, with the most ad hoc one being the same-position assumption for the full-quantum calculation.

free parameters (4)
  • NS (PSD normalization factor) = ∝ Δx
    Introduced to compensate the 1/Δx scaling of the incoherent fraction so that shapes can be compared with the semiclassical result. Ad hoc, not derived from first principles.
  • Ng(2) (g(2) normalization factor) = Set so that g(2)(0) matches the semiclassical value
    Scales the g(2) curves for different wavepacket widths to match at τ=0. Post-hoc normalization that could mask shape discrepancies.
  • β (two-transmon suppression exponent) = 3
    Stated as '|Ψinc|²/|Ψ|² ∼ 1/Δx^β and β=3' with no plot, fit, or error bars. This is effectively a fitted exponent.
  • σ (reference wavepacket width unit) = 20 v_g/(3Γ)
    Chosen by hand as the unit for wavepacket widths; no physical motivation is given.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Born-Markov master equation for the semiclassical dynamics
    Used in Sec. III to trace out the photon bath; valid only in the Markovian, weak-coupling regime.
  • standard math Rotating wave approximation
    Standard in quantum optics, used in the Hamiltonians (4) and (23).
  • domain assumption Perfect chiral coupling to right-propagating modes and unity waveguide coupling efficiency
    Stated at the end of Sec. II: 'we assume ℏ=1 and all the transmons are perfectly coupled to the waveguide'. Idealization that is hard to achieve experimentally.
  • ad hoc to paper All transmons at the same position x_n=0 in the full-quantum simulation
    In Sec. IV the paper sets x_n=0 so that the coupling is k-independent. This is a modeling choice that may affect the scaling exponent and the suppression mechanism.
  • domain assumption Two-photon sector truncation (no more than 2 excitations)
    The wavefunction (18) includes only up to two excitations. This is justified in the weak-driving limit, but the paper itself notes it is limited to that regime.
  • domain assumption Linear dispersion ω = v_g k with periodic boundary conditions
    Used in the full-quantum model (Sec. IV). Idealized waveguide; real devices may have dispersion and losses.
  • standard math Dark dimer state |D⟩=(|01⟩−|10⟩)/√2 is the decoupled steady state for two transmons
    Cited from Refs [53–55]; used to explain the revival of coherence in Sec. III.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonlinear Optics Mediated by Chiral Waveguide QED: Generation of Momentum-anticorrelated Photon Pairs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C2HT7BWX

@misc{pith2026260718562,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonlinear Optics Mediated by Chiral Waveguide QED: Generation of Momentum-anticorrelated Photon Pairs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C2HT7BWX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.18562}
}
abstract

In recent years, chiral quantum optics has emerged as an active research area due to the promising applications in quantum information processing as well as nonlinear optics. We present results on the properties of the incoherent component of the transmitted light after transmons chirally coupled to a waveguide. The well-known resonance fluorescence of one chiral transmon resembles nonlinear quantum optics as it can convert the coherent light, with photons having spatially extensive coherence and Poisson distribution, into a field with spatially localized coherence and bunching photon statistics. However, another chiral transmon can undo the effect of the first transmon regardless of the Rabi frequency under the idealization involved in this work. A full wavefunction calculation shows that, in the weak driving limit, this incoherent light mainly comes from two-photon processes - one chiral transmon converts two independent photons into a photon pair with opposite momentum shift. In addition to the driving through the waveguide, a local driving with independently tunable amplitude and phase can address each transmon individually. The interplay between the waveguide driving and local driving modulates the contribution of the incoherent transmission and hence enables the engineering of the quantum statistics of the transmitted field, with tunable $g^{(2)}(0)$ spanning anti-bunched, coherent, and strongly bunched regimes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.18562 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematics of the system: Two transmons chirally [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. On-resonance incoherent transmission probability af [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Second-order correlation function of the incoherent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Power spectrum density of the incoherent compo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Incoherent transmission after one (blue dashed line) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Schematics of the full-quantum calculation: One [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison between the power spectrum densities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Clearly, the probability density mainly locates on the line k − k0 = −(k ′ − k0). This implies the nonlinear quantum optics mediated by a single chiral transmon, which converts two independent photons into a photon pair with opposite momentum shift. By Eq. 31, the powe…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The one-photon Wigner function of the component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The power spectrum density of the incoherent trans [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. High-order quantum correlations in nonlinear waveguide quantum electrodynamics

