Non-Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser Quantum Sensors for Quantum Parameter Estimation

Arul Lakshminarayan; Athreya Shankar; Naga Dileep Varikuti; Sourav Manna; Vaibhav Madhok

REVIEW

Non-Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser Quantum Sensors for Quantum Parameter Estimation

Naga Dileep Varikuti, Sourav Manna, Athreya Shankar, Arul Lakshminarayan, Vaibhav Madhok

Quantum Physics · Submitted 2 Sep 2026 · 83 references

Pith's verdict: Interesting paper with a solid analytical result for R=2, but the general transport bound derivation in Sec. III B is not rigorous and contains an arithmetic error that undermines the claimed general scaling argument.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on September 8, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 8 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2609.03092 (version 1)

Pith IDNFUU5ING, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationArul Lakshminarayan, Athreya Shankar, Naga Dileep Varikuti, Sourav Manna, Vaibhav Madhok. "Non-Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser Quantum Sensors for Quantum Parameter Estimation." arXiv:2609.03092 (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NFUU5ING

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

The paper is worth reading for the R=2 analytical result. The authors show that for that specific resonance the QFI grows as t^6, exactly, using a sixth-order polynomial in t (Appendix B). That is a concrete, checkable calculation and it is the cleanest part of the paper. The numerical data for R=4 is also suggestive, though less definitive (t^5.7 vs t^6). The central idea—that translational invariance at resonances produces ballistic energy growth and hexic QFI scaling—is physically appealing and the authors connect it to a non-KAM resource distinct from chaos-assisted schemes.

The soft spot is the general transport bound in Sec. III B, which the stress-test correctly nails. The step from mean-energy growth ∼ t^α to variance growth ∆²n ∼ t^{2α} (Eq. 15) is unjustified for pure states. The paper supplies no argument specific to the KHO or to the actual states simulated, and the counterexample of a two-component superposition is a genuine concern. More critically, the stated estimate that the second term in Eq. (14) grows at most as t^{α+2} would, after squaring, contribute t^{2α+4}, which dominates the claimed t^{2α+2} instead of being subdominant. That is not a minor slip—it breaks the logic of the bound as written. The heuristic paragraph after Eq. (14) conflates the sum of standard deviations with the bound on the sum of variances.

That said, the R=2 polynomial calculation does not rely on this general argument, and the numerics for R=4 could still be correct even if the general bound is unproven. So the paper's strongest result survives the flaw, but the advertised “transport bound” should be downgraded to a heuristic or removed. The authors need to either fix the derivation or be explicit that the bound is not rigorously established.

The paper is clearly written, the model is well-motivated, and the experimental connections (ion traps, cold atoms) are plausible. The literature review is adequate; the self-citations are relevant.

Recommendation: Send to peer review. The R=2 calculation and the idea of resonance-enhanced metrology are novel and merit scrutiny. But the referee should ask the authors to address the bound derivation. If they cannot fix it, they should relegate it to a heuristic and let the concrete results stand on their own.

I'd bring it to a reading group as a discussion piece about when heuristic scaling arguments cross into error, and I might cite the R=2 result if I work on kicked systems. The authors are clearly serious—the flaw is in one argument, not in their thinking overall.

Referee report

Significance

The paper's appealing core is the identification of resonance-induced translational invariance as a scalable metrological resource, with a clean hierarchy of scaling exponents (t², t⁴, t⁶) and a rigorous anchor: for R=1,2 the time-evolved generator is computed exactly in Appendix B as a polynomial of degree 3 in t, giving a degree-6 polynomial QFI; this is a strong, checkable analytical result that deserves explicit credit. The falsifiable scaling predictions, the detuning-robustness analysis (Fig. 5) supporting a practical adaptive protocol, and the concrete quadrature-measurement study (Fig. 7) are additional strengths. However, the headline 'transport bound' I ≲ t^{2α+2} is the part most in need of scrutiny: Sec. III B itself describes the argument as heuristic, and the two nontrivial estimates it relies on are neither proven nor precisely stated (see major comments). The general significance is therefore contingent: the special-case results appear sound, but the general principle advertised in the abstract outruns the derivation in the body.

Major objections (3)

[Sec. III B, Eq. (15)] The step from mean-energy growth to variance growth is not valid as stated. The text claims that in an arbitrary quantum state |ψ⟩, if the mean energy grows as t^α then Δ²n̂(t) ≲ t^{2α}, but this inference is false in general: for the pure state √(1−ε)|0⟩ + √ε|M⟩ with large M, the mean excitation is ≈ εM while the variance is ≈ ε(1−ε)M², which can be arbitrarily large relative to the mean squared. Since no argument specific to the KHO dynamics, or to the Fock and coherent states actually simulated, is supplied, the general transport bound I(t) ≲ t^{2α+2} announced in the abstract is not established as written. The remedy is within scope: either prove the needed variance bound for the relevant class of states (using Eq. (16) and the boundedness of the kick terms), or explicitly restrict the transport bound to states and regimes where Δn̂(j) ≲ j^α can be verified, and mark the general statement as a heuristic with the R=1,2 computation of Appendix B as the rigorous special case.
[Sec. III B, text after Eq. (15)] The estimate that 'the second term on the right-hand side of the inequality in Eq. (14) grows at most as t^{α+2}' is ambiguous and, on the natural reading, inconsistent with the claimed conclusion. To obtain I ≲ t^{2α+2} from Eq. (14), one needs Σ_j Δ[Â(j) sin Â(j)] ≲ t^{α+1}; if the stated t^{α+2} refers to this summed unsquared quantity, its squared contribution t^{2α+4} would dominate the claimed scaling, while if it refers to the squared bracket contribution, it requires the stronger and unproven per-step estimate Δ[Â(j) sin Â(j)] ≲ j^{α/2}. In either case the needed estimate is not the one stated, and no proof or numerical check is offered. The authors should supply the missing estimate or explicitly downgrade the general transport bound to a conjecture, with the exact R=1,2 calculation and the numerical hierarchy as supporting evidence.
[Sec. IV, Eqs. (21)–(23) and Fig. 6] The numerical R=4 demonstration and the analytical translation-invariance condition are not shown to coincide. The condition [sin X̂, U⁴] = 0 is derived for the discrete frequencies ω = 1/(2kπ) with k ∈ Z⁺, whereas Fig. 6 simulates ω = 2/π (with τ = π²/4 so that ωτ = 2π/4), and 2/π is not of the form 1/(2kπ). As written, the analytical mechanism of Eqs. (22)–(23) therefore does not cover the simulated parameters, and the claim that the observed I ∼ t^{5.7} saturates the bound at a translationally invariant resonance is not substantiated. Please either perform the R=4 numerics at a value of ω covered by the derivation (for example ω = 1/(2π), as used in Fig. 7), or show explicitly that ω = 2/π belongs to a translationally invariant resonance family and state the corresponding symmetry condition.

