Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Intermittency in Quantum Graviton-Phonon Conversion

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Within the rotating-wave approximation, graviton-to-phonon conversion obeys the unitarity bound and, for coherent graviton states, proceeds in intermittent narrow bursts, while squeezed states are suppressed after their first peak.

desk verdict The exact RWA unitarization is real and useful, but the detection claim is built on post-selected amplitudes and Eq. (3.31) has a power error; worth refereeing, not worth taking at face value. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.20107 v1 pith:H4TNEVSM submitted 2026-07-22 gr-qc hep-phquant-ph

Yuna Gouin , Sugumi Kanno , Jiro Soda This is my paper
classification gr-qchep-phquant-ph
keywords graviton-phononconversionsingle-gravitondetectionresonantbardetectorrotating-waveapproximationcoherentstatesqueezedunitarityboundintermittency
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 argues that first-order perturbation theory's prediction of large—sometimes greater-than-one—graviton-to-phonon conversion probabilities breaks down, and that solving the full quantum dynamics restores unitarity and reveals qualitatively new temporal behavior. For an initial coherent graviton state, conversion happens in narrow bursts separated by strong suppression; for an initial squeezed state, conversion is strongly damped after its initial growth. These non-perturbative features could serve as signatures of quantum graviton-phonon dynamics relevant to single-graviton detection. A sympathetic reader cares because the result reframes the search for single gravitons away from simple rate enhancement and toward a burst-like quantum signature.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a factorized time evolution operator U(t) = e^{iδ} R_a R_b T, where R_a and R_b are single-mode rotation operators and T = exp[q(e^{−iχ}ab† − e^{iχ}a†b)] is a two-mode mixing operator. Substituting this Ansatz into the Schrödinger equation reduces the full quantum dynamics to a closed system of ordinary differential equations for q, χ, θ_a, and θ_b, which are then integrated numerically. Transition amplitudes are evaluated by acting with this operator on coherent or squeezed initial states; the exponential coherent-state overlap e^{−|α−β|²} is what converts the simple single-graviton Rabi factor sin² q into burst-like intermittency at large |α|.

What would settle it

Compute the fully traced phonon probability, P_b(t) = Tr_a[⟨1|_b U|ψ0⟩⟨ψ0|U†|1⟩_b], for coherent and squeezed initial states under the same rotating-wave Hamiltonian. If it shows smooth growth without intermittency for large |α|, the paper's predicted bursts are artifacts of graviton post-selection. Alternatively, a phonon-counting resonant bar driven by a large coherent graviton source could search for the burst pattern; absence of bursts would falsify the claim as an observable signature.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that when graviton-phonon conversion is treated with the full quantum evolution within the rotating-wave approximation, the conversion probability satisfies the unitarity bound. For a coherent graviton state with occupation number |α|², the exact probability is |α|² sin² q(t) exp[−2|α|²(1 − cos q(t) cos(θ_a − ω_a t))], which reduces in the resonant limit to |α|² sin²(gt) exp[−2|α|²(1 − cos gt)]. This expression never exceeds unity; for large |α| it becomes a sequence of narrow conversion bursts separated by intervals of strong suppression. For a squeezed-vacuum initial state, the exact probability is suppressed after an initial peak, with the departure from perturbative

