Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 69 references

Synchronized Aharonov-Bohm Motifs via Engineered Dissipation

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

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

Pith's one-line read In a π-flux spin motif, local dephasing leaves exactly one protected oscillation, and all inner spins lock to it while the central spin runs opposite.

desk verdict The single-magnon mechanism is real; the general proof and the printed Hamiltonian are not ready as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.19219 v2 pith:6WPL3OFV submitted 2025-11-24 quant-ph cond-mat.other

Christopher W. Wächtler , Gloria Platero This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.other
keywords Aharonov-BohmcagingquantumsynchronizationstrongdynamicalsymmetryLindbladmasterequationengineereddissipationflatbandsconcurrencespinmotifs
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 tries to establish that engineered dissipation and gauge-field interference cooperate in rotationally symmetric spin clusters, which it calls Aharonov-Bohm motifs, to produce synchronized magnetization that is largely independent of initial conditions. The central claim is that, for any cyclic order n, local dephasing on the outer spins leaves a single pair of non-decaying oscillation modes in the single-excitation sector, with frequency Ω = 2√n g set by the coupling and the motif size. After a transient, the n inner spins oscillate in phase with one another and the central spin oscillates exactly opposite, while the outer spins relax to constants. The same protected oscillation carries measurable entanglement between the central spin and inner spins, and between inner-spin pairs. If correct, this gives a direct, experimentally accessible route from flat-band localization to collective synchronized dynamics in open quantum systems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the strong dynamical symmetry: an operator A that is a Hamiltonian eigenoperator ([H,A] = λA) and simultaneously commutes with every Lindblad operator. In this setup the AB π-flux and the Cn symmetry force the only such operators to live in the one-magnon subspace and to be built from states with zero weight on the dissipative outer sites; that gives the protected oscillatory eigenmode pair ±i·2√n g. The total-magnetization / single-magnon decomposition then makes the long-time dynamics tractable: higher-magnon sectors contribute only static offsets, and the outer-spin dephasing damps every state not in the protected sector.

What would settle it

Numerically diagonalize the full Lindbladian (not just the one-magnon sector) for a C5 or C6 motif with π flux and local σz dephasing on the outer spins, and list all eigenvalues with zero real part; the central claim is false if any pair of purely imaginary eigenvalues beyond ±i·2√5 g or ±i·2√6 g appears. Alternatively, starting from a random single-excitation state, measure ⟨σz_c(t)⟩ and an inner-spin ⟨σz_i(t)⟩ and look for Fourier components in addition to Ω = 2√n g or for a long-time phase lag differing from π.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a spectral statement about the Lindblad superoperator of the Cn-motif with π flux per plaquette and local σz dephasing on the outer spins: within the single-magnon sector the Liouvillian has exactly one strong dynamical symmetry, generated by the pair |ψ±⟩ = (|c⟩ + (1/√n)∑i |i⟩)/√2 with energies h ± √n g. This produces the single imaginary eigenmode pair ±i·2√n g. All other single-magnon states and all multi-magnon sectors decay, so for almost any initial condition the long-time magnetization obeys the closed forms (central and inner); entanglement, measured by concurrence, oscillates at the same frequency and phase. The paper further shows that cou

