Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 56 references

High-performance neuromorphic computing architecture of brain

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims the brain stores about $7.48\times10^{18}$ bytes and runs $6.24\times10^{18}$ FLOPS by treating neuron clusters as 'neural spheres' with strange-attractor activity, placing the 20-watt brain at 79% of the Landauer limit.

desk verdict Abstract's exascale brain numbers fail a Landauer arithmetic check on their face, and the supplied full text is a different paper; no verdict is possible yet. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.03191 v1 pith:DVMIKTAV submitted 2025-08-05 physics.bio-ph q-bio.NC

Jinxuan Ma , Wanlin Guo This is my paper
classification physics.bio-phq-bio.NC
keywords neuralsphereneuromorphiccomputingbrainstoragecapacitycomputationalpowerLandauer'sprinciplestrangeattractorschaosdynamicsfractaltheory
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

The paper tries to establish that the human brain's 20-watt efficiency can be explained by a fundamental information unit it calls a neural sphere: a cluster of neurons whose electrophysiological activity wanders over strange attractors. Chaos dynamics and fractal theory are invoked to argue that each distinct attractor state is a memory and a computational event. Counting these states across the brain yields a predicted storage capacity of $7.48\times10^{18}$ bytes and a computational power of $6.24\times10^{18}$ FLOPS. Applying Landauer's principle to that count at 20 watts gives an energy efficiency of up to 79%, about eight orders of magnitude above current computer chips. If true, the brain is not just an energy-efficient computer; it is close to the thermodynamic floor for information processing.

What carries the argument

The central object is the neural sphere, a spatial agglomeration of neurons treated as the brain's fundamental information-processing unit. The mathematical machinery is chaos and fractal theory: the sphere's electrophysiological activities are modeled as trajectories on strange attractors, the folded and never-exactly-repeating trajectories of chaotic dynamics, with different attractors or attractor regions encoding different stored memories and operations. A counting procedure over sphere-level attractor states produces the global storage and FLOPS estimates. The thermodynamic connector is Landauer's principle, the $k_B T \ln 2$ minimum energy cost of erasing one bit of information, which turns the 20-watt brain power and the counted operations into the 79% efficiency figure.

What would settle it

Measure the number of reliably distinguishable activity patterns in a known volume of brain tissue and the energy cost of switching between them; if the measured per-switch energy vastly exceeds the tiny physical minimum cost per bit, or the number of patterns per volume falls short of the model's, then the predicted 7.5-exabyte capacity and 79% efficiency are wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the brain's information strategy is organized around neural spheres, spatial agglomerations of neurons that exhibit ultra-long-period or random electrophysiological activity. Using chaos dynamics and fractal theory, the authors argue that these activity patterns are governed by strange attractors, so different attractor trajectories constitute different memories and operations. From this they construct a neuromorphic computing architecture for the brain and predict whole-brain figures: storage of $7.48\times10^{18}$ bytes and computation of $6.24\times10^{18}$ FLOPS. At that capacity, Landauer's principle converts the brain's roughly 20-watt power draw into an energy efficiency as high as 79%, which the paper presents as eight orders of magnitude better than the latest computer chips and as evidence that the proposed architecture is physically reasonable.

Load-bearing premise

The claim depends on counting each distinct activity pattern of a neuron cluster as one stored piece of information and one operation, and on assuming that the physical minimum energy cost of forgetting a bit applies to every one of those operations; if either assumption fails, the headline capacity, speed, and efficiency numbers do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the estimates hold, the human brain stores roughly $7.5\times10^{18}$ bytes and processes at $6.2\times10^{18}$ FLOPS, giving concrete capacity and throughput numbers for the brain's information machinery.
  • Operating at up to 79% of the Landauer limit would mean the brain is close to the minimum energy per bit operation, so its 20-watt power budget is nearly thermodynamically optimal.
  • The claimed eight-order-of-magnitude energy-efficiency gap over computer chips would make the brain the strongest known evidence that near-optimal information processing is physically realizable.
  • The stated architecture ties memory and computation to the same attractor-state repertoire, so the same neural-sphere states that store information also perform operations, merging storage and processing in one unit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable consequence the paper does not spell out: if each neural sphere is an attractor-based memory unit, then experimental counts of distinguishable activity patterns in a cortical column (for example from high-density electrophysiology) should match the state counts assumed by the construction; a large discrepancy would rescale the 7.5-exabyte number.
  • The paper's one-state-to-one-bit, one-state-to-one-operation mapping is an editorial hazard: a single attractor could encode multiple memories through trajectory detail, or one operation could require many attractor transitions, either of which would change both headline figures even if neural spheres exist.
  • The body text supplied with this entry is a different manuscript (a driven superconducting-qubit experiment), so the derivation behind the abstract's numbers is not present here; the extraction above therefore relies on the abstract alone.
  • If the 79% figure is right, inverting it yields a bound on how many attractor operations the brain can perform per second at 20 watts; comparing that implied rate with observed spike and oscillation timescales would be a quick consistency check.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript, based on its abstract, proposes a 'neural sphere' as the fundamental information processing unit of the brain, claims that chaos and fractal dynamics provide the mathematical principle by which these spheres memorize and compute, and derives headline numbers: a human-brain storage capacity of 7.48×10^18 bytes, a computational power of 6.24×10^18 FLOPS, and an energy efficiency of 79% relative to Landauer's principle at 20 W. However, the full text supplied for review is arXiv:2508.03188, a superconducting qubit-resonator paper, not this manuscript. Consequently, the derivation of the central quantitative claims cannot be audited from the provided material.

