Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 60 references

Experimental Demonstration of a Measurement-Feedback Quantum Information Engine

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read By replacing the hot reservoir with a projective measurement and routing feedback through fast unitary strokes, a trapped-ion engine shows that quantum inner friction can push efficiency above the Otto limit and break the efficiency-power t

desk verdict Real trapped-ion experiment, but the super-Otto efficiency is an accounting construct, not a metered one. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.28702 v1 pith:2M3SKSUV submitted 2026-07-30 quant-ph

Jinfeng Wei , Yingying Hong , Dehua Liu , Xi Wang , Zhe Wang , Yiling Zhan , Kaifeng Cui , Jintao Bu
show 3 more authors
Jianhui Wang Leilei Yan Gang Chen
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords quantuminformationenginemeasurement-feedbackcontrolinnerfrictionOttolimitLandauererasuretrappedionthermodynamicsefficiency-powertrade-off
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 reports an experimental measurement-feedback quantum information engine built from a single trapped calcium ion. Instead of a hot reservoir, the engine uses a projective measurement along a tilted spin axis to inject nonthermal energy, and the measurement outcome determines whether the ion undergoes a rapid compression-expansion stroke or is coupled to a cold bath. The authors show that after a few cycles the engine settles into a stable operating point with a complete energy balance, and that by tuning the measurement angle and the stroke durations, both the coherence the measurement creates and the 'inner friction' of fast non-adiabatic driving become beneficial: the engine's efficiency exceeds the Otto limit, and the inner-friction contribution lets it produce high efficiency and high power simultaneously, breaking the usual efficiency-power trade-off.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the feedback-routed cycle: a projective measurement M(θ) replaces the hot bath, and the outcome selects one of two conditional strokes. The cycle's performance is quantified by two dynamical parameters—the non-adiabatic transition probability ξ (the inner-friction strength) and the coherence-dependent parameter ζ—which enter the work formula ⟨w⟩ = p_+ ε0[2(ζ_c + ζ_e − 2ξ_e ζ_c) + (ξ_c + ξ_e − 2ξ_e ξ_c) cosθ]. The inner-friction contribution ⟨w⟩_fri = p_+ ε0 cosθ(ξ_c + ξ_e − 2ξ_c ξ_e) is the term that turns fast driving into a resource, and the Landauer erasure cost closes the cycle's energy bookkeeping.

What would settle it

Equip the measurement and feedback apparatus with energy meters and measure the total power draw over a complete cycle, including the microwave pulses, laser cooling, and any electronic control. If the measured external energy input exceeds the bookkeeping input ⟨ΔE_mea⟩ + ⟨q_er⟩ (with uncertainties), the corrected efficiency drops below the Otto limit, which would falsify the claim of a genuine measurement-powered super-Otto engine.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that finite-time irreversibility—normally a loss mechanism—can serve as a work-producing resource in a measurement-feedback engine. In the experiment, the measurement of M(θ) = cosθ σ_z + sinθ σ_x collapses the spin onto a coherent superposition; for a+ outcomes the ion is driven through a time-dependent compression-expansion unitary, while a− outcomes send it toward thermal equilibrium with a cold reservoir. The extracted work in the unitary branch contains an inner-friction term proportional to cosθ(ξ_c + ξ_e − 2 ξ_c ξ_e), which is non-negative for |θ| < π/2, so rapid driving contributes positive work. The engine reaches a stable cycle with efficiency 59.1(1.6)% ve