Minor objections (8)

[Sec. III C] The phrase 'resonance points R<R_c' should read 'R ∉ R_c' (or similar); R=5 is not less than the elements of R_c = {1,2,3,4,6}.
[Fig. 6 and surrounding text] Please report the power-law fit exponents with uncertainties and fit I(t) and ⟨n̂(t)⟩ over the same time window; with the measured ⟨n̂⟩ exponent ≈ 1.8, the heuristic bound would predict I ≲ t^{5.6}, so the claimed t^{5.7} exponent requires the quantitative finite-time-correction discussion promised in the text.
[Appendix A, Eq. (A1)] Please re-check the sign in ∂_ω V = +(iK/2ω)X̂ sin X̂ · V; a direct differentiation of V(ω) = e^{−iK cos X̂} using ∂_ω X̂ = −X̂/(2ω) gives ∂_ω cos X̂ = +X̂ sin X̂/(2ω) and hence ∂_ω V = −(iK/2ω)X̂ sin X̂ · V. The sign propagates into the second term of Eqs. (9), (A2), and (B3); the leading t⁶ coefficient is unaffected, but the subleading polynomial coefficients in Appendix B and the early-time scalings in Fig. 4 would change.
[Appendix B] The statement that the QFI 'will be a sixth-degree polynomial of t' is asserted rather than demonstrated; please display the leading coefficient (for instance its dependence on Var(sin²X̂) for |0⟩ and |α⟩) to establish that the t⁶ term is nonzero, and note explicitly that Appendix B covers both R=1 and R=2.
[Sec. IV] The crossover time t ∼ O(K^{−2/3}) for the onset of hexic growth is stated without derivation; either derive it from Eq. (B5) or label it as an empirical observation.
[Secs. III A and III C] The conversion between the R-derivative and the ω-derivative (ωτ = 2π/R, so dω/dR = −2π/(τR²)) is not stated; it is needed to interpret the Loschmidt-echo scaling exponents of Fig. 2 as QFI scaling exponents for the parameter ω.
[Sec. III C, Fig. 3(b)] The coherent-state result at R=5 (I ∼ t³) is left unexplained; since the abstract associates α=1 diffusion with t⁴ scaling, a sentence clarifying the state-dependence of the exponent would prevent confusion.
[Various] Typos and small inconsistencies: 'invariance phase space tori' in the Discussion; 'Statiscal' in Ref. [32]; 'Hefernan' in Ref. [66] (elsewhere 'Heffernan'); and the abstract's 'established analytically at resonance R=2' should read 'R=1,2', since Appendix B covers both cases.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

This paper shows that non-KAM quantum systems, specifically the kicked harmonic oscillator, can achieve hexic (t^6) scaling of the quantum Fisher information for frequency estimation at resonances, far exceeding the typical quadratic…

The reading

This paper argues that non-KAM dynamical systems, which classically exhibit sharp transitions to chaos near resonances, can be harnessed in the quantum regime as high-performance sensors for frequency estimation. The authors study the kicked harmonic oscillator (KHO) and derive a fundamental bound linking the growth of the mean excitation number to the growth of the quantum Fisher information (QFI): if the mean energy grows as t^α, then the QFI grows at most as $t^{{2α+2}}$. Crucially, at specific resonances (R=2 and R=4) the KHO develops translational invariance, causing ballistic energy growth (α=2) and saturating the bound with hexic ($t^{6}$) QFI growth—much faster than the quadratic scaling of non-resonant regimes. This shows that symmetry-induced transport, rather than chaos or criticality, can serve as a powerful metrological resource.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the transport bound derived from the generator h_ω(t) = i U^† ∂_ω U. A Cauchy-Schwarz inequality relates the variance of the generator to the variances of the time-evolved number operator and the operator Â sin Â. From this, the bound I(t) ≲ $t^{{2α+2}}$ follows if the mean energy grows as t^α. At resonances R=2 and R=4, the Heisenberg evolution of the ladder operators is linear in time (Eq. (18) and (22)), leading to quadratic energy growth and thus hexic QFI. The translational symmetry of the Floquet operator at these resonances is the underlying cause of the linear operator growth.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the quantum Fisher information for frequency estimation in the kicked harmonic oscillator obeys I(t) ≲ $t^{{2α+2}}$ when the mean excitation number grows as ⟨n̂(t)⟩ ∼ t^α. At the translationally invariant resonances R=2 and R=4, the mean energy grows quadratically (α=2), so the bound predicts I(t) ≲ $t^{6}$. The authors confirm analytically for R=2 and numerically for R=4 that this hexic scaling is indeed attained. This saturation implies that the bound is tight and that the system achieves the maximum possible information accumulation given its energy growth.

Load-bearing premise

The central bound (Eq. 14) relies on an inequality that splits the generator variance into two terms; the second term involving Δ[Â sin Â] is argued heuristically to grow at most as $t^{{α+2}}$, but a rigorous proof that it does not saturate faster than the first term is not given. The numerical evidence for R=2 and R=4 supports the bound's saturation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Frequency estimation in the kicked harmonic oscillator at resonance can achieve Heisenberg-limited-like scaling (t^6) without entanglement, purely via dynamical symmetry.
The transport bound provides a general diagnostic for metrological utility: systems with faster energy growth (larger α) yield faster QFI growth, up to the bound.
An adaptive sensing protocol is suggested: a coarse measurement provides an initial frequency estimate, which is used to adjust the kick period to a resonance, then a second stage with enhanced QFI yields high precision.
The sharp resonance peaks (Fig. 5) imply that the KHO can serve as a sensitive frequency discriminator, detecting small drifts from a target operating frequency.

Reading between the lines

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

If the bound is tight and the subdominant term can be rigorously shown not to spoil scaling, the KHO achieves optimal metrological performance among all systems with the same energy growth.
The hexic scaling may be fragile under decoherence; future work should examine the bound in open-system settings and whether measurement strategies can maintain the advantage.
Other non-KAM systems (e.g., particles in wells with competing length scales) may also exhibit translational invariance and thus similar metrological enhancements, extending the class of useful sensors.

