pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21036 · v1 · pith:4DUZMXJVnew · submitted 2026-05-20 · 🪐 quant-ph

Quantum theory of a three-photon Kerr parametric oscillator

Alessandro Bruno , Patrick P. Potts , Alexander Grimm , Matteo Brunelli This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 04:51 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Kerr parametric oscillatorthree-photon drivesqueezed cat statesqutrit encodingphase-flip protectionspectral degeneracyparametric squeezing
0
0 comments X

The pith

A three-photon-driven Kerr oscillator produces a threefold degenerate ground state of squeezed superpositions that can encode a phase-flip-protected qutrit.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper derives exact analytical solutions at points of spectral degeneracy and approximate solutions in quasi-degenerate regimes for the ground state of a nonlinear Kerr oscillator under three-photon driving. In both cases the resulting manifold consists of superpositions of three macroscopically distinct states that contain squeezing whose strength and sign depend parametrically on the detuning. This squeezing can be enhanced, suppressed, or reversed by changing the detuning, producing a squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition that is absent from ordinary three-component cat states. The controlled states are shown to be robust enough to serve as a logical qutrit encoding protected from phase-flip errors, with explicit expressions for leakage out of the manifold. A reader would care because the construction supplies an analytically tractable route to stabilized multi-level quantum information in a single nonlinear mode.

Core claim

In the three-photon Kerr parametric oscillator the exact solution at spectral degeneracy and the approximate solution at quasi-degeneracy both yield a threefold ground-state manifold whose members are quantum superpositions of three macroscopically distinct states. These states differ from conventional three-component Schrödinger cat states because they incorporate squeezing whose amplitude and sign are set by the detuning parameter. Changing the detuning therefore enhances, suppresses, or reverses the squeezing, driving a squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition. The resulting states can be generated and stabilized, remain robust against small perturbations, and admit an analytic bound on the

What carries the argument

The three-photon pump term added to the single-mode Kerr Hamiltonian, which enforces the exact or quasi-degenerate threefold ground-state manifold and the associated parametric squeezing.

If this is right

  • Squeezing strength and sign become tunable knobs for the logical states by simple adjustment of detuning.
  • The manifold supplies a Kerr-cat qutrit encoding that is protected against phase-flip errors.
  • Leakage out of the ground-state manifold can be bounded analytically as a function of drive strength and detuning.
  • The superpositions remain stable against small perturbations that preserve the three-photon resonance condition.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same three-photon resonance condition could be engineered in other platforms that realize strong Kerr nonlinearity, such as superconducting circuits or trapped ions.
  • The squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition offers a diagnostic for the validity of the rotating-wave approximation used to derive the effective Hamiltonian.
  • Encoding higher-dimensional logical spaces with similar multi-photon drives may follow by replacing the three-photon term with an n-photon drive.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes an ideal single-mode Kerr oscillator containing only a pure three-photon pump term and no loss channels or higher-order nonlinearities that would lift the degeneracy or alter the ground-state manifold.