Load-bearing premise

The cycle's energy ledger assumes that the projective measurement costs exactly the change in the ion's average energy and that erasing the measurement record costs exactly the Landauer minimum—yet the real measurement apparatus and controller are not metered; if their actual energy consumption is higher, the engine's efficiency advantage over the Otto cycle shrinks or disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If correct, the stable operating regime means a measurement-feedback engine can run continuously from arbitrary initial states without external state preparation.
  • Efficiency beyond the Otto limit by about 18% (relative) is achieved experimentally, so the protocol offers a concrete route to outperform standard cycle efficiency.
  • The positive inner-friction contribution implies that faster strokes can enhance both efficiency and power, overturning the assumption that finite-time driving always degrades engine performance.
  • Tuning the measurement angle and stroke duration gives two independent control knobs for the engine's efficiency and power, which could be used in practical engineering of quantum engines.
  • The comparison with a fully dephased reference cycle indicates that measurement-induced coherence is a genuine resource, not an artifact of the energy accounting.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the energy-accounting assumption is right, the same positive-friction mechanism could be imported into other finite-time quantum machines, such as refrigerators or batteries, where non-adiabatic driving is currently treated purely as a cost.
  • A testable implication is that the size of the efficiency-power trade-off breaking should scale with how much the measurement basis is tilted relative to the energy basis (θ); scanning θ and measuring efficiency and power would map the anticipated phase boundary.
  • The paper leaves the measurement apparatus outside the thermodynamic bookkeeping; a natural next test is to build a version where the demon's memory is reset inside the device and measure the total external energy input, which would confirm whether the super-Otto efficiency is fully extractable.
  • Connecting this engine to a quantum load or battery, as the authors suggest, would test whether the claimed advantage survives when work is stored rather than measured theoretically.
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

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper reports a trapped-ion experiment implementing a two-level measurement-feedback quantum information engine (MFQIE). The cycle consists of a projective measurement in a rotated basis, followed by feedback: outcome a+ leads to a finite-time unitary compression-expansion stroke, outcome a− leads to thermalization with an engineered cold reservoir. Using quantum-state tomography, the authors reconstruct the conditional states and compute extracted work, heat, measurement-energy input, and a Landauer erasure cost, defining efficiency as work divided by the sum of these costs. They find convergence to a stable cycle and report an efficiency of 59.1(1.6)% against an Otto limit of 50%, with a duration-dependent positive 'inner-friction' contribution that they argue enhances work output and can break the efficiency-power trade-off.

Significance. The experiment addresses a genuinely open question: whether nonadiabaticity in a finite-time quantum engine can be exploited as a resource rather than a penalty. Its strengths are the direct state-tomographic characterization, the demonstration of convergence to a stable operating regime, and the presentation of a clear quantitative result (59.1(1.6)%) with simulation agreement. If the thermodynamic accounting convention is accepted, the result would be an important experimental step. However, the accounting is the main weakness: two of the three terms in the efficiency denominator are not measured external energy inputs, and the erasure term follows a nonstandard convention that is not physically implemented. The paper is therefore scientifically credible only with substantial clarification and re-analysis under standard cost conventions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Model, Eq. (3) and efficiency definition] Eq. (3) evaluates the Landauer erasure cost as -p_- beta_c^{-1} Tr[rho_{t1^-} ln rho_{t1^-}], i.e., from the von Neumann entropy of the thermalizing branch. For a binary measurement record, the standard Landauer cost is determined by the entropy of the measurement record (at least H(p_+,p_-)), not by the entropy of one branch. The a+ outcome is also recorded and must be reset. The text explicitly states that the erasure stroke is not implemented as a physical stroke. Consequently the denominator of eta is an idealized bookkeeping term, and the reported 59.1% > 50% comparison to the Otto limit is not a demonstrated physical energy balance. Please either implement/measure the erasure or recompute with the standard Landauer term and report the sensitivity of the super-Otto claim.
  2. [Model, 'energy cost of measurement'] The measurement input is defined by ⟨Delta E_mea⟩ = ⟨w⟩ − ⟨q⟩, an identity from energy conservation for the working medium. It is not the measured energy drawn from the 397 nm detection lasers, microwave source, or feedback electronics. The phrase 'fully resolved energetic balance' (p. 4) therefore overstates what is measured. The super-Otto conclusion depends on this residual being the true external cost. Please state this limitation explicitly and, ideally, estimate or bound the actual metrological energy cost.
  3. [Fig. 4(b) and abstract] The abstract claims that quantum inner friction can break the traditional efficiency-power trade-off to synchronously achieve high efficiency and large power. Yet Fig. 4(b) shows power decreasing at small tau_c for tau_e = 0.1 tau_0 while efficiency increases—the conventional trade-off. The authors acknowledge this in one sentence but do not reconcile it with the global claim. Please define the precise parameter domain and provide an efficiency-power characteristic relative to a standard Otto/reference cycle, rather than making a global trade-off-breaking claim.
  4. [Eq. (1) and 'inner-friction contribution'] The paper calls the term p_+ epsilon_0 cosθ (xi_c + xi_e − 2 xi_c xi_e) the quantum inner-friction contribution and states it is always positive. This is an algebraic term in Eq. (1), not the standard nonadiabatic excess work, which is nonnegative and describes dissipated energy. The connection between this term and conventional inner friction needs a derivation and comparison with the standard definition; otherwise the claim that friction is exploited as a resource is a matter of convention rather than a demonstrated physical mechanism.
minor comments (3)
  1. [General] The main text relies on Supplemental Material [54] for the derivations of Eqs. (1)-(3), but [54] is only cited as a URL; a referee cannot verify the derivation. The central formulas should be self-contained or at least accompanied by a brief derivation in the main text.
  2. [Fig. 1(c)] The effective temperature T_c = 0.26 T_0 is quoted without defining the relationship between T_0 and the dissipative rates. Define T_0 clearly in the caption or text, and avoid potential confusion with the compression/expansion durations tau_c, tau_e.
  3. [References] The companion paper [55] is by the same group and is listed as submitted. Since it is used to support the central interpretation, the main text should either summarize its results or cite it as a preprint with full archival status. The paper also lacks a data availability statement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: measured ξ, ζ, and state tomography drive the work/efficiency formulas; idealized erasure bookkeeping and same-author companion citations are caveats, not reductions.