Original abstract

Non-KAM (Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser) systems, when subjected to weak time-dependent perturbations, exhibit an abrupt transition to classical chaos through the breakdown of invariant phase-space tori. We showcase the utilization of non-KAM systems in the quantum regime as quantum sensors, leveraging their sensitivity at \textit{resonances}. Quantum Fisher information (QFI) is a central quantity in quantum parameter estimation theory that measures how much information a quantum state contains about an unknown parameter that is encoded into it. In other words, it quantifies the sensitivity of a quantum state to small changes in that parameter. In this work, through numerical analysis in conjunction with analytical results, we study the performance of the non-KAM systems for quantum sensing applications by computing the QFI. We find that the growth of the QFI is remarkably enhanced when the resonance condition is satisfied. For frequency estimation under Floquet unitary encodings, we derive a transport bound: if the mean excitation number grows as $\langle\hat n(t)\rangle\sim t^{\alpha}$, the QFI obeys $I(t)\lesssim t^{2\alpha+2}$. The quantum kicked harmonic oscillator, a paradigmatic non-KAM system, realizes the full hierarchy: localized dynamics ($\alpha=0$) yield quadratic growth, delocalized diffusion along stochastic webs ($\alpha=1$) yields quartic growth, and translationally invariant resonances ($\alpha=2$) saturate the bound with anomalous hexic growth, $I(t)\sim t^{6}$, established analytically at resonance $R=2$ and numerically at $R=4$. The enhancement stems from resonance-induced translational symmetry rather than exponential instability, identifying non-KAM resonances as a metrological resource distinct from chaos-assisted and criticality-based sensing.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 7,213 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.05 · states limitation 0.12 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.09 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.98 · compares with prior results 0.66 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

Non-KAM (Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser) systems, when subjected to weak time-dependent perturbations, exhibit an abrupt transition to classical chaos through the breakdown of invariant phase-space tori. We showcase the utilization of non-KAM systems in the quantum regime as quantum sensors, leveraging their sensitivity at \textit{resonances}. Quantum Fisher information (QFI) is a central quantity in quantum parameter estimation theory that measures how much information a quantum state contains about an unknown parameter that is encoded into it. In other words, it quantifies the sensitivity of a quantum state to small changes in that parameter. In this work, through numerical analysis in conjunction with analytical results, we study the performance of the non-KAM systems for quantum sensing applications by computing the QFI. We find that the growth of the QFI is remarkably enhanced when the resonance condition is satisfied. For frequency estimation under Floquet unitary encodings, we derive a transport bound: if the mean excitation number grows as $\langle\hat n(t)\rangle\sim t^{\alpha}$, the QFI obeys $I(t)\lesssim t^{2\alpha+2}$. The quantum kicked harmonic oscillator, a paradigmatic non-KAM system, realizes the full hierarchy: localized dynamics ($\alpha=0$) yield quadratic growth, delocalized diffusion along stochastic webs ($\alpha=1$) yields quartic growth, and translationally invariant resonances ($\alpha=2$) saturate the bound with anomalous hexic growth, $I(t)\sim t^{6}$, established analytically at resonance $R=2$ and numerically at $R=4$. The enhancement stems from resonance-induced translational symmetry rather than exponential instability, identifying non-KAM resonances as a metrological resource distinct from chaos-assisted and criticality-based sensing.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	Non-KAM (Kolmogorov-Arnold-Moser) systems, when subjected to weak time-dependent perturbations, exhibit an abrupt transition to classical chaos through the breakdown of invariant phase-space tori.	background 1.00	0.05	0.03	asserted 1.00
s1	We showcase the utilization of non-KAM systems in the quantum regime as quantum sensors, leveraging their sensitivity at \textit{resonances}.	contribution 0.99	0.70	0.11	asserted 1.00
s2	Quantum Fisher information (QFI) is a central quantity in quantum parameter estimation theory that measures how much information a quantum state contains about an unknown parameter that is encoded into it.	background 1.00	0.04	0.02	asserted 1.00
s3	In other words, it quantifies the sensitivity of a quantum state to small changes in that parameter.	background 0.92	0.04	0.02	asserted 1.00
s4	In this work, through numerical analysis in conjunction with analytical results, we study the performance of the non-KAM systems for quantum sensing applications by computing the QFI.	contribution 0.69	0.95	0.05	asserted 0.92
s5	We find that the growth of the QFI is remarkably enhanced when the resonance condition is satisfied.	result 1.00	0.96	0.49	asserted 1.00
s6	For frequency estimation under Floquet unitary encodings, we derive a transport bound: if the mean excitation number grows as $\langle\hat n(t)\rangle\sim t^{\alpha}$, the QFI obeys $I(t)\lesssim t^{2\alpha+2}$.	result 0.82	0.92	0.11	asserted 1.00
s7	The quantum kicked harmonic oscillator, a paradigmatic non-KAM system, realizes the full hierarchy: localized dynamics ($\alpha=0$) yield quadratic growth, delocalized diffusion along stochastic webs ($\alpha=1$) yields quartic growth, and translationally invariant resonances ($\alpha=2$) saturate the bound with anomalous hexic growth, $I(t)\sim t^{6}$, established analytically at resonance $R=2$ and numerically at $R=4$.	result 1.00	0.91	0.48	asserted 1.00
s8	The enhancement stems from resonance-induced translational symmetry rather than exponential instability, identifying non-KAM resonances as a metrological resource distinct from chaos-assisted and criticality-based sensing.	interpretation 1.00	0.85	0.62	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.92 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.84.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1. Classical phase-space trajectories for a fixed initial condi

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Evolution of the Loschmidt echo for the quantum KHO sys

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4. Time evolution of the QFI under translational invariance.

**Figure 6.** FIG. 6. Time evolution of the QFI at the resonance

**Figure 7.** FIG. 7. Comparison of the quantum Fisher information (QFI) and

Showing 5 of the paper's 7 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:2609.03092 by the authors.

References

Works cited (83)

[1]

G. Rosi, F. Sorrentino, L. Cacciapuoti, M. Prevedelli, and G. M. Tino, Precision measurement of the newtonian gravitational constant using cold atoms, Nature510, 518 (2014)

View on Pith 2014
[2]

By tuning the phase angleϕ, we examine how CFI varies at different dis- crete time. Let Q qϕ be the projector along an eigenstate|q ϕ⟩ FIG. 7. Comparison of the quantum Fisher information (QFI) and classical Fisher information (CFI) as functions of the quadrature an- gleϕat the resonanceR=4, for an initial coherent state with (x,p)=(π,0) at discrete time ...