Load-bearing premise

The claim that exactly one oscillation survives rests on a short, not fully detailed step in the Supplementary Material (Section II, 'General motif with Cn-symmetry') asserting that the constraints admit exactly two one-magnon dark states and no purely imaginary eigenvalues in any other sector, and that step contains a sign inconsistency about the outer-spin eigenvalue versus zero weight on outer spins.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any Cn-symmetric AB motif, starting from almost any single-excitation initial state, the long-time magnetization is determined by one frequency and one global phase; inner spins synchronize and the central spin is π out of phase.
  • The oscillation frequency Ω = 2√n g depends only on the coupling g and the motif size n, so it can serve as a direct spectroscopic signature of the protected mode; the amplitude is maximized by starting with a single spin flip at the center.
  • The synchronized motion is accompanied by periodic entanglement: central-inner concurrence oscillates with amplitude up to 1/√n and inner-inner concurrence up to 1/n, at the same frequency Ω.
  • Weak coherent perturbations (on-site disorder, coupling disorder, or flux disorder) shift the frequency only at first order, with damping appearing only at second order, so synchronization survives as a metastable state for sufficiently small ε.
  • Coupling several motifs and applying collective dephasing inside each motif synchronizes corresponding spins across the whole network; without that collective dephasing, inter-motif synchronization is lost.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An extension the paper only gestures at: the same 'local loss on ring sites selects a compact dark eigenstate' mechanism should transfer to other flat-band lattices (dice, Creutz, rhombic chains), giving synchronized observables in bosonic or fermionic settings, not just spin motifs.
  • Because the oscillation is protected by exact destructive interference, a natural quantitative test is to measure the phase lag between ⟨σz_c(t)⟩ and ⟨σz_i(t)⟩ in a realization with independent single-spin control; a deviation from π at long times would indicate a second surviving mode.
  • The paper leaves Ising-type interactions for future work; in the dissipative setting those interactions may stabilize new synchronized phases rather than destroy caging, and the two-magnon sector is the first place to look for such effects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 manuscript proposes that applying local σ^z dephasing to the outer spins of C_n-symmetric spin motifs threaded by π flux per plaquette projects the dynamics onto a two-dimensional, interference-protected subspace in the single-magnon sector. There the central and inner spins oscillate at Ω = 2√n g, with all inner spins synchronized and the central spin anti-synchronized, independently of the initial single-magnon state. The paper derives closed-form expressions for the local magnetizations and for the concurrence after a transient, and it shows numerically that coupled motifs with additional collective dissipation synchronize across motifs. The explicit eigenstates and the numerical simulations for n = 2, 4, 6 are strengths, and the proposed connection between AB caging and dissipative quantum synchronization is interesting. However, the proof that the Liouvillian has exactly one strong dynamical symmetry is incomplete in the Supplementary Material, and the concurrence expressions contain numerically fitted constants, so the full strength of the announced results is not yet supported.

Significance. If the claims are correct, the paper establishes a new mechanism for robust quantum synchronization based on gauge-field-induced localization and engineered dephasing, with potential experimental relevance in synthetic-gauge-field platforms. The analytical eigenstates (Eq. (3)) and the explicit single-magnon solution are elegant, and the numerical evidence for n = 2, 4, 6 is credible. The multi-motif generalization is a useful extension. The main caveat is that the central uniqueness proof—that no other sectors or states support persistent oscillations—is not rigorously established, and the 'analytical' concurrence expressions rely on numerically determined constants. These weaknesses currently prevent the paper from fully supporting its general claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Supplementary Material, Section II ('General motif with C_n-symmetry')] The proof that the Liouvillian possesses exactly one strong dynamical symmetry is incomplete. Dark states must be simultaneous eigenstates of all σ^z_outer, so each outer spin can have eigenvalue +1 or -1; the text asserts 'the eigenvalue conditions enforce z_{i,i+1}=-1 for all i' and then only analyzes states with zero weight on all outer spins. For multi-magnon sectors, configurations with some outer spins in the +1 eigenstate are possible and are never ruled out. The two-magnon 'no-leakage' condition, Eq. (S19), is only necessary, not sufficient: for n = 2 the state |C_0>=(|c1>+|c2>)/√2 satisfies the stated zero-leakage condition, but H|C_0> contains |12>, which has non-vanishing amplitude on outer spins and therefore is not dark. Thus the conclusion that higher-magnon sectors contribute only static offsets, and the main-text claim of 'exactly one strong dynamical symmetry', are not e
  2. [Main text, Eqs. (6)-(7) and Supplementary Material, Section IV] The concurrence expressions are presented as analytical, but the constants C_c and \bar C are 'obtained numerically'. This makes the comparison in Fig. 2 partly circular: the numerical data are used to fix the constants that are then compared with the numerical data. The paper should either derive these constants from the stationary modes of the Liouvillian (which are in principle computable from the spectral decomposition) or explicitly label Eqs. (6)-(7) as semi-analytical. This is load-bearing for the entanglement claim, which is a highlighted result in the abstract.
  3. [Supplementary Material, Section II (two-magnon paragraph) and main text, 'all sectors ... possess a unique steady state'] The statement that 'only the totally symmetric state |C_0> satisfies the no-leakage condition' is misleading: satisfying no-leakage does not make a state an eigenstate of H, and the text does not explain how a single dark state in the two-magnon manifold would preclude oscillatory dynamics. A single dark state cannot generate a pair of purely imaginary eigenvalues; one needs two degenerate-eigenvalue H eigenstates with the same eigenvalue pattern of every σ^z_outer. The manuscript never verifies the absence of such pairs in higher sectors. This gap directly affects the claim that the long-time dynamics is dominated by a single oscillatory mode and that synchronization is independent of initial conditions.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Supplementary Material, Section II] The text says 'all remaining magnetization sectors with m≠±(N+2)' should read m≠±(N−2).
  2. [Main text, Fig. 2 caption and Eqs. (6)-(7)] The caption says 'including a numerically determined constant shift' while the text says 'using numerically determined constants C_c and \bar C'. Please use consistent terminology and state clearly that these constants are not derived from first principles.
  3. [Supplementary Material, Section II] The statement 'z_{i,i+1}=-1 ... implying zero weight on all outer spins' is not a sign inconsistency per se, but the text should justify why eigenvalue +1 configurations cannot be eigenstates of H. In the single-magnon case this can be shown by direct calculation, but the manuscript does not provide that argument.
  4. [Throughout] Minor typos: 'mirros' should be 'mirrors'; 'ansuring' should be 'ensuring'; 'Eploiting' should be 'Exploiting'.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Central Ω=2√n g derivation is first-principles; entanglement offsets are numerically fitted, and higher-sector uniqueness is asserted rather than fully proven.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Entanglement section, Eqs. (6)-(7) and Fig. 2 caption]
    "Solid lines correspond to the analytical expressions in Eqs. (6)–(7), including a numerically determined constant shift... where C_c and C̄ denote contributions from components of the density matrix outside the strong-dynamical-symmetry subspace (which we obtain numerically below)."