full rationale

The central work output is obtained from Eq. (1) using independently characterized nonadiabatic transition parameters ξ and coherence parameters ζ extracted from state-tomography measurements; the efficiency is then assembled from measured work, measured heat exchange, and an explicit Landauer erasure term. None of these inputs is fitted to the final efficiency, and the super-Otto claim is not forced by the definitions. The measurement energy input is introduced through the first-law residual ⟨ΔE_mea⟩=⟨w⟩−⟨q⟩, which is a bookkeeping identity rather than an externally measured energy supply; the paper acknowledges this idealization explicitly: 'this erasure step is not implemented as an additional physical stroke, but is included as the minimal thermodynamic cost required by Landauer's principle.' Equation (3) similarly computes erasure cost from the thermalized-branch von Neumann entropy rather than the full measurement-record Shannon entropy, which may affect the denominator, but this is an assumption about the thermodynamic accounting, not a circular derivation. Self-citations [53] and [55] by overlapping authors motivate and extend the theory, but the experimental data and the benchmark against the Otto limit stand independently. No equation is equivalent to its own output by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction; therefore no load-bearing circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model contains no new physical entities. However, the central efficiency claims depend on several chosen experimental parameters and on idealized accounting assumptions for measurement and erasure. The most delicate inputs are the measured dissipation rates (which set the cold reservoir temperature) and the definition of the inner-friction contribution.

