Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 68 references

Entropy Production in Continuously Measured Gaussian Quantum Systems

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Continuous measurement changes entropy production by an information term and yields a stricter second law.

desk verdict A clean derivation of a conditional entropy-production identity for Gaussian systems, but the key split is a convention that needs a physical anchor before the 'refined second law' carries real weight. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09382 v2 pith:U2WG5T2U submitted 2019-08-25 quant-ph

Alessio Belenchia , Luca Mancino , Gabriel T. Landi , Mauro Paternostro This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords entropyproductioncontinuousmeasurementGaussianquantumsystemsWignerstochasticmasterequationsecondlawofthermodynamicsmutualinformationphase-spacemethods
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 seeks a general formula for the entropy production rate of a Gaussian quantum system that is being continuously measured. It claims that the monitored rate $\Pi$ is exactly the unmonitored rate $\Pi_{\mathrm{uc}}$ plus a term $\dot I$ coming from the information acquired by the measurement: $\Pi = \Pi_{\mathrm{uc}} + \dot I$, with $I = -I(X:\bar X) \le 0$ the negative mutual information between the phase-space position and the measurement outcomes. Because $\Pi_{\mathrm{uc}} \ge 0$, the paper obtains a refined second law $\Pi \ge \dot I$ that encodes the entropic cost of continuous monitoring. This matters because it ties irreversibility directly to information flow and offers a route to quantifying entropy production in monitored optical and mechanical systems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the phase-space probability current of the Wigner function. For a Gaussian state the conditional Wigner function obeys a stochastic phase-space continuity equation $dW = -\mathrm{div}(J\,dt + J_{\mathrm{sto}})$, and the deterministic current splits into reversible and irreversible parts, $J = J_{\mathrm{rev}} + J_{\mathrm{irr}}$, plus a measurement-induced contribution $J_2 = \frac12 \chi \nabla W$. The entropy production is identified with the part of the entropy rate quadratic in the irreversible currents, including the negative semidefinite $J_2$ term, while the entropy flux is the linear part; averaging over trajectories then produces the identity $\Pi = \Pi_{\mathrm{uc}} + \dot I$. The Wigner entropy $S = -\int W \ln W = \frac12 \ln \det \sigma + \mathrm{const}$ is what makes the conditional entropy rate deterministic even though individual trajectories are stochastic.

What would settle it

Record the quadrature trajectories of a homodyne-monitored harmonic oscillator coupled to a thermal bath, reconstruct the conditional covariance matrix $\sigma(t)$, and compute $\dot I$ from the explicit formula; independently estimate the averaged trajectory entropy production by comparing the forward and time-reversed path probabilities of the recorded stochastic record. If the two numbers do not match, the chosen split into flux and production is not the physical one. In a regime where $\dot I > 0$ (for instance the thermal quench described in the paper), the refined bound $\Pi \ge \dot I$ can also be checked directly; a stationary violation would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Working with the Wigner function and the Wigner entropy $S = \frac12 \ln \det \sigma + \mathrm{const}$, the paper establishes that for Gaussian systems under continuous Gaussian measurements the averaged conditional entropy production rate is $$\Pi = \Pi_{\mathrm{uc}} + \dot I, \qquad I = \ln \frac{P_{\mathrm{uc}}}{P} = -I(X:\bar X) \le 0,$$ where $P$ is the purity of the conditional state and $I(X:\bar X)$ is the classical mutual information between the phase-space position $X$ and the stochastic first moments $\bar X$ of the measurement record. The rate is $\dot I = \frac12 \mathrm{Tr}[\sigma^{-1}(D - \chi(\sigma)) - \sigma_{\mathrm{uc}}^{-1}D]$, with $\chi(\sigma)$ the measurement back-action term. Combined with the unconditioned second law $\Pi_{\mathrm{uc}} \ge 0$, this yields the sharper bound $\Pi \ge \dot I$. The paper also shows that the averaged conditional entropy flux equals the unconditional flux, so all measurement effects are concentrated in the informational term.