View on Pith 2025
[3]

C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Reviews of modern physics89, 035002 (2017)

View on Pith 2017
[4]

L. Pezz `e, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035005 (2018)

View on Pith 2018
[5]

D. DeMille, N. R. Hutzler, A. M. Rey, and et al., Quantum sens- ing and metrology for fundamental physics with molecules, Na- ture Physics20, 741 (2024)

View on Pith 2024
[6]

V . Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum-enhanced measurements: beating the standard quantum limit, Science 306, 1330 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[7]

V . Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum metrology, Physical review letters96, 010401 (2006)

View on Pith 2006
[8]

C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer, Phys. Rev. D23, 1693 (1981)

View on Pith 1981
[9]

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

View on Pith 2017
[10]

L. Pezz ´e and A. Smerzi, Ultrasensitive two-mode interferome- try with single-mode number squeezing, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 163604 (2013)

View on Pith 2013
[11]

F. Wolf, C. Shi, J. C. Heip,et al., Motional fock states for quantum-enhanced amplitude and phase measurements with trapped ions, Nature Communications10, 2929 (2019)

View on Pith 2019
[12]

S. C. Burd, H. M. Knaack, R. Srinivas, C. Arenz, A. L. Collopy, L. J. Stephenson, A. C. Wilson, D. J. Wineland, D. Leibfried, J. J. Bollinger, D. T. C. Allcock, and D. H. Slichter, Experi- mental speedup of quantum dynamics through squeezing, PRX Quantum5, 020314 (2024)

View on Pith 2024
[13]

S. Hawaldar, P. Shahi, A. L. Carter, A. M. Rey, J. J. Bollinger, and A. Shankar, Bilayer crystals of trapped ions for quantum information processing, Phys. Rev. X14, 031030 (2024)

View on Pith 2024
[14]

S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the 10 geometry of quantum states, Physical Review Letters72, 3439 (1994)

View on Pith 1994
[15]

R. Sankaranarayanan, A. Lakshminarayan, and V . Sheorey, Chaos in a well: effects of competing length scales, Physics Letters A279, 313 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[16]

R. Sankaranarayanan, A. Lakshminarayan, and V . B. Sheorey, Quantum chaos of a particle in a square well: Competing length scales and dynamical localization, Phys. Rev. E64, 046210 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[17]

N. D. Varikuti, A. Sahu, A. Lakshminarayan, and V . Madhok, Probing dynamical sensitivity of a non-kolmogorov-arnold- moser system through out-of-time-order correlators, Phys. Rev. E109, 014209 (2024)

View on Pith 2024
[18]

N. D. Varikuti, Instabilities in a non-kam system via infor- mation scrambling: A note, arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.12761 (2026)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[19]

P. Sreeram, A. Sahu, N. D. Varikuti, B. K. Das, S. Manna, and V . Madhok, Information acquisition, scrambling, and sensitiv- ity to errors in quantum chaos: Pg sreeram et al., Journal of the Indian Institute of Science105, 97 (2025)

View on Pith 2025
[20]

N. D. Varikuti, Quantum information scrambling, chaos, sensitivity, and emergent state designs, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.10182 (2024)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[21]

V . I. Arnold, Proof of a theorem of an kolmogorov on the in- variance of quasi-periodic motions under small perturbations of the hamiltonian, Collected Works: Representations of Func- tions, Celestial Mechanics and KAM Theory, 1957–1965 , 267 (2009)

View on Pith 2009
[22]

A. N. Kolmogorov, On conservation of conditionally periodic motions for a small change in hamilton’s function, inDokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, V ol. 98 (1954) pp. 527–530

View on Pith 1954
[23]

J. Moser, Convergent series expansions for quasi-periodic mo- tions, Mathematische Annalen169, 136 (1967)

View on Pith 1967
[24]

J. M ¨oser, On invariant curves of area-preserving mappings of an annulus, Nachr. Akad. Wiss. G¨ottingen, II , 1 (1962)

View on Pith 1962
[25]

J. P ¨oschel, A lecture on the classical kam theorem, arXiv preprint arXiv:0908.2234 (2009)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009
[26]

J. A. Segura-Landa, M. Kumari, D. J. Nader, S. H ¨usn¨ugil, A. SaraerToosi, and S. Lerma-Hern ´andez, Resonant fragility and nonresonant robustness of floquet eigenstates in kicked spin systems (2026), arXiv:2504.13257 [quant-ph]

View on Pith arXiv 2026
[27]

M. Kumari and S. Ghose, Quantum-classical correspondence in the vicinity of periodic orbits, Phys. Rev. E97, 052209 (2018)

View on Pith 2018
[28]

K. Chinni, M. H. Mu ˜noz Arias, I. H. Deutsch, and P. M. Poggi, Trotter errors from dynamical structural instabilities of floquet maps in quantum simulation, PRX Quantum3, 010351 (2022)

View on Pith 2022
[29]

C. W. Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory, Journal of Statistical Physics1, 231 (1969)

View on Pith 1969
[30]

C. R. Rao, Information and the accuracy attainable in the es- timation of statistical parameters, inBreakthroughs in Statis- tics: Foundations and Basic Theory, edited by S. Kotz and N. L. Johnson (Springer New York, New York, NY , 1992) pp. 235– 247

View on Pith 1992
[31]

H. Cram ´er,Mathematical methods of statistics, V ol. 43 (Prince- ton university press, 1999)

View on Pith 1999
[32]

S. L. Braunstein, C. M. Caves, and G. J. Milburn, Generalized uncertainty relations: theory, examples, and lorentz invariance, annals of physics247, 135 (1996)

View on Pith 1996
[33]

N. N. Chentsov, Statiscal decision rules and optimal inference, Monog53(1982)

View on Pith 1982
[34]

E. A. Morozova and N. N. Chentsov, Markov invariant geom- etry on manifolds of states, Journal of Soviet Mathematics56, 2648 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[35]

J. J. Meyer, Fisher information in noisy intermediate-scale quantum applications, Quantum5, 539 (2021)

View on Pith 2021
[36]

P. Hyllus, W. Laskowski, R. Krischek, C. Schwemmer, W. Wieczorek, H. Weinfurter, L. Pezz´e, and A. Smerzi, Fisher information and multiparticle entanglement, Phys. Rev. A85, 022321 (2012)

View on Pith 2012
[37]

