Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 29 references

A non-Markovian approach to spin-phonon coherence and the breakdown of the Markovian approximation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Group-IV vacancy qubits in diamond stay coherent longer than the standard Born-Markov master equation predicts, and a non-Markovian treatment with a Brownian phonon spectral density recovers the observed coherence times.

desk verdict Useful non-Markovian framework and a falsifiable orientation test, but the central T2 enhancement is undermined by an internal normalization inconsistency in the Brownian spectral density. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.09455 v1 pith:KUKZFUKM submitted 2026-08-10 quant-ph

Mohamed Belhassen , Tim Schröder , Gregor Pieplow This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords spin-phonondecoherencegroup-IVvacancycentersdiamondcolorsilicon-vacancycentertin-vacancynon-MarkoviandynamicsBorn-MarkovapproximationBrownianspectraldensity
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 the standard Born-Markov master equation systematically underestimates the electron-spin coherence time $T_2$ of group-IV vacancy centers in diamond, and that the shortfall is a physics problem, not a fitting issue. The authors trace the failure to three sources: a Debye spectral density that makes the bath correlation function diverge, the rotating-wave removal of pure-dephasing terms, and the neglect of system-bath memory. They then replace the phonon spectral density with a Brownian form and solve the dynamics with both time-convolutionless and Nakajima-Zwanzig non-Markovian master equations, which lengthen predicted $T_2$ by a factor of 2 to 6.7 and bring silicon- and tin-vacancy results into line with measured values. The paper also shows that the dependence of $T_2$ on the magnetic-field orientation relative to the defect axis is a discriminating test between spectral-density models. If the claim holds, quantitative coherence predictions for engineered diamond quantum devices need a non-Markovian treatment, not just a regularized Lindblad equation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Brownian spectral density $J(\omega)=\sum_i \alpha^2\Gamma\omega/[ (\omega_i^2-\omega^2)^2+\Gamma^2\omega^2]$, chosen so that its width $\Gamma$ sets the decay rate of the bath correlation function $\propto e^{-\Gamma t/2}$, supplying a finite memory time while preserving the Markovian rates at resonance. The spin-phonon interaction is a strain coupling $H_{SB}=\sum_\alpha \sigma_\alpha B_\alpha$ with phonon displacement operators $B_\alpha$. This spectral density is inserted into two second-order non-Markovian equations: the time-convolutionless (TCL) master equation, which keeps only bath memory, and the Nakajima-Zwanzig integro-differential equation (IDE), which also keeps system memory. The two formalisms are the machinery that converts the spectral density into the $T_2$ values that match experiment.

What would settle it

Measure $T_2$ for a silicon-vacancy center at $T\approx 3.6$ K with the magnetic field parallel and then perpendicular to the defect symmetry axis, using isotopically purified, deeply implanted diamond to suppress spin and surface noise. The Brownian non-Markovian model predicts the parallel orientation exceeds the perpendicular by 19–46% under the IDE approach, while exponential regularization predicts a difference under 1.2%; observing a ratio close to 1 would rule out the Brownian memory mechanism. A second check: if measured $T_2$ at higher temperatures drops to or below the Markovian prediction, the central underestimate would be disproven.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Born-Markov Lindblad master equation cannot quantitatively describe phonon-induced spin decoherence in group-IV vacancy centers, because it discards exactly the memory effects that determine the measured coherence. The paper shows that the standard $J(\omega) \propto \omega^3$ Debye spectral density makes the bath correlation function divergent, that the Markovian reduction removes diagonal pure-dephasing contributions, and that the resulting $T_2$ falls short of experiment at finite temperature. Using a Brownian spectral density $J(\omega)=\sum_i \alpha^2\Gamma\omega/[ (\omega_i^2-\omega^2)^2+\Gamma^2\omega^2]$ with a finite bath-memory decay rate $\Gamma$, both the time-convolutionless and the Nakajima-Zwanzig integro-differential equations produce $T_2$ values increased by 2–6.7 times relative to Markovian predictions, matching measured silicon-vacancy and tin-vacancy coherence times. The same framework predicts a 19–46% difference in $T_2$ between magnetic fields parallel and perpendicular to the defect axis for the Brownian spectral density, versus less than 1.2% for exponential regularization, giving an experimental route to decide which model is right.

