Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 90 references

Disentanglement--induced bistability in a magnetic resonator

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that bistability in a ferrimagnetic sphere resonator favors a nonlinear master equation with deterministic disentanglement over the standard Bosonization-based magnon-Kerr model, indirectly supporting spontaneous…

desk verdict The experiment and SI are carefully done, but the RD model's steady-state equation is classical mean-field foldover with no gamma_D dependence, so the data cannot support the spontaneous disentanglement claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11046 v1 pith:TGTEX2X4 submitted 2025-01-19 quant-ph

Eyal Buks This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords spontaneousdisentanglementbistabilityferrimagneticsphereresonatormagnonKerreffectnonlinearmasterequationrapidapproximationyttriumirongarnethysteresis
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 argues that bistability measured in a driven ferrimagnetic (YIG) sphere resonator is better explained by the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis than by the standard Bosonization-based magnon-Kerr model. Because any master equation linear in the density operator excludes multistability in finite systems, the observed hysteresis implies the underlying dynamics is nonlinear. The paper compares a rapid-disentanglement (RD) model, derived from a master equation with a nonlinear term that deterministically destroys entanglement, against the usual Duffing-Kerr model, and finds the RD model's predicted jump and peak frequencies match the experimental data more closely. If the fit is genuine, the result is evidence that nature's quantum dynamics may be nonlinear in a way that makes explicit collapse postulates unnecessary.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the modified master equation (1): to the Lindblad superoperator it adds the nonlinear disentanglement term $-\Theta\rho-\rho\Theta+2\langle\Theta\rangle\rho$, where $\Theta=\gamma_D Q(D)$ measures bipartite entanglement and vanishes on product states. The rapid disentanglement (RD) approximation, valid when the rate $\gamma_D$ is large, factorizes spin-spin correlations and reduces the many-spin system to the cubic steady-state relation (3) for the normalized polarization $z=P_z/P_{z0}$; the bistability region is bounded by two cusp points and has both lower and upper driving-power bounds. The rival Duffing-Kerr model, derived from the Holstein-Primakoff Bosonization, yields a different cubic equation (4) for the bosonic occupation $E=|C|^2$, with a single lower power bound. The two equations predict distinguishable jump and peak frequencies, and the experiment is designed to discriminate them.

What would settle it

Sweep the driving power upward until it exceeds the RD model's predicted upper bistability bound $W_+\simeq 27D^2 W_-/4$; if hysteresis or jumping still occurs there, the rapid-disentanglement cubic equation cannot describe the system. A complementary check is to measure spin-spin correlations directly and look for factorization at high driving, which the RD approximation requires.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the bistable response of a ferrimagnetic spin resonator cannot be derived from any master equation that depends linearly on the spins' reduced density operator, and that a nonlinear master equation implementing spontaneous disentanglement fits the data better than the established Bosonization approach. The modified master equation (1) adds the term $-\Theta\rho-\rho\Theta+2\langle\Theta\rangle\rho$, with $\Theta=\gamma_D Q(D)$ a disentanglement operator built from subsystem observables; this makes the evolution of $\rho$ nonlinear without violating norm conservation or positivity. In the rapid disentanglement limit the spin-spin correlations factorize, and the steady-state polarization $P_z$ obeys the cubic equation (3), whose three real solutions, when they exist, give two stable states and hysteresis. Experiments on a room-temperature YIG sphere, probed by magneto-optical modulation and intermodulation, yield jump and peak frequencies as functions of detuning and power, and Fig. 5 shows the RD model in better agreement with those data than the Duffing-Kerr model. Together with the paper's argument that the Bosonization mapping to an infinite bosonic space is hard to justify, this indirectly supports the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the rapid disentanglement approximation: the cubic equation that fits the data is derived by replacing spin-spin correlations with products, which is justified only if the disentanglement rate $\gamma_D$ is large, and the paper neither measures nor bounds $\gamma_D$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the RD model is correct, the room-temperature hysteresis in a YIG sphere is a macroscopic signature of spontaneous disentanglement, meaning the reduced density operator evolves nonlinearly.
  • The measured bistability itself contradicts the standard Lindblad ansatz, because linear master equations exclude multistability in finite quantum systems.
  • The RD model predicts a finite upper bound on driving power for bistability, whereas the Duffing-Kerr model predicts bistability persists at all higher powers; sweeping to that bound tests which nonlinearity is physical.
  • The Bosonization-based explanation is weakened not only by the data but by its own justification problem: mapping a finite spin system to an infinite bosonic space introduces multistability the original system forbids.
  • Because the disentanglement term leaves product states untouched, all standard quantum predictions remain valid for systems that never become entangled, so the new physics only appears when entanglement is present.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper does not measure or bound the disentanglement rate $\gamma_D$; a natural next step is to vary temperature or coupling strength and check whether the fitted $\gamma_D$ remains consistently large enough for the RD approximation.
  • If spontaneous disentanglement is real, similar hysteresis and multistability should appear in other finite-dimensional driven quantum systems, with onset powers and jump frequencies determined by the same cubic structure.
  • The model's finite upper power bound gives a sharp experimental discriminator: look for the disappearance of hysteresis at very high driving powers, which the Duffing-Kerr model does not predict.
  • The successful RD fit could also be reinterpreted as environment-induced nonlinear feedback rather than fundamental spontaneous disentanglement; separating these requires independently probing the entanglement dynamics.
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 paper reports experimental observations of frequency- and power-bistability in a ferrimagnetic YIG sphere resonator and compares them with two theoretical models: a "rapid disentanglement" (RD) model derived from a nonlinear master equation that includes spontaneous disentanglement, and a Duffing-Kerr bosonization model. The author claims that the RD model agrees better with the measured data and that this indirectly supports the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis. The manuscript derives the RD steady-state equation, maps the bistability region, presents experimental data from magneto-optical and microwave measurements, and shows a comparison plot in Fig. 5.

