Generalized Glauber theorem for dark-matter axion and graviton detection

Akira Miyazaki; Ayuki Kamada; Jakub Br\k{e}czewski

Generalized Glauber theorem for dark-matter axion and graviton detection

T0 review · 0 major / 5 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 For any Hamiltonian quadratic in creation and annihilation operators acting on classical sources, time evolution factors exactly into displacement, squeezing, and rotation operators.

desk verdict A careful, honest restatement of a known theorem with genuinely simpler linear parameter equations and a useful thermal-state extension; graviton application is asserted, not derived. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05082 v1 pith:IKZ35TIK submitted 2026-08-05 hep-ph gr-qchep-ex

Jakub Bręczewski , Ayuki Kamada , Akira Miyazaki This is my paper

classification hep-phgr-qchep-ex MSC 81V8081R3022E70 PACS 14.80.Va04.30.-w42.50.Dv03.65.-w

keywords generalizedGlaubertheoremdisplacementoperatorsqueezerotationaxionhaloscopethermalcoherentstategravitonproductionDysonseries

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 establishes a generalized Glauber theorem: when a Hamiltonian contains terms up to quadratic order in creation and annihilation operators, with coefficients that are ordinary complex functions of time (classical sources), the full time-evolution operator factorizes exactly into a displacement operator, a squeezing operator, and a rotation operator, up to a global phase. The paper derives simple linear differential equations for the parameters of these three operators, so the quantum dynamics reduces to solving c-number equations rather than a perturbative Dyson expansion. This matters for experiments because axion-photon conversion in microwave haloscopes emerges as the purely linear (displacement) limit, while squeezed graviton production from black-hole mergers follows from the quadratic terms. The same machinery works for initial thermal states, giving displaced thermal coherent states that describe real microwave cavities and support Monte Carlo simulation of quantum-enhanced axion searches.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the closed Lie algebra generated by $\hat{a}_i$, $\hat{a}_i^\dagger$, and the quadratic operators $\hat{J}_+$, $\hat{J}_-$, $\hat{J}_3$, together with the generalized Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff theorem. From this algebra, the unitary is written as $\hat{U}'_I(t) = \hat{D}\hat{S}\hat{P}$, and the parameter dynamics are fixed by demanding that the Heisenberg-picture operators $\hat{b}'(t) = \hat{U}'^\dagger \hat{a} \hat{U}'$ satisfy the same linear equation as the exact $\hat{b}(t)$. The resulting system $(d/dt)[\mu^*; -\nu^*] = M [\mu^*; -\nu^*]$ and $(d/dt)(\alpha; \alpha^*) = M(\alpha; \alpha^*) + (f; f^*)$, with $M = [[-ih, -g], [-g^*, ih^*]]$, is linear and solved with initial conditions $\mu(t_0)=I$, $\nu(t_0)=0$, $\alpha(t_0)=0$.