Load-bearing premise

The identity stands on the convention that the entropy-production piece is exactly the quadratic part of the irreversible phase-space currents, including the negative measurement-induced term, and on taking the Wigner entropy as the thermodynamic entropy of the system; change either of those choices and $\Pi = \Pi_{\mathrm{uc}} + \dot I$ need not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In any monitored Gaussian system, the ordinary second law $\Pi_{\mathrm{uc}}\ge0$ is replaced by the refined bound $\Pi \ge \dot I$; when $\dot I>0$, this bound is strictly stronger than the unmonitored one.
  • The informational term $I=-\ln(P_{\mathrm{uc}}/P)=-I(X:\bar X)$ is non-positive and vanishes only when the conditional and unconditional covariance matrices coincide, so any measurement that actually extracts information makes $I$ negative.
  • At a steady state maintained by continuous monitoring, $\dot I$ vanishes only if the monitored and unmonitored steady states coincide; with noisy or inefficient detection the steady states differ and $I$ remains nonzero, as the optical-parametric-oscillator example shows.
  • Because the averaged conditional entropy flux equals the unconditional flux for Gaussian systems, the measurement alters irreversibility only through the covariance dynamics, not through the heat-flux term; this makes the framework directly applicable to monitored optical and mechanical platforms.
  • The result generalizes earlier discrete-measurement information bounds on the cost of measurement to continuously monitored systems out of equilibrium.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension would be to estimate $\dot I$ independently from the measured covariance dynamics of a levitated nanoparticle or cavity mode and compare it with entropy production inferred from the trajectory statistics; agreement would confirm the production/flux split experimentally.
  • Since $\dot I$ depends on the measurement matrices through $\chi(\sigma)$, choosing the detection strategy (homodyne versus heterodyne, detection efficiency, added noise) tunes the lower bound on dissipation; this suggests using continuous measurements as a control knob for irreversibility, an idea the paper leaves implicit.
  • The negativity of $I$ invites a resource interpretation: information acquired by the observer acts as an entropic credit that can make the monitored process appear less irreversible than the unmonitored one; extending the formalism to feedback control could convert that credit into extractable work.
  • Because Gaussianity is used mainly to make the conditional Wigner entropy deterministic, a similar identity may hold for the entropy built from the Q function; testing a two-level or spin system would show whether the structure survives outside the Gaussian class.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a phase-space formalism for entropy production in continuously monitored Gaussian quantum systems. It models the conditional dynamics through a stochastic master equation, uses the Wigner entropy as the entropic measure, and writes the entropy balance as S_dot = Phi + Pi. The central result is Eq. (2), Pi = Pi_uc + I_dot, where Pi_uc is the unconditional entropy production and I_dot is the rate of the informational term I = S(W)-S(W_uc), which is identified with minus the mutual information between the phase-space position and the measured first moments. From Pi_uc >= 0 the authors derive the refined second law Pi >= I_dot. The framework is illustrated on a driven harmonic oscillator undergoing a thermal quench and on a driven-dissipative optical parametric oscillator under homodyne and heterodyne detection.

Significance. If the proposed split is accepted, the paper provides a clean, explicit closed-form decomposition for Gaussian systems, with detailed derivations in the Supplement, a transparent Gaussian averaging, and a physically motivated identification of the informational term with mutual information. The numerical examples are relevant and the comparison with the Groenewold-Ozawa quantum-classical information is interesting. The main caveat is that the central identity is tied to a particular choice of how to split the entropy rate into flux and production, and to the use of Wigner entropy; the paper would be substantially strengthened by explicitly stating and defending that this split is a convention rather than a forced result.