G. T ´oth, Multipartite entanglement and high-precision metrol- ogy, Phys. Rev. A85, 022322 (2012)

View on Pith 2012
[38]

H. Strobel, W. Muessel, D. Linnemann, T. Zi- bold, D. B. Hume, L. Pezz `e, A. Smerzi, and M. K. Oberthaler, Fisher information and entanglement of non-gaussian spin states, Science345, 424 (2014), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1250147

View on Pith doi:10.1126/science.1250147 2014
[39]

P. Hauke, M. Heyl, L. Tagliacozzo, and P. Zoller, Measur- ing multipartite entanglement through dynamic susceptibilities, Nature Physics12, 778 (2016)

View on Pith 2016
[40]

P. Zanardi, M. G. Paris, and L. C. Venuti, Quantum criticality as a resource for quantum estimation, Physical Review A78, 042105 (2008)

View on Pith 2008
[41]

C. Invernizzi, M. Korbman, L. C. Venuti, and M. G. Paris, Op- timal quantum estimation in spin systems at criticality, Physical Review A78, 042106 (2008)

View on Pith 2008
[42]

P. Ivanov and D. Porras, Adiabatic quantum metrology with strongly correlated quantum optical systems, Physical Review A88, 023803 (2013)

View on Pith 2013
[43]

M. Tsang, Quantum transition-edge detectors, Physical Review A88, 021801 (2013)

View on Pith 2013
[44]

K. Macieszczak, M. Gut ¸˘a, I. Lesanovsky, and J. P. Garrahan, Dynamical phase transitions as a resource for quantum en- hanced metrology, Physical Review A93, 022103 (2016)

View on Pith 2016
[45]

M. M. Rams, P. Sierant, O. Dutta, P. Horodecki, and J. Za- krzewski, At the limits of criticality-based quantum metrology: Apparent super-heisenberg scaling revisited, Physical Review X8, 021022 (2018)

View on Pith 2018
[46]

I. Fr ´erot and T. Roscilde, Quantum critical metrology, Physical review letters121, 020402 (2018)

View on Pith 2018
[47]

Y . Chu, S. Zhang, B. Yu, and J. Cai, Dynamic framework for criticality-enhanced quantum sensing, Physical Review Letters 126, 010502 (2021)

View on Pith 2021
[48]

L. Garbe, M. Bina, A. Keller, M. G. Paris, and S. Felicetti, Criti- cal quantum metrology with a finite-component quantum phase transition, Physical review letters124, 120504 (2020)

View on Pith 2020
[49]

L. Garbe, O. Abah, S. Felicetti, and R. Puebla, Critical quan- tum metrology with fully-connected models: from heisenberg to kibble–zurek scaling, Quantum Science and Technology7, 035010 (2022)

View on Pith 2022
[50]

K. Gietka, L. Ruks, and T. Busch, Understanding and improv- ing critical metrology. quenching superradiant light-matter sys- tems beyond the critical point, Quantum6, 700 (2022)

View on Pith 2022
[51]

L. J. Fiderer and D. Braun, Quantum metrology with quantum- chaotic sensors, Nature communications9, 1 (2018)

View on Pith 2018
[52]

W. Liu, M. Zhuang, B. Zhu, J. Huang, and C. Lee, Quantum metrology via chaos in a driven bose-josephson system, Physi- cal Review A103, 023309 (2021)

View on Pith 2021
[53]

A. Chernikov, R. Sagdeev, D. Usikov, and G. Zaslavsky, Sym- metry and chaos, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 17, 17 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[54]

V . Afanasiev, A. Chernikov, R. Sagdeev, and G. Zaslavsky, The width of the stochastic web and particle diffusion along the web, Physics Letters A144, 229 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[55]

L. E. Reichl,Transition to Chaos(Springer, 2021)

View on Pith 2021
[56]

A. B. Rechester and R. B. White, Calculation of turbulent dif- fusion for the chirikov-taylor model, Phys. Rev. Lett.44, 1586 (1980)

View on Pith 1980
[57]

Y . H. Ichikawa, T. Kamimura, and T. Hatori, Stochastic diffu- 11 sion in the standard map, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena29, 247 (1987)

View on Pith 1987
[58]

R. Ishizaki, T. Horita, T. Kobayashi, and H. Mori, Anoma- lous diffusion due to accelerator modes in the standard map, Progress of Theoretical Physics85, 1013 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[59]

M. V . Daly,Classical and quantum chaos in a non-linearly kicked harmonic oscillator, Ph.D. thesis, Dublin City Univer- sity (1994)

View on Pith 1994
[60]

F. Borgonovi and L. Rebuzzini, Translational invariance in the kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. E52, 2302 (1995)

View on Pith 1995
[61]

G. M. Zaslavsky,The physics of chaos in Hamiltonian systems (world scientific, 2007)

View on Pith 2007
[62]

T. M. Fromhold, A. A. Krokhin, C. R. Tench, S. Bujkiewicz, P. B. Wilkinson, F. W. Sheard, and L. Eaves, Effects of stochas- tic webs on chaotic electron transport in semiconductor super- lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 046803 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[63]

T. Fromhold, A. Patane, S. Bujkiewicz, P. Wilkinson, D. Fowler, D. Sherwood, S. Stapleton, A. Krokhin, L. Eaves, M. Henini,et al., Chaotic electron diffusion through stochastic webs enhances current flow in superlattices, Nature428, 726 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[64]

G. P. Berman, V . Y . Rubaev, and G. M. Zaslavsky, The problem of quantum chaos in a kicked harmonic oscillator, Nonlinearity 4, 543 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[65]

D. Shepelyansky and C. Sire, Quantum evolution in a dynami- cal quasi-crystal, Europhysics Letters20, 95 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[66]

G. Kells,Quantum Chaos in the Delta Kicked Harmonic Os- cillator, Ph.D. thesis, National University of Ireland, Maynooth (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[67]

M. Daly and D. Hefernan, Non saturation of energy in a quan- tum kicked oscillator, Acta Physica Polonica A89, 571 (1996)

View on Pith 1996
[68]

U. M. Engel,On quantum chaos, stochastic webs and local- ization in a quantum mechanical kick system(Logos-Verlag, 2007)

View on Pith 2007
[69]

G. A. Kells, J. Twamley, and D. M. Heffernan, Dynamical prop- erties of the delta-kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. E70, 015203(R) (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[70]

S. A. Gardiner, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum chaos in an ion trap: The delta-kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4790 (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[71]