What would settle it

Compute the exact unitary time evolution for a finite set of modes by exponentiating the full quadratic Hamiltonian numerically, for a case with nonzero f, g, and h, and compare expectation values such as the mode occupancy and the pair amplitude against the factorized prediction solved through the linear equations; any mismatch beyond numerical precision would falsify the theorem. Alternatively, in an axion haloscope, measure the photon second-order correlation function across the signal line and check whether it matches the displaced-thermal-coherent prediction including the mixed thermal-quantum terms; a statistically significant deviation would indicate that the classical-source quadratic Hamiltonian is not the right description.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that for the interaction-picture Hamiltonian $$H_I(t) = i\hbar \sum_i [f_i(t)\hat{a}_i^\dagger - f_i^*(t)\hat{a}_i] + \frac{i}{2}\hbar \sum_{i,j}[g^*_{ij}(t)\hat{a}_i \hat{a}_j - g_{ij}(t)\hat{a}_i^\dagger \hat{a}_j^\dagger] + \hbar \sum_{i,j} h_{ij}(t)\hat{a}_i^\dagger \hat{a}_j$$ with $f,g,h$ c-number functions, the interaction-picture evolution operator equals $\hat{D}(\{\alpha(t)\})\hat{S}(\{\zeta(t)\})\hat{P}(\{\phi(t)\})$ up to an irrelevant phase. The proof proceeds by writing the Heisenberg equations for the transformed operators and matching them to the same linear system $(d/dt)(\hat{b},\hat{b}^\dagger)^T = M(t)(\hat{b},\hat{b}^\dagger)^T + (f,f^*)^T$, giving linear equations for the parameters. The paper recovers the original Glauber coherent state as the special case with only $f(t)$ nonzero, recovers squeezed vacuum for real diagonal $g(t)$, and shows that a naive 'integrate the exponent first' application of the Dyson series fails when time ordering matters, with deviations shown numerically.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the interaction Hamiltonian is exactly quadratic in creation and annihilation operators with no higher-order terms and with all coefficients being ordinary complex numbers (classical sources), so that a single closed algebra governs the evolution; if the source has quantum fluctuations or the Hamiltonian has cubic or higher terms, the exact factorization into displacement, squeezing, and rotation no longer holds.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Axion-photon conversion in haloscopes is exactly the f-only limit, so the emitted microwave field is a (thermal) coherent state whose displacement is set by the axion coupling.
Graviton production from a classical black-hole merger includes squeezing and mode mixing, so the produced gravitons are in a displaced squeezed state rather than a coherent state.
For thermal initial states, the expectation values factor into thermal and coherent parts, but the variance contains mixed thermal-times-quantum cross terms, so noise estimates cannot be obtained by adding the two contributions independently.
The linear differential equations for the parameters allow the full quantum state to be computed without truncating the Dyson series, so the formalism is a practical tool for the parameter regimes of realistic experiments.
A classical probability density over coherent-state amplitudes is provided, giving a direct sampling rule for Monte Carlo simulations of axion detectors.

Reading between the lines

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

If the theorem is right, the same factorization should apply to any bosonic system with classical drivings and quadratic couplings, e.g. phonons in optomechanics or magnons in cavity spintronics, wherever the source stays classical.
A testable consequence is that the second-order correlation function $g^{(2)}$ of microwave photons in an axion haloscope should interpolate between thermal statistics and coherent statistics according to the displaced-thermal formula; measuring $g^{(2)}$ at signal-on and signal-off would probe the cross terms directly.
The classical probability density found for thermal coherent states suggests that existing axion-search Monte Carlo codes could be upgraded by sampling complex amplitudes from that distribution instead of heuristic noise power estimates; the paper does not run such a simulation itself.
For black-hole merger gravitons, the formalism implies that the quantum state's squeezing parameters are computable from the classical metric perturbation alone; whether such squeezed graviton states are detectable remains open, but their statistics are now defined.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The real news in this paper is not the theorem—the generalized Glauber factorization has been in the quantum-optics literature since Schumaker and Ma/Rhodes, and the authors say so themselves. The value is in the presentation and one genuine technical improvement: the parameter evolution is reduced to the linear equations (3.19), which are substantially simpler than the nonlinear equations in the earlier references. That makes the formalism actually usable for particle-physics calculations, and the paper gives the derivations in full. Good.

The proof in Sec. 3.2 holds up. The factorization ansatz is checked by matching Heisenberg equations for the transformed operators, and uniqueness of the linear initial-value problem gives the equality up to a phase. The symplectic condition on M(t) is consistent with the constraint equations. I went through the key steps and found no circularity or hidden fitting. The thermal-state extension in Sec. 4 is also solid and practically useful: the thermal coherent state with the shifted Gaussian probability density gives a clean way to compute normal-ordered expectation values, and the point about variance mixing thermal and quantum contributions is worth making for axion-experiment simulations. The comparison with the naive Dyson computation and the demonstration that time ordering matters is pedagogically valuable, though it is not new physics.