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In a nonlinear waveguide, the interparticle spacing can switch the strongest connected two-atom correlations between bulk and boundary, while stronger squeezing monotonically boosts third-order connected correlations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, S. Stobbe, A. Rauschenbeu- tel, P. Schneeweiss, J. Volz, H. Pichler, and P. Zoller, Chiral quantum optics, Nature 541, 473 (2017)

    2017

  2. [2]

    Su´ arez-Forero, M

    D. Su´ arez-Forero, M. Jalali Mehrabad, C. Vega, A. Gonz´ alez-Tudela, and M. Hafezi, Chiral quantum op- tics: Recent developments and future directions, PRX Quantum 6, 020101 (2025)

    2025

  3. [3]

    K. Y. Bliokh and F. Nori, Transverse and longitudinal angular momenta of light, Physics Reports592, 1 (2015), transverse and longitudinal angular momenta of light

    2015

  4. [4]

    K. Y. Bliokh, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, F. Nori, and A. V. Zayats, Spin–orbit interactions of light, Nature Photonics 9, 796 (2015)

    2015

  5. [5]

    Aiello, P

    A. Aiello, P. Banzer, M. Neugebauer, and G. Leuchs, From transverse angular momentum to photonic wheels, Nature Photonics 9, 789 (2015)

    2015

  6. [6]

    I. S. Sinev, A. A. Bogdanov, F. E. Komissarenko, K. S. Frizyuk, M. I. Petrov, I. S. Mukhin, S. V. Makarov, A. K. Samusev, A. V. Lavrinenko, and I. V. Iorsh, Chirality driven by magnetic dipole response for demultiplexing of surface waves, Laser & Photonics Reviews 11, 1700168 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, G. Marino, P. Ginzburg, D. O’Connor, A. Mart ´ ınez, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zay- ats, Near-field interference for the unidirectional excita- tion of electromagnetic guided modes, Science 340, 328 (2013)

    2013

  8. [8]

    Spitzer, A

    F. Spitzer, A. N. Poddubny, I. A. Akimov, V. F. Sapega, L. Klompmaker, L. E. Kreilkamp, L. V. Litvin, R. Jede, G. Karczewski, M. Wiater, T. Wojtowicz, D. R. Yakovlev, and M. Bayer, Routing the emission of a near- surface light source by a magnetic field, Nature Physics 14, 1043 (2018)

    2018

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Fratini, E

    F. Fratini, E. Mascarenhas, L. Safari, J.-P. Poizat, D. Va- lente, A. Auff` eves, D. Gerace, and M. F. Santos, Fabry- perot interferometer with quantum mirrors: Nonlinear light transport and rectification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 243601 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    Rosario Hamann, C

    A. Rosario Hamann, C. M¨ uller, M. Jerger, M. Zanner, J. Combes, M. Pletyukhov, M. Weides, T. M. Stace, and A. Fedorov, Nonreciprocity realized with quantum non- linearity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 123601 (2018)

    2018

  3. [11]

    Gheeraert, S

    N. Gheeraert, S. Kono, and Y. Nakamura, Programmable directional emitter and receiver of itinerant microwave photons in a waveguide, Phys. Rev. A 102, 053720 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Guimond, B

    P.-O. Guimond, B. Vermersch, M. L. Juan, A. Sharafiev, G. Kirchmair, and P. Zoller, A unidirectional on-chip photonic interface for superconducting circuits, npj Quantum Information 6, 32 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Kannan, A

    B. Kannan, A. Almanakly, Y. Sung, A. Di Paolo, D. A. 11 Rower, J. Braum¨ uller, A. Melville, B. M. Niedziel- ski, A. Karamlou, K. Serniak, A. Veps¨ al¨ ainen, M. E. Schwartz, J. L. Yoder, R. Winik, J. I.-J. Wang, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, J. A. Grover, and W. D. Oliver, On...

