Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 68 references

Magnon blockade in spin-magnon systems with frequency detuning

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A frequency-detuned YIG–NV hybrid system can make conventional and unconventional magnon blockade happen at the same time, yielding a single-magnon source with g^(2)(0) ≈ 10^-8.

desk verdict The detuning-based simultaneous CMB+UMB intersection is a real theoretical result, but the 10^-8 purity is only shown at an experimentally ungrounded g/γ=20, so the claim about five orders of magnitude needs tempering. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21320 v1 pith:SS67IWSF submitted 2025-05-27 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall

Sheng Zhao , Ya-Long Ren , Xin-Lei Hei , Xue-Feng Pan , Peng-Bo Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.mes-hall
keywords magnonblockadeNVcenteryttriumirongarnetfrequencydetuningsecond-ordercorrelationfunctionunconventionalconventionalsingle-magnonsource
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 proposes a scheme for an optimal single-magnon source in a hybrid system where a yttrium-iron-garnet (YIG) magnon is directly coupled to the spin qubit of an NV center. Its central claim is that the frequency detuning Δ_F between the magnon and the spin qubit can serve as a control knob that makes the conventional magnon blockade (from anharmonic dressed-state ladders) and the unconventional magnon blockade (from destructive quantum interference) occur simultaneously. When both the magnon and the spin qubit are driven with a Rabi-frequency ratio λ > 2√2, the two blockade conditions intersect at a particular detuning, and the equal-time second-order correlation function reaches about $10^{-8}$, roughly five orders of magnitude lower than earlier magnon-blockade results. The same detuning also lets blockade survive in the weak-coupling regime and makes the time-delayed correlation function rise smoothly instead of oscillating. If correct, the scheme offers a path to high-purity single-magnon emission without requiring strong magnon-spin coupling.

What carries the argument

The central object is the equal-time second-order magnon correlation function g^(2)(0), evaluated from the steady state of a non-Hermitian Schrödinger equation truncated to the two-excitation subspace. Analytically it factorizes as g^(2)(0) ≈ |B2|²|C|²/(|A2|²|D|²), so blockade appears when the factor |B2|² (unconventional, drive-dependent) or |C|² (conventional, drive-independent) vanishes. The drive ratio λ=Ω_NV/Ω_m enters |B2|² and shifts the UMB lines; requiring both |B2|²=0 and |C|²=0 yields the intersection formula for Δ_F^(1,2,3), with Δ_F^(3) existing only for λ>2√2.

What would settle it

A direct check is to measure g^(2)(0) as a function of driving detuning in a single YIG-NV device with g/κ ≈ 40, qubit-to-magnon drive ratio λ=4, and near-zero temperature. The scheme predicts a dip below $10^{-7}$ at the detuning \$Delta_F^{{(3)}}$ = -g(\$\lambda$ - 3\sqrt{\$lambda^{2}$-8})/8, and the dip should disappear when the qubit drive is off; observing no such detuning-controlled dip, or a dip only at \Delta_F=0, would falsify the simultaneous-blockade claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that conventional and unconventional magnon blockade are not mutually exclusive regimes but can be merged by detuning. In the singly driven magnon case, the CMB condition |C|²=0 gives a hyperbola Δ=±√(g²+Δ_F²), while the UMB condition |B1|²=0 gives shifted lines; in the doubly driven case, the qubit drive shifts the UMB by 2λg, producing three intersections with the CMB hyperbola when λ>2√2. The authors identify the third intersection Δ_F^(3) = -g(λ-3√(λ²-8))/8 as the point where destructive interference and anharmonicity reinforce each other, far from the magnon-induced-tunneling region, yielding g^(2)(0) ~ $10^{-8}$ for g=20γ and λ=4. They further show that the combined scheme keeps blockade at weak coupling and yields a monotone time-delayed correlation function.