Soft spots, in proportion: the graviton production from black-hole mergers is motivation, not a derivation. The paper does not provide the black-hole-merger Hamiltonian or show how the quadratic couplings arise; it cites recent work and says the formalism applies. Flagging that clearly would help readers. There is also a typo in Eq. (4.11)—the first δijδkl term should multiply ni nk, and the phase should be ωi + ωk − ωj − ωl. It is cosmetic and does not affect the variance discussion. The paper is long and partly a review, so readers familiar with quantum optics will skim large parts of Sec. 2. That is fine, but it explains the modest novelty score.

The citation pattern is honest: the prior quantum-optics theorems are credited, the axion and gravitational-wave experiment literature is current, and the recent papers on nonclassical axion dark matter are cited. Nothing looks self-serving.

Who should read this: particle physicists working on axion haloscopes, microwave-cavity quantum optics, or graviton detection who want the quantum-optics machinery in a language they can use directly. It is also useful for people writing Monte Carlo simulation codes for quantum-enhanced axion searches.

Yes, this deserves a serious referee. The central derivation is sound, the linear parameter equations are a real simplification, and the thermal-state treatment is a concrete contribution. I would send it to review and expect minor revisions.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper revisits the generalized Glauber theorem for Hamiltonians that are quadratic in annihilation and creation operators with c-number, time-dependent coefficients. The central result is that the interaction-picture time-evolution operator factorizes exactly into displacement, squeeze, and rotation operators, with parameters satisfying the linear ODEs in Eq. (3.19). The derivation is based on matching the Heisenberg-picture operators b(t) from the exact evolution with the operators b'(t) constructed from the factorized ansatz; uniqueness of the linear initial-value problem then identifies the two evolutions up to a phase. Special cases reproduce the Glauber displacement-only result and the parametric-amplifier squeeze-only result, and a comparison with a naive, non-time-ordered Dyson exponent illustrates the role of time ordering. The formalism is then applied to thermal initial states, yielding explicit first- and second-moment formulas and a thermal-coherent-state probability representation.

Significance. The main theorem is significant because it reduces quantum particle production from classical backgrounds to solving linear c-number equations, with no perturbative approximation. The proof in Section 3.2 is internally consistent: the symplectic condition (3.20) preserves the constraints (3.13), and the same-evolution/same-initial-condition argument gives U'_I = U_I up to a phase. The classical-source and up-to-quadratic restrictions are explicitly stated in Eq. (3.4), so the scope is not overstated; the paper does not claim validity for quantum-fluctuating sources or cubic/higher-order interactions. The thermal-state formulas in Section 4 provide a concrete and useful description of microwave-cavity axion detectors, including nontrivial fourth-order correlations. The numerical convergence check in Appendix C and the explicit special cases are additional strengths. I find no circularity in the derivation, and I agree with the reader that the stated assumptions are genuine hypotheses of the theorem rather than unacknowledged limitations.

minor comments (5)