Significance. If the claims were substantiated, they would represent a dramatic revision of estimates for brain storage and compute, and a near-Landauer-limit efficiency would be a striking result. However, the reviewable material contains no derivation, no anatomical measurement, no error bars, and no reproducibility artifacts. The central numbers appear to exceed common published estimates by orders of magnitude, and the Landauer-efficiency arithmetic is not internally consistent. Because the substantive contribution rests entirely on unverifiable quantitative claims, the significance cannot currently be assessed.

major comments (4)
  1. [Full text / Abstract] The supplied full text is arXiv:2508.03188, a paper on a strongly driven superconducting qubit-resonator system, not the claimed manuscript arXiv:2508.03191 on neuromorphic architecture. The abstract's numbers—7.48×10^18 bytes, 6.24×10^18 FLOPS, and 79% Landauer efficiency—therefore have no derivable path in the reviewable text. This is load-bearing: the central claims cannot be checked.
  2. [Abstract, Landauer efficiency claim] The 79% efficiency claim is arithmetically inconsistent as stated. At 310 K, kT ln 2 ≈ 2.97×10^-21 J per bit erased. At 20 W, 79% efficiency corresponds to about 5.32×10^21 bit-erasure equivalents per second, which is roughly 853 erasures per claimed FLOP (6.24×10^18 FLOPS). The claimed storage of 5.98×10^19 bits implies only about 9.6 bits per operation. To reach 79%, the manuscript must introduce an unstated multiplier of order 10^2 erasures per FLOP or about 90 writes/erases per stored bit per second. No such derivation appears.
  3. [Abstract, neural sphere definition and mapping] The abstract does not define what a neural sphere is, how neurons agglomerate into such spheres, or how the repertoire of electrophysiological activities maps one-to-one to stored bits and to computational operations. The headline storage and FLOPS numbers depend entirely on this mapping, and none of the needed definitions or counting rules are present in the reviewable text.
  4. [Abstract, '8-order higher' comparison] The claim that the proposed architecture is '8-order higher than the latest computer chips' is unsupported: no reference chip, no measured or cited efficiency, and no comparison methodology are given. Without a baseline, the factor cannot be evaluated.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'ultra-long period or random electrophysiological activities' is vague and not defined; no timescales or statistical characterizations are provided.
  2. [Abstract] The sentence stating that 'Chaos dynamics and fractal theory demonstrated the mathematical principle' is grammatically unclear and does not identify a specific theorem, equation, or falsifiable prediction.
  3. [Abstract] The three-significant-digit figures for storage and compute are presented without uncertainty estimates, derivation, or anatomical input parameters, which is unusual for a quantitative prediction of this magnitude.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No demonstrable circularity from the available text; the supplied full text is a different paper, so the claimed exascale predictions cannot be audited but no circular reduction can be exhibited.