free parameters (4)
  • γ_g, γ_e (effective dissipation rates) = Not quoted in main text; steady-state ground population P_g=0.979(1), giving T_c=0.26 T0
    Measured by fitting population dynamics of the thermalization stroke (Fig. 1(c)). They set the cold reservoir temperature and appear in the expressions for heat exchange and erasure cost.
  • ω_c, ω_h (energy splittings) = ω_c/2π=4 kHz, ω_h/2π=8 kHz
    Chosen fixed parameters of the engine. They define the Otto limit η_Otto=1−ω_c/ω_h=0.5 against which the efficiency advantage is claimed.
  • θ (measurement angle) = Scanned over range including θ=0.15π in main demonstration
    Tunable control parameter mapping out the measurement-induced coherence and efficiency regimes; not fitted to the final claim.
  • τ_c, τ_e, τ_d (stroke durations) = τ_0 = π/(2ω_c); various multiples in figures
    Tunable control parameters that modulate inner friction and power; the claim about friction relies on their finite values.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Landauer's principle: erasing a memory with entropy S costs at least k_B T ln2 of work.
    Used to compute erasure cost ⟨q_er⟩ in Eq. (3).
  • domain assumption Lindblad master equation with local decay operators describes the thermalization stroke.
    The effective dissipation rates γ_g, γ_e are measured by fitting to the solution of the Lindblad equation; the steady state is taken as thermal equilibrium with inverse temperature β_c.
  • domain assumption Projective measurement of M(θ) with instantaneous backaction is a valid description of the measurement stroke, and its energy cost is fully accounted by the state change.
    The engine's energy balance (⟨ΔE_mea⟩=⟨w⟩−⟨q⟩) relies on this; no physical measurement apparatus or finite-time measurement dynamics is included.
  • ad hoc to paper The decomposition of extracted work into 'inner friction' term ⟨w⟩_fri = p+ ε0 cosθ(ξc+ξe−2ξcξe) is a meaningful separation between adiabatic and nonadiabatic contributions.
    This term is mathematically nonnegative for |θ|<π/2, and its interpretation as a positive friction resource is central to the paper's narrative; the derivation is in the companion paper [55].
  • ad hoc to paper Erasure is not physically implemented; the minimal Landauer cost represents the true erasure cost of the feedback record.
    The reported efficiency includes this theoretical cost rather than a measured one; if physical erasure costs more, the super-Otto advantage may be reduced.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Experimental Demonstration of a Measurement-Feedback Quantum Information Engine." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2M3SKSUV

@misc{pith2026260728702,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Experimental Demonstration of a Measurement-Feedback Quantum Information Engine},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2M3SKSUV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.28702}
}
read the original abstract

Harnessing quantum inner friction in a finite-time stroke of quantum engine to extract work remains an open experimental challenge. Here we address this issue by experimentally establishing and demonstrating an innovative measurement-feedback quantum information engine model in the trapped 40Ca+ ion system, where the projective measurement replaces the hot reservoir as a nonthermal energy source and feedback-control conditionally steers the system through either unitary compression-expansion strokes or thermalization. We experimentally show that the engine, starting from arbitrary initial states, converges to a stable operating regime with a fully resolved energetic balance, and by controlling the measurement angle and stroke duration, the measurement-induced coherence and quantum inner friction can act as tunable resources to enhance the efficiency of engine beyond the Otto limit. The experimental results further demonstrate that the quantum inner friction can be utilized to break the traditional efficiency-power trade-off relation to synchronously achieve the high efficiency and large power. Our experiment establishes a route toward information-to-work quantum engines that convert finite-time irreversibility into performance-enhancing resources.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28702 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references

  1. [1]

    James Clerk Maxwell,Theory of Heat(Longmans, Green, and Co., London, 1871)

  2. [2]

    ¨Uber die entropieverminderung in einem ther- modynamischen system bei eingriffen intelligenter wesen,

    Le ´o Szil ´ard, “ ¨Uber die entropieverminderung in einem ther- modynamischen system bei eingriffen intelligenter wesen,” Z. Phys.53, 840–856 (1929)

    1929

  3. [3]

    Leff and Andrew F

    Harvey S. Leff and Andrew F. Rex, eds.,Maxwell’s Demon: Entropy, Information, Computing(Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1990)

    1990

  4. [4]

    Irreversibility and heat generation in the com- puting process,

    Rolf Landauer, “Irreversibility and heat generation in the com- puting process,” IBM J. Res. Dev.5, 183–191 (1961)

    1961

  5. [5]

    The thermodynamics of computation—a review,

    Charles H. Bennett, “The thermodynamics of computation—a review,” Int. J. Theor. Phys.21, 905–940 (1982)

    1982

  6. [6]

    Collo- quium: The physics of maxwell’s demon and information,

    Koji Maruyama, Franco Nori, and Vlatko Vedral, “Collo- quium: The physics of maxwell’s demon and information,” Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 1–23 (2009)

    2009

  7. [7]