major comments (3)
  1. [Supplemental Note 3, Eqs. (S26)-(S29)] The split of dS into entropy production (the first two quadratic terms of Eq. (S26)) and flux (the last linear term) is adopted rather than derived. If the negative term -2∫ dx J2^T χ^{-1}J2 were grouped with the flux instead, Eq. (2) would become Pi = Pi_uc with a modified flux, and the "refined" second law would reduce to the unconditional one. The manuscript itself says the authors "incorporate this term in the entropy production" and that the "crucial step is to identify" the quadratic part; this is an explicit admission of convention. The proof that E[dφ/dt] = Φuc in Eq. (S31) does not resolve the ambiguity because dφ is defined as the linear part of the rate. Since the claim of a sharpened second law rests on this split, the paper should either state that Eq. (2) is a definition within the adopted split and adjust the abstract and Discussion accordingly, or supply an independent criterion (e.g., a path-ratio fluctuation theorem or a microscopic collisional model) that singles out the split.
  2. [Supplemental Note 3, Eq. (S26)] The expression uses χ^{-1}, but χ(σ) = (σC^T+Γ^T)(Cσ+Γ) is positive semi-definite and is singular for ideal homodyne detection, which is one of the main cases considered in Fig. 2. As written, the trajectory-level entropy-production integrand is therefore not well-defined for those examples. The authors should replace χ^{-1} with the pseudo-inverse acting on the range of χ, or show that the final averaged expressions (S29)-(S32) are well-defined in the homodyne limit. This is a technical gap in the trajectory-level formulation even though the averaged rates only involve Tr[σ^{-1}χ].
  3. [Results, paragraph containing Eq. (2)] The inequality Pi >= I_dot is algebraically equivalent to Pi_uc >= 0, since Pi - I_dot = Pi_uc by Eq. (2). Calling the result a "sharpened" or "more stringent" second law is therefore not quite accurate as a mathematical statement; the genuinely new content is the informational reinterpretation of I_dot, not a stronger numerical bound. In particular, because I <= 0, the bound can be weaker than Pi >= 0 over finite intervals. The presentation should be revised so that the contribution is framed as an identity with an information-theoretic interpretation rather than as a tightening of the second law.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Supplemental Note 1, Eq. (S3)] The first expression in Eq. (S3) has a sign error. Since S(W) = -∑ p log p and S(Wuc) = H(X), the quantity I = S(W)-S(Wuc) should read -∑ p log p + H(X) = H(X|\bar X) - H(X), not ∑ p log p - H(X). The final identification I = -I(X:\bar X) is correct, but the displayed equation should be fixed.
  2. [Supplemental Note 1, Eq. (S4)] The displayed identity H(A|B)-H(B) = H(B|A)-H(A) is not true in general; the correct relation is I(A:B) = H(A)-H(A|B) = H(B)-H(B|A). The conclusion I = -I(X:\bar X) is unaffected, but Eq. (S4) should be corrected or removed.
  3. [Supplemental Notes, references] The Supplement cites [S42], [S59], [S61], and [S64], but no supplemental bibliography is provided, so these citations cannot be resolved. Please add a supplementary reference list or map each [S...] label to the main reference list.
  4. [Results, linearity assumption] The claim that linearity of the stochastic entropy flux can be proven for more general systems via repeated collisions is supported by Ref. [61], which is listed as "In preparation (2020)". This is an unpublished self-citation for a load-bearing general point; please replace it with a citable proof or clearly label the statement as an anticipation.
  5. [Main text, after Eq. (7)] The symbol I is used both for the informational quantity and for the classical mutual information I(X:\bar X) in the sentence following Eq. (7). This is confusing; please use a different symbol for at least one of the two quantities.
  6. [Figure 2 caption and Methods] The caption of Fig. 2 is not self-contained. The mapping between the parameter s and the monitored quadrature (homodyne with s=0 or s=∞, heterodyne with s=1) is only given in Methods; please state it in the caption or in the main text.
  7. [Figure 2 caption, panel (c)] The caption describes panel (c) as showing I, while the surrounding text and panels (a), (b), (d), (e) refer to the information rate I_dot. Please make the distinction between I and I_dot consistent in the caption and the text.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

Eq. (2) is partly a stipulated decomposition: the negative measurement-current term is assigned to entropy production in Supplement Note 3, and the general flux-linearity premise leans on an in-preparation self-citation; the Gaussian derivation itself is explicit and I is independently identified.

  1. self definitional [Supplemental Note 3, Eqs. (S26)-(S29)]
    "We identify the last terms as the entropy flux increment and the first two terms as the entropy production one. ... Nonetheless, we incorporate this term in the entropy production and recognize in the last term the entropy flux with the same form as in the unconditional case."