Load-bearing premise

The result assumes the YIG-NV coupling can be as large as twenty times the common decay rate while the thermal magnon occupation stays near zero; if the realizable coupling is much smaller than the decay rates, the point where conventional and unconventional blockade coincide does not exist.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single-magnon source with g^(2)(0) ~ 10^-8 becomes accessible in the same device, about five orders of magnitude stronger antibunching than earlier magnon-blockade proposals.
  • Strong coupling is not required for blockade: with both drives on, the conventional blockade appears even at g=0.5γ, so a wider class of spin-magnon samples can be used.
  • The time-delayed correlation function for the combined scheme approaches zero smoothly rather than oscillating above one, so single-magnon detection does not require high time resolution.
  • The combined blockade tolerates thermal magnon occupations up to n_th ≈ 0.1 before losing antibunching, whereas the unconventional blockade alone fails already at n_th = 10^-3.
  • The drive-ratio condition λ>2√2 is a concrete experimental target: below it only one intersection exists and the optimal blockade point disappears.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same frequency-detuning prescription may carry over to other magnetic-dipole-coupled spin-magnon platforms, since the derivation only uses a two-level spin and a single magnon mode; the optimal point would shift with the physical parameters but the intersection logic would not.
  • Because the qubit drive causes the downward shift of the UMB, the drive ratio λ can be used as a tuning knob independent of detuning; one could hold the device fixed and sweep λ to map the predicted three intersections.
  • The zero-temperature, weak-driving limit underlies the 10^-8 number; a practical source would need a finite-drive and finite-temperature version of the correlation formula to predict the best achievable purity.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a scheme for magnon blockade in a hybrid system consisting of a YIG-sphere Kittel mode coupled to an NV-center spin qubit, with a frequency detuning ΔF between the magnon and the spin. In the weak-driving limit the authors derive approximate analytical expressions for the equal-time second-order correlation function g^(2)(0) from a non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, and identify conditions for conventional (|C|^2=0) and unconventional (|B1|^2=0 or |B2|^2=0) blockade. For two-tone driving with λ=Ω_NV/Ω_m>2√2, the CMB and UMB conditions intersect, producing deeper blockade; QuTiP master-equation simulations confirm the analytical blockade loci. The authors report g^(2)(0)≈1e-8 for g/γ=20, λ=4, and study the time-delayed correlation function and thermal-occupation robustness.