What would settle it

Spectroscopic measurement of the oscillator energy levels at the predicted degeneracy points that shows either lifted degeneracy or squeezing amplitudes that fail to follow the calculated detuning dependence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21036 by Alessandro Bruno, Alexander Grimm, Matteo Brunelli, Patrick P. Potts.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) Phase diagram of the three-photon Kerr parametric oscillator (3KPO), obtained from the meta-potential [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (c) and (d) display the energy spectrum as a function of detuning, showing that a large negative detuning also leads to triple degeneracy of the spectrum. We notice that, for neg￾ative detuning, the spectrum in the limit of vanishing pump is no longer decreasingly ordered with respect to n (some of the E (G=0) n≥1 become positive). This can lead to extra degeneracies for the choice of specific integer valu… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a)-(c) Wigner function of the ground states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Magnitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Squeezing parameter Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The vacuum manifold of the 3KPO hosts a qutrit. At the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Fidelity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Steady-state Wigner function of the 3KPO subject to photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. State initialization and evolution under single-photon loss. (a) Populations of the three-legged squeezed cat states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. (a)-(b) Exact wavefunctions Eqs. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the quantum properties of a nonlinear Kerr oscillator driven by a three-photon pump. We derive both exact and approximate analytical expressions for the ground state of this interacting model. The exact solution arises at an exact spectral degeneracy, while the approximate solution describes regimes of quasi-degeneracy of the energy spectrum. In both cases, the threefold (quasi)degenerate ground-state manifold consists of quantum superpositions of three macroscopically distinct states. These states differ qualitatively from conventional three-component Schr\"odinger's cat states due to the presence of squeezing with a distinctive parametric dependence. By varying the detuning between the oscillator and the three-photon pump, we show that the squeezing can be enhanced, suppressed, or even reversed, leading to a squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition. We analyze the generation and stabilization of these superposition states, their robustness against perturbations and analytically quantify the leakage to excited states. Our analysis elucidates how the three-photon Kerr parametric oscillator can be used to encode a Kerr-cat qutrit protected against phase-flip errors.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops the quantum theory of a three-photon Kerr parametric oscillator, deriving both exact analytical solutions at points of spectral degeneracy and approximate solutions in quasi-degenerate regimes. The threefold (quasi)degenerate ground-state manifold is shown to consist of squeezed superpositions of three macroscopically distinct states that differ from conventional three-component cat states; varying the detuning induces a squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition, and the construction is proposed for encoding a Kerr-cat qutrit with protection against phase-flip errors, including analytical quantification of leakage to excited states.

Significance. If the analytical derivations hold and the claimed phase-flip protection is robust, the work would offer a useful analytical framework for realizing protected qutrits in driven nonlinear oscillators, extending Kerr-cat qubit ideas with explicit control over squeezing via detuning. The provision of both exact and approximate closed-form expressions for the manifold is a clear strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Derivation of exact spectral degeneracy] The central claim of exact threefold degeneracy (and resulting phase-flip protection) is derived for the ideal Hamiltonian H = Δ a†a + χ (a†a)^2 + (g/3)(a^3 + a†^3) without loss or higher-order terms. Any single-photon loss or χ_5 term would lift the degeneracy by an amount proportional to the perturbation strength, reducing the gap that protects the encoded qutrit; the manuscript should include a perturbative estimate of this splitting and its effect on leakage.
  2. [Approximate solutions and transition analysis] The quasi-degenerate approximation and the squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition are load-bearing for the qutrit encoding proposal, yet the validity range of the perturbation (e.g., relative to the pump amplitude g and detuning) is not explicitly bounded against the neglected counter-rotating or loss terms.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Ground-state manifold description] Clarify the definition and parametric dependence of the squeezing parameter in the exact versus approximate manifolds to avoid ambiguity when comparing to standard cat states.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us improve the presentation of our results on the three-photon Kerr parametric oscillator and the proposed Kerr-cat qutrit encoding.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim of exact threefold degeneracy (and resulting phase-flip protection) is derived for the ideal Hamiltonian H = Δ a†a + χ (a†a)^2 + (g/3)(a^3 + a†^3) without loss or higher-order terms. Any single-photon loss or χ_5 term would lift the degeneracy by an amount proportional to the perturbation strength, reducing the gap that protects the encoded qutrit; the manuscript should include a perturbative estimate of this splitting and its effect on leakage.

    Authors: We agree that perturbations such as single-photon loss and higher-order terms like χ_5 can lift the exact degeneracy and affect the protection. In the revised manuscript we have added a new subsection providing a first-order perturbative estimate of the splitting induced by a small loss rate κ and a χ_5 term. The splitting scales linearly with the perturbation strength, and the leakage out of the ground-state manifold is shown to be of order (perturbation strength / gap)^2. This analysis confirms that the phase-flip protection remains effective provided the perturbations remain small compared with the gap set by g, consistent with the regime already discussed in the original text. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The quasi-degenerate approximation and the squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition are load-bearing for the qutrit encoding proposal, yet the validity range of the perturbation (e.g., relative to the pump amplitude g and detuning) is not explicitly bounded against the neglected counter-rotating or loss terms.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting the need for explicit bounds. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated paragraph that states the conditions of validity: the quasi-degenerate approximation holds for |Δ| ≪ g with an error bounded by |Δ|/g, while the rotating-wave approximation underlying the Hamiltonian requires g/ω ≪ 1 to suppress counter-rotating terms. We also note that small loss rates κ ≪ g do not qualitatively alter the squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition. These bounds are now stated explicitly with reference to the parameter regimes used in the figures. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Derivation from ideal Hamiltonian is self-contained with no circular reductions