Significance. If the inference were valid, the experiment would constitute a significant test of a nonlinear modification of quantum mechanics, with implications for the foundations of quantum theory. The paper's strengths include the use of multiple independent measurement techniques (magneto-optical modulation, VNA reflectivity, intermodulation) and a self-contained derivation of the RD steady state. However, as detailed below, the central inference is not supported because the fitted RD equation is independent of the disentanglement rate γD, so the experimental comparison cannot distinguish spontaneous disentanglement from a classical mean-field nonlinearity.

major comments (4)
  1. [SI Section S4, Eq. (S23) / main text Eq. (3)] The steady-state equation used for the RD-model comparison, Eq. (3) [SI Eq. (S23)], contains no γD. In SI Section S4 the rapid disentanglement approximation factorizes spin-spin correlations, and the resulting equations (S21)-(S22) are exactly the classical mean-field Bloch equations with a nonlinear frequency shift; the disentanglement rate γD enters nowhere. Consequently, agreement with Eq. (3) can constrain only the presence of a cubic nonlinearity, not whether that nonlinearity arises from spontaneous disentanglement. The paper neither measures nor bounds γD, so the statement that the data "indirectly support the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis" is not justified by the presented analysis.
  2. [Comparison with experimental results, Fig. 5] The RD-model fit parameters are not reported. The caption of Fig. 5 states only the Duffing-Kerr parameters (γ1/γ = 0.4, ωK/γ = −0.01, and γ3 = 0.1 × 3^{−1/2}ωK). The RD model has its own parameters, such as D = (ωK T2 Pz0/4)^2, T1, T2, or an effective ωK, which must have been optimized to produce the blue curves shown. Without these values, the comparison is not reproducible, and the claim of better agreement cannot be quantitatively assessed or checked for overfitting.
  3. [SI Section S8] The paper's own estimate of the anisotropy rate for this FMSR, ωK = −7.1 × 10^−9 Hz, is inconsistent with the condition D ≥ 1 required for bistability in the RD model. With any realistic transverse relaxation time T2, D = (ωK T2 Pz0/4)^2 is many orders of magnitude below unity, so the RD model cannot produce bistability for this sphere unless an effective ωK is adopted without explanation. This internal inconsistency undermines the RD-model predictions used in Fig. 5.
  4. [Comparison with experimental results, Fig. 5] The claim that the RD model "better aligns" with the experimental results is based only on visual inspection. Given the large scatter of the measured jump points and the existence of free parameters in both models, a quantitative goodness-of-fit measure (for example, residual sums or confidence intervals) is required to support the comparison and the subsequent physical interpretation.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Title and affiliations] The text contains typographical artifacts such as "resona tor" and "Engineeri ng" in the title and affiliation; these should be corrected.
  2. [Comparison with experimental results, Fig. 5] The normalized variables fd/fdc and Pp/Pc are defined in the context of the Duffing-Kerr model, but it is not clarified whether the same normalization is used for the RD model, which has a different bistability-onset structure (two cusp points instead of one).
  3. [SI Section S4] The factorization condition "provided that the rate of disentanglement γD is sufficiently large" is not quantified anywhere in the paper; a concrete criterion or an experimental bound on γD would be needed to justify the RD approximation for this macroscopic room-temperature YIG sphere.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The RD model's steady-state equation (3) is the classical mean-field foldover equation and contains no γD; the Fig. 5 fit therefore cannot test the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis.

  1. renaming known result [SI S4, Eq. (S23); main text Eq. (3); SI S5 classical equations; 'Comparison with experimental results' and Fig. 5]
    "The approximation ⟨SRl′,+Sl′′,z + Sz,l′SRl′′,+⟩ ≃ ⟨SRl′,+⟩⟨Sl′′,z⟩ + ⟨Sz,l′⟩⟨SRl′′,+⟩ ≃ 2L−2⟨SR+⟩⟨Sz⟩ can be implemented provided that the rate of disentanglement γD is sufficiently large. ... In steady state, i.e. for dP+/dt = 0 and dPz/dt = 0, Eqs. (S21) and (S22) yield Pz = (1 + (ωd − ωKPz)^2 T2^2)/(1 + (ωd − ωKPz)^2 T2^2 + ω1^2 T1T2) Pz0."