full rationale

The abstract claims that neural spheres memorize and process through electrophysiological activities determined by strange attractors, and that the resulting architecture predicts 7.48e18 Bytes and 6.24e18 FLOPS with an energy efficiency up to 79% via Landauer's principle. However, the supplied full text is arXiv:2508.03188, a superconducting qubit-resonator paper by Ivakhnenko et al., not the cited brain-architecture manuscript by Ma and Guo. Under the requirement to exhibit a specific reduction (Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction, or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction), no such reduction can be shown from the abstract alone. The closest structural concern is that if the number of attractor states were defined as the number of electrophysiological activities, then the storage capacity would be a count of the defined repertoire rather than an independent prediction; but the abstract supplies no definition or equation establishing that identity, so this remains a possibility rather than a demonstrated circular step. Likewise, the 79% Landauer efficiency depends on an unstated bit-erasure-per-FLOP multiplier, but that is a dimensional/derivation gap, not a circularity. No self-citation, fitted-input-as-prediction, or imported-uniqueness pattern is present in the available text. The honest finding is therefore no circularity score, with the caveat that the missing/mismatched full text makes the derivation unauditable.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The abstract, the only usable content for this submission, rests on a new anatomical-computational unit (the neural sphere), on a claimed correspondence between strange attractors and stored information, and on an application of Landauer's principle at per-operation granularity. The measurable predictions in the abstract, the exabyte capacity, exaFLOPS compute, and 79% efficiency, depend on unspecified per-unit factors and energy assignments. The ledger items above are therefore the minimal set of postulates needed for the headline claims.

free parameters (2)
  • per-neural-sphere storage capacity and per-sphere compute (implicit)
    The headline totals, 7.48e18 bytes and 6.24e18 FLOPS, must equal a per-sphere factor times a brain-wide sphere count. Neither factor is given in the abstract, so the totals cannot be audited or reproduced.
  • effective operation temperature and bits-per-operation used in the Landauer efficiency estimate
    The 79% efficiency claim requires a per-operation energy assignment. At body or room temperature, the Landauer cost is about 3e-21 J per bit, which would make 6.24e18 operations cost roughly 0.02 W against a 20 W budget, far from 79%. Some other per-operation cost, not stated in the abstract, must be assumed.
assumptions (3)
  • ad hoc to paper Neural spheres exist as a distinct anatomical and functional unit of the brain.
    The abstract asserts that the neural sphere is 'the fundamental information strategy unit of brain' without presenting independent anatomical or physiological evidence.
  • domain assumption Strange-attractor dynamics in neural spheres encode information, so that different attractors correspond to different stored items or operations.
    The abstract states that the mathematical principle of memory and processing 'depend[s] on strange attractors'; the one-to-one mapping between attractor states and bits or operations is postulated.
  • domain assumption Landauer's principle applies to brain computation at the per-operation granularity used for the 79% efficiency claim.
    The efficiency figure only means something if each counted operation carries a definite minimum energy; the abstract does not justify this mapping.
invented entities (1)
  • Neural sphere
    purpose: Postulated fundamental information unit of the brain, claimed to agglomerate neurons into spheres and to enable energy-efficient storage and processing via chaotic activity.
    No falsifiable handle is given in the abstract, such as a predicted sphere size, neuron count per sphere, or a distinct electrophysiological signature that could be measured independently of the model.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of High-performance neuromorphic computing architecture of brain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DVMIKTAV

@misc{pith2026250803191,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: High-performance neuromorphic computing architecture of brain},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DVMIKTAV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.03191}
}
abstract

Artificial intelligence can outperform humans in specific tasks but consumes substantial energy. How the human brain can work at just 20 watts with complex cognitive intelligence? Here we decode the fundamental information strategy unit of brain, neural sphere, which agglomerates neurons into sphere to achieve energy-efficient and exhibits many ultra-long period or random electrophysiological activities. Chaos dynamics and fractal theory demonstrated the mathematical principle of neural spheres to memorize and process through different electrophysiological activities which depend on strange attractors. A high-performance neuromorphic computing architecture of brain was then constructed which predicts a storage capacity of $7.48\times 10^{18}$ Bytes and a computational power of $6.24\times 10^{18}$ FLOPS for human brain. At this capacity, the energy efficiency of the human brain after long-term evolution can be up to 79% via Landauer's principle, 8-order higher than that of the latest computer chips, supporting the rationality of the proposed architecture.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Dissipative environment We use the Lindblad equation with initial Hamiltonian (5a) to which we add relaxation and dephasing for the qubit and relaxation for photon states in the resonator LD 1 = σ− p Γ1, (A1a) LD 2 = σz p Γ2, (A1b) LD 3 = a√κ, (A1c) where Γ1,2 are the relaxation and dephasing rates, and κ is the photon decay rate in resonator

    work page

  2. [2]