    The expressions labeled 'analytical' (Eqs. 6-7) are not closed-form predictions: the offset constants C_c and C̄ are obtained from the full numerical Lindblad solutions (the dashed curves in Fig. 2) that the solid 'analytical' lines are then compared against. Matching at the level of the constant shift is therefore enforced by construction, so the Conclusions' statement that analytic entanglement expressions are 'confirmed by numerical simulations' is partly self-confirming. Only the oscillatory part (frequency Ω, amplitudes 1/√n and 1/n, phase φ) is genuinely derived from |ψ_±⟩; the offset is fitted input, though openly disclosed.

full rationale

Central derivation: Ω=2√n g and the synchronization pattern are genuinely first-principles. The single-magnon subspace is diagonalized in SM §II: the dark-state constraints force zero weight on all outer spins, yielding |ψ_±⟩=(1/√2)(±|c⟩+n^{-1/2}Σ|i⟩) with E_±=h±√n g, so Ω=E_+-E_-=2√n g. Eqs. (4)-(5) follow from the Liouvillian spectral decomposition (SM S22-S26): identical phase φ, central amplitude 2, inner amplitude 2/n, outer static. No fitted input enters the frequency or the synchronization pattern. The strong-dynamical-symmetry framework is cited from external works [56,57,66]; author self-citations are contextual only — there is no load-bearing self-citation. Partial circularity (score driver): the 'analytic' concurrence expressions (6)-(7) carry constants C_c and C̄ 'obtained numerically below', i.e., extracted from the same full Lindblad solutions (dashed curves, Fig. 2) that the solid curves are said to confirm. The constant shift is thus fitted input, so the offset-matching is self-confirming by construction; only the oscillatory part is a genuine prediction. The magnetization formulas (4)-(5) similarly route their offsets through the numerically-identified stationary mode ϱ̄ (SM S24-S26). Both uses are disclosed, and neither affects the derived frequency or phase. Proof gap (flagged per reviewing rule, weighed but not counted as circularity): SM §II's uniqueness claim for higher excitation sectors rests on the assertion 'The same argument extends to all higher-excitation sectors: only the one-magnon spaces possess a two-dimensional invariant subspace capable of supporting coherent oscillations.' For n=2, the exhibited state |C_0⟩ satisfies the no-leakage condition (S19) yet is not an eigenstate of H (H|C_0⟩ contains a |12⟩ component), so the 'single dark state' claim and the exclusion of additional purely imaginary Liouvillian modes for generic multi-magnon initial conditions are not established. This is a missing-support/correctness concern, not a reduction-to-inputs. Verdict: no self-definitional circularity and no load-bearing self-citation in the central claim; one openly disclosed fitted-offset instance in auxiliary entanglement formulas; one omitted-proof gap. Score 3.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. The free parameters are the numerically fitted static concurrence offsets. The main load-bearing assumptions are the uniqueness of the oscillatory Liouvillian mode, the exact π-flux/local-dephasing setup, and the unproven generalization of the multi-motif synchronization.