    The RD limit removes γD, the only new parameter that distinguishes spontaneous disentanglement, and Eq. (S23) is exactly the steady state of the classical Bloch equation with a nonlinear frequency shift ωKPz derived in SI S5. Since Eq. (3) contains no disentanglement rate or entanglement variable, the data-theory comparison in Fig. 5 reduces to a classical mean-field foldover fit. The paper's conclusion that better agreement 'indirectly support[s] the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis' therefore asserts that a result which is by construction indifferent to γD supports a model whose only novel content is γD.

full rationale

The experimental work and the classical/mean-field calculations are largely self-contained, but the central interpretive step is circular. The RD model is introduced as the tractable limit of the modified master equation (1); however, in that limit the disentanglement parameter γD disappears entirely from the steady-state equation (S23)/(3). As the paper's own SI S5 shows, the same steady-state equations are obtained from the classical Bloch equation with magnetic anisotropy. Thus the 'better agreement' of the RD model with the measured jump and peak points cannot discriminate spontaneous disentanglement from an ordinary classical nonlinearity; every model with a nonlinear frequency shift obeys Eq. (3). The paper neither measures nor bounds γD, and its statement that the factorization 'can be implemented provided that the rate of disentanglement γD is sufficiently large' is an assumed regime, not an independently supported one. Consequently, the headline conclusion overreaches: the fit may support a classical nonlinear frequency shift, but it does not, by the paper's own equations, support the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis. Score 6: one central 'prediction' reduces by construction to a known classical result, while the rest of the derivation is not itself circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on the ad hoc disentanglement operator and on the untested rapid disentanglement approximation. The equations that are actually fitted to data contain none of the new physics parameters, so the ledger shows a large gap between theoretical input and empirical content.

free parameters (5)
  • gamma_D (disentanglement rate) = not measured; assumed much larger than other rates
    The RD approximation requires gamma_D to be large enough to factorize spin-spin correlators (SI S4), but the paper gives no bound or measurement.
  • D = (omega_K T_2 P_z0/4)^2 = set to 3 in Fig. 2; value for Fig. 5 not stated
    This dimensionless parameter controls the RD bistability region; the experimental comparison in Fig. 5 does not report the value used.
  • T1 and T2 (relaxation times) = not reported
    Needed to convert measured drive power and detuning into the normalized variables of Eq. (3) and Fig. 2; the paper does not give fitted or measured values.
  • omega_K (anisotropy rate) = estimated as -7.1e-9 Hz from YIG anisotropy constants in SI S8; also fitted as -0.01 gamma in Duffing-Kerr model
    Used as an input for the RD model and as a fit parameter for the Duffing-Kerr model; two different uses.
  • Duffing-Kerr fit parameters: gamma1/gamma, omega_K/gamma, gamma3 = gamma1/gamma = 0.4, omega_K/gamma = -0.01, gamma3 = 0.1*3^{-1/2} omega_K
    Optimized values reported in Fig. 5 caption; these are fits to the bistability data.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Standard linear master equations on finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces exclude multistability
    Invoked in the introduction to motivate the need for nonlinearity (Ref 22); it is a rigorous theorem but is not directly applicable to a macroscopic magnet with L >> 1.
  • ad hoc to paper The disentanglement operator Theta has the form Theta = gamma_D Q^(D) with Q^(D) built from subsystem correlation matrices (SI S1)
    This is the new physics input; no independent evidence is given.
  • ad hoc to paper Rapid disentanglement approximation: spin-spin correlators factorize when gamma_D is sufficiently large (SI S4)
    This is the key approximation that converts Eq. (1) into the cubic Eq. (3); its validity is assumed, not tested.
  • domain assumption The single-mode Hamiltonian (2) with anisotropy rates omega_K and omega_A describes the FMSR Kittel mode
    Standard in magnonics but reduces a many-spin system to one collective mode.
  • domain assumption Pz0 is the thermal equilibrium spin polarization related to T1 and T2 via the given formulas (SI S1)
    Used to fix Pz0 from temperature and field; no measurement is shown.
invented entities (2)
  • Spontaneous disentanglement process (rate gamma_D)
    purpose: To add a nonlinear term to the master equation so that finite spin systems can show bistability without bosonization.
    The rate gamma_D never appears in the fitted steady-state equation (Eq. 3), so the experiment provides no falsifiable handle on it; the only evidence is the author's prior theoretical proposals.
  • Disentanglement operator Theta
    purpose: The Hermitian, state-dependent operator in Eq. (1) that deterministically generates disentanglement.
    It is a theoretical construct defined in SI S1; no independent measurement or prediction tied to Theta is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Disentanglement--induced bistability in a magnetic resonator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TGTEX2X4

@misc{pith2026250111046,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Disentanglement--induced bistability in a magnetic resonator},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TGTEX2X4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11046}
}
read the original abstract

Multi--stability in the response of a ferrimagnetic spin resonator to an externally applied driving is experimentally studied. The observed multi--stability cannot be derived from any master equation that linearly depends on the spins' reduced density operator. Traditionally, the nonlinearity that is required in order to theoretically account for the observed multi--stability is introduced by implementing the method of Bosonization. Here, an alternative explanation, which is based on the hypothesis that disentanglement spontaneously occurs in quantum systems is explored. According to this hypothesis, time evolution is governed by a master equation having an added nonlinear term, which deterministically generates disentanglement. Experimental results are compared with predictions derived from both competing theoretical models. It is found that better agreement with data is obtained from the disentanglement--based model. This finding, together with a difficulty to justify the Bosonization--based model, indirectly support the spontaneous disentanglement hypothesis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11046 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Driven two spins. The expectation value [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: RD model. (a) Stability map in the plane of nor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4: Experimental setup. (a) RF components and coax [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Comparison with experimental results. Measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Precision tests of quantum mechan- ics