Load-bearing premise

The premise that the real phonon environment of a group-IV vacancy is a Brownian spectral density with a single decay width $\Gamma$ is load-bearing; the paper states that $\Gamma$ cannot be predicted from diamond phonons without modeling interphonon interactions, so if the true bath has a different spectral shape, the predicted $T_2$ values, the 2–6.7x enhancement, and the orientation test all shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Device simulations for silicon- and tin-vacancy spin qubits that rely on Lindblad master equations will systematically understate usable coherence and therefore overstate the needed cooling; if the non-Markovian $T_2$ values are the real ones, operation temperatures can be higher than Markovian models suggest.
  • The 2–6.7-fold memory-induced lengthening of $T_2$ means phonon-bath engineering that slows the bath decay rate $\Gamma$ should directly translate into longer spin coherence within the strain-coupling regime.
  • The magnetic-field orientation ratio provides a model discriminator: the Brownian spectral density predicts the parallel-orientation $T_2$ larger by 19–46%, while exponential regularization predicts a difference below 1.2%, so two coherence measurements can exclude one class of phonon models.
  • Because the Markovian prediction is already shorter than experiment, adding realistic extra decoherence channels only widens the gap; agreement requires either non-Markovian memory or a modified spectral density, not better noise parameters.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Brownian form is right, fitting orientation-dependent $T_2$ data would extract $\Gamma$, effectively measuring the interphonon interaction rate that the paper says cannot currently be predicted from diamond phonons alone.
  • The same non-Markovian machinery should apply to other group-IV centers such as germanium-vacancy and to phononic-crystal or nanobeam geometries where the effective spectral density is reduced or gapped; the memory enhancement may be larger there because the dephasing channels are fewer.
  • The stretched-exponential exponent $p$ in the paper's fitting function could serve as a memory meter: $p$ should move from 1 (Markovian) toward 2 as the bath decay rate $\Gamma$ decreases, a prediction that could be checked with existing Hahn-echo setups.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies phonon-induced electronic spin decoherence in group-IV vacancy centers in diamond, with a focus on silicon-vacancy (SiV) and tin-vacancy (SnV) centers. It derives spin-phonon master equations under the Born-Markov approximation and then considers non-Markovian treatments based on the Nakajima-Zwanzig and time-convolutionless projection-operator formalisms. The central claim is that the Markovian approximation systematically underestimates experimentally observed coherence times, and that a non-Markovian treatment with a Brownian spectral density, which introduces a finite bath-memory time, yields longer T2 values that more closely match experiment. The paper also proposes that magnetic-field-orientation-dependent coherence measurements could discriminate between spectral-density models.