[Section 4.1, Eq. (4.11)] In the fourth-order correlator of Eq. (4.11), the first term should read δ_ij δ_kl n_i(T) n_k(T) rather than δ_ij δ_kl n_i(T) n_j(T), and the final phase factor should be exp[i(ω_i+ω_k−ω_j−ω_l)t] rather than exp[i(ω_i+ω_k−2ω_j)t]. As written the expression is not consistent with the pairing rule (4.9); the corrected form is needed if Eq. (4.11) is used for variance calculations.
[Section 2.3, Eqs. (2.14)-(2.15)] In Eq. (2.14), the second equality for J3,ij is off by a central term: from the first expression one obtains (1/2)a†_i a_j + (1/4)δ_ij, not (1/2)(a†_i a_j + δ_ij). The commutators in Eq. (2.15) are unchanged because the central contributions cancel, but the displayed identity should be corrected. Also, in the last line of Eq. (2.15) the symbol J± should be J+ in both terms.
[Section 3.1, Eqs. (3.1)-(3.4)] When passing from Eq. (3.1) to Eq. (3.4), the term ℏ Σ_{i,j} h_ij(t) a†_i a_j in the interaction picture should carry a phase e^{i(ω_i−ω_j)t} unless h(t) has been redefined to absorb that phase. The authors should state this redefinition explicitly, since the time dependence of h(t) is part of the input to the linear ODEs (3.19).
[Section 3.2, after Eq. (3.19)] After deriving the linear equations (3.19), the proof would be fully explicit if the authors noted that any solution (μ,ν) satisfying the constraints (3.13) can be written in the form (3.12) for suitable ζ and φ, via the polar decomposition of a symplectic matrix. This standard fact is the step that closes the existence of the factorization U'_I = D S P; adding one sentence would make the argument self-contained.
[Various] There are several typographical issues: 'Analitical' in the caption of Figure 2, 'Galuber' in Section 3.1, 'reaction operators' in Section 3.2, and the left-hand side of the first line of Eq. (3.28) should be β(t) rather than β_i(t) if the sum over i is retained in that expression.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the generalized Glauber theorem parameter equations are derived by exact operator matching, with no fitted input relabeled as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an exact factorization theorem for Hamiltonians quadratic in annihilation and creation operators with c-number sources. The derivation is constructive rather than circular: it postulates U'_I(t) = D({α(t)}) S({ζ(t)}) P({ϕ(t)}), computes the transformed operators b'(t) using standard single-operator transformation formulas, derives the time derivative in Eq. (3.15), imposes equality with the target Heisenberg equations (3.8), and obtains the linear system (3.19) for µ, ν, and α with initial conditions µ(t0)=I, ν(t0)=0, α(t0)=0. Since these are linear first-order ODEs with unique solutions and the matching is an exact operator identity at all times, the factorization parameters are determined, not fitted. The axion and diagonal-squeezing special cases are derived as limits of the same equations, and the Dyson-series comparison is an independent consistency check that explicitly demonstrates the role of time ordering. The thermal-state results follow from the factorized evolution operator and are not assumed as inputs. The cited references [38,43,44] are external quantum-optics results for the existence of the factorization, not self-citations, and the paper supplies its own derivation of the parameter equations rather than importing a load-bearing conclusion from the authors' prior work. The only noted imperfections are minor typesetting errors in Eq. (4.11) and a motivational black-hole-merger discussion, neither of which affects the logical derivation. Thus no step reduces to its own inputs, and the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger is clean. The only listed free parameters are illustrative values in a numerical example, not fitted to data. The axioms are standard quantum mechanics, the finite-mode regularization, the quadratic Hamiltonian assumption, and Gaussian initial states. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

Sample coupling parameters beta_i, gamma_i, Delta_i = 0.01, 1, 100
Chosen for the illustrative numerical comparison in Section 3.4 and Figure 1. They are not fitted to any data and do not affect the central theorem; they only parameterize the example Hamiltonian (3.37).

assumptions (5)

standard math The annihilation and creation operators obey the canonical commutation relations [a_i, a_j^dagger] = delta_ij.
Stated in Eq. (2.1) and used throughout the construction of the displacement, squeeze, and rotation operators.
domain assumption The Hamiltonian is exactly quadratic in creation and annihilation operators with c-number coupling functions f(t), g(t), h(t) as in Eq. (3.1).
This is the core modeling assumption. If the sources were quantized or higher-order terms present, the factorization into displacement, squeeze, and rotation operators would fail.
domain assumption The number of modes is finite, ensured by infrared and ultraviolet cutoffs (Section 2.1).
Needed so that matrix operations on the parameters (products, inverses) are well-defined.
standard math The generalized Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff theorem holds for the closed algebra of linear and quadratic operators.
Used in Appendix A to establish the factorized forms of the operators and their transformation properties.
domain assumption Initial states considered are vacuum, coherent, or thermal states, all of which are Gaussian states.
The expectation values in Section 4 are computed for these states; non-Gaussian initial states would require additional terms.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generalized Glauber theorem for dark-matter axion and graviton detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IKZ35TIK