    Instant eigenstate basis To solve the Lindblad equation (A3) in the adiabatic (instantaneous eigenstate) basis, we need to transfer our Hamiltonian from the diabatic basis to the adiabatic (in- stant eigenstate) basis [48]. For this we use the static transfer matrix between bases S = S† = γ+ γ− γ− −γ+ , (A2a) H ′ Q = SHS † = ℏ ωQ 2 σz = 1 2 ωQ 0 0 −ωQ , (...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Rotating wave approximation, dressed Hamiltonian Here we describe a procedure of dressing the Hamil- tonian. The dressing technique is convenient to describe systems with two driving signals with significantly differ- ent frequencies, like the ones studied here, with probing and driving signals, and it helps to eliminate the fast- rotating terms, which ca...

    work page

  4. [4]

    6 and the qubit upper-level occupation probability in Fig

    Impact of the coupling strength We show how the value of the coupling strength im- pacts the theoretical interferometry for the transmission coefficient in Fig. 6 and the qubit upper-level occupation probability in Fig. 7. As we expected, with growing cou- pling strength, the distortion of the resonances becomes stronger and spreads to higher driving ampl...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Xiang, S

    Z.-L. Xiang, S. Ashhab, J. Q. You, and F. Nori, Hybrid quantum circuits: Superconducting circuits interacting with other quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 623 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    X. Gu, A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y.-x. Liu, and F. Nori, Microwave photonics with superconducting quantum circuits, Phys. Rep. 718–719, 1 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gus- tavsson, and W. D. Oliver, A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021318 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    Kjaergaard, M

    M. Kjaergaard, M. E. Schwartz, J. Braum¨ uller, P. Krantz, J. I.-J. Wang, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Superconducting qubits: Current state of play, Annu. Rev. Conden. Matt. Phys. 11, 369 (2020)

    work page 2020

Show all 56 references
  1. [9]

    A. A. Clerk, K. W. Lehnert, P. Bertet, J. R. Petta, and Y. Nakamura, Hybrid quantum systems with circuit quantum electrodynamics, Nat. Phys. 16, 257 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Carusotto, A

    I. Carusotto, A. A. Houck, A. J. Koll´ ar, P. Roushan, D. I. Schuster, and J. Simon, Photonic materials in circuit quantum electrodynamics, Nat. Phys. 16, 268 (2020)

    2020

  3. [11]

    Blais, A

    A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025005 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    M. V. Gustafsson, T. Aref, A. F. Kockum, M. K. Ekstr¨ om, G. Johansson, and P. Delsing, Propagating phonons coupled to an artificial atom, Science 346, 207 (2014)

    2014

  5. [13]

    W. D. Oliver, Y. Yu, J. C. Lee, K. K. Berggren, L. S. Levitov, and T. P. Orlando, Mach-Zehnder interferome- try in a strongly driven superconducting qubit, Science 310, 1653 (2005)

    2005

  6. [14]

    W. D. Oliver and S. O. Valenzuela, Large-amplitude driv- ing of a superconducting artificial atom: Interferometry, cooling, and amplitude spectroscopy, Quantum Inf. Pro- cess. 8, 261 (2009)

    2009

  7. [15]

    P. Wen, A. Kockum, H. Ian, J. Chen, F. Nori, and I.-C. Hoi, Reflective amplification without population inver- sion from a strongly driven superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 063603 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    Ashhab and F

    S. Ashhab and F. Nori, Qubit-oscillator systems in the ultrastrong-coupling regime and their potential for preparing nonclassical states, Phys. Rev. A 81, 042311 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Hu, Y.-x

    X. Hu, Y.-x. Liu, and F. Nori, Strong coupling of a spin qubit to a superconducting stripline cavity, Phys. Rev. B 11 86, 035314 (2012)

    2012

  10. [18]

    Flick, N

    J. Flick, N. Rivera, and P. Narang, Strong light-matter coupling in quantum chemistry and quantum photonics, Nanophotonics 7, 1479 (2018)

    2018

  11. [19]

    D. S. Dovzhenko, S. V. Ryabchuk, Y. P. Rakovich, and I. R. Nabiev, Light–matter interaction in the strong cou- pling regime: configurations, conditions, and applica- tions, Nanoscale 10, 3589 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Frisk Kockum, A

    A. Frisk Kockum, A. Miranowicz, S. De Liberato, S. Savasta, and F. Nori, Ultrastrong coupling between light and matter, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 19 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Forn-D ´ ıaz, L

    P. Forn-D ´ ıaz, L. Lamata, E. Rico, J. Kono, and E. Solano, Ultrastrong coupling regimes of light-matter interaction, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025005 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Mercurio, V