    Steven Weinberg, “Precision tests of quantum mechan- ics”, in THE OSKAR KLEIN MEMORIAL LECTURES 1988–1999, pp. 61–68. World Scientific, 2014

    1988

  2. [2]

    Introducing non- linear gauge transformations in a family of nonlinear schr¨ odinger equations

    H-D Doebner and Gerald A Goldin, “Introducing non- linear gauge transformations in a family of nonlinear schr¨ odinger equations”,Physical Review A , vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 3764, 1996

    1996

  3. [3]

    The quantum-state diffusion model applied to open systems

    Nicolas Gisin and Ian C Percival, “The quantum-state diffusion model applied to open systems”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , vol. 25, no. 21, pp. 5677, 1992

    1992

  4. [4]

    A simple nonlinear dissipative quantum evolution equation

    Nicolas Gisin, “A simple nonlinear dissipative quantum evolution equation”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 2259, 1981

    1981

  5. [5]

    Causal frame- work for nonlinear quantum mechanics

    David E Kaplan and Surjeet Rajendran, “Causal frame- work for nonlinear quantum mechanics”, Physical Review 6 D, vol. 105, no. 5, pp. 055002, 2022

    2022

  6. [6]

    Simulating nonlinear dynamics of collective spins via quantum measurement and feedback

    Manuel H Mu˜ noz-Arias, Pablo M Poggi, Poul S Jessen, and Ivan H Deutsch, “Simulating nonlinear dynamics of collective spins via quantum measurement and feedback”, Physical review letters, vol. 124, no. 11, pp. 110503, 2020

    2020

  7. [7]

    A straightforward in- troduction to continuous quantum measurement

    Kurt Jacobs and Daniel A Steck, “A straightforward in- troduction to continuous quantum measurement”, Con- temporary Physics, vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 279–303, 2006

    2006

  8. [8]

    Fast quantum state discrimination with nonlinear positive trace-preserving channels

    Michael R Geller, “Fast quantum state discrimination with nonlinear positive trace-preserving channels”, Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies, p. 2200156, 2023

    2023

Show all 90 references
  1. [9]

    Die gegenwartige situation in der quan- tenmechanik

    E. Schrodinger, “Die gegenwartige situation in der quan- tenmechanik”, Naturwissenschaften, vol. 23, pp. 807, 1935

    1935

  2. [10]

    Uncertainty in quantum mechanics: faith or fantasy?

    Roger Penrose, “Uncertainty in quantum mechanics: faith or fantasy?”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineer- ing Sciences, vol. 369, no. 1956, pp. 4864–4890, 2011

    1956

  3. [11]

    Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests

    Angelo Bassi, Kinjalk Lochan, Seema Satin, Tejinder P Singh, and Hendrik Ulbricht, “Models of wave-function collapse, underlying theories, and experimental tests”, Reviews of Modern Physics , vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 471, 2013

    2013

  4. [12]

    Reduction of the state vector by a non- linear schr¨ odinger equation

    Philip Pearle, “Reduction of the state vector by a non- linear schr¨ odinger equation”,Physical Review D , vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 857, 1976

    1976

  5. [13]

    Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic sys- tems

    Gian Carlo Ghirardi, Alberto Rimini, and Tullio Weber, “Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic sys- tems”, Physical review D , vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 470, 1986

    1986

  6. [14]

    Dynamical re- duction models

    Angelo Bassi and GianCarlo Ghirardi, “Dynamical re- duction models”, Physics Reports, vol. 379, no. 5-6, pp. 257–426, 2003

    2003

  7. [15]

    Can closed timelike curves or nonlin- ear quantum mechanics improve quantum state discrim- ination or help solve hard problems?

    Charles H Bennett, Debbie Leung, Graeme Smith, and John A Smolin, “Can closed timelike curves or nonlin- ear quantum mechanics improve quantum state discrim- ination or help solve hard problems?”, Physical review letters, vol. 103, no. 17, pp. 170502, 2009

    2009

  8. [16]

    Linear and integrable nonlinear evolution of the qutrit

    Krzysztof Kowalski, “Linear and integrable nonlinear evolution of the qutrit”, Quantum Information Process- ing, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 1–31, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Bifurcations and chaos in nonlinear lindblad equations

    Bernd Fernengel and Barbara Drossel, “Bifurcations and chaos in nonlinear lindblad equations”, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , vol. 53, no. 38, pp. 385701, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    Integrable nonlinear evolution of the qubit

    K Kowalski and J Rembieli´ nski, “Integrable nonlinear evolution of the qubit”, Annals of Physics , vol. 411, pp. 167955, 2019

    2019

  11. [19]

    A postquantum theory of clas- sical gravity?