    Thermodynamics of information,

    Juan M. R. Parrondo, Jordan M. Horowitz, and Takahiro Sagawa, “Thermodynamics of information,” Nat. Phys.11, 131–139 (2015)

    2015

  8. [8]

    Generalized jarzynski equality under nonequilibrium feedback control,

    Takahiro Sagawa and Masahito Ueda, “Generalized jarzynski equality under nonequilibrium feedback control,” Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 090602 (2010)

    2010

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Experimental demonstration of information-to-energy conversion and validation of the gener- alized jarzynski equality,

    Shoichi Toyabe, Takahiro Sagawa, Masahito Ueda, Eiro Muneyuki, and Masaki Sano, “Experimental demonstration of information-to-energy conversion and validation of the gener- alized jarzynski equality,” Nat. Phys.6, 988–992 (2010)

    2010

  2. [10]

    Experimental observation of the role of mutual infor- mation in the nonequilibrium dynamics of a maxwell demon,

    Jonne V . Koski, Ville F. Maisi, Takahiro Sagawa, and Jukka P. Pekola, “Experimental observation of the role of mutual infor- mation in the nonequilibrium dynamics of a maxwell demon,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 030601 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    On-chip maxwell’s demon as an information-powered refrigerator,

    Jonne V . Koski, Aki Kutvonen, Ivan M. Khaymovich, Tapio Ala-Nissila, and Jukka P. Pekola, “On-chip maxwell’s demon as an information-powered refrigerator,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 260602 (2015)

    2015

  4. [12]

    Observing a quantum maxwell demon at work,

    Nathana ¨el Cottet, S´ebastien Jezouin, Landry Bretheau, Philippe Campagne-Ibarcq, Quentin Ficheux, Janet Anders, Alexia Auff`eves, R´emi Azouit, Pierre Rouchon, and Benjamin Huard, “Observing a quantum maxwell demon at work,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.114, 7561–7564 (2017). 6

    2017

  5. [13]

    Quantum fuel with nonclassical correlations for maxwell’s demon engines,

    Cyril Elouard, Andrew N. Jordan, Alexia Auff `eves, and Maxime Clusel, “Quantum fuel with nonclassical correlations for maxwell’s demon engines,” Phys. Rev. A95, 062115 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    Efficient quantum mea- surement engines,

    Cyril Elouard and Andrew N. Jordan, “Efficient quantum mea- surement engines,” Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 260601 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    Efficiently fueling a quantum engine with incompatible measurements,

    Sreenath K. Manikandan, Cyril Elouard, Kater W. Murch, Alexia Auff`eves, and Andrew N. Jordan, “Efficiently fueling a quantum engine with incompatible measurements,” Phys. Rev. E105, 044137 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Quantum fokker- planck master equation for continuous feedback control,

    Bj ¨orn Annby-Andersson, Faraj Bakhshinezhad, Debankur Bhattacharyya, Guilherme De Sousa, Christopher Jarzynski, Peter Samuelsson, and Patrick P. Potts, “Quantum fokker- planck master equation for continuous feedback control,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 050401 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Effi- ciency at maximum power of a carnot quantum information en- gine,

    Paul Fadler, Alexander Friedenberger, and Eric Lutz, “Effi- ciency at maximum power of a carnot quantum information en- gine,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 240401 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    The role of quantum measurement in stochastic thermodynamics,

    Cyril Elouard, David A. Herrera-Mart ´ı, Maxime Clusel, and Alexia Auff `eves, “The role of quantum measurement in stochastic thermodynamics,” npj Quantum Inf.3, 9 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    Experimental rectification of entropy production by maxwell’s demon in a quantum system,

    Patrice A. Camati, John P. S. Peterson, Tiago B. Batalh˜ao, Kao- nan Micadei, Alexandre M. Souza, Roberto S. Sarthour, Ivan S. Oliveira, and Roberto M. Serra, “Experimental rectification of entropy production by maxwell’s demon in a quantum system,” Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 240502 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    Information-to-work conver- sion by maxwell’s demon in a superconducting circuit quantum electrodynamical system,

    Yuta Masuyama, Ken Funo, Y ˆuto Murashita, Atsushi Noguchi, Shingo Kono, Yutaka Tabuchi, Rekishu Yamazaki, Masahito Ueda, and Yasunobu Nakamura, “Information-to-work conver- sion by maxwell’s demon in a superconducting circuit quantum electrodynamical system,” Nat. Commun.9, 1...