A. R. R. Carvalho and A. Buchleitner, Web-assisted tunneling in the kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 204101 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[72]

S. A. Gardiner, D. Jaksch, R. Dum, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Nonlinear matter wave dynamics with a chaotic potential, Phys. Rev. A62, 023612 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[73]

G. J. Duffy, A. S. Mellish, K. J. Challis, and A. C. Wilson, Non- linear atom-opticalδ-kicked harmonic oscillator using a bose- einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. A70, 041602(R) (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[74]

T. P. Billam and S. A. Gardiner, Quantum resonances in an atom-opticalδ-kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. A80, 023414 (2009)

View on Pith 2009
[75]

M. Frasca, Quantum kicked dynamics and classical diffusion, Physics Letters A231, 344 (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[76]

A. Peres, Stability of quantum motion in chaotic and regular systems, Phys. Rev. A30, 1610 (1984)

View on Pith 1984
[77]

T. Prosen and M. Znidaric, Stability of quantum motion and cor- relation decay, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 35, 1455 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[78]

A. Goussev, R. A. Jalabert, H. M. Pastawski, and D. A. Wisni- acki, Loschmidt echo, Scholarpedia7, 11687 (2012), revision #127578

View on Pith 2012
[79]

A. Sahu, N. D. Varikuti, and V . Madhok, Loschmidt echo and scrambling of systematic errors in tomography—a quantum sig- nature of chaos, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlin- ear Science36, 033129 (2026)

View on Pith 2026
[80]

S. Pang and A. N. Jordan, Optimal adaptive control for quan- tum metrology with time-dependent hamiltonians, Nature com- munications8, 1 (2017)

View on Pith 2017
[81]

M. G ¨arttner, P. Hauke, and A. M. Rey, Relating out-of-time- order correlations to entanglement via multiple-quantum coher- ences, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 040402 (2018)

View on Pith 2018
[82]

N. D. Varikuti and V . Madhok, Out-of-time ordered correlators in kicked coupled tops: Information scrambling in mixed phase space and the role of conserved quantities, Chaos: An Interdis- ciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science34, 063124 (2024)

View on Pith 2024
[83]

N. D. Varikuti, S. Bandyopadhyay, and P. Hauke, Deep thermal- ization and measurements of quantum resources, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.09999 (2025). Appendix A: Calculating Generator ˆh(t) ω The floquet unitary is ˆU=exp n −iKcos ˆX o exp{−iωτˆn}, where ˆn=ˆa†aand ˆX=(a+a †)/ √ 2ω. Let’s say ˆU= ˆV(ω)· ˆF(ω), so, ˆV(ω)=exp{−iKcos ˆX}andF(ω)=exp{−iωτˆn}. T...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

G. Rosi, F. Sorrentino, L. Cacciapuoti, M. Prevedelli, and G. M. Tino, Precision measurement of the newtonian gravitational constant using cold atoms, Nature510, 518 (2014)

View on Pith 2014

[2] [2]

By tuning the phase angleϕ, we examine how CFI varies at different dis- crete time. Let Q qϕ be the projector along an eigenstate|q ϕ⟩ FIG. 7. Comparison of the quantum Fisher information (QFI) and classical Fisher information (CFI) as functions of the quadrature an- gleϕat the resonanceR=4, for an initial coherent state with (x,p)=(π,0) at discrete time ...

View on Pith 2025

[3] [3]

C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Reviews of modern physics89, 035002 (2017)

View on Pith 2017

[4] [4]

L. Pezz `e, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035005 (2018)

View on Pith 2018

[5] [5]

D. DeMille, N. R. Hutzler, A. M. Rey, and et al., Quantum sens- ing and metrology for fundamental physics with molecules, Na- ture Physics20, 741 (2024)

View on Pith 2024

[6] [6]

V . Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum-enhanced measurements: beating the standard quantum limit, Science 306, 1330 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[7] [7]

V . Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum metrology, Physical review letters96, 010401 (2006)

View on Pith 2006

[8] [8]

C. M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer, Phys. Rev. D23, 1693 (1981)

View on Pith 1981

[9] [9]

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

View on Pith 2017

[10] [10]

L. Pezz ´e and A. Smerzi, Ultrasensitive two-mode interferome- try with single-mode number squeezing, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 163604 (2013)

View on Pith 2013

[11] [11]

F. Wolf, C. Shi, J. C. Heip,et al., Motional fock states for quantum-enhanced amplitude and phase measurements with trapped ions, Nature Communications10, 2929 (2019)

View on Pith 2019

[12] [12]

S. C. Burd, H. M. Knaack, R. Srinivas, C. Arenz, A. L. Collopy, L. J. Stephenson, A. C. Wilson, D. J. Wineland, D. Leibfried, J. J. Bollinger, D. T. C. Allcock, and D. H. Slichter, Experi- mental speedup of quantum dynamics through squeezing, PRX Quantum5, 020314 (2024)

View on Pith 2024

[13] [13]

S. Hawaldar, P. Shahi, A. L. Carter, A. M. Rey, J. J. Bollinger, and A. Shankar, Bilayer crystals of trapped ions for quantum information processing, Phys. Rev. X14, 031030 (2024)

View on Pith 2024

[14] [14]

S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the 10 geometry of quantum states, Physical Review Letters72, 3439 (1994)

View on Pith 1994

[15] [15]

R. Sankaranarayanan, A. Lakshminarayan, and V . Sheorey, Chaos in a well: effects of competing length scales, Physics Letters A279, 313 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[16] [16]

R. Sankaranarayanan, A. Lakshminarayan, and V . B. Sheorey, Quantum chaos of a particle in a square well: Competing length scales and dynamical localization, Phys. Rev. E64, 046210 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[17] [17]

N. D. Varikuti, A. Sahu, A. Lakshminarayan, and V . Madhok, Probing dynamical sensitivity of a non-kolmogorov-arnold- moser system through out-of-time-order correlators, Phys. Rev. E109, 014209 (2024)

View on Pith 2024

[18] [18]

N. D. Varikuti, Instabilities in a non-kam system via infor- mation scrambling: A note, arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.12761 (2026)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[19] [19]

P. Sreeram, A. Sahu, N. D. Varikuti, B. K. Das, S. Manna, and V . Madhok, Information acquisition, scrambling, and sensitiv- ity to errors in quantum chaos: Pg sreeram et al., Journal of the Indian Institute of Science105, 97 (2025)

View on Pith 2025

[20] [20]