Significance. If the required parameters are physically accessible, the scheme is a clean theoretical proposal for a high-purity single-magnon source. The analytical formulas are explicit and parameter-free in the sense that all coefficients are expressed in Hamiltonian parameters, and the numerical master-equation results match the predicted blockade curves, giving confidence in the internal consistency. The frequency detuning is identified as a useful control knob that shifts the UMB condition and enables the CMB+UMB overlap. The main limitations are the lack of experimental justification for the strong-coupling, symmetric-decay operating point used for the 1e-8 value, and the absence of a quantitative comparison with earlier magnon-blockade results; these issues do not invalidate the derivation but bound the claimed practical significance.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 8(a), Eq. (16)] The headline value g^(2)(0)≈1e-8 is obtained at g/γ=20, κ/γ=0.5, λ=4, and ΔF^(3)/γ≈11.2, but the manuscript does not provide an experimental or quantitative basis for a directly coupled single-NV/Kittel-mode coupling of g/2π≈20 MHz; Ref. [56] is a theoretical design rather than a measurement. Because the blockade depth in Fig. 8(a) clearly improves as g increases, the abstract's claim that the scheme 'relaxes the requirements for coupling strength' is not supported in the regime where the 1e-8 value is obtained. Please add a scaling analysis of the minimum g^(2)(0) versus g/κ (and versus κq/κm) and state the coupling threshold below which the advertised improvement is lost.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (6), Eqs. (10) and (14)] The master equation sets κm=κq=κ, and the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian in Eq. (8) adds the same κ/2 damping to the magnon and spin sectors; this equality is used in the derivation of all analytical blockade conditions. For an NV center, the spin amplitude decay rate is typically orders of magnitude smaller than the Kittel-mode linewidth, and the paper gives no argument that the symmetric case is representative. Because the UMB relies on destructive interference between decay-broadened pathways, the 1e-8 minimum may be an artifact of this symmetric choice. Please report results for κq/κm ranging from 0.01 to 1, or justify κq=κ for the proposed experimental setup.
  3. [Abstract and Sec. III.B] The claim that the achieved g^(2)(0)≈1e-8 is 'about five orders of magnitude lower than that in previous works' is never backed by specific numerical values from the cited earlier studies. Without a quantitative baseline, the magnitude of the improvement cannot be assessed. Please add a comparison table or cite explicit g^(2)(0) minima from the relevant references (e.g., Refs. [47]-[55]) and state the parameters at which they were obtained.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III.B, text before Eq. (16)] 'Combining Eq. (11) and Eq. (15)' should read 'Combining Eq. (12) and Eq. (15)', because the intersection points in Eq. (16) follow from the CMB curve (12) and the two-drive UMB curve (15), not from the single-drive UMB condition (11).
  2. [Fig. 8(a) caption] The caption lists only ΔF/γ values for curves (i)-(iii) and refers to 'different λ and g' without specifying λ and g for each curve; please give the exact parameter values used for each curve.
  3. [Sec. III.B, Fig. 8(b) discussion] The statement that for the CMB+UMB case 'g^(2)(t) smoothly approaches 0' is confusing on a log10 axis; the physically expected long-time value is 1, so the text should say 'g^(2)(t) smoothly approaches 1' or 'the log10 value tends to 0 without oscillation'.
  4. [Sec. III, opening paragraph] The word 'mast equation' should be 'master equation'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the blockade conditions and the 10^-8 correlation value are model outputs from the stated Hamiltonian, not inputs or fitted quantities.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. It starts from the explicitly stated spin-magnon Hamiltonian, Eq. (5), and the Lindblad master equation, Eq. (6), then solves the weak-driving amplitude equations in Appendices A and B to obtain closed-form expressions for the equal-time second-order correlation function, Eqs. (9) and (13). The conventional and unconventional blockade conditions are derived as the zeros of the factors |C|^2 and |B1|^2 or |B2|^2, and the simultaneous-blockade points, Eq. (16), are obtained algebraically by requiring both factors to vanish. The numerical QUTIP simulation is an independent solution of the same master equation and confirms the analytical conditions rather than being fit to them. No parameter is fitted to the target correlation function; values such as g/gamma = 20, kappa/gamma = 0.5, lambda = 4, and Delta_F/gamma = 11.2 are chosen operating points, and the value g^(2)(0) ~ 10^-8 is the output of the calculation, not an input. The only overlapping-author citation is Ref. [56], used to justify the direct magnon-NV magnetic-dipole interaction Hamiltonian. This is a standard Jaynes-Cummings-type coupling, is not the target result of the paper, and is not invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as a prohibition on alternative models; moreover, the coupling form is independently standard. The paper's practical weakness, namely that the extreme 10^-8 value requires a large coupling g/gamma = 20 that may not yet be experimentally demonstrated, is a feasibility or parameter-justification concern, not a circularity concern. Overall, no step reduces by construction to its own input, and there is no fitted input renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model uses standard physical ingredients (YIG magnon, NV center spin qubit, microwave drives). No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. All parameters are system parameters chosen for the simulation, not fitted to external data.