free parameters (2)
  • C_c = not specified (obtained numerically)
    Static contribution to concurrence C(ϱ_ci) from components outside the strong-dynamical-symmetry subspace; the text states 'which we obtain numerically below', so the analytic concurrence formula is partly fitted to numerics.
  • \bar C = not specified (obtained numerically)
    Static contribution to concurrence C(ϱ_ij); likewise obtained numerically and included in the 'analytic' expressions (6)-(7).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Lindblad master equation accurately describes the open-system dynamics (Markovian, weak system-bath coupling).
    Used throughout to define the dynamics; standard in quantum synchronization literature but an assumption about the physical platform.
  • domain assumption Total magnetization M is conserved and the dynamics decomposes into magnetization sectors; focusing on the single-magnon sector captures the synchronization of local observables.
    Used to reduce the problem; conservation is shown in the main text, but the reduction assumes higher sectors contribute no persistent oscillations.
  • ad hoc to paper All magnetization sectors m ≠ ±(N-2) possess a unique steady state and no purely imaginary Liouvillian eigenvalues.
    Asserted in SM Section II with a compressed dark-state counting argument; this is load-bearing for the claim that long-time dynamics is governed only by the single oscillatory mode pair. Not fully proven for general n and all excitation sectors.
  • domain assumption The gauge flux is exactly π per plaquette and dephasing is strictly local on outer spins with equal rate γ.
    The synchronization mechanism relies on perfect destructive interference at π flux; robustness to perturbations is only treated perturbatively and qualitatively.
  • standard math Non-Hermitian perturbation theory for a purely imaginary Liouvillian eigenvalue: first-order correction is purely imaginary, second-order yields a negative real part.
    Used in SM Section IV for the disorder analysis; the derivation is standard but relies on the non-degeneracy of the eigenvalue and the absence of other imaginary eigenvalues.
  • ad hoc to paper For coupled motifs, collective dissipation Lν = √κ Σ σ^z_αν plus inter-motif couplings leads to complete synchronization across motifs; the behavior generalizes to arbitrary C_n motifs and arbitrary networks.
    Only demonstrated numerically for three coupled C_3 motifs (Fig. 3); the generalization to arbitrary networks is an extrapolation without proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Synchronized Aharonov-Bohm Motifs via Engineered Dissipation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6WPL3OFV

@misc{pith2026251119219,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Synchronized Aharonov-Bohm Motifs via Engineered Dissipation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6WPL3OFV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.19219}
}
read the original abstract

The interplay between external gauge fields and lattice geometry can induce extreme localization dynamics through complete destructive interference. We show that combining this flux-induced localization with engineered dissipation leads to robust spin synchronization in rotationally symmetric spin geometries, referred to as Aharonov-Bohm motifs, with cyclic symmetries of any order. The synchronized dynamics is independent of initial conditions and features entanglement among spins within each motif. We further demonstrate that multiple motifs can fully synchronize when coupled, which is achieved by applying additional collective dissipation acting on all intra-motif spins. These results reveal a direct connection between flux-induced localization, dissipative engineering, and collective quantum synchronization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.19219 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Synchronized dynamics in spin motifs of different cyclic order [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Concurrence as a measure of entanglement during [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) Schematic representation of three coupled [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Schematic representation of three coupled [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    von Klitzing, The quantized Hall effect, Rev