    Jonathan Oppenheim, “A postquantum theory of clas- sical gravity?”, Physical Review X , vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 041040, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Macroscopic quantum test with bulk acoustic wave resonators

    Bj¨ orn Schrinski, Yu Yang, Uwe von L¨ upke, Marius Bild, Yiwen Chu, Klaus Hornberger, Stefan Nimmrichter, and Matteo Fadel, “Macroscopic quantum test with bulk acoustic wave resonators”, Physical Review Letters , vol. 130, no. 13, pp. 133604, 2023

    2023

  13. [21]

    On the generators of quantum dy- namical semigroups

    Goran Lindblad, “On the generators of quantum dy- namical semigroups”, Communications in Mathematical Physics, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 119–130, 1976

    1976

  14. [22]

    Disentanglement-induced multistability

    Eyal Buks, “Disentanglement-induced multistability”, Physical Review A , vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 012439, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Quantum phase transition in a single-molecule quantum dot

    Nicolas Roch, Serge Florens, Vincent Bouchiat, Wolfgang Wernsdorfer, and Franck Balestro, “Quantum phase transition in a single-molecule quantum dot”, Nature, vol. 453, no. 7195, pp. 633–637, 2008

    2008

  16. [24]

    Macroscopic quantum tunnelling of magnetization in a single crystal of nano- magnets

    L Thomas, FL Lionti, R Ballou, Dante Gatteschi, Roberta Sessoli, and B Barbara, “Macroscopic quantum tunnelling of magnetization in a single crystal of nano- magnets”, Nature, vol. 383, no. 6596, pp. 145–147, 1996

    1996

  17. [25]

    Moir´ e tuning of spin excitations: Individual fe atoms on mos 2/au (111)

    Sergey Trishin, Christian Lotze, Nils Bogdanoff, Felix von Oppen, and Katharina J Franke, “Moir´ e tuning of spin excitations: Individual fe atoms on mos 2/au (111)”, Physical Review Letters , vol. 127, no. 23, pp. 236801, 2021

    2021

  18. [26]

    Topological quantum phase transition in individual fe atoms on mos 2/au (111)

    GG Blesio and AA Aligia, “Topological quantum phase transition in individual fe atoms on mos 2/au (111)”, Physical Review B , vol. 108, no. 4, pp. 045113, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    A hysteresis phenomenon in nmr spectra of molecular nano- magnets fe8: a resonant quantum tunneling system

    Tomoaki Yamasaki, Miki Ueda, and Satoru Maegawa, “A hysteresis phenomenon in nmr spectra of molecular nano- magnets fe8: a resonant quantum tunneling system”, Physica B: Condensed Matter , vol. 329, pp. 1187–1188, 2003

    2003

  20. [28]

    Mag- netic bistability of molecules in homogeneous solution at room temperature

    S Venkataramani, U Jana, M Dommaschk, FD S¨ onnichsen, F Tuczek, and R Herges, “Mag- netic bistability of molecules in homogeneous solution at room temperature”, Science, vol. 331, no. 6016, pp. 445–448, 2011

    2011

  21. [29]

    Phase tran- sitions in finite systems

    Philippe Chomaz and Francesca Gulminelli, “Phase tran- sitions in finite systems”, in Dynamics and thermody- namics of systems with long-range interactions , pp. 68–

  22. [30]

    Phase transitions in finite systems

    Paul Mainwood, “Phase transitions in finite systems”, 2005

    2005

  23. [31]

    Taking thermodynamics too seri- ously

    Craig Callender, “Taking thermodynamics too seri- ously”, Studies in history and philosophy of science part B: studies in history and philosophy of modern physics , vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 539–553, 2001

    2001

  24. [32]

    Explaining the emergence of cooperative phenomena

    Chuang Liu, “Explaining the emergence of cooperative phenomena”, Philosophy of Science , vol. 66, no. S3, pp. S92–S106, 1999

    1999

  25. [33]

    Finite-size scaling theory: Quantitative and qualitative approaches to crit- ical phenomena

    Vincent Ardourel and Sorin Bangu, “Finite-size scaling theory: Quantitative and qualitative approaches to crit- ical phenomena”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol. 100, pp. 99–106, 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    What is the paradox of phase transitions?

    Elay Shech, “What is the paradox of phase transitions?”, Philosophy of Science, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 1170–1181, 2013

    2013

  27. [35]

    Morikazu Toda, Ryogo Kubo, Nobuhiko Sait¯ o, Natsuki Hashitsume, and Natsuki Hashitsume, Statistical physics I, Springer Science, 1978

    1978

  28. [36]

    Magnetisation and mean field theory in the ising model

    Dalton AR Sakthivadivel, “Magnetisation and mean field theory in the ising model”, SciPost Physics Lec- ture Notes , p. 035, 2022

    2022

  29. [37]

    Quantum phase transitions

    Matthias Vojta, “Quantum phase transitions”, Reports on Progress in Physics , vol. 66, no. 12, pp. 2069, 2003

    2003

  30. [38]

    The theory of ferromagnetic resonance at high signal powers

    H Suhl, “The theory of ferromagnetic resonance at high signal powers”, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 209–227, 1957

    1957

  31. [39]

    Spontaneous disentanglement and thermal- ization

    Eyal Buks, “Spontaneous disentanglement and thermal- ization”, Advanced Quantum Technologies , p. 2400036, 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    Daniel D Stancil and Anil Prabhakar, Spin waves , Springer, 2009

    2009

  33. [41]

    Tutorial: non- linear magnonics

    Shasha Zheng, Zhenyu Wang, Yipu Wang, Fengxiao Sun, Qiongyi He, Peng Yan, and HY Yuan, “Tutorial: non- linear magnonics”, Journal of Applied Physics , vol. 134, no. 15, pp. 151101, 2023