free parameters (7)
  • g/γ (spin-magnon coupling ratio) = 0.5, 3, 20 (chosen values)
    Defines weak/medium/strong coupling. The value 20 is used in the optimal case reaching g^(2)(0) ≈ 10^-8.
  • κ/γ (decay rate ratio) = 0.5
    Assumed equal decay rates for magnon and spin qubit; chosen for numerical demonstration.
  • Ω_m/γ (magnon drive amplitude) = 0.01
    Weak-driving regime where Ω_m ≪ κ.
  • λ = Ω_NV/Ω_m (drive ratio) = 4 (also 1, 3, 5 studied)
    Ratio of qubit to magnon drive. λ>2√2 is required for three intersection points; λ=4 gives the best blockade.
  • Δ_F/γ (frequency detuning) = 11.2 at the optimal point
    Chosen from the intersection formula Δ_F^(3) to make CMB and UMB coincide.
  • Δ/γ (driving detuning) = 22.8 at the optimal point
    Chosen from Δ=√(g^2+Δ_F^2) at the simultaneous blockade point.
  • n_th (thermal magnon occupation) = 0
    Set to zero, justified at low temperature for GHz magnons.
assumptions (6)
  • standard math Master equation with Lindblad dissipators is the correct open-system description.
    Used in Sec. III to compute ρ and g^(2)(0).
  • domain assumption Rotating-wave approximation is valid (g smaller than resonance frequencies).
    Stated in Sec. II to obtain the spin-magnon interaction Hamiltonian.
  • domain assumption NV center can be truncated to a two-level system (|0>, |−1>); |+1> is off-resonant.
    Stated in Sec. II and Fig. 1(b).
  • domain assumption Only the Kittel mode of the YIG sphere is considered.
    Stated in Sec. II; other magnon modes neglected.
  • domain assumption Weak-driving limit Ω_m, Ω_NV ≪ κ allows truncation to the two-excitation subspace.
    Used in App. A and B to derive the analytical g^(2).
  • standard math Non-Hermitian Hamiltonian evolution with neglected quantum jumps gives the steady-state wavefunction in the weak-driving limit.
    Standard approach cited to refs [65,66]; used in Eq. (8) and appendices.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Magnon blockade in spin-magnon systems with frequency detuning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SS67IWSF

@misc{pith2026250521320,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Magnon blockade in spin-magnon systems with frequency detuning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SS67IWSF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21320}
}
abstract

Magnon blockade is a physical mechanism for the preparation of a single-magnon source, which has important applications in quantum information processing. Here we propose a scheme for generating an optimal magnon blockade in the spin-magnon quantum system. By introducing frequency detuning between the magnon and the spin qubit of the NV center, the conventional magnon blockade and the unconventional magnon blockade can be obtained under both strong and weak coupling, relaxing the requirements for coupling strength. Moreover, the conventional and unconventional magnon blockade can occur simultaneously when both the magnon and the spin qubit are driven. This allows the equal-time second-order correlation function to reach $10^{-8}$, about five orders of magnitude lower than that in previous works. Additionally, the time-delayed second-order correlation function avoids oscillation. Our study demonstrates the impact of frequency detuning on the magnon blockade and proposes methods to enhance the magnon blockade and relax the requirements for coupling strength through frequency detuning.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.21320 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic diagram of the spin-magnon hybrid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The equal-time second-order magnon correlation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Graph of the relationship between the second-order [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Structure of analytical solution in terms of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The equal-time correlation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Structure of analytical solution in terms of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. correlation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Appearance of the CMB and the UMB at the same [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [56]

    F. Wang, C. Gou, J. Xu, and C. Gong, Hybrid magnon- atom entanglement and magnon blockade via quantum interference, Phys. Rev. A106, 013705 (2022)

    2022

  2. [47]

    Xie, C.-G

    H. Xie, C.-G. Liao, X. Shang, M.-Y. Ye, and X.-M. Lin, Phonon blockade in a quadratically coupled optomechan- ical system, Phys. Rev. A96, 013861 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [55]

    C. Zhao, X. Li, S. Chao, R. Peng, C. Li, and L. Zhou, Simultaneous blockade of a photon, phonon, and magnon induced by a two-level atom, Phys. Rev. A101, 063838 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [1]

    AndtheeigenstatesofspinoperatorS Z are{|0⟩,|±1⟩} withS Z |j⟩=j|j⟩andj= 0and±1. Since the external magnetic fieldB Z exists along the axis of symmetry of the NV center, the degeneracy of state|±1⟩splits by the Zeeman effect [34, 60] withω± =D 0 ± |γe|B Z taking|0⟩ as the energy reference value. Here,D0 = 2π×2.87GHz is the zero-field splitting. We plot the ...