full rationale

The paper starts from the explicit Hamiltonian of the three-photon driven Kerr oscillator and derives exact eigenstates at points of spectral degeneracy as well as approximate solutions in quasi-degenerate regimes. These steps consist of direct analytical diagonalization or perturbation methods applied to the given model, producing the threefold manifold and its squeezing properties as mathematical consequences rather than tautological redefinitions or fitted renamings. No load-bearing self-citations, parameter fits renamed as predictions, or ansatzes smuggled via prior work are present; the ideal-model assumptions (absence of loss and higher-order terms) are stated upfront and the results are falsifiable within that framework. The squeezing-to-anti-squeezing transition follows parametrically from varying detuning in the same equations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper relies on the standard framework of open quantum systems or circuit QED for parametric oscillators. No new entities invented; free parameters are the physical detuning and drive strengths typical in such models.

free parameters (2)
  • detuning parameter
    The detuning between oscillator and pump is varied to control squeezing, likely a tunable parameter in the model.
  • pump amplitude
    Strength of the three-photon pump is a key parameter in the Hamiltonian.
axioms (2)
  • standard math Standard quantum mechanical treatment of bosonic modes with Kerr nonlinearity and parametric drive.
    The model is built on the usual Hamiltonian for nonlinear oscillators in quantum optics.
  • domain assumption Existence of exact spectral degeneracy at specific parameter values.
    The exact solution arises at an exact spectral degeneracy as stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5708 in / 1565 out tokens · 42153 ms · 2026-05-21T04:51:43.668611+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 84 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    2NhnwtqRY92B2ID2IXunQpoAHtg=

    The projection of that state on thexyplane would be the mixed state(|C 0⟩⟨C0|+|C 1⟩⟨C1|)/2. D. Comparison with numerics We now benchmark the expressions of the three-legged squeezed cat states Eqs. (23)-(25) obtained within our ap- proximate treatment against the actual ground state of the 3KPO Hamiltonian Eq. (1). Results for three representative cases w...

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    NO6fhRBrpGo0zFMBucy64S9veE0=

    This is a second- order differential equation (with non-constant coefficients) and therefore admits two independent solutions, each corre- sponding to a pure state. Which linear combination of the two is selected depends upon the choice of the boundary terms. The two independent solutions,φ A(x)andφ B(x), have the following elegant expressions φA(x) =N A ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Bartolo, F

    N. Bartolo, F. Minganti, W. Casteels, and C. Ciuti, Phys. Rev. A94, 033841 (2016)

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Minganti, N

    F. Minganti, N. Bartolo, J. Lolli, W. Casteels, and C. Ciuti, Sci- entific Reports6, 26987 (2016)

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Roberts and A

    D. Roberts and A. A. Clerk, Phys. Rev. X10, 021022 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Grigoriou and C

    E. Grigoriou and C. Navarrete-Benlloch, (2023), arXiv:2303.12894

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Casteels, F

    W. Casteels, F. Storme, A. Le Boit´e, and C. Ciuti, Phys. Rev. A 93, 033824 (2016)

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Minganti, A

    F. Minganti, A. Biella, N. Bartolo, and C. Ciuti, Phys. Rev. A 98, 042118 (2018)

    work page 2018

  9. [9]

    X. H. H. Zhang and H. U. Baranger, Phys. Rev. A103, 033711 (2021)

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    Minganti, V

    F. Minganti, V . Savona, and A. Biella, Quantum7, 1170 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Soriente, T

    M. Soriente, T. L. Heugel, K. Omiya, R. Chitra, and O. Zilber- berg, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 023100 (2021)

    work page 2021

  12. [12]