    2018

  13. [21]

    Quantum measurement and the first law of ther- modynamics: The energy cost of measurement is the work value of the acquired information,

    Kurt Jacobs, “Quantum measurement and the first law of ther- modynamics: The energy cost of measurement is the work value of the acquired information,” Phys. Rev. E86, 040106(R) (2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Single- temperature quantum engine without feedback control,

    Juyeon Yi, Peter Talkner, and Yong Woon Kim, “Single- temperature quantum engine without feedback control,” Phys. Rev. E96, 022108 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    The role of quantum information in thermodynamics—a topical review,

    John Goold, Marcus Huber, Arnau Riera, L ´ıdia del Rio, and Paul Skrzypczyk, “The role of quantum information in thermodynamics—a topical review,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 49, 143001 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    Quantum thermal absorption machines: refrigerators, engines and clocks,

    Mark T. Mitchison, “Quantum thermal absorption machines: refrigerators, engines and clocks,” Contemp. Phys.60, 164–187 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Discrete four-stroke quantum heat engine exploring the origin of friction,

    Ronnie Kosloff and Tova Feldmann, “Discrete four-stroke quantum heat engine exploring the origin of friction,” Phys. Rev. E65, 055102(R) (2002)

    2002

  18. [26]

    Irreversible work and inner friction in quantum thermodynamic processes,

    Francesco Plastina, Antonio Alecce, Tony John George Apol- laro, Giovanni Falcone, Gianluca Francica, Fernando Galve, Nicola Lo Gullo, and Roberta Zambrini, “Irreversible work and inner friction in quantum thermodynamic processes,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 260601 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Quantum four-stroke heat engine: Thermodynamic observables in a model with intrinsic friction,

    Tova Feldmann and Ronnie Kosloff, “Quantum four-stroke heat engine: Thermodynamic observables in a model with intrinsic friction,” Phys. Rev. E68, 016101 (2003)

    2003

  20. [28]

    The asymmetric quantum otto engine: frictional effects on performance bounds and operational modes,

    Varinder Singh, Vahid Shaghaghi, Tanmoy Pandit, Cameron Beetar, Giuliano Benenti, and Dario Rosa, “The asymmetric quantum otto engine: frictional effects on performance bounds and operational modes,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus139, 1020 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    The quantum friction and optimal finite- time performance of the quantum otto cycle,

    Andrea R. Insinga, “The quantum friction and optimal finite- time performance of the quantum otto cycle,” Entropy22, 1060 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Supera- diabatic quantum friction suppression in finite-time thermody- namics,

    Shujin Deng, Aur ´elia Chenu, Pengpeng Diao, Fang Li, Shi Yu, Ivan Coulamy, Adolfo del Campo, and Haibin Wu, “Supera- diabatic quantum friction suppression in finite-time thermody- namics,” Sci. Adv.4, eaar5909 (2018)

    2018

  23. [31]

    Transitionless quantum driving,

    Michael Victor Berry, “Transitionless quantum driving,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.42, 365303 (2009)

    2009

  24. [32]

    Quantum otto cycle in a su- perconducting cavity in the nonadiabatic regime,

    Nicol ´as F. Del Grosso, Fernando C. Lombardo, Francisco D. Mazzitelli, and Paula I. Villar, “Quantum otto cycle in a su- perconducting cavity in the nonadiabatic regime,” Phys. Rev. A 105, 022202 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Finite-time quantum otto engine: Surpassing the qua- sistatic efficiency due to friction,

    Sangyun Lee, Meesoon Ha, Jong-Min Park, and Hawoong Jeong, “Finite-time quantum otto engine: Surpassing the qua- sistatic efficiency due to friction,” Phys. Rev. E101, 022127 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Quantum dynam- ical framework for brownian heat engines,