    K. von Klitzing, The quantized Hall effect, Rev. Mod. Phys.58, 519 (1986)

    1986

  2. [2]

    D. C. Tsui, H. L. Stormer, and A. C. Gossard, Two- Dimensional Magnetotransport in the Extreme Quantum Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.48, 1559 (1982)

    1982

  3. [3]

    Yoshioka,The Quantum Hall Effect, edited by M

    D. Yoshioka,The Quantum Hall Effect, edited by M. Car- dona, P. Fulde, K. Von Klitzing, H.-J. Queisser, R. Mer- lin, and H. St¨ ormer, Springer Series in Solid-State Sci- ences, Vol. 133 (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2002)

    2002

  4. [4]

    Y.-J. Lin, R. L. Compton, K. Jim´ enez-Garc ´ ıa, J. V. Porto, and I. B. Spielman, Synthetic magnetic fields for ultracold neutral atoms, Nature462, 628 (2009)

    2009

  5. [5]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Realization of the Hofstadter Hamiltonian with Ultracold Atoms in Optical Lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Atala, M

    M. Atala, M. Aidelsburger, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Observation of chiral currents with ultracold atoms in bosonic ladders, Nature Phys10, 588 (2014)

    2014

  7. [7]

    F. A. An, E. J. Meier, and B. Gadway, Direct observation of chiral currents and magnetic reflection in atomic flux lattices, Sci. Adv.3, e1602685 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Roushan, C

    P. Roushan, C. Neill, A. Megrant, Y. Chen, R. Bab- bush, R. Barends, B. Campbell, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, A. Fowler, E. Jeffrey, J. Kelly, E. Lucero, J. Mutus, P. J. J. O’Malley, M. Neeley, C. Quintana, D. Sank, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, T. White, E. Kapit, H. Neven, and J. Martinis, Chiral ground-state currents of interacting photons in a synt...

    2017

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Neill, T

    C. Neill, T. McCourt, X. Mi, Z. Jiang, M. Y. Niu, W. Mruczkiewicz, I. Aleiner, F. Arute, K. Arya, J. Ata- laya, R. Babbush, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, A. Bengts- son, A. Bourassa, M. Broughton, B. B. Buckley, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, N. Bushnell, J. Campero, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro,...

    2021

  2. [10]

    Shapira, T

    Y. Shapira, T. Manovitz, N. Akerman, A. Stern, and R. Ozeri, Quantum Simulations of Interacting Systems with Broken Time-Reversal Symmetry, Phys. Rev. X13, 6 021021 (2023)

    2023

  3. [11]

    Wang, Y.-K

    Y. Wang, Y.-K. Wu, Y. Jiang, M.-L. Cai, B.-W. Li, Q.- X. Mei, B.-X. Qi, Z.-C. Zhou, and L.-M. Duan, Realizing Synthetic Dimensions and Artificial Magnetic Flux in a Trapped-Ion Quantum Simulator, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 130601 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    Vidal, R

    J. Vidal, R. Mosseri, and B. Dou¸ cot, Aharonov-Bohm Cages in Two-Dimensional Structures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5888 (1998)

    1998

  5. [13]

    Vidal, B

    J. Vidal, B. Dou¸ cot, R. Mosseri, and P. Butaud, Interac- tion Induced Delocalization for Two Particles in a Peri- odic Potential, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 3906 (2000)

    2000

  6. [14]

    C. E. Creffield and G. Platero, Coherent Control of Inter- acting Particles Using Dynamical and Aharonov-Bohm Phases, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 086804 (2010)

    2010

  7. [15]

    Mukherjee and R

    S. Mukherjee and R. R. Thomson, Observation of local- ized flat-band modes in a quasi-one-dimensional photonic rhombic lattice, Opt. Lett., OL40, 5443 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Creutz, End States, Ladder Compounds, and Domain-Wall Fermions, Phys

    M. Creutz, End States, Ladder Compounds, and Domain-Wall Fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 2636 (1999)