    Ameye, A

    O. Ameye, A. Eichler, and O. Zilberberg, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033204 (2025)

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Wielinga and G

    B. Wielinga and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. A48, 2494 (1993)

    work page 1993

  14. [14]

    Wustmann and V

    W. Wustmann and V . Shumeiko, Low Temperature Physics45, 848 (2019)

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    Dykman,Fluctuating Nonlinear Oscillators: From Nanomechanics to Quantum Superconducting Circuits(Oxford University Press, 2012)

    M. Dykman,Fluctuating Nonlinear Oscillators: From Nanomechanics to Quantum Superconducting Circuits(Oxford University Press, 2012)

    work page 2012

  16. [16]

    Eichler and O

    A. Eichler and O. Zilberberg,Classical and Quantum Paramet- ric Phenomena(Oxford University Press, 2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    S. Puri, S. Boutin, and A. Blais, npj Quantum Information3, 18 (2017)

    work page 2017

  18. [18]

    Goto, Sci

    H. Goto, Sci. Rep.6, 21686 (2016)

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    P. T. Cochrane, G. J. Milburn, and W. J. Munro, Physical Re- view A59, 2631 (1999)

    work page 1999

  20. [20]

    Mirrahimi, Z

    M. Mirrahimi, Z. Leghtas, V . V . Albert, S. Touzard, R. J. Schoelkopf, L. Jiang, and M. H. Devoret, New Journal of Physics16, 045014 (2014)

    work page 2014

  21. [22]

    Touzard, A

    S. Touzard, A. Grimm, Z. Leghtas, S. Mundhada, P. Rein- hold, C. Axline, M. Reagor, K. Chou, J. Blumoff, K. Sliwa, S. Shankar, L. Frunzio, R. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, and M. Devoret, Physical Review X8, 021005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [23]

    Lescanne, M

    R. Lescanne, M. Villiers, T. Peronnin, A. Sarlette, M. Delbecq, B. Huard, T. Kontos, M. Mirrahimi, and Z. Leghtas, Nat. Phys. 16, 509 (2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [24]

    Grimm, N

    A. Grimm, N. E. Frattini, S. , S. O. Mundhada, S. Touzard, M. Mirrahimi, S. M. Girvin, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Nature584, 205 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [25]

    N. E. Frattini, R. G. Corti ˜nas, J. Venkatraman, X. Xiao, Q. Su, C. U. Lei, B. J. Chapman, V . R. Joshi, S. M. Girvin, R. J. 19 Schoelkopf, S. , and M. H. Devoret, Phys. Rev. X14, 031040 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [26]

    A. Hajr, B. Qing, K. Wang, G. Koolstra, Z. Pedramrazi, Z. Kang, L. Chen, L. B. Nguyen, C. J¨unger, N. Goss, I. Huang, B. Bhandari, N. E. Frattini, S. Puri, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, Physical Review X14, 041049 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [27]

    B. Qing, A. Hajr, K. Wang, G. Koolstra, L. B. Nguyen, J. Hines, I. Huang, B. Bhandari, Z. Padramrazi, L. Chen, Z. Kang, C. J ¨unger, N. Goss, N. Jain, H. Kim, K.-H. Lee, A. Hashim, N. E. Frattini, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, D. I. Santiago, and I. Siddiqi, Benchmarking Single-Qubit Gates on a Noise-Biased Qubit Beyond the Fault-Tolerant Threshold (2024), ar...

    work page arXiv 2024

  27. [28]

    A. Z. Ding, B. L. Brock, A. Eickbusch, A. Koottandavida, N. E. Frattini, R. G. Corti ˜nas, V . R. Joshi, S. J. de Graaf, B. J. Chap- man, S. Ganjam, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. De- voret, Nature Communications16, 5279 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [29]

    Adinolfi, D

    F. Adinolfi, D. Z. Haxell, A. Bruno, L. Michaud, V . H. Kam- rul, P. Pandey, and A. Grimm, Enhancing Kerr-Cat Qubit Co- herence with Controlled Dissipation (2025), arXiv:2511.01027 [quant-ph] version: 1