Significance. If the central quantitative claim were established, the paper would provide a useful microscopic framework for predicting spin coherence in group-IV vacancy centers and would identify a falsifiable experimental test. The derivation of the master equations from standard open-quantum-system methods, the exact bath correlation functions for the Brownian spectral density, and the explicit comparison of TCL and integro-differential-equation approaches are valuable contributions. However, the quantitative claims currently rest on an internal normalization error, on free parameters that are not independently determined, and on non-Markovian results shown only for SiV. These issues must be resolved before the paper's main conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.3, Eq. (27)-(28)] The stated normalization α² = Γω_i² does not reproduce Eq. (24). For the Brownian spectral density Eq. (27), J(ω_i) = α²/(Γω_i); with α² = Γω_i² this gives J(ω_i) = ω_i, whereas Eq. (24) is derived from the Debye spectral density J(ω) = ω³. The Markovian rates therefore differ by a factor of ω_i², i.e., about 2500 for SiV (Δ≈50 GHz) and 8×10⁵ for SnV (Δ≈903 GHz). The claim that this spectral density 'reproduces Eq. (24)' and 'leaves the Markovian results unchanged' is thus incorrect, and the 2–6.7× non-Markovian enhancement reported in Fig. 7 is measured against an inconsistent baseline. Please correct the normalization (e.g., α² = Γω_i⁴ if the ω_i³ behavior is intended) and regenerate the affected results, or explicitly re-derive the Markovian limit of Eq. (27).
  2. [Sec. 4.1, Figs. 6-7] The non-Markovian results are presented only for SiV; the text states that the SnV simulations become unstable and are not shown. The abstract's claim that 'experimentally measured electronic spin coherence dynamics are consistently captured' and the conclusion's general statements about G4V centers therefore go beyond the presented evidence. Please either provide stable SnV non-Markovian results or explicitly restrict the quantitative claims to SiV.
  3. [Sec. 3.3, Figs. 5 and 7] The agreement with experimental T2 values depends on parameters that are not independently determined: the cutoff frequency ω_c in the exponential regularization and the linewidth Γ in the Brownian spectral density. In Fig. 5, T2 varies by orders of magnitude as ω_c is varied, and in Fig. 7 the match to the measured SiV T2 is obtained by choosing Γ. The manuscript acknowledges that Γ 'cannot be predicted from diamond phonons', but this means the central claim of improved agreement with experiment is not a parameter-free prediction. Please quantify the sensitivity of the non-Markovian enhancement to these parameters and discuss what additional input would fix them.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3, text after Eq. (17)] There are several typographical errors: 'allows us to right' should be 'allows us to write', 'optained' should be 'obtained', and 'signigicant' should be 'significant'.
  2. [Sec. 4.1, Eqs. (34)-(37)] In the definitions of C_R^k, ν_R^k, C_I^k, and ν_I^k, the two branches are both labeled 'k=0' with different expressions; the index convention should be clarified, for example by distinguishing the two resonance terms explicitly.
  3. [Figs. 5-7] Several axis labels and tick labels contain corrupted unicode sequences such as 'uni00000039/uni0000004e/...'; these must be replaced with readable mathematical notation.
  4. [Abstract] The sentence 'Understanding the coherence properties of the underlying physical qubits that facilitate such applications is therefore are often limited' is grammatically incomplete and should be revised.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

The central quantitative agreement with experiment is obtained by scanning a free bath-memory rate Γ that the paper admits cannot be predicted from diamond phonons, so the 'closer match' is partly a fitted spectral-density parameter rather than an independent prediction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 3.3–4.1 (Eq. 27, Fig. 7)]
    "This spectral density is well suited to our analysis: it leaves the Markovian results unchanged while introducing the bath memory required for non-Markovian effects. It also avoids introducing cutoff frequencies to regularize the spectral density, at the cost of an effective bath memory time that cannot be predicted from diamond phonons ... Also, when we consider the system memory via the IDE Eq.(16), coherence times further increase from 2 to 6.7 times."

    The Brownian spectral density contains a free parameter Γ that the paper explicitly states 'cannot be predicted from diamond phonons.' The claimed agreement with the measured SiV T2 is then demonstrated by sweeping Γ (Fig. 7) and showing that the non-Markovian T2 curve crosses the experimental value; the reported 2–6.7× enhancement is quoted over a range of Γ. Since no independent constraint fixes Γ, the closer match to experiment is obtained by choosing a spectral-density parameter so that the target coherence time is reproduced, rather than by a parameter-free prediction.