Load-bearing premise

The conversion probability is computed as the amplitude to end in a particular graviton state, yet a resonant bar detector measures only the phonon and does not post-select the graviton; if the observable is the unconditional phonon probability, the predicted bursts and late-time suppression may change or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The exact coherent-state conversion probability is bounded by unity, correcting perturbative estimates that grow as (|α| gt)² and can exceed one.
  • For large coherent occupation, graviton-to-phonon conversion appears as intermittent bursts rather than monotone growth, a feature first-order perturbation theory cannot capture.
  • For squeezed initial states, conversion is strongly suppressed after its initial peak, and the breakdown of perturbation theory sets in earlier than for coherent states.
  • These non-perturbative behaviors are candidate signatures of quantum graviton-phonon dynamics in single-graviton detection experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The computed probabilities post-select a particular final graviton state; a resonant bar detector measures only the phonon mode, so the unconditioned phonon probability—obtained by tracing over graviton states—could behave very differently and may not exhibit the predicted bursts.
  • A concrete next step is to compute the reduced phonon density matrix for the same coherent and squeezed initial states; if the traced probability is smooth, the intermittency is an artifact of graviton post-selection rather than a directly observable signal.
  • Because the underlying Hamiltonian has the same algebraic structure, the same exact-solution method could be applied to other large-occupation conversion channels such as axion-photon or graviton-photon transduction, where perturbative probabilities also exceed unity.
  • For primordial squeezed gravitational-wave states, the early strong suppression implies the enhanced conversion window is short, which would constrain when a detector must be sensitive to catch the signal.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies the rotating-wave-approximation Hamiltonian H = ω_a a†a + ω_b b†b − g(ab† + a†b) for a single graviton mode coupled to a phonon mode. It factorizes the time-evolution operator into single-mode rotations and a two-mode mixing operator, reducing the dynamics to a closed set of ODEs. It then computes transition amplitudes for single-graviton, coherent, and one-graviton-added squeezed initial states: P_{g→p} = sin²q; P_{α→α,1} (Eq. 3.12), which is bounded by unity and exhibits intermittent bursts; and P_{ξ;1,0→ξ;0,1} (Eq. 3.31), which departs early from perturbation theory and is strongly suppressed after its initial peak. The paper claims these effects may provide signatures of quantum graviton–phonon dynamics relevant to single-graviton detection.

Significance. The exact algebraic solution is a legitimate technical contribution: it gives closed-form, unitarity-respecting transition amplitudes for nontrivial initial states and correctly diagnoses the breakdown of first-order perturbation theory. The coherent-state transition amplitude is derived transparently (Eqs. 3.9–3.12). However, the detection-relevant claims rest on identifying these transition amplitudes with the probability measured by a bar detector. A bar detector measures only the phonon mode; the graviton final state is not post-selected. The unconditional phonon probabilities for the same initial states are different (e.g., Poissonian for a coherent state) and do not exhibit the claimed intermittency and suppression in the same way. Thus the significance as a path to single-graviton detection is not established. With a clear reframing as post-selected transition probabilities, the exact RWA results would still be of interest in quantum optics / quantum field theory.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (3.12)] P_{α→α,1}(t) = |⟨α(t),1|U|α,0⟩|² is a transition amplitude to a post-selected graviton coherent state |α(t)⟩. A resonant-bar detector does not post-select the graviton mode; it measures the phonon mode only. For the beam-splitter evolution, U|α,0⟩ = (up to phases) |α e^{-iθ_a} cos q⟩_a ⊗ |α e^{-i(χ+θ_b)} sin q⟩_b. The unconditional one-phonon probability is therefore P_1^{det}(t) = e^{-n} n with n = |α|² sin²q. This is smooth (bounded by 1/e) and does not have the intermittent bursts shown in Fig. 2. Hence the intermittency claim in the abstract and conclusion is not supported for phonon-counting detectors.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (3.31)] The same post-selection issue applies to the squeezed-state calculation. The amplitude in Eq. (3.31) is conditional on the graviton final state |ξ(t);0,1⟩. The experimentally accessible quantity is the reduced phonon probability after tracing over graviton states: P_1^{det} = Tr[|1⟩_b⟨1| Tr_a(U|ξ;1,0⟩⟨ξ;1,0|U†)]. This is not Eq. (3.31). The claimed strong suppression after initial growth is therefore a property of the post-selected amplitude, not of phonon counting. (For the squeezed-vacuum initial state |ξ;0,0⟩ the reduced phonon state is thermal; for the one-phonon-added squeezed state used here it is different, but in neither case is it given by Eq. (3.31).)
  3. [Eq. (3.31)] There is a power error in Eq. (3.31). From Eq. (3.29) the amplitude contains (1 − x)^{-3/2}; its modulus squared is D^{-3/2}, where D = |1−x|² = 1 + tanh⁴r cos⁴q − 2 tanh²r cos²q cos(2θ_a − 2ω_a t), not D^{-3}. Thus the bracket in Eq. (3.31) should appear with exponent −3/2 (equivalently in the denominator to the power 3/2), not as written. As printed, Eq. (3.31) does not reduce to Eq. (3.32) in the perturbative limit; with the corrected exponent it does. This affects the quantitative curves in Fig. 3.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§3.3] The state |ξ;0,1⟩ is used in Eq. (3.22) but is never explicitly defined. Please define it as |ξ⟩_a ⊗ |1⟩_b.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] The caption refers to the 'squeezed initial state', but the calculation actually uses the one-graviton-added squeezed state |ξ;1,0⟩, not the squeezed vacuum |ξ;0,0⟩. Please state this explicitly to avoid confusion.
  3. [Eq. (3.31)] The typesetting of Eq. (3.31) is ambiguous: the expression 'sin²q / cosh⁴r [···]³' could be read as multiplying by [···]³ rather than dividing by it. Write the denominator explicitly as D^{3/2} or use D^{-3/2} with D defined.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; exact RWA derivation is self-contained, with only non-load-bearing self-citations to prior perturbative results.