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [30]

    S. Puri, L. St-Jean, J. A. Gross, A. Grimm, N. E. Frattini, P. S. Iyer, A. Krishna, S. Touzard, L. Jiang, A. Blais, S. T. Flammia, and S. M. Girvin, Science Advances6, eaay5901 (2020)

    work page 2020

  30. [31]

    A. S. Darmawan, B. J. Brown, A. L. Grimsmo, D. K. Tuckett, and S. Puri, PRX Quantum2, 030345 (2021)

    work page 2021

  31. [32]

    Chono, T

    H. Chono, T. Kanao, and H. Goto, Physical Review Research4, 043054 (2022), arXiv:2204.03347 [cond-mat, physics:physics, physics:quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  32. [33]

    Gravina, F

    L. Gravina, F. Minganti, and V . Savona, PRX Quantum4, 020337 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [34]

    Dickerson

    R. Rousseau, D. Ruiz, E. Albertinale, P. d’Avezac, D. Banys, U. Blandin, N. Bourdaud, G. Campanaro, G. Cardoso, N. Cot- tet, C. Cullip, S. Del ´eglise, L. Devanz, A. Devulder, A. Es- sig, P. F ´evrier, A. Gicquel, ´Elie Gouzien, A. Gras, J. Guil- laud, E. G¨um¨us ¸, M. Hall´en, A. Jacob, P. Magnard, A. Marquet, S. Miklass, T. Peronnin, S. Polis, F. Rautsc...

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv 2025

  34. [35]

    Putterman, J

    H. Putterman, J. Iverson, Q. Xu, L. Jiang, O. Painter, F. G. Brand˜ao, and K. Noh, Physical Review Letters128, 110502 (2022)

    work page 2022

  35. [36]

    D. Ruiz, R. Gautier, J. Guillaud, and M. Mirrahimi, Phys. Rev. A107, 042407 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [37]

    Masuda, S

    S. Masuda, S. Kamimura, T. Yamamoto, T. Aoki, and A. Tomonaga, npj Quantum Information11, 26 (2025)

    work page 2025

  37. [38]

    Q. Su, R. G. Corti ˜nas, J. Venkatraman, and S. Puri, Phys. Rev. A112, 042202 (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [39]

    Benhayoune-Khadraoui, C

    O. Benhayoune-Khadraoui, C. Lled ´o, and A. Blais, (2025), arXiv:2507.06160

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [40]

    Marquet, A

    A. Marquet, A. Essig, J. Cohen, N. Cottet, A. Murani, E. Al- bertinale, S. Dupouy, A. Bienfait, T. Peronnin, S. Jezouin, R. Lescanne, and B. Huard, Physical Review X14, 021019 (2024)

    work page 2024

  40. [41]

    Guillaud and M

    J. Guillaud and M. Mirrahimi, Physical Review X9, 041053 (2019)

    work page 2019

  41. [42]

    Guillaud and M

    J. Guillaud and M. Mirrahimi, Physical Review A103, 042413 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [43]

    Chamberland, K

    C. Chamberland, K. Noh, P. Arrangoiz-Arriola, E. T. Camp- bell, C. T. Hann, J. Iverson, H. Putterman, T. C. Bohdanowicz, S. T. Flammia, A. Keller, G. Refael, J. Preskill, L. Jiang, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, O. Painter, and F. G. Brand˜ao, PRX Quantum3, 010329 (2022)

    work page 2022

  43. [44]

    Gautier, A

    R. Gautier, A. Sarlette, and M. Mirrahimi, PRX Quantum3, 020339 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [45]

    Q. Xu, J. K. Iverson, F. G. S. L. Brand˜ao, and L. Jiang, Physical Review Research4, 013082 (2022)

    work page 2022

  45. [46]

    Venkatraman, R

    J. Venkatraman, R. G. Corti ˜nas, N. E. Frattini, X. Xiao, and M. H. Devoret, Proceedings of the Na- tional Academy of Sciences121, e2311241121 (2024), https://www.pnas.org/doi/pdf/10.1073/pnas.2311241121

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.2311241121 2024

  46. [47]