    2023

  6. [14]

    E. S. Redchenko, A. V. Poshakinskiy, R. Sett, M. ˇZemliˇ cka, A. N. Poddubny, and J. M. Fink, Tunable directional photon scattering from a pair of supercon- ducting qubits, Nature Communications 14, 2998 (2023)

    2023

  7. [15]

    Joshi, F

    C. Joshi, F. Yang, and M. Mirhosseini, Resonance flu- orescence of a chiral artificial atom, Phys. Rev. X 13, 021039 (2023)

    2023

  8. [16]

    Junge, D

    C. Junge, D. O’Shea, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Strong coupling between single atoms and nontransversal photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 213604 (2013)

    2013

  9. [17]

    Shomroni, S

    I. Shomroni, S. Rosenblum, Y. Lovsky, O. Bechler, G. Guendelman, and B. Dayan, All-optical rout- ing of single photons by a one-atom switch con- trolled by a single photon, Science 345, 903 (2014), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1254699

    2014 doi

  10. [18]

    Mitsch, C

    R. Mitsch, C. Sayrin, B. Albrecht, P. Schneeweiss, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Quantum state-controlled directional spontaneous emission of photons into a nanophotonic waveguide, Nature Communications 5, 5713 (2014)

    2014

  11. [19]

    I. J. Luxmoore, N. A. Wasley, A. J. Ramsay, A. C. T. Thi- jssen, R. Oulton, M. Hugues, S. Kasture, V. G. Achanta, A. M. Fox, and M. S. Skolnick, Interfacing spins in an ingaas quantum dot to a semiconductor waveguide cir- cuit using emitted photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 037402 (2013)

    2013

  12. [20]

    I. J. Luxmoore, N. A. Wasley, A. J. Ramsay, A. C. T. Thi- jssen, R. Oulton, M. Hugues, A. M. Fox, and M. S. Skol- nick, Optical control of the emission direction of a quan- tum dot, Applied Physics Letters 103, 241102 (2013)

    2013

  13. [21]

    S¨ ollner, S

    I. S¨ ollner, S. Mahmoodian, S. L. Hansen, L. Midolo, A. Javadi, G. Kirˇ sansk˙ e, T. Pregnolato, H. El-Ella, E. H. Lee, J. D. Song, S. Stobbe, and P. Lodahl, Determinis- tic photon–emitter coupling in chiral photonic circuits, Nature Nanotechnology 10, 775 (2015)

    2015

  14. [22]

    R. J. Coles, D. M. Price, J. E. Dixon, B. Royall, E. Clarke, P. Kok, M. S. Skolnick, A. M. Fox, and M. N. Makhonin, Chirality of nanophotonic waveguide with em- bedded quantum emitter for unidirectional spin transfer, Nature Communications 7, 11183 (2016)

    2016

  15. [23]

    Neugebauer, T

    M. Neugebauer, T. Bauer, P. Banzer, and G. Leuchs, Polarization tailored light driven directional optical nanobeacon, Nano Letters 14, 2546 (2014)

    2014

  16. [24]

    Petersen, J

    J. Petersen, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Chiral nanophotonic waveguide interface based on spin- orbit interaction of light, Science 346, 67 (2014), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1257671

    2014 doi

  17. [25]

    Lee, I.-M

    S.-Y. Lee, I.-M. Lee, J. Park, S. Oh, W. Lee, K.-Y. Kim, and B. Lee, Role of magnetic induction currents in nanoslit excitation of surface plasmon polaritons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 213907 (2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    J. Lin, J. P. B. Mueller, Q. Wang, G. Yuan, N. An- toniou, X.-C. Yuan, and F. Capasso, Polarization- controlled tunable directional coupling of sur- face plasmon polaritons, Science 340, 331 (2013), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1233746

    2013 doi

  19. [27]

    O’Connor, P

    D. O’Connor, P. Ginzburg, F. J. Rodr ´ ıguez-Fortu˜ no, G. A. Wurtz, and A. V. Zayats, Spin–orbit coupling in surface plasmon scattering by nanostructures, Nature Communications 5, 5327 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    T. E. Roth, R. Ma, and W. C. Chew, The transmon qubit for electromagnetics engineers: An introduction, IEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine 65, 8 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Blais, R.-S

    A. Blais, R.-S. Huang, A. Wallraff, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Cavity quantum electrodynamics for superconducting electrical circuits: An architecture for quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 69, 062320 (2004)

    2004

  22. [30]

    Blais, J

    A. Blais, J. Gambetta, A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, S. M. Girvin, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Quantum- information processing with circuit quantum electrody- namics, Phys. Rev. A 75, 032329 (2007)

    2007

  23. [31]

    X. Gu, A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y. xi Liu, and F. Nori, Microwave photonics with superconducting quantum circuits, Physics Reports 718-719, 1 (2017), microwave photonics with superconducting quantum cir- cuits

    2017

  24. [32]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gus- tavsson, and W. D. Oliver, A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits, Applied Physics Reviews 6, 021318 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    A. S. Sheremet, M. I. Petrov, I. V. Iorsh, A. V. Poshakin- skiy, and A. N. Poddubny, Waveguide quantum electro- dynamics: Collective radiance and photon-photon corre- lations, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 015002 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    Mirhosseini, E