    2023

  34. [42]

    Cavity magnonics

    Babak Zare Rameshti, Silvia Viola Kusminskiy, James A Haigh, Koji Usami, Dany Lachance-Quirion, Yasunobu Nakamura, Can-Ming Hu, Hong X Tang, Gerrit EW Bauer, and Yaroslav M Blanter, “Cavity magnonics”, 7 Physics Reports, vol. 979, pp. 1–61, 2022

    2022

  35. [43]

    Cavity optomagnonics

    Silvia Viola Kusminskiy, “Cavity optomagnonics”, in Optomagnonic Structures: Novel Architectures for Si- multaneous Control of Light and Spin Waves , pp. 299–

  36. [44]

    Bistability of cavity magnon polaritons

    Yi-Pu Wang, Guo-Qiang Zhang, Dengke Zhang, Tie-Fu Li, C-M Hu, and JQ You, “Bistability of cavity magnon polaritons”, Physical review letters , vol. 120, no. 5, pp. 057202, 2018

    2018

  37. [45]

    Magnon kerr effect in a strongly coupled cavity-magnon system

    Yi-Pu Wang, Guo-Qiang Zhang, Dengke Zhang, Xiao- Qing Luo, Wei Xiong, Shuai-Peng Wang, Tie-Fu Li, C- M Hu, and JQ You, “Magnon kerr effect in a strongly coupled cavity-magnon system”, Physical Review B , vol. 94, no. 22, pp. 224410, 2016

    2016

  38. [46]

    Direct measurement of foldover in cavity magnon-polariton systems

    P Hyde, BM Yao, YS Gui, Guo-Qiang Zhang, JQ You, and C-M Hu, “Direct measurement of foldover in cavity magnon-polariton systems”, Physical Review B , vol. 98, no. 17, pp. 174423, 2018

    2018

  39. [47]

    Sum-frequency excitation of coherent magnons

    Dominik M Juraschek, Derek S Wang, and Prineha Narang, “Sum-frequency excitation of coherent magnons”, Physical Review B, vol. 103, no. 9, pp. 094407, 2021

    2021

  40. [48]

    Effect of magnon bands on quantum entan- glement in two-dimensional ferromagnets in the checker- board lattice

    LS Lima, “Effect of magnon bands on quantum entan- glement in two-dimensional ferromagnets in the checker- board lattice”, The European Physical Journal Plus , vol. 137, no. 5, pp. 1–6, 2022

    2022

  41. [49]

    Cavity optomagnonics

    Silvia Viola Kusminskiy, “Cavity optomagnonics”, arXiv:1911.11104, 2019

    1911 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Optical cooling of magnons

    Sanchar Sharma, Yaroslav M Blanter, and Gerrit EW Bauer, “Optical cooling of magnons”, Physical review letters, vol. 121, no. 8, pp. 087205, 2018

    2018

  43. [51]

    Inverse faraday effect in an optomagnonic waveguide

    Na Zhu, Xufeng Zhang, Xu Han, Chang-Ling Zou, and Hong X Tang, “Inverse faraday effect in an optomagnonic waveguide”, arXiv:2012.11119, 2020

    2012 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Light propagation and magnon-photon coupling in op- tically dispersive magnetic media

    V ASV Bittencourt, I Liberal, and S Viola Kusminskiy, “Light propagation and magnon-photon coupling in op- tically dispersive magnetic media”, Physical Review B , vol. 105, no. 1, pp. 014409, 2022

    2022

  45. [53]

    Hybrid quantum systems based on magnonics

    Dany Lachance-Quirion, Yutaka Tabuchi, Arnaud Gloppe, Koji Usami, and Yasunobu Nakamura, “Hybrid quantum systems based on magnonics”, Applied Physics Express, vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 070101, 2019

    2019

  46. [54]

    Entanglement-based single-shot detection of a single magnon with a superconducting qubit

    Dany Lachance-Quirion, Samuel Piotr Wolski, Yutaka Tabuchi, Shingo Kono, Koji Usami, and Yasunobu Nakamura, “Entanglement-based single-shot detection of a single magnon with a superconducting qubit”, arXiv:1910.09096, 2019

    1910 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Quantum magnonics: The magnon meets the superconducting qubit

    Yutaka Tabuchi, Seiichiro Ishino, Atsushi Noguchi, Toy- ofumi Ishikawa, Rekishu Yamazaki, Koji Usami, and Ya- sunobu Nakamura, “Quantum magnonics: The magnon meets the superconducting qubit”, Comptes Rendus Physique, vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 729–739, 2016

    2016

  48. [56]

    Resources of nonlinear cavity magnonics for quantum information

    Mehrdad Elyasi, Yaroslav M Blanter, and Gerrit EW Bauer, “Resources of nonlinear cavity magnonics for quantum information”, Physical Review B , vol. 101, no. 5, pp. 054402, 2020

    2020

  49. [57]

    Quantum entanglement between two magnon modes via kerr nonlinearity driven far from equilibrium

    Zhedong Zhang, Marlan O Scully, and Girish S Agarwal, “Quantum entanglement between two magnon modes via kerr nonlinearity driven far from equilibrium”, Physical Review Research, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 023021, 2019

    2019

  50. [58]

    Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet

    T Holstein and Hl Primakoff, “Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet”, Phys- ical Review, vol. 58, no. 12, pp. 1098, 1940