    Putterman, K

    H. Putterman, K. Noh, C. T. Hann, G. S. MacCabe, S. Aghaeimeibodi, R. N. Patel, M. Lee, W. M. Jones, H. Moradinejad, R. Rodriguez, N. Mahuli, J. Rose, J. C. Owens, H. Levine, E. Rosenfeld, P. Reinhold, L. Moncelsi, J. A. Alcid, N. Alidoust, P. Arrangoiz-Arriola, J. Barnett, P. Bienias, H. A. Carson, C. Chen, L. Chen, H. Chinkezian, E. M. Chisholm, M.-H. C...

    work page 2025

  47. [48]

    A. C. C. d. Albornoz, R. G. Corti˜nas, M. Sch¨afer, N. E. Frattini, B. Allen, D. G. A. Cabral, P. E. Videla, P. Khazaei, E. Geva, V . S. Batista, and M. H. Devoret, (2024), arXiv:2409.13113

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  48. [49]

    D. Ruiz, J. Guillaud, A. Leverrier, M. Mirrahimi, and C. Vuillot, Nature Communications16, 1040 (2025)

    work page 2025

  49. [50]

    R ´eglade, A

    U. R ´eglade, A. Bocquet, R. Gautier, J. Cohen, A. Marquet, E. Albertinale, N. Pankratova, M. Hall ´en, F. Rautschke, L.-A. Sellem, P. Rouchon, A. Sarlette, M. Mirrahimi, P. Campagne- Ibarcq, R. Lescanne, S. Jezouin, and Z. Leghtas, Nature629, 778 (2024)

    work page 2024

  50. [51]

    Kanao, S

    T. Kanao, S. Masuda, S. Kawabata, and H. Goto, Phys. Rev. Appl.18, 014019 (2022)

    work page 2022

  51. [52]

    A. M. Eriksson, T. S´epulcre, M. Kervinen, T. Hillmann, M. Ku- dra, S. Dupouy, Y . Lu, M. Khanahmadi, J. Yang, C. Castillo- Moreno, P. Delsing, and S. Gasparinetti, Nature Communica- tions15, 2512 (2024)

    work page 2024

  52. [53]

    Svensson, A

    I.-M. Svensson, A. Bengtsson, P. Krantz, J. Bylander, V . Shumeiko, and P. Delsing, Phys. Rev. B96, 174503 (2017)

    work page 2017

  53. [54]

    C. W. S. Chang, C. Sab ´ın, P. Forn-D´ıaz, F. Quijandr´ıa, A. M. Vadiraj, I. Nsanzineza, G. Johansson, and C. M. Wilson, Phys. Rev. X10, 011011 (2020)

    work page 2020

  54. [55]

    S. Kwon, D. Hoshi, T. Nagase, D. Sugiyama, H. Mukai, K. Takemura, R. Kojima, Y . Zhou, S. Watabe, F. Yoshihara, and J.-S. Tsai, Realisation of Protected Cat Qutrit via Engineered Quantum Tunnelling (2026), arXiv:2601.17675 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  55. [56]

    Zhang, J

    Y . Zhang, J. Gosner, S. M. Girvin, J. Ankerhold, and M. I. Dyk- man, Phys. Rev. A96, 052124 (2017)

    work page 2017

  56. [57]

    Zhang and M

    Y . Zhang and M. I. Dykman, Phys. Rev. E100, 052148 (2019)

    work page 2019

  57. [58]

    L ¨orch, Y

    N. L ¨orch, Y . Zhang, C. Bruder, and M. I. Dykman, Phys. Rev. 20 Res.1, 023023 (2019)

    work page 2019

  58. [59]

    Gosner, B

    J. Gosner, B. Kubala, and J. Ankerhold, Phys. Rev. B101, 054501 (2020)

    work page 2020

  59. [60]

    Arndt and F

    L. Arndt and F. Hassler, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 187701 (2022)

    work page 2022

  60. [61]

    Arndt and F

    L. Arndt and F. Hassler, Phys. Rev. B106, 014513 (2022)

    work page 2022

  61. [62]