    Equation (S26) splits dS into a positive quadratic term in J_irr, a negative semi-definite quadratic term in J_2=(1/2)χ∇W, and a linear term. The central identity Π=Πuc+˙I follows only because the negative J_2 term is assigned to the entropy production Π (Eqs. S28-S29). If that term were instead assigned to the flux, the averaged production would be Πuc + (1/2)Tr[(σ^{-1}-σ_uc^{-1})D], not Πuc+˙I, and the refined second law would reduce to the unconditional one. The paper offers no independent criterion, such as a fluctuation-theorem ratio, that forces this split; the 'linearity of the flux' is then partly a restatement of the chosen decomposition rather than a dynamical prediction.

  2. self citation load bearing [Main text, 'Entropy rate of a continuously measured system' (paragraph after Eq. (1))]
    "To the best of our knowledge, no example of violation of this assumption has been reported in the literature so far. However, a formal proof of linearity is still missing. ... The same can be done for more general systems starting from a microscopic description of the system-environment interaction via a repeated collisions model [61]."

    The linearity of the stochastic entropy flux in the conditional state is the premise that makes Eq. (2) more than a definition. For Gaussian systems the paper supplies an explicit proof, but the extension to general systems is deferred to Ref. [61], which is an in-preparation work by the same authors (Landi, Paternostro, Belenchia). This self-citation does not provide independent verification of the missing general proof; it is a promissory note. Because the paper's central claim is Gaussian, this step is only mildly load-bearing.

full rationale

The main derivation is self-contained for Gaussian systems: the stochastic Fokker-Planck equation is derived from the SME, the Wigner-entropy rate is computed, and the informational term is independently shown to equal -I(X:\bar{X}). No parameter is fitted and no external benchmark is silently used. However, the central result Π=Πuc+˙I is not a forced theorem: it depends on the explicit choice in Supplement Note 3 to classify the negative semi-definite J_2-quadratic term as entropy production rather than flux. The paper is candid about this ('we incorporate this term in the entropy production'), and without that stipulation the sharpened second law would not follow. The Wigner-entropy measure is imported from the authors' prior Ref. [59], but that is published, peer-reviewed work and is not fitted to the present examples; the main identity would survive with any entropy that depends only on the CM. The remaining use of self-citations (Refs. [21,61,68]) supports context or generalization, not the Gaussian derivation. Overall the circularity burden is mild: the result is a plausible, convention-dependent decomposition rather than an identity forced by hidden assumptions.

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

The main result has no fitted free parameters; the examples use illustrative parameter choices. The central identity depends on the Wigner entropy measure, the linearity of the stochastic flux, and the chosen split of entropy into flux and production. The informational term I is a derived quantity, not a new physical entity.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The unconditional entropy production rate is non-negative (Πuc ≥ 0).
    Standard second law for the unmonitored Markovian dynamics, used to derive the refined inequality Π ≥ ˙I.
  • domain assumption Wigner entropy (Rényi-2) is the appropriate entropy measure for the Gaussian systems considered.
    Adopted from Ref [59] to avoid divergences at zero temperature; equals von Neumann entropy in the high-temperature limit.
  • domain assumption The stochastic entropy flux averaged over trajectories equals the unconditional flux, E[dφ/dt] = Φuc.
    Proven for Gaussian states in the Supplement; assumed to hold more generally in the main text.
  • ad hoc to paper Entropy production is defined as the quadratic part of the entropy rate in the irreversible phase-space currents, including the negative measurement contribution.
    This identification is a modeling choice; it is what makes Π = Πuc + ˙I hold.
  • standard math Gaussianity is preserved under linear Lindblad dynamics and Gaussian measurements.
    Standard result in Gaussian quantum information, used to reduce the dynamics to covariance matrix equations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entropy Production in Continuously Measured Gaussian Quantum Systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U2WG5T2U

@misc{pith2026190809382,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entropy Production in Continuously Measured Gaussian Quantum Systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U2WG5T2U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09382}
}
read the original abstract

The entropy production rate is a key quantity in non-equilibrium thermodynamics of both classical and quantum processes. No universal theory of entropy production is available to date, which hinders progress towards its full grasping. By using a phase space-based approach, here we take the current framework for the assessment of thermodynamic irreversibility all the way to quantum regimes by characterizing entropy production -- and its rate -- resulting from the continuous monitoring of a Gaussian system. This allows us to formulate a sharpened second law of thermodynamics that accounts for the measurement back-action and information gain from a continuously monitored system. We illustrate our framework in a series of physically relevant examples.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09382 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Reciprocal Relations in Irreversible Processes. I