    work page

  5. [2]

    To verify intersection points of the CMB and the UMB, we plot the equal-time second-order magnon correlation functionlog10 g(2) (0)as a function of ∆and∆ F with different values ofλin Fig. 7. As shown in Fig. 7(a), whenλ= 1, only one intersection point ∆F (1)exists at∆ F = 0and∆ =g. When the param- eterλ >2 √ 2is satisfied, we can see three intersection p...

    work page

  6. [3]

    Knill, R

    E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and G. J. Milburn, A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics, Nature 409, 46 (2001)

    2001

  7. [4]

    P. Kok, W. J. Munro, K. Nemoto, T. C. Ralph, J. P. Dowling, and G. J. Milburn, Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits, Rev. Mod. Phys.79, 135 (2007)

    2007

  8. [5]

    H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature453, 1023 (2008)

    2008

Show all 68 references
  1. [6]

    M. A. Gilleo and S. Geller, Magnetic and crystallo- graphic properties of substituted yttrium-iron garnet, 3y2o3 ·xm 2o3 ·(5−x)fe 2o3, Phys. Rev.110, 73 (1958)

    1958

  2. [7]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Us- ami, and Y. Nakamura, Hybridizing ferromagnetic magnons and microwave photons in the quantum limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 083603 (2014)

    2014

  3. [8]

    Barker and G

    J. Barker and G. E. W. Bauer, Thermal spin dynamics of yttriumirongarnet,Phys.Rev.Lett.117,217201(2016)

    2016

  4. [9]

    Collet, X

    M. Collet, X. De Milly, O. d’Allivy Kelly, V. V. Naletov, R. Bernard, P. Bortolotti, J. Ben Youssef, V. Demidov, S. Demokritov, J. L. Prieto, et al., Generation of coher- ent spin-wave modes in yttrium iron garnet microdiscs by spin–orbit torque, Nat. Commun.7, 10377 (2016)

    2016

  5. [10]

    A. J. Princep, R. A. Ewings, S. Ward, S. Tóth, C. Dubs, D. Prabhakaran, and A. T. Boothroyd, The full magnon spectrum of yttrium iron garnet, npj Quant. Mater.2, 63 (2017)

    2017

  6. [11]

    X.-Y. Wei, O. A. Santos, C. S. Lusero, G. Bauer, J. Ben Youssef, and B. van Wees, Giant magnon spin conductivity in ultrathin yttrium iron garnet films, Nat. Mater.21, 1352 (2022)

    2022

  7. [12]

    Zhang, C.-L

    X. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Cavity magnomechanics, Science Advances2, e1501286 (2016)

    2016

  8. [13]

    Zhang, C.-L

    X. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Strongly coupled magnons and cavity microwave photons, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 156401 (2014)

    2014

  9. [14]

    H.Huebl, C.W.Zollitsch, J.Lotze, F.Hocke, M.Greifen- stein, A. Marx, R. Gross, and S. T. B. Goennenwein, High cooperativity in coupled microwave resonator ferri- magnetic insulator hybrids, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 127003 (2013)

    2013

  10. [15]

    Zare Rameshti, Y

    B. Zare Rameshti, Y. Cao, and G. E. W. Bauer, Mag- netic spheres in microwave cavities, Phys. Rev. B91, 214430 (2015)

    2015

  11. [16]

    Maier-Flaig, M

    H. Maier-Flaig, M. Harder, R. Gross, H. Huebl, and S. T. B. Goennenwein, Spin pumping in strongly cou- pled magnon-photon systems, Phys. Rev. B94, 054433 (2016)

    2016

  12. [17]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Ya- mazaki, K.Usami, andY.Nakamura, Coherentcoupling between a ferromagnetic magnon and a superconducting qubit, Science349, 405 (2015)