full rationale

The paper's central exact solution is derived internally: the time-evolution operator is factorized via the closed Lie algebra of the RWA Hamiltonian, the parameters are obtained from coupled ODEs, and the coherent/squeezed transition amplitudes are computed explicitly. The first-order limits (3.13), (3.15), and (3.32) are presented as reductions of the exact formulas, not imported from outside. The self-citations [37,38] are used only to attribute a previously known perturbative enhancement and do not load-bearing work for the exact unitarity bound or intermittency. The identification of P_{α→α,1} with the 'conversion probability' is a post-selected transition amplitude; an actual bar detector measures only the phonon and would require tracing over graviton final states, but this is a physical-relevance/correctness concern, not a circular derivation. There is also a separate algebraic issue (Eq. 3.31's denominator power appears inconsistent with the modulus-squared of Eq. 3.29), which is a mathematical correctness risk rather than circularity. No definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation circularity is present in the claimed derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central exact derivation relies on standard quantum-optics algebra plus the RWA and single-mode assumptions. There are no newly postulated physical entities. The key unstated modeling choice is the post-selected final graviton state. No parameters are fitted to data; the listed numerical values are illustrative.

free parameters (1)
  • Illustrative parameters for Figs. 1-3 (g, ω_a-ω_b, |α|², r) = g = 1e-5 Hz, detunings 0.001–0.04 Hz, |α|² = 1e6–1e8, r = 7.6009
    Chosen by hand to make the breakdown of perturbation theory and intermittency visible; the paper states they are not a realistic detector configuration.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Rotating-wave approximation: counter-rotating terms ab and a†b† average to zero; Hamiltonian reduces to Eq. (2.6).
    Valid for g ≪ ω_a, ω_b and near resonance; stated in Sec. 2.1.
  • domain assumption Single-mode approximation: the gravitational wave is a single mode because its wavelength exceeds the detector size.
    Sec. 2.1; standard for low-frequency bars.
  • domain assumption Conversion probability is defined as the amplitude to a specified final graviton coherent/squeezed state (|α(t),1⟩ or |ξ(t);0,1⟩).
    Used in Eqs. (3.9) and (3.27); not justified as the detector-relevant observable.
  • standard math Factorization ansatz U(t) = e^{iδ} R_a R_b T with the specified single- and two-mode operators.
    Lie-algebra structure of the RWA Hamiltonian; standard.
  • standard math Identity Σ (2n+1)(2n)!/(2^{2n}(n!)²) x^n = (1-x)^(-3/2).
    Used in Eq. (3.30).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Intermittency in Quantum Graviton-Phonon Conversion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H4TNEVSM