    1999

  9. [17]

    Zurita, C

    J. Zurita, C. E. Creffield, and G. Platero, Topology and Interactions in the Photonic Creutz and Creutz-Hubbard Ladders, Advanced Quantum Technologies3, 1900105 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    C. C. Abilio, P. Butaud, Th. Fournier, B. Pannetier, J. Vidal, S. Tedesco, and B. Dalzotto, Magnetic Field Induced Localization in a Two-Dimensional Supercon- ducting Wire Network, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 5102 (1999)

    1999

  11. [19]

    C. Naud, G. Faini, and D. Mailly, Aharonov-Bohm Cages in 2D Normal Metal Networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 5104 (2001)

    2001

  12. [20]

    Mukherjee, M

    S. Mukherjee, M. Di Liberto, P. ¨Ohberg, R. R. Thom- son, and N. Goldman, Experimental Observation of Aharonov-Bohm Cages in Photonic Lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 075502 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Kremer, I

    M. Kremer, I. Petrides, E. Meyer, M. Heinrich, O. Zil- berberg, and A. Szameit, A square-root topological insu- lator with non-quantized indices realized with photonic Aharonov-Bohm cages, Nat Commun11, 907 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    H. Li, Z. Dong, S. Longhi, Q. Liang, D. Xie, and B. Yan, Aharonov-Bohm Caging and Inverse Anderson Transi- tion in Ultracold Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 220403 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    T. Chen, C. Huang, I. Velkovsky, T. Ozawa, H. Price, J. P. Covey, and B. Gadway, Interaction-driven break- down of Aharonov–Bohm caging in flat-band Rydberg lattices, Nat. Phys.21, 221 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    Zhang, W

    J. Zhang, W. Huang, J. Chu, J. Qiu, X. Sun, Z. Tao, J. Zhang, L. Zhang, Y. Zhou, Y. Chen, Y. Liu, S. Liu, Y. Zhong, J.-J. Miao, J. Niu, and D. Yu, Synthetic Mul- tidimensional Aharonov-Bohm Cages in Fock State Lat- tices, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 070601 (2025)

    2025

  17. [25]

    P. M. Harrington, E. J. Mueller, and K. W. Murch, Engi- neered dissipation for quantum information science, Nat Rev Phys4, 660 (2022)

    2022

  18. [26]

    Verstraete, M

    F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. Ignacio Cirac, Quan- tum computation and quantum-state engineering driven by dissipation, Nature Phys5, 633 (2009)

    2009

  19. [27]

    Diehl, E

    S. Diehl, E. Rico, M. A. Baranov, and P. Zoller, Topology by dissipation in atomic quantum wires, Nature Phys7, 971 (2011)

    2011

  20. [28]

    Diehl, A

    S. Diehl, A. Micheli, A. Kantian, B. Kraus, H. P. B¨ uchler, and P. Zoller, Quantum states and phases in driven open quantum systems with cold atoms, Nature Phys4, 878 (2008)

    2008

  21. [29]

    Carollo, E

    F. Carollo, E. Gillman, H. Weimer, and I. Lesanovsky, Critical Behavior of the Quantum Contact Process in One Dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 100604 (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    Marcuzzi, M

    M. Marcuzzi, M. Buchhold, S. Diehl, and I. Lesanovsky, Absorbing State Phase Transition with Competing Quantum and Classical Fluctuations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 245701 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Gillman, F

    E. Gillman, F. Carollo, and I. Lesanovsky, Nonequilib- rium Phase Transitions in ($1+1$)-Dimensional Quan- tum Cellular Automata with Controllable Quantum Cor- relations, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 100403 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    Lesanovsky, K

    I. Lesanovsky, K. Macieszczak, and J. P. Garrahan, Non- equilibrium absorbing state phase transitions in discrete- time quantum cellular automaton dynamics on spin lat- tices, Quantum Sci. Technol.4, 02LT02 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    Chertkov, Z

    E. Chertkov, Z. Cheng, A. C. Potter, S. Gopalakrishnan, T. M. Gatterman, J. A. Gerber, K. Gilmore, D. Gresh, A. Hall, A. Hankin, M. Matheny, T. Mengle, D. Hayes, B. Neyenhuis, R. Stutz, and M. Foss-Feig, Character- izing a non-equilibrium phase transition on a quantum computer...