full rationale

There is no definitional circularity: the master equations are derived from standard Nakajima-Zwanzig, time-convolutionless, and Born-Markov formalisms, and the spin-strain coupling parameters χ are taken from independent literature. The Markovian underprediction of T2 is a forward calculation compared with external experimental data. However, the central quantitative claim that the non-Markovian framework 'more closely match[es] experimental observations' relies on a free bath-memory rate Γ that is acknowledged to be unpredictable from diamond phonons; scanning Γ and showing a crossing with the measured T2 is effectively fitting the spectral-density model to the target data. This is partial circularity of the fitted-input-called-prediction kind. The proposed magnetic-field-orientation dependence of T2 is an independent, falsifiable prediction, which prevents the circularity from being total. An additional correctness concern, not scored as circularity, is that Eq. (27) with α²=Γω_i² gives J(ω_i)=ω_i, not the ω_i³ used in Eq. (24), so the printed equations do not literally preserve the Markovian baseline claimed in the text.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard open-quantum-system techniques (Born approximation, NZ/TCL projection operators) plus two phenomenological spectral densities. The quantitative T2 predictions depend on free spectral-density parameters, wc and Gamma, that are not fixed by independent physics; the paper itself states Gamma cannot be predicted from diamond phonons. The strain-based spin-phonon Hamiltonian is taken from prior literature and is valid only at low phonon frequencies. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • wc (phonon cutoff frequency in exponential regularization) = varied; agreement near orbital splitting (approx. 50 GHz SiV, 903 GHz SnV)
    In J(w)=chi w^d e^{-w/wc}, the cutoff wc is not determined by the model; Fig 5 shows T2 depends strongly on wc and the experimental match occurs near the orbital splitting.
  • Gamma (Brownian spectral density linewidth / bath memory decay rate) = varied; Fig 7 shows agreement with SiV experiment at intermediate Gamma
    Gamma sets the bath memory time and is not predicted from diamond phonon physics; the paper states it cannot be predicted without interphonon interactions. The T2 enhancement and the experimental match are controlled by this parameter.
  • p (stretched-exponential exponent) = p in [1,2], chosen per fit
    Used to extract T2 from non-exponential decays (Eq. 30); not a physical model parameter.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Born approximation: system and bath remain factorized, bath stays thermal
    Used in deriving Eq. (16) and Eq. (18); standard weak-coupling assumption.
  • standard math Projection operator techniques (NZ, TCL) expanded to second order in system-bath coupling
    The master equations are derived from Breuer and Petruccione [12].
  • domain assumption Strain-based spin-phonon Hamiltonian (Eqs. 6-12) with static strain coupling constants d and f is valid for dynamic coupling at low phonon frequencies
    The authors note the strain model is limited to wavelengths larger than the defect size and that dynamic coupling differs from static coupling; used throughout.
  • domain assumption Debye spectral density J(w) = chi w^3 in bulk diamond
    Used in the Markovian rates Eq. (24); leads to divergent correlation function, acknowledged in Section 3.2.
  • ad hoc to paper Brownian spectral density (Eq. 27) with alpha^2 = Gamma w_i^2 captures the true phonon bath while preserving Markovian rates
    Introduced to provide finite bath memory; Gamma is not derived from phonon physics.
  • domain assumption Only resonant phonon frequencies contribute to decoherence (used in the Brownian model)
    Motivates choosing w_i as transition frequencies in Eq. (27); supported by phononic bandgap experiment [24].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A non-Markovian approach to spin-phonon coherence and the breakdown of the Markovian approximation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KUKZFUKM

@misc{pith2026260809455,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A non-Markovian approach to spin-phonon coherence and the breakdown of the Markovian approximation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KUKZFUKM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.09455}
}
read the original abstract

Qubit coherence is an essential figure of merit for quantum information processing applications such as quantum computing, or quantum repeaters. Understanding the coherence properties of the underlying physical qubits that facilitate such applications is therefore are often limited by coupling to lattice phonons, which in turn constrains operation temperature. Here we study phonon induced electronic spin decoherence in group-IV vacancy centers in diamond. We begin by modeling the spin-phonon interaction and then employ the widely used Born-Markov approximation, highlighting its inconsistencies in this setting and its deviations from experimental observations. To close the gap between theoretical predictions and experimental results, we relax certain approximations, investigate their contributions to the predicted coherence times, and identify the dominant sources of discrepancy. We further demonstrate that experimentally measured electronic spin coherence dynamics are consistently captured within a non-Markovian framework, and we show how the magnetic field orientation influences the qubit coherence time.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.09455 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Group IV vacancy in a sawfish resonator [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. We use a fitting function in combination with calculating the time evolution, because at finite temperatures the coherence time cannot be directly determined using just the rates γij for this multi-level problem. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Coherence time T2 for SnV with Hahn-echo as a function of Temperature compared to experiments. Data reported in [18] based on [19] tral density is derived from a Debye model for a large bulk sample under ideal conditions. In re￾alistic nanostructures, however, the geometry is more complex and the spectral density may dif￾fer [20]. Moreover, when one or two spatial di￾mensions are much larger than the others [21], th… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Coherence time T2 of SiV and SnV as a func￾tion of wc compared to experiments. For SiV, mea￾sured at T = 3.6 K and orbital splitting ≈ 50 GHz [23]. For SnV, measured at T ≈ 3.5 K and orbital splitting ∆ ≈ 903 GHz [19]. The dash lines are the experiment measurement for …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Coherence time T2 of SiV at T = 3.6 K and orbital splitting ∆ ≈ 50 GHz [23] as a function of wc using TCL Eq. (18) and the IDE Eq. (16). The dash line is the experiment measurement for SiV T2 = 114.19 ns Accepted in Quantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Coherence time T2 of SiV at T = 3.6 K and orbital splitting ∆ ≈ 50 GHz [23] as a function of Γ using TCL Eq. (18) and the IDE Eq. (16). The dashed line shows the measured coherence time for the SiV T2 = 114.19 ns 5 Conclusion In this work, we highlight the difficulty o…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quan- tum Computer Based on Color Centers in Diamond