    A. Mercurio, V. Macr ` ı, C. Gustin, S. Hughes, S. Savasta, and F. Nori, Regimes of cavity QED under incoherent excitation: From weak to deep strong coupling, Phys. Rev. Research 4, 023048 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Bj¨ orkman, M

    I. Bj¨ orkman, M. Kuzmanovi´ c, and G. S. Paraoanu, Ob- servation of the two-photon Landau-Zener-St¨ uckelberg- Majorana effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 060602 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    S.-S. Gu, S. Kohler, Y.-Q. Xu, R. Wu, S.-L. Jiang, S.- K. Ye, T. Lin, B.-C. Wang, H.-O. Li, G. Cao, and G.-P. Guo, Probing two driven double quantum dots strongly coupled to a cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 233602 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Sillanp¨ a¨ a, T

    M. Sillanp¨ a¨ a, T. Lehtinen, A. Paila, Y. Makhlin, and P. Hakonen, Continuous-time monitoring of Landau- Zener interference in a Cooper-pair box, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 187002 (2006)

    2006

  18. [26]

    Ashhab, J

    S. Ashhab, J. R. Johansson, A. M. Zagoskin, and F. Nori, Two-level systems driven by large-amplitude fields, Phys. Rev. A 75, 063414 (2007)

    2007

  19. [27]

    J. Q. You, X. Hu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Low- decoherence flux qubit, Phys. Rev. B 75, 140515 (2007)

    2007

  20. [28]

    S. N. Shevchenko, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Lan- dau–Zener–St¨ uckelberg interferometry, Phys. Rep.492, 1 (2010)

    2010

  21. [29]

    S. N. Shevchenko, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Inverse Landau-Zener-St¨ uckelberg problem for qubit-resonator systems, Phys. Rev. B 85, 094502 (2012)

    2012

  22. [30]

    M. P. Silveri, J. A. Tuorila, E. V. Thuneberg, and G. S. Paraoanu, Quantum systems under frequency modula- tion, Rep. Progr. Phys. 80, 056002 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    O. V. Ivakhnenko, S. N. Shevchenko, and F. Nori, Nona- diabatic Landau–Zener–St¨ uckelberg–Majorana transi- tions, dynamics, and interference, Phys. Rep. 995, 1 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    A. I. Ryzhov, O. V. Ivakhnenko, S. N. Shevchenko, M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, and F. Nori, Alternative fast quantum logic gates using nonadiabatic Landau-Zener- St¨ uckelberg-Majorana transitions, Phys. Rev. Research 6, 033340 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    Kivel¨ a, S

    F. Kivel¨ a, S. Dogra, and G. S. Paraoanu, Quan- tum simulation of the pseudo-Hermitian Landau-Zener- St¨ uckelberg-Majorana effect, Phys. Rev. Research 6, 023246 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    S. D. Tedo, O. Feulefack, J. Danga, S. Mkam Tchouo- biap, R. Keumo Tsiaze, A. Fotue, M. Hounkonnou, and L. Fai, Harmonic driving and dynamic transitions in the Landau–Zener–St¨ uckelberg–Majorana interferom- etry induced by tunneling flux-driven symmetric trans- mon qubits, Re...

    2025

  27. [35]

    Peyruchat, F

    L. Peyruchat, F. Minganti, M. Scigliuzzo, F. Ferrari, V. Jouanny, F. Nori, V. Savona, and P. Scarlino, Lan- dau–Zener without a qubit: multiphoton sidebands in- teraction and signatures of dissipative quantum chaos, npj Quantum Information 11, 62 (2025)

    2025

  28. [36]

    S. Hu, S. Li, M. Hu, and Z. Lei, Symmetry- protected Landau-Zener-St¨ uckelberg-Majorana interfer- ence and nonadiabatic topological transport of edge states, Phys. Rev. A 111, 052414 (2025)

    2025

  29. [37]

    J. P. Pekola, P. Solinas, A. Shnirman, and D. V. Averin, Calorimetric measurement of work in a quantum system, New J. Phys. 15, 115006 (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    F. Yan, S. Gustavsson, A. Kamal, J. Birenbaum, A. P. Sears, D. Hover, T. J. Gudmundsen, D. Rosenberg, G. Samach, S. Weber, J. L. Yoder, T. P. Orlando, J. Clarke, A. J. Kerman, and W. D. Oliver, The flux qubit revisited to enhance coherence and reproducibility, Nat. Commun. 7, ...