    Girish S. Agarwal and Subhas Chaturvedi, “Quantum dynam- ical framework for brownian heat engines,” Phys. Rev. E88, 012130 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Com- bining energy efficiency and quantum advantage in cyclic ma- chines,

    Waner Hou, Wanchao Yao, Xingyu Zhao, Kamran Rehan, Yi Li, Yue Li, Eric Lutz, Yiheng Lin, and Jiangfeng Du, “Com- bining energy efficiency and quantum advantage in cyclic ma- chines,” Nat. Commun.16, 5127 (2025)

    2025

  28. [36]

    Colloquium: Quantum coherence as a resource,

    Alexander Streltsov, Gerardo Adesso, and Martin B. Plenio, “Colloquium: Quantum coherence as a resource,” Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 041003 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Quantifying coherence,

    Tillmann Baumgratz, Marcus Cramer, and Martin B. Plenio, “Quantifying coherence,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 140401 (2014)

    2014

  30. [38]

    Coherence-enhanced thermodynamic performance in a periodically driven inelastic heat engine,

    Jincheng Lu, Zi Wang, Jie Ren, Chen Wang, and Jian-Hua Jiang, “Coherence-enhanced thermodynamic performance in a periodically driven inelastic heat engine,” Phys. Rev. B109, 125407 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    The extraction of work from quantum coher- ence,

    Kamil Korzekwa, Matteo Lostaglio, Jonathan Oppenheim, and David Jennings, “The extraction of work from quantum coher- ence,” New J. Phys.18, 023045 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Role of coherence in the nonequilibrium thermodynamics of quan- tum systems,

    Gianluca Francica, John Goold, and Francesco Plastina, “Role of coherence in the nonequilibrium thermodynamics of quan- tum systems,” Phys. Rev. E99, 042105 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Experimental demonstration of quantum effects in the opera- tion of microscopic heat engines,

    James Klatzow, Jonas N. Becker, Patrick M. Ledingham, Chris- tian Weinzetl, Krzysztof T. Kaczmarek, Dylan J. Saunders, Joshua Nunn, Ian A. Walmsley, Raam Uzdin, and Eilon Poem, “Experimental demonstration of quantum effects in the opera- tion of microscopic heat engines,” Phys...

    2019

  34. [42]

    A photonic quantum engine driven by superradiance,

    Jinuk Kim, Seung-hoon Oh, Daeho Yang, Junki Kim, Moonjoo Lee, and Kyungwon An, “A photonic quantum engine driven by superradiance,” Nat. Photonics16, 707–711 (2022)

    2022

  35. [43]

    Spin quantum heat engine quantified by quantum steer- ing,

    Wentao Ji, Zihua Chai, Mengqi Wang, Yuhang Guo, Xing Rong, Fazhan Shi, Changliang Ren, Ya Wang, and Jiangfeng Du, “Spin quantum heat engine quantified by quantum steer- ing,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 090602 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Quantum thermodynamic advantage in work extraction from steerable quantum correlations,

    Tanmoy Biswas, Chandan Datta, and Luis Pedro Garc´ıa-Pintos, “Quantum thermodynamic advantage in work extraction from steerable quantum correlations,” Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 110402 (2025)

    2025

  37. [45]

    De- scription of quantum coherence in thermodynamic processes re- quires constraints beyond free energy,

    Matteo Lostaglio, David Jennings, and Terry Rudolph, “De- scription of quantum coherence in thermodynamic processes re- quires constraints beyond free energy,” Nat. Commun.6, 6383 (2015)

    2015

  38. [46]

    Quantum photocell: Using quantum coher- ence to reduce radiative recombination and increase efficiency,

    Marlan O. Scully, “Quantum photocell: Using quantum coher- ence to reduce radiative recombination and increase efficiency,” Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 207701 (2010)

    2010

  39. [47]

    Quantum heat engine power can be increased by noise-induced coher- ence,

    Marlan O. Scully, Kimberly R. Chapin, Konstantin E. Dorfman, Moochan Barnabas Kim, and Anatoly Svidzinsky, “Quantum heat engine power can be increased by noise-induced coher- ence,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.108, 15097–15100 (2011)