@misc{pith2026260805082,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generalized Glauber theorem for dark-matter axion and graviton detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IKZ35TIK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05082}
}

read the original abstract

We revisit the generalized Glauber theorem motivated by recent applications to dark-matter axion searches and graviton production. For Hamiltonian containing up to quadratic terms in annihilation and creation operators coupled to classical sources, the time-evolution operator can be factorized into displacement, squeezing, and rotation operators. We derive the differential equations governing time evolution of their parameters, reducing the quantum dynamics to c-number equations that can be solved analytically or numerically. To compare another form of the time-evolution operator, Dyson series, we demonstrate the essential role of time ordering. This formalism based on generalized Glauber theorem provides a unified description of particle production from classical backgrounds. Axion-photon conversion in microwave haloscopes is recovered as the linear-interaction limit, while squeezed graviton production from black-hole mergers follows naturally from quadratic interactions. Extending the theorem to thermal initial states yields a realistic quantum description of microwave cavities used in axion experiments. We show that higher-order photon statistics exhibit nontrivial behavior, providing a rigorous foundation for Monte Carlo simulations of quantum-enhanced axion searches beyond heuristic noise estimates.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

[4]

Y. Kim, J. Jeong, S. Youn, S. Bae, K. Lee, A.F. van Loo et al.,Experimental search for invisible dark matter axions around22µeV,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 051802

work page 2024
[5]

S. Ahn, J. Kim, B.I. Ivanov, O. Kwon, H. Byun, A.F. van Loo et al.,Extensive search for axion dark matter over 1 ghz with capp’s main axion experiment,Phys. Rev. X14(2024) 031023. – 27 –

work page 2024
[6]

Zhong, S

L. Zhong, S. Al Kenany, K.M. Backes, B.M. Brubaker, S.B. Cahn, G. Carosi et al.,Results from phase 1 of the haystac microwave cavity axion experiment,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 092001

work page 2018
[7]

Adair, K

C. Adair, K. Altenmüller, V. Anastassopoulos, S. {Arguedas Cuendis}, J. Baier, K. Barth et al.,Search for dark matter axions with cast-capp,Nature Communications13(2022)

work page 2022
[8]

Quiskamp, B.T

A. Quiskamp, B.T. McAllister, P. Altin, E.N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev and M.E. Tobar, Exclusion of axionlike-particle cogenesis dark matter in a mass window above100µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 031601. [9]ORGANcollaboration,Direct search for dark matter axions excluding ALP cogenesis in the 63- to 67-µeV range with the ORGAN experiment,Sci. Adv.8(2022) abq3...

arXiv 2024
[13]

Isi, W.M

M. Isi, W.M. Farr, M. Giesler, M.A. Scheel and S.A. Teukolsky,Testing the black-hole area law with gw150914,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 011103. [14]LIGO Scientific, Virgo, and KAGRA Collaborationscollaboration,Gw250114: Testing hawking’s area law and the kerr nature of black holes,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 111403. [15]LIGO Scientificcollaboration,A Gravitat...

arXiv 2021
[19]

Caves,Quantum limits on noise in linear amplifiers,Phys

C.M. Caves,Quantum limits on noise in linear amplifiers,Phys. Rev. D26(1982) 1817

work page 1982
[20]

Lamoreaux, K.A

S.K. Lamoreaux, K.A. van Bibber, K.W. Lehnert and G. Carosi,Analysis of single-photon and linear amplifier detectors for microwave cavity dark matter axion searches,Phys. Rev. D 88(2013) 035020

work page 2013

Show all 33 references

[21]