    L. Onsager, “Reciprocal Relations in Irreversible Processes. I.” Phys. Rev. 37, 405 (1931)

    work page 1931

  2. [2]

    Fluctuations and Irreversible Process. II. Systems with Kinetic Energy,

    S. Machlup and L. Onsager, “Fluctuations and Irreversible Process. II. Systems with Kinetic Energy,” Phys. Rev. 91, 1512 (1953)

    work page 1953

  3. [3]

    S. R. de Groot and P. Mazur, Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics (North-Holland Physics Publishing, Amsterdam, 1961)

    work page 1961

  4. [4]

    Fluctuations and Irreversible Thermodynamics,

    L. Tisza and I. Manning, “Fluctuations and Irreversible Thermodynamics,” Phys. Rev. 105, 1695 (1957)

    work page 1957

  5. [5]

    Network theory of microscopic and macroscopic behavior of master equation sys- tems,

    J. Schnakenberg, “Network theory of microscopic and macroscopic behavior of master equation sys- tems,” Rev. Mod. Phys.48, 571 (1976)

    work page 1976

  6. [6]

    Entropy production in nonequilibrium systems at stationary states,

    T. Tom ´e and M. J. de Oliveira, “Entropy production in nonequilibrium systems at stationary states,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 020601 (2012)

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    Entropy production in linear Langevin systems,

    G. T. Landi, T. Tom´e, and M. J. de Oliveira, “Entropy production in linear Langevin systems,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 46, 395001 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Quantum jumps and entropy production,

    Heinz-Peter Breuer, “Quantum jumps and entropy production,” Phys. Rev. A 68, 032105 (2003)

    work page 2003

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Nonequilibrium entropy production for open quantum systems,

    Sebastian De ffner and Eric Lutz, “Nonequilibrium entropy production for open quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 140404 (2011)

    2011

  2. [10]

    Quantum fokker-planck-kramers equation and entropy production,

    M ´ario J. de Oliveira, “Quantum fokker-planck-kramers equation and entropy production,” Phys. Rev. E 94, 012128 (2016)

    2016

  3. [11]

    T. B. Batalh ˜ao, S. Gherardini, J. P. Santos, G. T. Landi, and M. Paternostro, in Thermodynamics in the quantum regime - Recent Progress and Outlook , Fundamental Theories of Physics (Springer International Publishing, 2019) p. 395

    2019

  4. [12]

    Nonequilibrium measurements of free energy di fferences for microscopically re- versible markovian systems,

    Gavin E. Crooks, “Nonequilibrium measurements of free energy di fferences for microscopically re- versible markovian systems,” J. Stat. Phys.90, 1481–1487 (1998). 16

    1998

  5. [13]

    Nonequilibrium equality for free energy di fferences,

    C. Jarzynski, “Nonequilibrium equality for free energy di fferences,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2690–2693 (1997)

    1997

  6. [14]

    Classical and quantum fluctuation theorems for heat exchange,

    Christopher Jarzynski and Daniel K. W ´ojcik, “Classical and quantum fluctuation theorems for heat exchange,” Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 230602 (2004)

    2004

  7. [15]

    Irreversibility and the arrow of time in a quenched quantum system,

    T. B. Batalh ˜ao et al, “Irreversibility and the arrow of time in a quenched quantum system,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 190601 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    Experimental determination of irreversible entropy production in out-of- equilibrium mesoscopic quantum systems,

    M. Brunelli et al, “Experimental determination of irreversible entropy production in out-of- equilibrium mesoscopic quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 160604 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    Reversing the direction of heat flow using quantum correlations,

    Kaonan Micadei et al, “Reversing the direction of heat flow using quantum correlations,” Nat. Com- mun. 10, 2456 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    Path-ensemble averages in systems driven far from equilibrium,

    Gavin E. Crooks, “Path-ensemble averages in systems driven far from equilibrium,” Phys. Rev. E 61, 2361–2366 (2000)

    2000

  11. [19]

    Entropy production in full phase space for continuous stochastic dynamics,

    Richard E. Spinney and Ian J. Ford, “Entropy production in full phase space for continuous stochastic dynamics,” Phys. Rev. E85, 051113 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    Quantum fluctuation theorems for arbitrary environments: Adiabatic and nonadiabatic entropy production,