    2015

  13. [18]

    Li and G.-L

    T. Li and G.-L. Long, Hyperparallel optical quantum computation assisted by atomic ensembles embedded in double-sided optical cavities, Phys. Rev. A94, 022343 (2016)

    2016

  14. [19]

    Clerk, K

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

    2020

  15. [20]

    O. O. Soykal and M. E. Flatté, Strong field interactions between a nanomagnet and a photonic cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 077202 (2010)

    2010

  16. [21]

    L. Bai, M. Harder, Y. P. Chen, X. Fan, J. Q. Xiao, and C.-M. Hu, Spin pumping in electrodynamically coupled magnon-photon systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 227201 (2015)

    2015

  17. [22]

    Viola Kusminskiy, H

    S. Viola Kusminskiy, H. X. Tang, and F. Marquardt, Coupled spin-light dynamics in cavity optomagnonics, Phys. Rev. A94, 033821 (2016)

    2016

  18. [23]

    J. A. Haigh, A. Nunnenkamp, A. J. Ramsay, and A. J. Ferguson, Triple-resonant brillouin light scattering in magneto-optical cavities, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 133602 (2016)

    2016

  19. [24]

    Kounalakis, G

    M. Kounalakis, G. E. W. Bauer, and Y. M. Blanter, Analog quantum control of magnonic cat states on a chip byasuperconductingqubit,Phys.Rev.Lett.129,037205 (2022)

    2022

  20. [25]

    Wang, G.-Q

    Y.-P. Wang, G.-Q. Zhang, D. Zhang, T.-F. Li, C.-M. Hu, and J. Q. You, Bistability of cavity magnon polaritons, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 057202 (2018)

    2018

  21. [26]

    Zhang, C.-L

    X. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, N. Zhu, F. Marquardt, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Magnon dark modes and gradient mem- ory, Nat. commun.6, 8914 (2015)

    2015

  22. [27]

    Y. Xiao, X. H. Yan, Y. Zhang, V. L. Grigoryan, C. M. Hu, H. Guo, and K. Xia, Magnon dark mode of an antiferromagnetic insulator in a microwave cavity, Phys. Rev. B99, 094407 (2019)

    2019

  23. [28]

    Iguchi, S

    Y. Iguchi, S. Uemura, K. Ueno, and Y. Onose, Non- reciprocal magnon propagation in a noncentrosymmetric ferromagnet life5o8, Phys. Rev. B92, 184419 (2015)

    2015

  24. [29]

    C. Kong, H. Xiong, and Y. Wu, Magnon-induced non- reciprocity based on the magnon kerr effect, Phys. Rev. Appl.12, 034001 (2019)

    2019

  25. [30]

    Wang, G.-Q

    Y.-P. Wang, G.-Q. Zhang, D. Zhang, X.-Q. Luo, W. Xiong, S.-P. Wang, T.-F. Li, C.-M. Hu, and J. Q. You, Magnon kerr effect in a strongly coupled cavity- magnon system, Phys. Rev. B94, 224410 (2016)

    2016

  26. [31]

    Sharma, Y

    S. Sharma, Y. M. Blanter, and G. E. W. Bauer, Optical cooling of magnons, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 087205 (2018)

    2018

  27. [32]

    Zhang, D.-Y

    W. Zhang, D.-Y. Wang, C.-H. Bai, T. Wang, S. Zhang, and H.-F. Wang, Generation and transfer of squeezed states in a cavity magnomechanical system by two-tone microwave fields, Opt. Express29, 11773 (2021)

    2021

  28. [33]

    Li, S.-Y

    J. Li, S.-Y. Zhu, and G. S. Agarwal, Squeezed states of magnons and phonons in cavity magnomechanics, Phys. Rev. A99, 021801 (2019)

    2019

  29. [34]

    Aharonovich, A

    I. Aharonovich, A. D. Greentree, and S. Prawer, Dia- mond photonics, Nat. Photon.5, 397 (2011)

    2011

  30. [35]