    2023

  26. [34]

    T. E. Lee and H. R. Sadeghpour, Quantum synchroniza- tion of quantum van der Pol oscillators with trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 234101 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Walter, A

    S. Walter, A. Nunnenkamp, and C. Bruder, Quan- tum synchronization of a driven self-sustained oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 094102 (2014)

    2014

  28. [36]

    Walter, A

    S. Walter, A. Nunnenkamp, and C. Bruder, Quantum synchronization of two van der Pol oscillators, Ann. Phys. 527, 131 (2015)

    2015

  29. [37]

    Dutta and N

    S. Dutta and N. R. Cooper, Critical response of a quan- tum van der Pol oscillator, Physical Review Letters123, 250401 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Thomas and M

    N. Thomas and M. Senthilvelan, Quantum synchroniza- tion in quadratically coupled quantum van der Pol oscil- lators, Phys. Rev. A106, 012422 (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    Es’ haqi-Sani, G

    N. Es’ haqi-Sani, G. Manzano, R. Zambrini, and R. Fazio, Synchronization along quantum trajectories, Phys. Rev. Research2, 023101 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    Delmonte, A

    A. Delmonte, A. Romito, G. E. Santoro, and R. Fazio, Quantum effects on the synchronization dynamics of the Kuramoto model, Phys. Rev. A108, 032219 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Y. Shen, H. Y. Soh, W. Fan, and L.-C. Kwek, Enhancing quantum synchronization through homodyne measure- ment and squeezing, arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13465 (2023), arXiv:2302.13465

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    M. Xu, D. A. Tieri, E. C. Fine, J. K. Thompson, and M. J. Holland, Synchronization of Two Ensembles of Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 154101 (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    C. W. W¨ achtler and G. Platero, Topological synchroniza- tion of quantum van der Pol oscillators, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023021 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Y. J. Zhao, J. E. Moore, J. Thingna, and C. W. W¨ achtler, Quantum Synchronization of Perturbed Oscillating Co- herences (2025), arXiv:2510.11601 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  37. [45]

    A. W. Laskar, P. Adhikary, S. Mondal, P. Katiyar, S. Vin- janampathy, and S. Ghosh, Observation of Quantum Phase Synchronization in Spin-1 Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 013601 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    Koppenh¨ ofer, C

    M. Koppenh¨ ofer, C. Bruder, and A. Roulet, Quantum synchronization on the IBM Q system, Phys. Rev. Re- search2, 023026 (2020). 7

    2020

  39. [47]

    Y. Li, Z. Xie, X. Yang, Y. Li, X. Zhao, X. Cheng, X. Peng, J. Li, E. Lutz, Y. Lin, and J. Du, Experimental realization and synchronization of a quantum van der Pol oscillator (2025), arXiv:2504.00751 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Z. Tao, F. Schmolke, C.-K. Hu, W. Huang, Y. Zhou, J. Zhang, J. Chu, L. Zhang, X. Sun, Z. Guo, J. Niu, W. Weng, S. Liu, Y. Zhong, D. Tan, D. Yu, and E. Lutz, Noise-induced quantum synchronization with entangled oscillations, Nat Commun16, 8457 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    J. Liu, Q. Wu, J. E. Moore, H. Haeffner, and C. W. W¨ achtler, Observation of synchronization between two quantum van der Pol oscillators in trapped ions (2025), arXiv:2509.18423 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    T. E. Lee, C.-K. Chan, and S. Wang, Entanglement tongue and quantum synchronization of disordered os- cillators, Phys. Rev. E89, 022913 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    Roulet and C

    A. Roulet and C. Bruder, Quantum synchronization and entanglement generation, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 063601 (2018)

    2018

  44. [52]

    Schmolke and E

    F. Schmolke and E. Lutz, Noise-induced quantum synchronization, Physical Review Letters129, 250601 (2022)

    2022

  45. [53]