    1940

  51. [59]

    Exactly solvable time-dependent pseudo-hermitian su (1, 1) hamiltonian models

    R Grimaudo, Asm De Castro, M Ku´ s, and A Messina, “Exactly solvable time-dependent pseudo-hermitian su (1, 1) hamiltonian models”, Physical Review A , vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 033835, 2018

    2018

  52. [60]

    Mixed-state entanglement from local randomized measurements

    Andreas Elben, Richard Kueng, Hsin-Yuan Robert Huang, Rick van Bijnen, Christian Kokail, Marcello Dalmonte, Pasquale Calabrese, Barbara Kraus, John Preskill, Peter Zoller, et al., “Mixed-state entanglement from local randomized measurements”, Physical Review Letters, vol. 125,...

    2020

  53. [61]

    Non- hermitian quantum dynamics of a two-level system and models of dissipative environments

    Alessandro Sergi and Konstantin G Zloshchastiev, “Non- hermitian quantum dynamics of a two-level system and models of dissipative environments”, International Jour- nal of Modern Physics B , vol. 27, no. 27, pp. 1350163, 2013

    2013

  54. [62]

    Mixed-state evo- lution in the presence of gain and loss

    Dorje C Brody and Eva-Maria Graefe, “Mixed-state evo- lution in the presence of gain and loss”, Physical review letters, vol. 109, no. 23, pp. 230405, 2012

    2012

  55. [63]

    Bistability phenomena in electron param- agnetic resonance

    M Cacchiani, M Giordano, M Martinelli, L Pardi, and S Santucci, “Bistability phenomena in electron param- agnetic resonance”, Physical Review A , vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 5695, 1989

    1989

  56. [64]

    Magnetic bistability and overhauser shift of conduction electrons in gallium oxide

    Eric Aubay and Didier Gourier, “Magnetic bistability and overhauser shift of conduction electrons in gallium oxide”, Physical Review B , vol. 47, no. 22, pp. 15023, 1993

    1993

  57. [65]

    Performance of cavity- parametric amplifiers, employing kerr nonlinearites, in the presence of two-photon loss

    Bernard Yurke and Eyal Buks, “Performance of cavity- parametric amplifiers, employing kerr nonlinearites, in the presence of two-photon loss”, J. Lightwave Tech. , vol. 24, pp. 5054–5066, 2006

    2006

  58. [66]

    Optical and magneto-optical behavior of cerium yttrium iron garnet thin films at wavelengths of 200–1770 nm

    Mehmet C Onbasli, Luk´ aˇ s Beran, Martin Zahradn ´ ık, Miroslav Kuˇ cera, Roman Antoˇ s, Jan Mistr ´ ık, Gerald F Dionne, Martin Veis, and Caroline A Ross, “Optical and magneto-optical behavior of cerium yttrium iron garnet thin films at wavelengths of 200–1770 nm”, Scientific ...

    2016

  59. [67]

    Magnetostatic modes in ferromag- netic resonance

    Laurence R Walker, “Magnetostatic modes in ferromag- netic resonance”, Physical Review , vol. 105, no. 2, pp. 390, 1957

    1957

  60. [68]

    Ferrimagnetic resonance modes in spheres

    PC Fletcher and RO Bell, “Ferrimagnetic resonance modes in spheres”, Journal of Applied Physics , vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 687–698, 1959

    1959

  61. [69]

    Triple-resonant brillouin light scattering in magneto-optical cavities

    JA Haigh, Andreas Nunnenkamp, AJ Ramsay, and AJ Ferguson, “Triple-resonant brillouin light scattering in magneto-optical cavities”, Physical review letters , vol. 117, no. 13, pp. 133602, 2016

    2016

  62. [70]

    Or- bital angular momentum conservation in brillouin light scattering within a ferromagnetic sphere

    A Osada, A Gloppe, Y Nakamura, and K Usami, “Or- bital angular momentum conservation in brillouin light scattering within a ferromagnetic sphere”, New Journal of Physics , vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 103018, 2018

    2018

  63. [71]

    Magnon-induced high-order sideband generation

    Zeng-Xing Liu, Bao Wang, Hao Xiong, and Ying Wu, “Magnon-induced high-order sideband generation”, Op- tics Letters, vol. 43, no. 15, pp. 3698–3701, 2018

    2018

  64. [72]

    Single-sideband microwave-to-optical conversion in high-q ferrimagnetic microspheres

    Cheng-Zhe Chai, Zhen Shen, Yan-Lei Zhang, Hao-Qi Zhao, Guang-Can Guo, Chang-Ling Zou, and Chun-Hua Dong, “Single-sideband microwave-to-optical conversion in high-q ferrimagnetic microspheres”, Photonics Re- search, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 820–827, 2022

    2022

  65. [73]

    Waveguide cavity optomagnonics for microwave-to-optics conversion

    Na Zhu, Xufeng Zhang, Xu Han, Chang-Ling Zou, Changchun Zhong, Chiao-Hsuan Wang, Liang Jiang, and Hong X Tang, “Waveguide cavity optomagnonics for microwave-to-optics conversion”, Optica, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 1291–1297, 2020

    2020

  66. [74]