    M. Mirhosseini, E. Kim, X. Zhang, A. Sipahigil, P. B. Dieterle, A. J. Keller, A. Asenjo-Garcia, D. E. Chang, and O. Painter, Cavity quantum electrodynamics with atom-like mirrors, Nature 569, 692 (2019)

    2019

  27. [35]

    Wallraff, D

    A. Wallraff, D. I. Schuster, A. Blais, L. Frunzio, R.-. S. Huang, J. Majer, S. Kumar, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Strong coupling of a single photon to a super- conducting qubit using circuit quantum electrodynamics, Nature 431, 162 (2004)

    2004

  28. [36]

    A. F. van Loo, A. Fedorov, K. Lalumi` ere, B. C. Sanders, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Photon-mediated interactions between distant artificial atoms, Science 342, 1494 (2013), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1244324

    2013 doi

  29. [37]

    R. Ma, B. Saxberg, C. Owens, N. Leung, Y. Lu, J. Si- mon, and D. I. Schuster, A dissipatively stabilized mott insulator of photons, Nature 566, 51 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    B. Du, Q. Guo, and R. Ma, Programmable superradiance in an interacting qubit array (2026), arXiv:2605.12442 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2026 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Almanakly, B

    A. Almanakly, B. Yankelevich, M. Hays, B. Kannan, R. Assouly, A. Greene, M. Gingras, B. M. Niedzielski, H. Stickler, M. E. Schwartz, K. Serniak, J. ˆI.-j. Wang, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, J. A. Grover, and W. D. Oliver, Deterministic remote entanglement using a chiral quant...

    2025

  32. [40]

    J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, H. J. Kimble, and H. Mabuchi, Quantum state transfer and entanglement distribution among distant nodes in a quantum network, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3221 (1997)

    1997

  33. [41]

    Kurpiers, P

    P. Kurpiers, P. Magnard, T. Walter, B. Royer, M. Pechal, J. Heinsoo, Y. Salath´ e, A. Akin, S. Storz, J.-C. Besse, S. Gasparinetti, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Deterministic quantum state transfer and remote entanglement using microwave photons, Nature 558, 264 (2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    T. E. Northup and R. Blatt, Quantum information trans- fer using photons, Nature Photonics 8, 356 (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    C. J. Axline, L. D. Burkhart, W. Pfaff, M. Zhang, 12 K. Chou, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, P. Reinhold, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, On-demand quantum state transfer and en- tanglement between remote microwave cavity memories, Nature Physic...

    2018

  36. [44]

    Campagne-Ibarcq, E

    P. Campagne-Ibarcq, E. Zalys-Geller, A. Narla, S. Shankar, P. Reinhold, L. Burkhart, C. Axline, W. Pfaff, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. De- voret, Deterministic remote entanglement of supercon- ducting circuits through microwave two-photon transi- tions, Phys. Rev. L...

    2018

  37. [45]

    Kurpiers, M

    P. Kurpiers, M. Pechal, B. Royer, P. Magnard, T. Wal- ter, J. Heinsoo, Y. Salath´ e, A. Akin, S. Storz, J.-C. Besse, S. Gasparinetti, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Quantum com- munication with time-bin encoded microwave photons, Phys. Rev. Appl. 12, 044067 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    Magnard, S

    P. Magnard, S. Storz, P. Kurpiers, J. Sch¨ ar, F. Marxer, J. L¨ utolf, T. Walter, J.-C. Besse, M. Gabureac, K. Reuer, A. Akin, B. Royer, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, Microwave quantum link between superconducting circuits housed in spatially separated cryogenic systems, Phys. Re...

    2020

  39. [47]

    Vermersch, P.-O

    B. Vermersch, P.-O. Guimond, H. Pichler, and P. Zoller, Quantum state transfer via noisy photonic and phononic waveguides, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 133601 (2017)

    2017

  40. [48]

    Xiang, M

    Z.-L. Xiang, M. Zhang, L. Jiang, and P. Rabl, Intracity quantum communication via thermal microwave net- works, Phys. Rev. X 7, 011035 (2017)

    2017

  41. [49]