N. D. Varikuti, Quantum information scrambling, chaos, sensitivity, and emergent state designs, arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.10182 (2024)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[21] [21]

V . I. Arnold, Proof of a theorem of an kolmogorov on the in- variance of quasi-periodic motions under small perturbations of the hamiltonian, Collected Works: Representations of Func- tions, Celestial Mechanics and KAM Theory, 1957–1965 , 267 (2009)

View on Pith 2009

[22] [22]

A. N. Kolmogorov, On conservation of conditionally periodic motions for a small change in hamilton’s function, inDokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, V ol. 98 (1954) pp. 527–530

View on Pith 1954

[23] [23]

J. Moser, Convergent series expansions for quasi-periodic mo- tions, Mathematische Annalen169, 136 (1967)

View on Pith 1967

[24] [24]

J. M ¨oser, On invariant curves of area-preserving mappings of an annulus, Nachr. Akad. Wiss. G¨ottingen, II , 1 (1962)

View on Pith 1962

[25] [25]

J. P ¨oschel, A lecture on the classical kam theorem, arXiv preprint arXiv:0908.2234 (2009)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009

[26] [26]

J. A. Segura-Landa, M. Kumari, D. J. Nader, S. H ¨usn¨ugil, A. SaraerToosi, and S. Lerma-Hern ´andez, Resonant fragility and nonresonant robustness of floquet eigenstates in kicked spin systems (2026), arXiv:2504.13257 [quant-ph]

View on Pith arXiv 2026

[27] [27]

M. Kumari and S. Ghose, Quantum-classical correspondence in the vicinity of periodic orbits, Phys. Rev. E97, 052209 (2018)

View on Pith 2018

[28] [28]

K. Chinni, M. H. Mu ˜noz Arias, I. H. Deutsch, and P. M. Poggi, Trotter errors from dynamical structural instabilities of floquet maps in quantum simulation, PRX Quantum3, 010351 (2022)

View on Pith 2022

[29] [29]

C. W. Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory, Journal of Statistical Physics1, 231 (1969)

View on Pith 1969

[30] [30]

C. R. Rao, Information and the accuracy attainable in the es- timation of statistical parameters, inBreakthroughs in Statis- tics: Foundations and Basic Theory, edited by S. Kotz and N. L. Johnson (Springer New York, New York, NY , 1992) pp. 235– 247

View on Pith 1992

[31] [31]

H. Cram ´er,Mathematical methods of statistics, V ol. 43 (Prince- ton university press, 1999)

View on Pith 1999

[32] [32]

S. L. Braunstein, C. M. Caves, and G. J. Milburn, Generalized uncertainty relations: theory, examples, and lorentz invariance, annals of physics247, 135 (1996)

View on Pith 1996

[33] [33]

N. N. Chentsov, Statiscal decision rules and optimal inference, Monog53(1982)

View on Pith 1982

[34] [34]

E. A. Morozova and N. N. Chentsov, Markov invariant geom- etry on manifolds of states, Journal of Soviet Mathematics56, 2648 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[35] [35]

J. J. Meyer, Fisher information in noisy intermediate-scale quantum applications, Quantum5, 539 (2021)

View on Pith 2021

[36] [36]

P. Hyllus, W. Laskowski, R. Krischek, C. Schwemmer, W. Wieczorek, H. Weinfurter, L. Pezz´e, and A. Smerzi, Fisher information and multiparticle entanglement, Phys. Rev. A85, 022321 (2012)

View on Pith 2012

[37] [37]

G. T ´oth, Multipartite entanglement and high-precision metrol- ogy, Phys. Rev. A85, 022322 (2012)

View on Pith 2012

[38] [38]

H. Strobel, W. Muessel, D. Linnemann, T. Zi- bold, D. B. Hume, L. Pezz `e, A. Smerzi, and M. K. Oberthaler, Fisher information and entanglement of non-gaussian spin states, Science345, 424 (2014), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.1250147

View on Pith doi:10.1126/science.1250147 2014

[39] [39]

P. Hauke, M. Heyl, L. Tagliacozzo, and P. Zoller, Measur- ing multipartite entanglement through dynamic susceptibilities, Nature Physics12, 778 (2016)

View on Pith 2016

[40] [40]

P. Zanardi, M. G. Paris, and L. C. Venuti, Quantum criticality as a resource for quantum estimation, Physical Review A78, 042105 (2008)

View on Pith 2008

[41] [41]

C. Invernizzi, M. Korbman, L. C. Venuti, and M. G. Paris, Op- timal quantum estimation in spin systems at criticality, Physical Review A78, 042106 (2008)

View on Pith 2008

[42] [42]

P. Ivanov and D. Porras, Adiabatic quantum metrology with strongly correlated quantum optical systems, Physical Review A88, 023803 (2013)

View on Pith 2013

[43] [43]

M. Tsang, Quantum transition-edge detectors, Physical Review A88, 021801 (2013)

View on Pith 2013

[44] [44]

K. Macieszczak, M. Gut ¸˘a, I. Lesanovsky, and J. P. Garrahan, Dynamical phase transitions as a resource for quantum en- hanced metrology, Physical Review A93, 022103 (2016)

View on Pith 2016

[45] [45]

M. M. Rams, P. Sierant, O. Dutta, P. Horodecki, and J. Za- krzewski, At the limits of criticality-based quantum metrology: Apparent super-heisenberg scaling revisited, Physical Review X8, 021022 (2018)

View on Pith 2018

[46] [46]

I. Fr ´erot and T. Roscilde, Quantum critical metrology, Physical review letters121, 020402 (2018)

View on Pith 2018

[47] [47]

Y . Chu, S. Zhang, B. Yu, and J. Cai, Dynamic framework for criticality-enhanced quantum sensing, Physical Review Letters 126, 010502 (2021)

View on Pith 2021

[48] [48]

L. Garbe, M. Bina, A. Keller, M. G. Paris, and S. Felicetti, Criti- cal quantum metrology with a finite-component quantum phase transition, Physical review letters124, 120504 (2020)

View on Pith 2020

[49] [49]

L. Garbe, O. Abah, S. Felicetti, and R. Puebla, Critical quan- tum metrology with fully-connected models: from heisenberg to kibble–zurek scaling, Quantum Science and Technology7, 035010 (2022)

View on Pith 2022

[50] [50]

K. Gietka, L. Ruks, and T. Busch, Understanding and improv- ing critical metrology. quenching superradiant light-matter sys- tems beyond the critical point, Quantum6, 700 (2022)

View on Pith 2022

[51] [51]