    J. F. Barry, J. M. Schloss, E. Bauch, M. J. Turner, C. A. Hart, L. M. Pham, and R. L. Walsworth, Sensitivity 10 optimization for nv-diamond magnetometry, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 015004 (2020)

    2020

  31. [36]

    M. W. Doherty, N. B. Manson, P. Delaney, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, and L. C. Hollenberg, The nitrogen- vacancy colour centre in diamond, Phys. Rep.528, 1 (2013)

    2013

  32. [37]

    Bar-Gill, L

    N. Bar-Gill, L. M. Pham, A. Jarmola, D. Budker, and R. L. Walsworth, Solid-state electronic spin coherence time approaching one second, Nat. Commun.4, 1743 (2013)

    2013

  33. [38]

    M. W. Doherty, V. V. Struzhkin, D. A. Simpson, L. P. McGuinness, Y. Meng, A. Stacey, T. J. Karle, R. J. Hem- ley, N. B. Manson, L. C. L. Hollenberg, and S. Prawer, Electronic properties and metrology applications of the diamondnv − center under pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, ...

    2014

  34. [39]

    M. H. Abobeih, J. Cramer, M. A. Bakker, N. Kalb, M.Markham, D.J.Twitchen, andT.H.Taminiau, One- second coherence for a single electron spin coupled to a multi-qubit nuclear-spin environment, Nat. Commun.9, 2552 (2018)

    2018

  35. [40]

    Fuchs, G

    G. Fuchs, G. Burkard, P. Klimov, and D. Awschalom, A quantum memory intrinsic to single nitrogen–vacancy centres in diamond, Nat. Phys.7, 789 (2011)

    2011

  36. [41]

    Kolkowitz, A

    S. Kolkowitz, A. C. B. Jayich, Q. P. Unterreithmeier, S. D. Bennett, P. Rabl, J. G. E. Harris, and M. D. Lukin, Coherent sensing of a mechanical resonator with a single-spin qubit, Science335, 1603 (2012)

    2012

  37. [42]

    Dolde, H

    F. Dolde, H. Fedder, M. W. Doherty, T. Nöbauer, F. Rempp, G. Balasubramanian, T. Wolf, F. Reinhard, L. C. Hollenberg, F. Jelezko, et al., Electric-field sensing using single diamond spins, Nat. Phys.7, 459 (2011)

    2011

  38. [43]

    K. M. Birnbaum, A. Boca, R. Miller, A. D. Boozer, T. E. Northup, and H. J. Kimble, Photon blockade in an optical cavity with one trapped atom, Nature436, 87 (2005)

    2005

  39. [44]

    Rabl, Photon blockade effect in optomechanical sys- tems, Phys

    P. Rabl, Photon blockade effect in optomechanical sys- tems, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 063601 (2011)

    2011

  40. [45]

    Ridolfo, M

    A. Ridolfo, M. Leib, S. Savasta, and M. J. Hartmann, Photon blockade in the ultrastrong coupling regime, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 193602 (2012)

    2012

  41. [46]

    Y.-x. Liu, A. Miranowicz, Y. B. Gao, J. c. v. Bajer, C. P. Sun, and F. Nori, Qubit-induced phonon blockade as a signature of quantum behavior in nanomechanical res- onators, Phys. Rev. A82, 032101 (2010)

    2010

  42. [48]

    X.-Y. Yao, H. Ali, F.-L. Li, and P.-B. Li, Nonreciprocal phonon blockade in a spinning acoustic ring cavity cou- pled to a two-level system, Phys. Rev. Appl.17, 054004 (2022)

    2022

  43. [49]

    Z.-X. Liu, H. Xiong, and Y. Wu, Magnon blockade in a hybrid ferromagnet-superconductor quantum system, Phys. Rev. B100, 134421 (2019)

    2019

  44. [50]