    Gonzalo Manzano, Jordan M. Horowitz, and Juan M. R. Parrondo, “Quantum fluctuation theorems for arbitrary environments: Adiabatic and nonadiabatic entropy production,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 031037 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Irreversible entropy production, from classical to quantum,

    G. T. Landi and M. Paternostro, “Irreversible entropy production, from classical to quantum,” Preprint at arXiv:2009.07668 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Entropy production as correlation between system and reservoir,

    Massimiliano Esposito, Katja Lindenberg, and Christian Van den Broeck, “Entropy production as correlation between system and reservoir,” New J. Phys.12, 013013 (2010)

    2010

  15. [23]

    An improved landauer principle with finite-size corrections,

    David Reeb and Michael M Wolf, “An improved landauer principle with finite-size corrections,” New J. Phys. 16, 103011 (2014)

    2014

  16. [24]

    The role of quantum coherence in non-equilibrium entropy production,

    Jader P. Santos, Lucas C. C ´eleri, Gabriel T. Landi, and Mauro Paternostro, “The role of quantum coherence in non-equilibrium entropy production,” npj Quant. Inf. 5, 23 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Role of coherence in the nonequilibrium thermodynamics of quantum systems,

    G. Francica, J. Goold, and F. Plastina, “Role of coherence in the nonequilibrium thermodynamics of quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. E99, 042105 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    Energetic footprints of irreversibility in the quantum regime,

    M. H. Mohammady, A Auff´eves, and J. Anders, “Energetic footprints of irreversibility in the quantum regime,” arXiv:1907.06559 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Ir- reversibility at zero temperature from the perspective of the environment,

    Jader P. Santos, Alberto L. de Paula, Raphael Drumond, Gabriel T. Landi, and Mauro Paternostro, “Ir- reversibility at zero temperature from the perspective of the environment,” Phys. Rev. A97, 050101(R) 17 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    On-chip maxwell’s demon as an information-powered refrigerator,

    J. V . Koski, A. Kutvonen, I. M. Khaymovich, T. Ala-Nissila, and J. P. Pekola, “On-chip maxwell’s demon as an information-powered refrigerator,” Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 260602 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Extracting work from quantum measurement in Maxwell demon engines,

    Cyril Elouard, David Herrera-Mart ´ı, Benjamin Huard, and Alexia Au ff`eves, “Extracting work from quantum measurement in Maxwell demon engines,” Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 260603 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Fluctuation theorems for continuous quantum measurements and absolute irreversibility,

    Sreenath K. Manikandan, Cyril Elouard, and Andrew N. Jordan, “Fluctuation theorems for continuous quantum measurements and absolute irreversibility,” Phys. Rev. A99, 022117 (2019)

    2019

  23. [31]

    Thermodynamics of weakly measured quantum systems,

    Jose Joaquin Alonso, Eric Lutz, and Alessandro Romito, “Thermodynamics of weakly measured quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 080403 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    The role of quantum measurement in stochastic thermodynamics,

    Cyril Elouard, David A Herrera-Mart ´ı, Maxime Clusel, and Alexia Au ff`eves, “The role of quantum measurement in stochastic thermodynamics,” npj Quantum Information 3, 9 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    Non-equilibrium thermodynamics of continuously measured quantum systems: a circuit-QED implementation,

    P G Di Stefano, J J Alonso, Eric Lutz, G Falci, and M Paternostro, “Non-equilibrium thermodynamics of continuously measured quantum systems: a circuit-QED implementation,” Phys. Rev. B98, 144514 (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    Heat and work along individual trajectories of a quantum bit,

    M. Naghiloo et al, “Heat and work along individual trajectories of a quantum bit,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110604 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Information gain and loss for a quantum maxwell’s demon,

    M. Naghiloo, J. J. Alonso, A. Romito, E. Lutz, and K. W. Murch, “Information gain and loss for a quantum maxwell’s demon,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 030604 (2018)

    2018

  28. [36]

    Quantum-trajectory approach to the stochastic thermodynamics of a forced harmonic oscillator,