Paolucci, N

F. Paolucci, N. Ligato, V. Buccheri, G. Germanese, P. Virtanen and F. Giazotto, Hypersensitive tunable josephson escape sensor for gigahertz astronomy,Phys. Rev. Appl.14 (2020) 034055

2020
[22]

Lee et al.,Graphene-based Josephson junction microwave bolometer,Nature586 (2020) 42 [1909.05413]

G.-H. Lee et al.,Graphene-based Josephson junction microwave bolometer,Nature586 (2020) 42 [1909.05413]

2020 arXiv
[23]

X. Fan, G. Gabrielse, P.W. Graham, R. Harnik, T.G. Myers, H. Ramani et al.,One-electron quantum cyclotron as a milli-ev dark-photon detector,Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) 261801. – 28 –

2022
[24]

X. Fan, G. Gabrielse, P.W. Graham, H. Ramani, S.S.Y. Wong and Y. Xiao,Highly excited electron cyclotron for qcd axion and dark-photon detection,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 075022

2025
[25]

Devlin, M.L

J.A. Devlin, M.L. Wojtkowiak, S.R. Banhatti, H. Zhang, J. Shi, T.S. Dofher et al.,A penning trap single-photon counter for axion detection, 2026

2026
[26]

Braggio, L

C. Braggio, L. Balembois, R. Di Vora, Z. Wang, J. Travesedo, L. Pallegoix et al., Quantum-enhanced sensing of axion dark matter with a transmon-based single microwave photon counter,Phys. Rev. X15(2025) 021031. [27]Endorserscollaboration,Searching for dark matter with plasma h...

2025
[28]

M. Kopp, V. Fragkos and I. Pikovski,Nonclassicality of axionlike dark matter through gravitational self-interactions,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 043517

2022
[29]

Cao and D

S. Cao and D. Boyanovsky,Nonequilibrium dynamics of axionlike particles: The quantum master equation,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 063518

2023
[30]

Marsh,Measuring the quantum state of dark matter,Annalen der Physik536(2024) 2200609 [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/andp.202200609]

D.J.E. Marsh,Measuring the quantum state of dark matter,Annalen der Physik536(2024) 2200609 [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/andp.202200609]

2024 doi
[31]

Sakurai,Advanced Quantum Mechanics, Pearson (1967)

J.J. Sakurai,Advanced Quantum Mechanics, Pearson (1967)

1967
[32]

Cheong, N.L

D.Y. Cheong, N.L. Rodd and L.-T. Wang,Quantum description of wave dark matter,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 015028

2025
[33]

Ioannisian, N

A.N. Ioannisian, N. Kazarian, A.J. Millar and G.G. Raffelt,Axion-photon conversion caused by dielectric interfaces: quantum field calculation,Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics2017(2017) 005

2017
[34]

Raffelt, G

G. Raffelt, G. Sigl and L. Stodolsky,Quantum statistics in particle mixing phenomena,Phys. Rev. D45(1992) 1782

1992
[35]

Bao, D.Y

Y. Bao, D.Y. Cheong, N.L. Rodd, J. Takach, L.-T. Wang and K. Zhou,Intrinsically quantum effects of axion dark matter are undetectable, 2025

2025
[36]

Bao, D.Y

Y. Bao, D.Y. Cheong, N.L. Rodd, J. Takach, L.-T. Wang and K. Zhou,Suppressed quantum effects of weakly coupled waves, 2026

2026
[37]

Gertsenshtein,Wave resonance of light and gravitational waves,Zhurnal Eksperimental’noi i Teoreticheskoi Fiziki41(1961) 113

M.E. Gertsenshtein,Wave resonance of light and gravitational waves,Zhurnal Eksperimental’noi i Teoreticheskoi Fiziki41(1961) 113

1961
[38]