    Lang and A

    B. Lang and A. D. Armour, New Journal of Physics23, 033021 (2021)

    work page 2021

  62. [63]

    M. A. P. Reynoso, E. M. Signor, J. Khalouf-Rivera, A. D. Ribeiro, F. P ´erez-Bernal, and L. F. Santos, Phys. Rev. A112, 032415 (2025)

    work page 2025

  63. [64]

    S. Kwon, S. Watabe, and J.-S. Tsai, npj Quantum Information 8, 40 (2022)

    work page 2022

  64. [65]

    S. Puri, A. Grimm, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, A. Eickbusch, K. Noh, G. Roberts, L. Jiang, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. Devoret, and S. M. Girvin, Phys. Rev. X9, 041009 (2019)

    work page 2019

  65. [66]

    Zhang and M

    Y . Zhang and M. I. Dykman, Phys. Rev. A95, 053841 (2017)

    work page 2017

  66. [67]

    Ch ´avez-Carlos, T

    J. Ch ´avez-Carlos, T. L. M. Lezama, R. G. Corti ˜nas, J. Venka- traman, M. H. Devoret, V . S. Batista, F. P´erez-Bernal, and L. F. Santos, npj Quantum Information9, 76 (2023)

    work page 2023

  67. [68]

    Marthaler and M

    M. Marthaler and M. I. Dykman, Phys. Rev. A76, 010102 (2007)

    work page 2007

  68. [69]

    X. Xiao, J. Venkatraman, R. G. Corti ˜nas, S. Chowdhury, and M. H. Devoret, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 044021 (2025)

    work page 2025

  69. [70]

    Eltschka, M

    C. Eltschka, M. Huber, S. Morelli, and J. Siewert, Quantum5, 485 (2021)

    work page 2021

  70. [71]

    G. T. Landi, M. J. Kewming, M. T. Mitchison, and P. P. Potts, PRX Quantum5, 020201 (2024)

    work page 2024

  71. [72]

    Kraus, H

    B. Kraus, H. P. B ¨uchler, S. Diehl, A. Kantian, A. Micheli, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A78, 042307 (2008)

    work page 2008

  72. [73]

    P. D. Drummond and D. F. Walls, Journal of Physics A: Math- ematical and General13, 725 (1980)

    work page 1980

  73. [74]

    Y . Wang, Z. Hu, B. C. Sanders, and S. Kais, Front. Phys.8, 589504 (2020)

    work page 2020

  74. [75]

    Champion, Z

    E. Champion, Z. Wang, R. W. Parker, and M. S. Blok, Phys. Rev. X15, 021096 (2025)

    work page 2025

  75. [76]

    E. T. Campbell, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 230501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  76. [77]

    Leghtas, S

    Z. Leghtas, S. Touzard, I. M. Pop, A. Kou, B. Vlastakis, A. Pe- trenko, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, S. Shankar, M. J. Hatridge, M. Reagor, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Science347, 853 (2015)

    work page 2015

  77. [78]

    Touzard, A

    S. Touzard, A. Grimm, Z. Leghtas, S. O. Mundhada, P. Rein- hold, C. Axline, M. Reagor, K. Chou, J. Blumoff, K. M. Sliwa, S. Shankar, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. Mirrahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Phys. Rev. X8, 021005 (2018)

    work page 2018

  78. [79]

    A. C. C. de Albornoz, R. G. Corti˜nas, M. Sch¨afer, N. E. Frattini, B. Allen, D. G. Cabral, P. E. Videla, P. Khazaei, E. Geva, V . S. Batista, and M. H. Devoret, PRX Quantum7, 020309 (2026)

    work page 2026

  79. [80]

    D. G. A. Cabral, P. Khazaei, B. C. Allen, P. E. Videla, M. Sch ¨afer, R. G. Corti ˜nas, A. C. Carrillo de Albornoz, J. Ch´avez-Carlos, L. F. Santos, E. Geva, and V . S. Batista, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters15, 12042 (2024)

    work page 2024

  80. [81]

    R. S. Berry, J. Chem. Phys.32, 933 (1960)

    work page 1960

Showing first 80 references.