    W.-K. Mok, D. Aghamalyan, J.-B. You, T. Haug, W. Zhang, C. E. Png, and L.-C. Kwek, Long-distance dissipation-assisted transport of entangled states via a chiral waveguide, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013369 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Y.-T. Yu, I. G. N. Y. Handayana, W. Chen, and H. H. Jen, Fast and high excitation transport in waveguide quantum electrodynamics, New Journal of Physics 28, 034501 (2026)

    2026

  43. [51]

    H. H. Jen, Bound and subradiant multiatom excitations in an atomic array with nonreciprocal couplings, Phys. Rev. A 103, 063711 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    H. H. Jen, Selective transport of atomic excitations in a driven chiral-coupled atomic chain, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 52, 065502 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    Stannigel, P

    K. Stannigel, P. Rabl, and P. Zoller, Driven-dissipative preparation of entangled states in cascaded quantum- optical networks, New Journal of Physics 14, 063014 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    Ramos, H

    T. Ramos, H. Pichler, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Quan- tum spin dimers from chiral dissipation in cold-atom chains, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 237203 (2014)

    2014

  47. [55]

    Pichler, T

    H. Pichler, T. Ramos, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Quan- tum optics of chiral spin networks, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042116 (2015)

    2015

  48. [56]

    Kleinbeck, H

    K. Kleinbeck, H. Busche, N. Stiesdal, S. Hofferberth, K. Mølmer, and H. P. B¨ uchler, Creation of nonclassical states of light in a chiral waveguide, Phys. Rev. A 107, 013717 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Mahmoodian, G

    S. Mahmoodian, G. Calaj´ o, D. E. Chang, K. Hammerer, and A. S. Sørensen, Dynamics of many-body photon bound states in chiral waveguide qed, Phys. Rev. X 10, 031011 (2020)

    2020

  50. [58]

    A. S. Prasad, J. Hinney, S. Mahmoodian, K. Hammerer, S. Rind, P. Schneeweiss, A. S. Sørensen, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Correlating photons using the collec- tive nonlinear response of atoms weakly coupled to an optical mode, Nature Photonics 14, 719 (2020)

    2020

  51. [59]

    Asenjo-Garcia, J

    A. Asenjo-Garcia, J. D. Hood, D. E. Chang, and H. J. Kimble, Atom-light interactions in quasi-one-dimensional nanostructures: A green’s-function perspective, Phys. Rev. A 95, 033818 (2017)

    2017

  52. [60]

    S. J. Masson and A. Asenjo-Garcia, Atomic-waveguide quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043213 (2020)

    2020

  53. [61]

    Fayard, L

    N. Fayard, L. Henriet, A. Asenjo-Garcia, and D. E. Chang, Many-body localization in waveguide quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033233 (2021)

    2021

  54. [62]

    Lalumi` ere, B

    K. Lalumi` ere, B. C. Sanders, A. F. van Loo, A. Fe- dorov, A. Wallraff, and A. Blais, Input-output theory for waveguide qed with an ensemble of inhomogeneous atoms, Phys. Rev. A 88, 043806 (2013)

    2013

  55. [63]

    Shen and S

    J.-T. Shen and S. Fan, Coherent single photon trans- port in a one-dimensional waveguide coupled with super- conducting quantum bits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 213001 (2005)

    2005

  56. [64]

    Shen and S

    J.-T. Shen and S. Fan, Strongly correlated two-photon transport in a one-dimensional waveguide coupled to a two-level system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 153003 (2007)

    2007

  57. [65]

    Zheng, D

    H. Zheng, D. J. Gauthier, and H. U. Baranger, Waveg- uide qed: Many-body bound-state effects in coherent and fock-state scattering from a two-level system, Phys. Rev. A 82, 063816 (2010)

    2010

  58. [66]

    Bhatti, J

    D. Bhatti, J. von Zanthier, and G. S. Agarwal, Super- bunching and nonclassicality as new hallmarks of super- radiance, Scientific Reports 5, 17335 (2015)

    2015

  59. [67]

    Zeidan, T

    Z. Zeidan, T. Karmstrand, M. Khanahmadi, and G. Jo- hansson, Superbunching from coherently driven atoms in a waveguide, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 250803 (2026)

    2026

  60. [68]

    Loudon, The quantum theory of light(OUP Oxford, 2000)

    R. Loudon, The quantum theory of light(OUP Oxford, 2000)

    2000

  61. [69]

    Lax, Formal theory of quantum fluctuations from a driven state, Phys

    M. Lax, Formal theory of quantum fluctuations from a driven state, Phys. Rev. 129, 2342 (1963)

    1963

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.