    Jordan M. Horowitz, “Quantum-trajectory approach to the stochastic thermodynamics of a forced harmonic oscillator,” Phys. Rev. E85, 031110 (2012)

    2012

  29. [37]

    Quantum jump approach for work and dissipation in a two-level system,

    F. W. J. Hekking and J. P. Pekola, “Quantum jump approach for work and dissipation in a two-level system,” Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 093602 (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    Observing a quantum maxwell demon at work,

    N Cottet et al, “Observing a quantum maxwell demon at work,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 7561–7564 (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    Information-to-work conversion by maxwell’s demon in a superconducting circuit quantum electrodynamical system,

    Y Masuyama et al, “Information-to-work conversion by maxwell’s demon in a superconducting circuit quantum electrodynamical system,” Nat. Commun. 9, 1–6 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Stochastic thermodynamics with arbitrary interventions,

    Philipp Strasberg and Andreas Winter, “Stochastic thermodynamics with arbitrary interventions,” Phys. Rev. E 100, 022135 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Repeated interactions and quantum stochastic thermodynamics at strong cou- pling,

    Philipp Strasberg, “Repeated interactions and quantum stochastic thermodynamics at strong cou- pling,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 180604 (2019)

    2019

  34. [42]

    Second law of thermodynamics with discrete quantum feed- 18 back control,

    Takahiro Sagawa and Masahito Ueda, “Second law of thermodynamics with discrete quantum feed- 18 back control,” Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 080403 (2008)

    2008

  35. [43]

    Minimal energy cost for thermodynamic information process- ing: Measurement and information erasure,

    Takahiro Sagawa and Masahito Ueda, “Minimal energy cost for thermodynamic information process- ing: Measurement and information erasure,” Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 250602 (2009)

    2009

  36. [44]

    Fundamental energy cost for quantum measurement,

    K. Abdelkhalek, Y . Nakata, and D. Reeb, “Fundamental energy cost for quantum measurement,” Preprint at arXiv:1609.06981 (2016)

    2016 arXiv

  37. [45]

    The entropic cost of quantum generalized measurements,

    Luca Mancino, Marco Sbroscia, Emanuele Roccia, Ilaria Gianani, Fabrizia Somma, Paolo Mataloni, Mauro Paternostro, and Marco Barbieri, “The entropic cost of quantum generalized measurements,” npj Quant. Inf. 4, 20 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    Quantum cooling and squeezing of a levitating nanosphere via time-continuous measurements,

    Marco G Genoni, Jinglei Zhang, James Millen, Peter F Barker, and Alessio Serafini, “Quantum cooling and squeezing of a levitating nanosphere via time-continuous measurements,” New J. Phys. 17, 073019 (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    General-dyne unravelling of a thermal master equation,

    M G Genoni, S Mancini, and A Serafini, “General-dyne unravelling of a thermal master equation,” Russ. J. Math. Phys. 21, 329 (2014)

    2014

  40. [48]

    Nanoscale temperature measurements using non- equilibrium brownian dynamics of a levitated nanosphere,

    J. Millen, T. Deesuwan, P. Barker, and J. Anders, “Nanoscale temperature measurements using non- equilibrium brownian dynamics of a levitated nanosphere,” Nat. Nanotechnol.9, 425 EP – (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    Dynamic relaxation of a levitated nanoparticle from a non-equilibrium steady state,

    Jan Gieseler, Romain Quidant, Christoph Dellago, and Lukas Novotny, “Dynamic relaxation of a levitated nanoparticle from a non-equilibrium steady state,” Nat. Nanotechnol.9, 358 EP – (2014)

    2014

  42. [50]

    Testing collapse models with levitated nanoparticles: Detection challenge,

    A. Vinante et al, “Testing collapse models with levitated nanoparticles: Detection challenge,” Phys. Rev. A 100, 012119 (2019)

    2019

  43. [51]

    Thermody- namics of continuous non-markovian feedback control,

    Maxime Debiossac, David Grass, Jose Joaquin Alonso, Eric Lutz, and Nikolai Kiesel, “Thermody- namics of continuous non-markovian feedback control,” Nat. Commun.11, 1360 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Direct measurement of kramers turnover with a levitated nanoparticle,

    L Rondin et al, “Direct measurement of kramers turnover with a levitated nanoparticle,” Nat. Nan- otechnol. 12, 1130 EP – (2017)