    2016

  31. [39]

    Thomas and J

    G. Thomas and J. P. Pekola, Dynamical phase and quan- tum heat at fractional frequencies, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L022036 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Zhelnin, L

    P. Zhelnin, L. Johns, and C. A. Arg¨ uelles, Qubit thermo- dynamics: Entropy production from nonadiabatic driv- ing, ArXiv (2025), arXiv:2506.16570

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Karimi and J

    B. Karimi and J. P. Pekola, Otto refrigerator based on a superconducting qubit: Classical and quantum perfor- mance, Phys. Rev. B 94, 184503 (2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Elouard, G

    C. Elouard, G. Thomas, O. Maillet, J. P. Pekola, and A. N. Jordan, Quantifying the quantum heat contribu- tion from a driven superconducting circuit, Phys. Rev. E 102, 030102 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    K. Ono, S. Shevchenko, T. Mori, S. Moriyama, and F. Nori, Analog of a quantum heat engine using a single- spin qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 166802 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    Guthrie, C

    A. Guthrie, C. D. Satrya, Y.-C. Chang, P. Menczel, F. Nori, and J. P. Pekola, Cooper-pair box coupled to two resonators: An architecture for a quantum refriger- ator, Phys. Rev. Appl. 17, 064022 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    Uusn¨ akki, T

    T. Uusn¨ akki, T. M¨ orstedt, W. Teixeira, M. Rasola, and M. M¨ ott¨ onen, Experimental realization of a quantum heat engine based on dissipation-engineered supercon- ducting circuits (2025), arXiv:2502.20143 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Upadhyay, G

    R. Upadhyay, G. Thomas, Y.-C. Chang, D. S. Golubev, A. Guthrie, A. Gubaydullin, J. T. Peltonen, and J. P. Pekola, Robust strong-coupling architecture in circuit quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Appl. 16, 044045 (2021)

    2021

  39. [47]

    A. N. Omelyanchouk, S. N. Shevchenko, Y. S. Greenberg, O. Astafiev, and E. Il’ichev, Quantum behavior of a flux qubit coupled to a resonator, Low. Temp. Phys. 36, 893 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    Ashhab, T

    S. Ashhab, T. Fuse, F. Yoshihara, S. Kim, and K. Semba, Controlling qubit-oscillator systems using linear param- eter sweeps, New J. Phys. 25, 093011 (2023)

    2023

  41. [49]

    Johansson, P

    J. Johansson, P. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP: An open- source Python framework for the dynamics of open quan- tum systems, Comput. Phys. Commun.183, 1760 (2012)

    2012

  42. [50]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP 2: A Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 1234 (2013)

    2013

  43. [51]

    Lambert, E

    N. Lambert, E. Gigu` ere, P. Menczel, B. Li, P. Hopf, G. Su´ arez, M. Gali, J. Lishman, R. Gadhvi, R. Agarwal, A. Galicia, N. Shammah, P. Nation, J. R. Johansson, S. Ahmed, S. Cross, A. Pitchford, and F. Nori, QuTiP 5: The Quantum Toolbox in Python (2024). 12

    2024

  44. [52]

    Suzuki, H

    T. Suzuki, H. Nakazato, R. Grimaudo, and A. Messina, Analytic estimation of transition between instantaneous eigenstates of quantum two-level system, Sci. Rep. 8, 17433 (2018)

    2018

  45. [53]

    S. N. Shevchenko, G. Oelsner, Y. S. Greenberg, P. Macha, D. S. Karpov, M. Grajcar, U. H¨ ubner, A. N. Omelyan- chouk, and E. Il’ichev, Amplification and attenuation of a probe signal by doubly dressed states, Phys. Rev. B89, 184504 (2014)

    2014

  46. [54]

    P. Y. Wen, O. V. Ivakhnenko, M. A. Nakonechnyi, B. Suri, J.-J. Lin, W.-J. Lin, J. C. Chen, S. N. Shevchenko, F. Nori, and I.-C. Hoi, Landau-Zener- St¨ uckelberg-Majorana interferometry of a superconduct- ing qubit in front of a mirror, Phys. Rev. B 102, 075448 (2020)

    2020

  47. [55]

    von Horstig, L

    F.-E. von Horstig, L. Peri, S. Barraud, S. N. Shevchenko, C. J. B. Ford, and M. F. Gonzalez-Zalba, Floquet in- terferometry of a dressed semiconductor quantum dot, ArXiv , 2407.14241 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    A. M. Satanin, M. V. Denisenko, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Amplitude spectroscopy of two coupled qubits, Phys. Rev. B 85, 184524 (2012)

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.