Glauber,Coherent and incoherent states of the radiation field,Phys

R.J. Glauber,Coherent and incoherent states of the radiation field,Phys. Rev.131(1963) 2766

1963
[39]

Parikh, F

M. Parikh, F. Wilczek and G. Zahariade,The Noise of Gravitons,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D29 (2020) 2042001 [2005.07211]

2020 arXiv
[40]

Kanno, J

S. Kanno, J. Soda and J. Tokuda,Noise and decoherence induced by gravitons,Phys. Rev. D 103(2021) 044017

2021
[41]

Parikh, F

M. Parikh, F. Wilczek and G. Zahariade,Quantum mechanics of gravitational waves,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 081602

2021
[42]

Kanno, J

S. Kanno, J. Soda and A. Taniguchi,Coherent state description of gravitational waves from binary black holes,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 061404

2026
[43]

Schumaker,Quantum mechanical pure states with gaussian wave functions,Phys

B.L. Schumaker,Quantum mechanical pure states with gaussian wave functions,Phys. Rept. 135(1986) 317. – 29 –

1986
[44]

Ma and W

X. Ma and W. Rhodes,Multimode squeeze operators and squeezed states,Phys. Rev. A41 (1990) 4625

1990
[45]

A. Das, M. Parikh, F. Wilczek and R. Wutte,Squeezed States in Gravity,2512.20601
[46]

Qin, K.-l

G. Qin, K.-l. Wang and T.-z. Li,General Multimode Squeezed States,quant-ph/0109020. – 30 –

arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [4]

Y. Kim, J. Jeong, S. Youn, S. Bae, K. Lee, A.F. van Loo et al.,Experimental search for invisible dark matter axions around22µeV,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 051802

work page 2024

[2] [5]

S. Ahn, J. Kim, B.I. Ivanov, O. Kwon, H. Byun, A.F. van Loo et al.,Extensive search for axion dark matter over 1 ghz with capp’s main axion experiment,Phys. Rev. X14(2024) 031023. – 27 –

work page 2024

[3] [6]

Zhong, S

L. Zhong, S. Al Kenany, K.M. Backes, B.M. Brubaker, S.B. Cahn, G. Carosi et al.,Results from phase 1 of the haystac microwave cavity axion experiment,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 092001

work page 2018

[4] [7]

Adair, K

C. Adair, K. Altenmüller, V. Anastassopoulos, S. {Arguedas Cuendis}, J. Baier, K. Barth et al.,Search for dark matter axions with cast-capp,Nature Communications13(2022)

work page 2022

[5] [8]

Quiskamp, B.T

A. Quiskamp, B.T. McAllister, P. Altin, E.N. Ivanov, M. Goryachev and M.E. Tobar, Exclusion of axionlike-particle cogenesis dark matter in a mass window above100µeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 031601. [9]ORGANcollaboration,Direct search for dark matter axions excluding ALP cogenesis in the 63- to 67-µeV range with the ORGAN experiment,Sci. Adv.8(2022) abq3...

arXiv 2024

[6] [13]

Isi, W.M

M. Isi, W.M. Farr, M. Giesler, M.A. Scheel and S.A. Teukolsky,Testing the black-hole area law with gw150914,Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 011103. [14]LIGO Scientific, Virgo, and KAGRA Collaborationscollaboration,Gw250114: Testing hawking’s area law and the kerr nature of black holes,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 111403. [15]LIGO Scientificcollaboration,A Gravitat...

arXiv 2021

[7] [19]

Caves,Quantum limits on noise in linear amplifiers,Phys

C.M. Caves,Quantum limits on noise in linear amplifiers,Phys. Rev. D26(1982) 1817

work page 1982

[8] [20]

Lamoreaux, K.A

S.K. Lamoreaux, K.A. van Bibber, K.W. Lehnert and G. Carosi,Analysis of single-photon and linear amplifier detectors for microwave cavity dark matter axion searches,Phys. Rev. D 88(2013) 035020

work page 2013