    G. L. Giorgi, F. Galve, G. Manzano, P. Colet, and R. Zambrini, Quantum correlations and mutual synchro- nization, Phys. Rev. A85, 052101 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    L¨ orch, S

    N. L¨ orch, S. E. Nigg, A. Nunnenkamp, R. P. Tiwari, and C. Bruder, Quantum synchronization blockade: Energy quantization hinders synchronization of identical oscilla- tors, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 243602 (2017)

    2017

  47. [55]

    Kehrer, T

    T. Kehrer, T. Nadolny, and C. Bruder, Quantum syn- chronization through the interference blockade, Phys. Rev. A110, 042203 (2024)

    2024

  48. [56]

    Buˇ ca, C

    B. Buˇ ca, C. Booker, and D. Jaksch, Algebraic theory of quantum synchronization and limit cycles under dissipa- tion, SciPost Phys.12, 097 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    Tindall, C

    J. Tindall, C. S´ anchez Mu˜ noz, B. Buˇ ca, and D. Jaksch, Quantum synchronisation enabled by dynamical symme- tries and dissipation, New J. Phys.22, 013026 (2020)

    2020

  50. [58]

    C. W. W¨ achtler and J. E. Moore, Topological quantum synchronization of fractionalized spins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 196601 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    Zurita, C

    J. Zurita, C. Creffield, and G. Platero, Tunable zero modes and quantum interferences in flat-band topolog- ical insulators, Quantum5, 591 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    Zurita, C

    J. Zurita, C. E. Creffield, and G. Platero, Hidden topol- ogy in flat-band topological insulators: Strong, weak, and square-root topological states, Phys. Rev. B111, 155406 (2025)

    2025

  53. [61]

    W. Feng, D. Shao, G.-Q. Zhang, Q.-P. Su, J.-X. Zhang, and C.-P. Yang, Quantum simulation of Hofstadter but- terfly with synthetic gauge fields on two-dimensional superconducting-qubit lattices, Front. Phys.18, 61302 (2023)

    2023

  54. [62]

    X. Li, Y. Ma, J. Han, T. Chen, Y. Xu, W. Cai, H. Wang, Y. Song, Z.-Y. Xue, Z.-q. Yin, and L. Sun, Perfect Quan- tum State Transfer in a Superconducting Qubit Chain with Parametrically Tunable Couplings, Phys. Rev. Ap- plied10, 054009 (2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    Manovitz, Y

    T. Manovitz, Y. Shapira, N. Akerman, A. Stern, and R. Ozeri, Quantum Simulations with Complex Geome- tries and Synthetic Gauge Fields in a Trapped Ion Chain, PRX Quantum1, 020303 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Cattaneo, M

    M. Cattaneo, M. A. Rossi, G. Garc ´ ıa-P´ erez, R. Zambrini, and S. Maniscalco, Quantum Simulation of Dissipative Collective Effects on Noisy Quantum Computers, PRX Quantum4, 010324 (2023)

    2023

  57. [65]

    See Supplemental Material [url] for (I) the spectral de- composition of the Liouvillian superoperator, (II) the proof of the synchronization condition, (III) the analytic expression of the local spin magnetization, and (IV) the Liouvillian perturbation theory; includes Ref. [69]

  58. [66]

    Buˇ ca, J

    B. Buˇ ca, J. Tindall, and D. Jaksch, Non-stationary coher- ent quantum many-body dynamics through dissipation, Nature Communications10, 1730 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    J. Dias, C. W. W¨ achtler, K. Nemoto, and W. J. Munro, Entanglement generation between distant spins via quasilocal reservoir engineering, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 043295 (2023)

    2023

  60. [68]

    W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of Formation of an Ar- bitrary State of Two Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 2245 (1998)

    1998

  61. [69]

    M.-J. Zhao, T. Ma, Z. Wang, S.-M. Fei, and R. Pereira, Coherence concurrence for X states, Quantum Inf Process 19, 104 (2020). END MA TTER Appendix A: Strong dynamical symmetries and syn- chronization of local observables.—Quantum synchro- nization, as discussed in the main te...

    2020

Pith tools

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