@misc{pith2026260720107,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Intermittency in Quantum Graviton-Phonon Conversion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H4TNEVSM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.20107}
}
read the original abstract

A graviton can be converted into a phonon in a resonant bar detector. First-order perturbation theory predicts a strong enhancement of this conversion for coherent and squeezed graviton states, but the probability can exceed unity when the coherent or squeezing parameter is large. Since a conversion probability must satisfy the unitarity bound, we solve the graviton-phonon quantum dynamics exactly within the rotating-wave approximation. For an initial coherent state, we find that the conversion occurs intermittently through narrow bursts separated by intervals of strong suppression. For an initial squeezed state, the departure from perturbative behavior occurs earlier, and the conversion is strongly suppressed after its initial growth. These effects may provide signatures of quantum graviton-phonon dynamics relevant to single-graviton detection.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.20107 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The conversion probability Pα→α,1(t) as a function of time. The blue curve shows the first-order perturbative result for an initial coherent state, while the gray curve shows the corresponding exact result. The green curve shows the single-graviton conversion probability Pg→p(t) = sin2 q(t). The magenta dashed line indicates the unitarity bound, Pα→α,1 = 1. The parameters, chosen for illustrative purposes, are ωa = … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The exact conversion probability Pα→α,1(t) for a large coherent-state parameter. The conversion occurs intermittently, appearing as narrow bursts separated by intervals of strong suppression. In this regime, the first-order perturbative approximation is no longer valid. The parameters are chosen to make the intermittent behavior clearly visible and are ωa = 1.04 Hz, ωb = 1.0 Hz, g = 10−5 Hz, and |α| 2 = 108 . 3.3 Sq… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Time evolution of the conversion probabilities for the coherent and squeezed initial states. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Suppressed Quantum Effects of Weakly Coupled Waves

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Nonclassical (quantum) signatures of weakly coupled waves are suppressed by an extra power of the tiny conversion efficiency η (~10^-21 for axions, ~10^-33 for gravitons), so experiments cannot establish the quantizat...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    B. P. Abbott et al. Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger. Phys. Rev. Lett., 116(6):061102, 2016

    2016

  2. [2]

    Gravitational wave physics and astronomy in the nascent era.PTEP, 2023(10):10A103, 2023

    Makoto Arimoto et al. Gravitational wave physics and astronomy in the nascent era.PTEP, 2023(10):10A103, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    L. P. Grishchuk and Yu. V. Sidorov. On the Quantum State of Relic Gravitons.Class. Quant. Grav., 6:L161–L165, 1989

    1989

  4. [4]

    L. P. Grishchuk and Yu. V. Sidorov. Squeezed quantum states of relic gravitons and pri- mordial density fluctuations.Phys. Rev. D, 42:3413–3421, 1990

    1990

  5. [5]

    Inflation and squeezed quantum states.Phys

    Andreas Albrecht, Pedro Ferreira, Michael Joyce, and Tomislav Prokopec. Inflation and squeezed quantum states.Phys. Rev. D, 50:4807–4820, 1994

    1994

  6. [6]

    Shock, and Jiro Soda

    Sugumi Kanno, Jeff Murugan, Jonathan P. Shock, and Jiro Soda. Entanglement entropy ofα-vacua in de Sitter space.JHEP, 07:072, 2014

    2014

  7. [7]

    Shock, and Jiro Soda

    Sugumi Kanno, Jonathan P. Shock, and Jiro Soda. Entanglement negativity in the multi- verse.JCAP, 03:015, 2015. 15

    2015

  8. [8]

    Shock, and Jiro Soda

    Sugumi Kanno, Jonathan P. Shock, and Jiro Soda. Quantum discord in de Sitter space. Phys. Rev. D, 94(12):125014, 2016