    Sébastien Pezzagna and Jan Meijer. “Quan- tum Computer Based on Color Centers in Diamond”. Applied Physics Reviews8, 011308 (2021)

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Quantum Networks Based on Color Centers in Diamond

    Maximilian Ruf, Noel H. Wan, Hyeongrak Choi, Dirk Englund, and Ronald Hanson. “Quantum Networks Based on Color Centers in Diamond”. Journal of Applied Physics 130, 070901 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Universal Distributed Blind Quan- tum Computing with Solid-State Qubits

    Y.-C. Wei, P.-J. Stas, A. Suleymanzade, G. Baranes, F. Machado, Y. Q. Huan, C. M. Knaut, S. W. Ding, M. Merz, E. N. Knall, U. Yazlar, M. Sirotin, I. W. Wang, B. Machielse, S. F. Yelin, J. Bor- regaard, H. Park, M. Lončar, and M. D. Lukin. “Universal Distributed Blind Quan- tum Computing with Solid-State Qubits”. Science388(2025)

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Entan- glement of nanophotonic quantum memory nodes in a telecom network

    C. M. Knaut, A. Suleymanzade, Y.-C. Wei, D. R. Assumpcao, P.-J. Stas, Y. Q. Huan, B. Machielse, E. N. Knall, M. Sutula, G. Baranes, N. Sinclair, C. De-Eknamkul, D. S. Levonian, M. K. Bhaskar, H. Park, M. Lončar, and M. D. Lukin. “Entan- glement of nanophotonic quantum memory nodes in a telecom network”. Nature629, 573–578 (2024)

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Modular archi- tectures and entanglement schemes for error- corrected distributed quantum computation

    Siddhant Singh, Fenglei Gu, Sébastian deBone, EduardoVillaseñor, DavidElkouss, and Johannes Borregaard. “Modular archi- tectures and entanglement schemes for error- corrected distributed quantum computation”. npj Quantum Information12(2025)

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Logical Qubit in a Diamond Quantum Processor

    M.H.Abobeih, Y.Wang, J.Randall, S.J.H. Loenen, C. E. Bradley, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, B.M.Terhal, andT.H.Taminiau. “Fault-Tolerant Operation of a Logical Qubit in a Diamond Quantum Processor”. Nature 606, 884–889 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Cryo- genic platform for coupling color centers in diamond membranes to a fiber-based micro- cavity

    M. Salz, Y. Herrmann, A. Stahl A. Nadara- jah, M. Hettrich, A. Stacey, S. Prawer, D. Hunger, and F. Schmidt-Kaler. “Cryo- genic platform for coupling color centers in diamond membranes to a fiber-based micro- cavity”. Applied Physics B126(2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Co- herence of Group-IV Color Centers

    Isaac B. W. Harris and Dirk Englund. “Co- herence of Group-IV Color Centers”. Physi- cal Review B109(2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    All-Optical Control of the Silicon-Vacancy Spin in Diamond at Mil- likelvin Temperatures

    Jonas N. Becker, Benjamin Pingault, David Groß, Mustafa Gündoğan, Nadezhda Kukharchyk, Matthew Markham, Andrew Edmonds, Mete Atatüre, Pavel Bushev, and Christoph Becher. “All-Optical Control of the Silicon-Vacancy Spin in Diamond at Mil- likelvin Temperatures”. Physical Review...