L. J. Fiderer and D. Braun, Quantum metrology with quantum- chaotic sensors, Nature communications9, 1 (2018)

View on Pith 2018

[52] [52]

W. Liu, M. Zhuang, B. Zhu, J. Huang, and C. Lee, Quantum metrology via chaos in a driven bose-josephson system, Physi- cal Review A103, 023309 (2021)

View on Pith 2021

[53] [53]

A. Chernikov, R. Sagdeev, D. Usikov, and G. Zaslavsky, Sym- metry and chaos, Computers & Mathematics with Applications 17, 17 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[54] [54]

V . Afanasiev, A. Chernikov, R. Sagdeev, and G. Zaslavsky, The width of the stochastic web and particle diffusion along the web, Physics Letters A144, 229 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[55] [55]

L. E. Reichl,Transition to Chaos(Springer, 2021)

View on Pith 2021

[56] [56]

A. B. Rechester and R. B. White, Calculation of turbulent dif- fusion for the chirikov-taylor model, Phys. Rev. Lett.44, 1586 (1980)

View on Pith 1980

[57] [57]

Y . H. Ichikawa, T. Kamimura, and T. Hatori, Stochastic diffu- 11 sion in the standard map, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena29, 247 (1987)

View on Pith 1987

[58] [58]

R. Ishizaki, T. Horita, T. Kobayashi, and H. Mori, Anoma- lous diffusion due to accelerator modes in the standard map, Progress of Theoretical Physics85, 1013 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[59] [59]

M. V . Daly,Classical and quantum chaos in a non-linearly kicked harmonic oscillator, Ph.D. thesis, Dublin City Univer- sity (1994)

View on Pith 1994

[60] [60]

F. Borgonovi and L. Rebuzzini, Translational invariance in the kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. E52, 2302 (1995)

View on Pith 1995

[61] [61]

G. M. Zaslavsky,The physics of chaos in Hamiltonian systems (world scientific, 2007)

View on Pith 2007

[62] [62]

T. M. Fromhold, A. A. Krokhin, C. R. Tench, S. Bujkiewicz, P. B. Wilkinson, F. W. Sheard, and L. Eaves, Effects of stochas- tic webs on chaotic electron transport in semiconductor super- lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 046803 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[63] [63]

T. Fromhold, A. Patane, S. Bujkiewicz, P. Wilkinson, D. Fowler, D. Sherwood, S. Stapleton, A. Krokhin, L. Eaves, M. Henini,et al., Chaotic electron diffusion through stochastic webs enhances current flow in superlattices, Nature428, 726 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[64] [64]

G. P. Berman, V . Y . Rubaev, and G. M. Zaslavsky, The problem of quantum chaos in a kicked harmonic oscillator, Nonlinearity 4, 543 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[65] [65]

D. Shepelyansky and C. Sire, Quantum evolution in a dynami- cal quasi-crystal, Europhysics Letters20, 95 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[66] [66]

G. Kells,Quantum Chaos in the Delta Kicked Harmonic Os- cillator, Ph.D. thesis, National University of Ireland, Maynooth (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[67] [67]

M. Daly and D. Hefernan, Non saturation of energy in a quan- tum kicked oscillator, Acta Physica Polonica A89, 571 (1996)

View on Pith 1996

[68] [68]

U. M. Engel,On quantum chaos, stochastic webs and local- ization in a quantum mechanical kick system(Logos-Verlag, 2007)

View on Pith 2007

[69] [69]

G. A. Kells, J. Twamley, and D. M. Heffernan, Dynamical prop- erties of the delta-kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. E70, 015203(R) (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[70] [70]

S. A. Gardiner, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum chaos in an ion trap: The delta-kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4790 (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[71] [71]

A. R. R. Carvalho and A. Buchleitner, Web-assisted tunneling in the kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 204101 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[72] [72]

S. A. Gardiner, D. Jaksch, R. Dum, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Nonlinear matter wave dynamics with a chaotic potential, Phys. Rev. A62, 023612 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[73] [73]

G. J. Duffy, A. S. Mellish, K. J. Challis, and A. C. Wilson, Non- linear atom-opticalδ-kicked harmonic oscillator using a bose- einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. A70, 041602(R) (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[74] [74]

T. P. Billam and S. A. Gardiner, Quantum resonances in an atom-opticalδ-kicked harmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. A80, 023414 (2009)

View on Pith 2009

[75] [75]

M. Frasca, Quantum kicked dynamics and classical diffusion, Physics Letters A231, 344 (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[76] [76]

A. Peres, Stability of quantum motion in chaotic and regular systems, Phys. Rev. A30, 1610 (1984)

View on Pith 1984

[77] [77]

T. Prosen and M. Znidaric, Stability of quantum motion and cor- relation decay, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 35, 1455 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[78] [78]

A. Goussev, R. A. Jalabert, H. M. Pastawski, and D. A. Wisni- acki, Loschmidt echo, Scholarpedia7, 11687 (2012), revision #127578

View on Pith 2012

[79] [79]

A. Sahu, N. D. Varikuti, and V . Madhok, Loschmidt echo and scrambling of systematic errors in tomography—a quantum sig- nature of chaos, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlin- ear Science36, 033129 (2026)

View on Pith 2026

[80] [80]

S. Pang and A. N. Jordan, Optimal adaptive control for quan- tum metrology with time-dependent hamiltonians, Nature com- munications8, 1 (2017)

View on Pith 2017

[81] [81]

M. G ¨arttner, P. Hauke, and A. M. Rey, Relating out-of-time- order correlations to entanglement via multiple-quantum coher- ences, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 040402 (2018)

View on Pith 2018

[82] [82]

N. D. Varikuti and V . Madhok, Out-of-time ordered correlators in kicked coupled tops: Information scrambling in mixed phase space and the role of conserved quantities, Chaos: An Interdis- ciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science34, 063124 (2024)

View on Pith 2024

[83] [83]

N. D. Varikuti, S. Bandyopadhyay, and P. Hauke, Deep thermal- ization and measurements of quantum resources, arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.09999 (2025). Appendix A: Calculating Generator ˆh(t) ω The floquet unitary is ˆU=exp n −iKcos ˆX o exp{−iωτˆn}, where ˆn=ˆa†aand ˆX=(a+a †)/ √ 2ω. Let’s say ˆU= ˆV(ω)· ˆF(ω), so, ˆV(ω)=exp{−iKcos ˆX}andF(ω)=exp{−iωτˆn}. T...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025