    Xie, S.-l

    J.-k. Xie, S.-l. Ma, and F.-l. Li, Quantum-interference- enhanced magnon blockade in an yttrium-iron-garnet sphere coupled to superconducting circuits, Phys. Rev. A101, 042331 (2020)

    2020

  45. [51]

    Zhang, S

    W. Zhang, S. Liu, S. Zhang, and H.-F. Wang, Magnon blockadeinducedbyparametricamplification,Phys.Rev. A109, 043712 (2024)

    2024

  46. [52]

    Wang, K.-W

    X. Wang, K.-W. Huang, and H. Xiong, Magnon block- ade in a qed system with a giant spin ensemble and a giant atom coupled to a waveguide, Phys. Rev. A110, 033702 (2024)

    2024

  47. [53]

    Yuan, Y.-J

    Z.-H. Yuan, Y.-J. Chen, J.-X. Han, J.-L. Wu, W.-Q. Li, Y. Xia, Y.-Y. Jiang, and J. Song, Periodic photon- magnon blockade in an optomagnonic system with chiral exceptional points, Phys. Rev. B108, 134409 (2023)

    2023

  48. [54]

    Jin and J

    Z.-y. Jin and J. Jing, Magnon blockade in magnon-qubit systems, Phys. Rev. A108, 053702 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    R. Hou, W. Zhang, X. Han, H.-F. Wang, and S. Zhang, Magnon blockade based on the kerr nonlinearity in cavity electromagnonics, Phys. Rev. A109, 033721 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    Hei, X.-L

    X.-L. Hei, X.-L. Dong, J.-Q. Chen, C.-P. Shen, Y.-F. Qiao, and P.-B. Li, Enhancing spin-photon coupling with a micromagnet, Phys. Rev. A103, 043706 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    Gonzalez-Ballestero, D

    C. Gonzalez-Ballestero, D. Hümmer, J. Gieseler, and O. Romero-Isart, Theory of quantum acoustomagnonics and acoustomechanics with a micromagnet, Phys. Rev. B101, 125404 (2020)

    2020

  52. [60]

    Kittel, On the theory of ferromagnetic resonance ab- sorption, Phys

    C. Kittel, On the theory of ferromagnetic resonance ab- sorption, Phys. Rev.73, 155 (1948)

    1948

  53. [61]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Ya- mazaki, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Quantum magnonics: The magnon meets the superconducting qubit, C. R. Phys.17, 729 (2016)

    2016

  54. [62]

    Li, P.-B

    B. Li, P.-B. Li, Y. Zhou, J. Liu, H.-R. Li, and F.-L. Li, Interfacing a topological qubit with a spin qubit in a hybrid quantum system, Phys. Rev. Appl.11, 044026 (2019)

    2019

  55. [63]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, Qutip: An open-source python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Comput. phys. commun.183, 1760 (2012)

    2012

  56. [64]

    Xu, Y.-J

    X.-W. Xu, Y.-J. Li, and Y.-x. Liu, Photon-induced tunneling in optomechanical systems, Phys. Rev. A87, 025803 (2013)

    2013

  57. [65]

    Kowalewska-Kudłaszyk, S

    A. Kowalewska-Kudłaszyk, S. I. Abo, G. Chimczak, J. Peřina, F. Nori, and A. Miranowicz, Two-photon blockade and photon-induced tunneling generated by squeezing, Phys. Rev. A100, 053857 (2019)

    2019

  58. [66]

    C. Zhai, R. Huang, H. Jing, and L.-M. Kuang, Me- chanical switch of photon blockade and photon-induced tunneling, Opt. Express27, 27649 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    M. B. Plenio and P. L. Knight, The quantum-jump ap- proach to dissipative dynamics in quantum optics, Rev. Mod. Phys.70, 101 (1998)

    1998

  60. [68]

    Minganti, A

    F. Minganti, A. Miranowicz, R. W. Chhajlany, and F. Nori, Quantum exceptional points of non-hermitian hamiltonians and liouvillians: The effects of quantum jumps, Phys. Rev. A100, 062131 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.