    2018

  2. [10]

    ’Sawfish’ Photonic Crys- tal Cavity for Near-Unity Emitter-to-Fiber Interfacing in Quantum Network Applica- tions

    Julian M. Bopp, Matthias Plock, Tim Tu- ran, Gregor Pieplow, Sven Burger, and Tim Schröder. “’Sawfish’ Photonic Crys- tal Cavity for Near-Unity Emitter-to-Fiber Interfacing in Quantum Network Applica- tions”. Advanced Optical Materials12, 2301286 (2024)

    2024

  3. [11]

    Efficient Microwave Spin Control of Negatively Charged Group-IV Color Centers in Diamond

    Gregor Pieplow, Mohamed Belhassen, and Tim Schröder. “Efficient Microwave Spin Control of Negatively Charged Group-IV Color Centers in Diamond”. Physical Re- view B109, 115409 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    The Theory of Open Quantum Sys- tems

    Heinz-Peter Breuer and Francesco Petruc- Accepted inQuantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0.10 cione. “The Theory of Open Quantum Sys- tems”. Oxford University Press. (2009)

    2009

  5. [13]

    Electronic structure of the silicon vacancy color center in diamond

    Christian Hepp. “Electronic structure of the silicon vacancy color center in diamond”. doi:10.22028/D291-23020 (2014). url:http: //dx.doi.org/10.22028/D291-23020

    2014 doi

  6. [14]

    Vibrational Modes of Negatively Charged Silicon-Vacancy Centers in Dia- mond from Ab Initio Calculations

    Elisa Londero, Gergő Thiering, Lukas Razinkovas, Adam Gali, and Audrius Alka- uskas. “Vibrational Modes of Negatively Charged Silicon-Vacancy Centers in Dia- mond from Ab Initio Calculations”. Physical Review B98(2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    Strain Engi- neering of the Silicon-Vacancy Center in Di- amond

    Srujan Meesala, Young-Ik Sohn, Benjamin Pingault, Linbo Shao, Haig A. Atikian, Jef- frey Holzgrafe, Mustafa Gündoğan, Camille Stavrakas, Alp Sipahigil, Cleaven Chia, Ruf- fin Evans, Michael J. Burek, Mian Zhang, Lue Wu, Jose L. Pacheco, John Abraham, Edward Bielejec, Mikhail D...

    2018

  8. [16]

    Transform-Limited Photons From a Coher- ent Tin-Vacancy Spin in Diamond

    Matthew E. Trusheim, Benjamin Pingault, Noel H. Wan, Mustafa Gündoğan, Lorenzo De Santis, Romain Debroux, Dorian Gan- gloff, Carola Purser, Kevin C. Chen, Michael Walsh, Joshua J. Rose, Jonas N. Becker, Benjamin Lienhard, Eric Bersin, Ioannis Pa- radeisanos, Gang Wang, Dominik...

    2020

  9. [17]

    Preservation of Positivity by Dynami- cal Coarse Graining

    Gernot Schaller and Tobias Brandes. “Preservation of Positivity by Dynami- cal Coarse Graining”. Phys. Rev. A78, 022106 (2008)

    2008

  10. [18]

    Ibwharri/Coherence-of-Group-IV-Color- Centers

    Isaac B. W. Harris and Dirk Englund. “Ibwharri/Coherence-of-Group-IV-Color- Centers”. Github (2023)

    2023

  11. [19]

    Microwave Spin Control of a Tin-Vacancy Qubit in Diamond

    Eric I. Rosenthal, Christopher P. Ander- son, Hannah C. Kleidermacher, Abigail J. Stein, Hope Lee, Jakob Grzesik, Giovanni Scuri, Alison E. Rugar, Daniel Riedel, Shahriar Aghaeimeibodi, Geun Ho Ahn, Kasper Van Gasse, and Jelena Vučković. “Microwave Spin Control of a Tin-Vacanc...