    2016

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    A model with cosmological Bell inequalities.Fortsch

    Juan Maldacena. A model with cosmological Bell inequalities.Fortsch. Phys., 64:10–23, 2016

    2016

  2. [10]

    Infinite violation of Bell inequalities in inflation.Phys

    Sugumi Kanno and Jiro Soda. Infinite violation of Bell inequalities in inflation.Phys. Rev. D, 96(8):083501, 2017

    2017

  3. [11]

    Detecting nonclassical primordial gravitational waves with Hanbury-Brown–Twiss interferometry.Phys

    Sugumi Kanno and Jiro Soda. Detecting nonclassical primordial gravitational waves with Hanbury-Brown–Twiss interferometry.Phys. Rev. D, 99(8):084010, 2019

    2019

  4. [12]

    Nonclassical primordial gravitational waves from the initial entangled state

    Sugumi Kanno. Nonclassical primordial gravitational waves from the initial entangled state. Phys. Rev. D, 100(12):123536, 2019

    2019

  5. [13]

    Is a graviton detectable?Int

    Freeman Dyson. Is a graviton detectable?Int. J. Mod. Phys. A, 28:1330041, 2013

    2013

  6. [14]

    Probing GHz gravitational waves with graviton–magnon resonance.Eur

    Asuka Ito, Tomonori Ikeda, Kentaro Miuchi, and Jiro Soda. Probing GHz gravitational waves with graviton–magnon resonance.Eur. Phys. J. C, 80(3):179, 2020

    2020

  7. [15]

    A formalism for magnon gravitational wave detectors.Eur

    Asuka Ito and Jiro Soda. A formalism for magnon gravitational wave detectors.Eur. Phys. J. C, 80(6):545, 2020

    2020

  8. [16]

    The Noise of Gravitons.Int

    Maulik Parikh, Frank Wilczek, and George Zahariade. The Noise of Gravitons.Int. J. Mod. Phys. D, 29(14):2042001, 2020. arXiv:2005.07211 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Noise and decoherence induced by gravitons

    Sugumi Kanno, Jiro Soda, and Junsei Tokuda. Noise and decoherence induced by gravitons. Phys. Rev. D, 103(4):044017, 2021. arXiv:2007.09838 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Quantum Mechanics of Gravitational Waves.Phys

    Maulik Parikh, Frank Wilczek, and George Zahariade. Quantum Mechanics of Gravitational Waves.Phys. Rev. Lett., 127(8):081602, 2021. arXiv:2010.08205 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Signatures of the quantiza- tion of gravity at gravitational wave detectors.Phys

    Maulik Parikh, Frank Wilczek, and George Zahariade. Signatures of the quantiza- tion of gravity at gravitational wave detectors.Phys. Rev. D, 104(4):046021, 2021. arXiv:2010.08208 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Indirect detection of gravitons through quantum entanglement.Phys

    Sugumi Kanno, Jiro Soda, and Junsei Tokuda. Indirect detection of gravitons through quantum entanglement.Phys. Rev. D, 104(8):083516, 2021. arXiv:2103.17053 [gr-qc]. 16

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Entanglement and squeezing of gravitational waves.Phys

    Thiago Guerreiro. Entanglement and squeezing of gravitational waves.Phys. Rev. D, 112(10):L101904, 2025

    2025

  14. [22]

    Manikandan and Frank Wilczek

    Sreenath K. Manikandan and Frank Wilczek. Testing the coherent-state description of radiation fields.Phys. Rev. A, 111(3):033705, 2025

    2025

  15. [23]

    Manikandan and Frank Wilczek

    Sreenath K. Manikandan and Frank Wilczek. Complementary Probes of Gravitational Radiation States. 5 2025

    2025

  16. [24]

    Manikandan and Frank Wilczek

    Sreenath K. Manikandan and Frank Wilczek. Probing Quantum Structure in Gravitational Radiation. 5 2025