    Quantum network with magnonic and mechan- 8 ical nodes

    Jie Li, Yi-Pu Wang, Wei-Jiang Wu, Shi-Yao Zhu, and JQ You, “Quantum network with magnonic and mechan- 8 ical nodes”, PRX Quantum , vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 040344, 2021

    2021

  67. [75]

    Polarization- selective magneto-optical modulation

    Banoj Kumar Nayak and Eyal Buks, “Polarization- selective magneto-optical modulation”, Journal of Ap- plied Physics , vol. 132, no. 19, pp. 193905, 2022

    2022

  68. [76]

    Polarimeter optical spectrum analyzer

    Eyal Buks, “Polarimeter optical spectrum analyzer”, Photonics, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 486, 2024

    2024

  69. [77]

    Dissipative dynamics of optomagnonic nonclassical features via anti-stokes optical pulses: squeezing, blockade, anti-correlation, and entangle- ment

    E Ghasemian, “Dissipative dynamics of optomagnonic nonclassical features via anti-stokes optical pulses: squeezing, blockade, anti-correlation, and entangle- ment”, Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 12757, 2023

    2023

  70. [78]

    Optomagnonics in magnetic solids

    Tianyu Liu, Xufeng Zhang, Hong X Tang, and Michael E Flatt´ e, “Optomagnonics in magnetic solids”, Physical Review B , vol. 94, no. 6, pp. 060405, 2016

    2016

  71. [79]

    Polar- ization dependent scattering in cavity optomagnonics

    JA Haigh, A Nunnenkamp, and AJ Ramsay, “Polar- ization dependent scattering in cavity optomagnonics”, Physical Review Letters , vol. 127, no. 14, pp. 143601, 2021

    2021

  72. [80]

    Helicity- changing brillouin light scattering by magnons in a ferro- magnetic crystal

    R Hisatomi, A Noguchi, R Yamazaki, Y Nakata, A Gloppe, Y Nakamura, and K Usami, “Helicity- changing brillouin light scattering by magnons in a ferro- magnetic crystal”, Physical Review Letters , vol. 123, no. 20, pp. 207401, 2019

    2019

  73. [81]

    Bidirectional conversion between microwave and light via ferromag- netic magnons

    Ryusuke Hisatomi, Alto Osada, Yutaka Tabuchi, Toy- ofumi Ishikawa, Atsushi Noguchi, Rekishu Yamazaki, Koji Usami, and Yasunobu Nakamura, “Bidirectional conversion between microwave and light via ferromag- netic magnons”, Physical Review B , vol. 93, no. 17, pp. 174427, 2016

    2016

  74. [82]

    Remote magnon entanglement between two massive ferrimagnetic spheres via cavity optomagnonics

    Wei-Jiang Wu, Yi-Pu Wang, Jin-Ze Wu, Jie Li, and JQ You, “Remote magnon entanglement between two massive ferrimagnetic spheres via cavity optomagnonics”, Physical Review A , vol. 104, no. 2, pp. 023711, 2021

    2021

  75. [83]

    Frequency mixing in a ferrimagnetic sphere resonator

    Cijy Mathai, Sergei Masis, Oleg Shtempluck, Shay Hacohen-Gourgy, and Eyal Buks, “Frequency mixing in a ferrimagnetic sphere resonator”, Euro. Phys. Lett. , vol. 131, 2020

    2020

  76. [84]

    Signatures for a classical to quantum transi- tion¡? format?¿ of a driven nonlinear nanomechanical resonator

    Itamar Katz, Alex Retzker, Raphael Straub, and Ron Lifshitz, “Signatures for a classical to quantum transi- tion¡? format?¿ of a driven nonlinear nanomechanical resonator”, Physical review letters , vol. 99, no. 4, pp. 040404, 2007

    2007

  77. [85]

    Quantum bistability at the interplay between collective and indi- vidual decay

    Nikita Leppenen and Ephraim Shahmoon, “Quantum bistability at the interplay between collective and indi- vidual decay”, arXiv:2404.02134, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Spectral theory of liouvillians for dis- sipative phase transitions

    Fabrizio Minganti, Alberto Biella, Nicola Bartolo, and Cristiano Ciuti, “Spectral theory of liouvillians for dis- sipative phase transitions”, Physical Review A , vol. 98, no. 4, pp. 042118, 2018

    2018

  79. [87]

    Critical slowing down in driven-dissipative bose-hubbard lattices

    Filippo Vicentini, Fabrizio Minganti, Riccardo Rota, Giuliano Orso, and Cristiano Ciuti, “Critical slowing down in driven-dissipative bose-hubbard lattices”, Phys- ical Review A , vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 013853, 2018

    2018

  80. [88]

    Multistability of driven-dissipative quantum spins

    Haggai Landa, Marco Schir´ o, and Gr´ egoire Misguich, “Multistability of driven-dissipative quantum spins”, Physical Review Letters, vol. 124, no. 4, pp. 043601, 2020

    2020

  81. [89]

    Spontaneous disentanglement of indistin- guishable particles

    Eyal Buks, “Spontaneous disentanglement of indistin- guishable particles”, Advanced Quantum Technologies , p. 2400248, 2024. 1 Supporting information: Disentanglement–induced bistab ility in a magnetic resonator Eyal Buks Andrew and Erna Viterbi Department of Electrical Engine...

    2024

  82. [353]

    World Scientific, 2021

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.