    2023

  12. [20]

    Dimensional Transformation of Defect-Induced Noise, Dissipation, and Non- linearity

    R. O. Behunin, F. Intravaia, and P. T. Rakich. “Dimensional Transformation of Defect-Induced Noise, Dissipation, and Non- linearity”. Physical Review B93(2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Phonon Networks with Silicon- Vacancy Centers in Diamond Waveguides

    M.-A. Lemonde, S. Meesala, A. Sipahigil, M. J. A. Schuetz, M. D. Lukin, M. Loncar, and P. Rabl. “Phonon Networks with Silicon- Vacancy Centers in Diamond Waveguides”. Phys. Rev. Lett120, 213603 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    Dynamics of the Dis- sipative Two-State System

    A. J. Leggett, S. Chakravarty, A. T. Dorsey, Matthew P. A. Fisher, Anupam Garg, and W. Zwerger. “Dynamics of the Dis- sipative Two-State System”. Rev. Mod. Phys.59(1987)

    1987

  15. [23]

    Co- herent Control of the Silicon-Vacancy Spin in Diamond

    Benjamin Pingault, David-Dominik Ja- rausch, Christian Hepp, Lina Klintberg, Jonas N. Becker, Matthew Markham, Christoph Becher, and Mete Atatüre. “Co- herent Control of the Silicon-Vacancy Spin in Diamond”. Nature Communications8, 15579 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Controlling Interactions between High-Frequency Phonons and Single Quan- tum Systems Using Phononic Crystals

    Kazuhiro Kuruma, Benjamin Pingault, Cleaven Chia, Michael Haas, Graham D. Joe, Daniel Rimoli Assumpcao, So- phie Weiyi Ding, Chang Jin, C. J. Xin, Matthew Yeh, Neil Sinclair, and Marko Lončar. “Controlling Interactions between High-Frequency Phonons and Single Quan- tum System...

    2025

  17. [25]

    Ab ini- tio magneto-optical spectrum of group-iv va- cancy color centers in diamond

    Gergő Thiering and Adam Gali. “Ab ini- tio magneto-optical spectrum of group-iv va- cancy color centers in diamond”. Physical Review X8, 021063 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    QuTiP-BoFiN: A Bosonic and Fermionic Numerical Hierarchical- Equations-of-Motion Library with Ap- plications in Light-Harvesting, Quantum Control, and Single-Molecule Electronics

    Neill Lambert, Tarun Raheja, Simon Cross, Paul Menczel, Shahnawaz Ahmed, Alexander Pitchford, Daniel Burgarth, and Franco Nori. “QuTiP-BoFiN: A Bosonic and Fermionic Numerical Hierarchical- Equations-of-Motion Library with Ap- plications in Light-Harvesting, Quantum Control, a...

    2023

  19. [27]

    Lectures on Background to Quantum Information

    T. Brandes. “Lectures on Background to Quantum Information”. Chapter 7 (Quan- tum dissipation) (2003)

    2003

  20. [28]

    Ultralong Spin Coherence Time in Isotopically Engi- neered Diamond

    Gopalakrishnan Balasubramanian, Philipp Neumann, Daniel Twitchen, Matthew Markham, Roman Kolesov, Norikazu Mizuochi, Junichi Isoya, Jocelyn Achard, Johannes Beck, Julia Tissler, Vincent Accepted inQuantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0.11 Jacques,...

    2009

  21. [29]

    Spectroscopy of Surface-Induced Noise Using Shallow Spins in Diamond

    Y. Romach, C. Müller, T. Unden, L. J. Rogers, T. Isoda, K. M. Itoh, M. Markham, A. Stacey, J. Meijer, S. Pezzagna, B. Nay- denov, L. P. McGuinness, N. Bar-Gill, and F. Jelezko. “Spectroscopy of Surface-Induced Noise Using Shallow Spins in Diamond”. Physical Review Letters114, ...

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.