    2011

  40. [48]

    Equivalence 7 of quantum heat machines, and quantum-thermodynamic signa- tures,

    Raam Uzdin, Amikam Levy, and Ronnie Kosloff, “Equivalence 7 of quantum heat machines, and quantum-thermodynamic signa- tures,” Phys. Rev. X5, 031044 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    A single-atom heat engine,

    Johannes Roßnagel, Samuel T. Dawkins, Karl N. Tolazzi, Obinna Abah, Eric Lutz, Ferdinand Schmidt-Kaler, and Kil- ian Singer, “A single-atom heat engine,” Science352, 325–329 (2016)

    2016

  42. [50]

    Spin heat engine coupled to a harmonic-oscillator flywheel,

    David von Lindenfels, Oliver Gr ¨ab, Christian T. Schmiegelow, Vidyut Kaushal, Jonas Schulz, Mark T. Mitchison, John Goold, Ferdinand Schmidt-Kaler, and Ulrich G. Poschinger, “Spin heat engine coupled to a harmonic-oscillator flywheel,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 080602 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Experimental characterization of a spin quantum heat engine,

    John P. S. Peterson, Tiago B. Batalh ˜ao, Marcela Herrera, Alexandre M. Souza, Roberto S. Sarthour, Ivan S. Oliveira, and Roberto M. Serra, “Experimental characterization of a spin quantum heat engine,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 240601 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    Single- atom energy-conversion device with a quantum load,

    Noah Van Horne, Dahyun Yum, Tarun Dutta, Peter H ¨anggi, Jiangbin Gong, Dario Poletti, and Manas Mukherjee, “Single- atom energy-conversion device with a quantum load,” npj Quantum Inf.6, 37 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    Beyond classi- cal limits: Quantum superposition and inner friction in a quan- tum mechanical engine,

    Dehua Liu, Yingying Hong, and Jianhui Wang, “Beyond classi- cal limits: Quantum superposition and inner friction in a quan- tum mechanical engine,” Chin. Phys. Lett.42, 080001 (2025)

    2025

  46. [54]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL] for derivations, experi- mental details, and additional data

  47. [55]

    Feedback-driven quantum engine: Harnessing quantum coherence and inner friction,

    Yingying Hong, Dehua Liu, Jinfeng Wei, Leilei Yan, and Jianhui Wang, “Feedback-driven quantum engine: Harnessing quantum coherence and inner friction,” (2026), companion pa- per submitted to Physical Review A

    2026

  48. [56]

    Thermody- namics with continuous information flow,

    Jordan M. Horowitz and Massimiliano Esposito, “Thermody- namics with continuous information flow,” Phys. Rev. X4, 031015 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    Thermodynamics of a physical model im- plementing a maxwell demon,

    Philipp Strasberg, Gernot Schaller, Tobias Brandes, and Mas- similiano Esposito, “Thermodynamics of a physical model im- plementing a maxwell demon,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 040601 (2013)

    2013

  50. [58]

    Quantum and information thermodynamics: A unifying framework based on repeated interactions,

    Philipp Strasberg, Gernot Schaller, Tobias Brandes, and Massi- miliano Esposito, “Quantum and information thermodynamics: A unifying framework based on repeated interactions,” Phys. Rev. X7, 021003 (2017)

    2017

  51. [59]

    Single- ion information engine for charging quantum battery,

    Jialiang Zhang, Pengfei Wang, Wentao Chen, Zhengyang Cai, Mu Qiao, Riling Li, Yingye Huang, Haonan Tian, Chuyang Luan, Hengchao Tu, Kaifeng Cui, Leilei Yan, Junhua Zhang, Jingning Zhang, Manhong Yung, and Kihwan Kim, “Single- ion information engine for charging quantum battery...

    2025

  52. [60]

    Irreversible performance of a quantum harmonic heat engine,

    Yair Rezek and Ronnie Kosloff, “Irreversible performance of a quantum harmonic heat engine,” New J. Phys.8, 83 (2006)

    2006

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.