    2017

  45. [53]

    Optically levitated nanoparticle as a model system for stochastic bistable dynamics,

    F. Ricci et al, “Optically levitated nanoparticle as a model system for stochastic bistable dynamics,” Nat. Commun. 8, 15141 EP – (2017)

    2017

  46. [54]

    Levitated nanoparticles for microscopic thermodynamics—a review,

    Jan Gieseler and James Millen, “Levitated nanoparticles for microscopic thermodynamics—a review,” Entropy 20 (2018)

    2018

  47. [55]

    Experimental test of the di fferential fluctuation theorem and a generalized Jarzynski equality for arbitrary initial states,

    Thai M. Hoang, Rui Pan, Jonghoon Ahn, Jaehoon Bang, H. T. Quan, and Tongcang Li, “Experimental test of the di fferential fluctuation theorem and a generalized Jarzynski equality for arbitrary initial states,” Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 080602 (2018)

    2018

  48. [56]

    Feedback control of quantum systems using continuous state estima- 19 tion,

    A. C Doherty and K. Jacobs, “Feedback control of quantum systems using continuous state estima- 19 tion,” Physical Review A60, 2700–2711 (1999)

    1999

  49. [57]

    Alessio Serafini, Quantum Continuous Variables: A Primer of Theoretical Methods (CRC Press, 2017)

    2017

  50. [58]

    Conditional and unconditional Gaussian quantum dynamics,

    M G Genoni, L Lami, and A Serafini, “Conditional and unconditional Gaussian quantum dynamics,” Contemp. Phys. 57, 331 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    Wigner entropy production rate,

    Jader P. Santos, Gabriel T. Landi, and Mauro Paternostro, “Wigner entropy production rate,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 220601 (2017)

    2017

  52. [60]

    Uzdin, in Thermodynamics in the quantum regime - Recent Progress and Outlook , Fundamental Theories of Physics (Springer International Publishing, 2019) p

    R. Uzdin, in Thermodynamics in the quantum regime - Recent Progress and Outlook , Fundamental Theories of Physics (Springer International Publishing, 2019) p. 681

    2019

  53. [61]

    Informational steady-states and condi- tional entropy production in continuously monitored systems,

    Gabriel T Landi, Mauro Paternostro, and Alessio Belenchia, “Informational steady-states and condi- tional entropy production in continuously monitored systems,” In preparation (2020)

    2020

  54. [62]

    Spin-phase-space-entropy production,

    Jader P. Santos, L C C ´eleri, F Brito, G T Landi, and M Paternostro, “Spin-phase-space-entropy production,” Phys. Rev. A97, 052123 (2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    Quantum features of entropy production in driven-dissipative transitions,

    Bruno O. Goes, Carlos E. Fiore, and Gabriel T. Landi, “Quantum features of entropy production in driven-dissipative transitions,” Phys. Rev. Research2, 013136 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    Optimal unravellings for feedback control in linear quantum systems,

    H. M. Wiseman and A. C. Doherty, “Optimal unravellings for feedback control in linear quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 070405 (2005)

    2005

  57. [65]

    Measuring gaussian quantum information and correlations using the r´enyi entropy of order 2,

    Gerardo Adesso, Davide Girolami, and Alessio Serafini, “Measuring gaussian quantum information and correlations using the r´enyi entropy of order 2,” Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 190502 (2012)

    2012

  58. [66]

    Complete parameterization, and invariance, of diffusive quantum trajectories for markovian open systems,

    Howard M Wiseman and L Di ´osi, “Complete parameterization, and invariance, of diffusive quantum trajectories for markovian open systems,” Chemical Physics268, 91–104 (2001)

    2001

  59. [67]

    Howard M Wiseman and Gerard J Milburn, Quantum measurement and control(Cambridge university press, 2009)

    2009

  60. [68]

    Experimental assessment of entropy production in a continuously measured me- chanical resonator,

    Massimiliano Rossi, Luca Mancino, Gabriel T Landi, Mauro Paternostro, Albert Schliesser, and Alessio Belenchia, “Experimental assessment of entropy production in a continuously measured me- chanical resonator,” Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 080601 (2020). 20 Supplemental Materials: Ent...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.