    2025

  17. [25]

    Mavromatos, Sarben Sarkar, and Sotirios-Neilos Vlachos

    Panagiotis Dorlis, Nick E. Mavromatos, Sarben Sarkar, and Sotirios-Neilos Vlachos. Super- radiant Axionic Black-Hole Clouds as Seeds for Graviton Squeezing. 7 2025

    2025

  18. [26]

    Mavromatos, Sarben Sarkar, and Sotirios-Neilos Vlachos

    Pangiotis Dorlis, Nick E. Mavromatos, Sarben Sarkar, and Sotirios-Neilos Vlachos. Squeezed gravitons from superradiant axion fields around rotating black holes. 7 2025

    2025

  19. [27]

    Coherent State Description of Gravitational Waves from Binary Black Holes.Phys

    Sugumi Kanno, Jiro Soda, and Akira Taniguchi. Coherent State Description of Gravitational Waves from Binary Black Holes.Phys. Rev. Lett., 136(6):061404, 2026

    2026

  20. [28]

    Squeezed States in Gravity

    Arunima Das, Maulik Parikh, Frank Wilczek, and Raphaela Wutte. Squeezed States in Gravity. 12 2025

    2025

  21. [29]

    Manikandan and Frank Wilczek

    Sreenath K. Manikandan and Frank Wilczek. Squeezed Quasinormal Modes from Nonlinear Gravitational Effects. 8 2025

    2025

  22. [30]

    Binary gravitational waves as probes of quantum graviton states.Phys

    Sugumi Kanno, Jiro Soda, and Akira Taniguchi. Binary gravitational waves as probes of quantum graviton states.Phys. Rev. D, 113(12):123542, 2026

    2026

  23. [31]

    Manikandan, Thomas Beitel, and Igor Pikovski

    Germain Tobar, Sreenath K. Manikandan, Thomas Beitel, and Igor Pikovski. Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing.Nature Commun., 15(1):7229, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    QUANTUM MECHANICS OF A GRA VITATIONAL ANTENNA

    Giuliano Preparata. QUANTUM MECHANICS OF A GRA VITATIONAL ANTENNA. Nuovo Cim. B, 101:625, 1988

    1988

  25. [33]

    L. P. Grishchuk. Quantum mechanics of a solid state bar gravitational antenna.Phys. Rev. D, 45:2601–2608, 1992. 17

    1992

  26. [34]

    Daniel Carney, Valerie Domcke, and Nicholas L. Rodd. Graviton detection and the quan- tization of gravity.Phys. Rev. D, 109(4):044009, 2024

    2024

  27. [35]

    Comments on graviton detection

    Daniel Carney. Comments on graviton detection. 7 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    Quantum State Characterization of Gravitational Waves via Graviton Counting Statistics

    Kristian Toccacelo, Thomas Beitel, Ulrik Lund Andersen, and Igor Pikovski. Quantum State Characterization of Gravitational Waves via Graviton Counting Statistics. 2 2026

    2026

  29. [37]

    Enhancing photon-axion conversion probability with squeezed coherent states.Phys

    Taiki Ikeda, Sugumi Kanno, and Jiro Soda. Enhancing photon-axion conversion probability with squeezed coherent states.Phys. Rev. D, 113(2):023539, 2026

    2026

  30. [38]

    Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion.Phys

    Taiki Ikeda, Youka Kaku, Sugumi Kanno, and Jiro Soda. Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion.Phys. Rev. D, 112(10):103504, 2025

    2025

  31. [39]

    Cavity-QED Transducer of Gravi- tons

    Fateme Shojaei Arani, Brahim Lamine, and Jiro Soda. Cavity-QED Transducer of Gravi- tons. 3 2026

    2026

  32. [40]

    Schumaker

    Bonny L. Schumaker. Quantum mechanical pure states with gaussian wave functions.Phys. Rept., 135(6):317–408, 1986. 18

    1986

Pith tools

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