Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 98 references

Controlling many-body quantum chaos in a dissipative optical cavity

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-11 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Cavity loss and spontaneous emission hit many-body chaos differently: one preserves linear chaos fingerprints, the other erases them.

desk verdict Solid open-systems analysis: cavity loss and spontaneous emission project to rank-1 vs high-rank dephasing with opposite effects on linear chaos diagnostics; the structural claim holds under the stated assumptions. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.04455 v1 pith:WDEBACCD submitted 2026-07-05 quant-ph cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.quant-gas

Filippo Ferrari , Francesca Orsi , Ekaterina Fedotova , Óscar Rios Alves , Micha{l} Zdziennicki , Jean-Philippe Brantut , Vincenzo Savona This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.quant-gas PACS 03.65.Yz42.50.Pq05.45.Mt67.85.Lm
keywords cavityQEDmany-bodyquantumchaosultracoldfermionsdissipationspontaneousemissionentanglemententropydephasingcooperativity
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

Cavity QED with ultracold fermions can engineer disordered long-range interactions that realize many-body quantum chaos, but the platform is open and loses coherence through two channels: photons leaking from the cavity and atoms spontaneously scattering drive light. This paper shows that those two channels are not equivalent. After the cavity is eliminated, photon loss becomes a single effective dephasing operator whose sparse structure still lets linear observables (orbital occupations) distinguish integrable from chaotic evolution. Spontaneous emission at realistic trap sizes instead produces a dense collection of nonlocal dephasing operators that thermalize occupations regardless of the underlying Hamiltonian. Both channels suppress half-system entanglement well below the Page value at cooperativities of a few tens to a few hundred. The work therefore supplies concrete operating windows and observable choices that keep selected chaos signatures experimentally accessible while quantifying how large the cooperativity must become before entanglement itself can serve as a faithful diagnostic.

What carries the argument

The fermionic random quantum circuit (f-RQC): a product of unitaries generated by successive, randomly disordered, cavity-mediated all-to-all Hamiltonians that produces chaotic evolution in the closed system; after adiabatic elimination the two Lindblad dissipators acquire qualitatively different ranks and thereby control whether chaos fingerprints survive in open dynamics.

What would settle it

Measure single-orbital occupations under static versus dynamically switched disorder at cavity detuning of order the cavity linewidth: if both protocols thermalize to half-filling equally fast, the claimed structural distinction between the two dissipators is absent; if only the dynamical protocol thermalizes, the distinction holds.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In a driven-dissipative cavity-fermion system that realizes a fermionic random quantum circuit, cavity photon loss reduces to one effective dephasing channel that leaves linear density-matrix observables able to distinguish integrable from chaotic Hamiltonian dynamics, whereas spontaneous emission at Lamb-Dicke parameter of order one generates an extensive set of nonlocal dephasing channels that erase that distinction; both mechanisms keep half-system entanglement below the Page value at realistic cooperativity.

Load-bearing premise

Atoms stay inside the fixed set of trap orbitals used to define the model; spontaneous-emission recoil does not eject population into higher bands or the continuum on the experimental timescale.

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 paper analyzes driven-dissipative dynamics of ultracold fermions in a single-mode optical cavity with controllable disorder, realizing photon-mediated long-range interactions. In the dispersive regime the unitary dynamics is generated by an effective fermionic Hamiltonian (Eq. 2); a time-dependent disorder protocol (f-RQC, Eq. 3) produces many-body chaos. The two physical dissipation channels are shown to map to qualitatively different Lindblad structures after adiabatic elimination: cavity loss yields a single sparse dephasing operator (Eq. 5), while spontaneous emission at realistic Lamb-Dicke parameter η∼ O(1) yields a high-rank collection of nonlocal dephasing operators (Eq. 6). Quantum-trajectory simulations (N≤14, half filling) demonstrate that cavity-dominated dephasing preserves the distinction between integrable (static disorder) and chaotic (f-RQC) evolution in linear observables such as orbital occupations, whereas spontaneous emission erases it; both channels keep half-system entanglement below the Page value at experimentally realistic cooperativities C∼20–200. Quantitative constraints on C and detuning for observing chaos signatures are extracted.

Significance. If the structural distinction between the two dissipators and its consequences for linear versus nonlinear observables hold, the work supplies concrete, experimentally actionable design rules for cavity-QED platforms that aim to realize disordered fermionic chaos (including SYK-like models). It identifies a usable window (cavity-dominated regime) in which thermodynamic and response quantities remain faithful diagnostics of integrability versus chaos even at present-day C, while clarifying that entanglement-based diagnostics require C∼10^4. Strengths include fully microscopic derivations of the effective Hamiltonian and jump operators (SI), direct comparison with unitary, SYK and Trotterized benchmarks, and the use of realistic 6Li parameters together with Monte-Carlo trajectories. The results therefore constrain both theory and ongoing experiments on disordered cavity-mediated interactions.

major comments (3)
  1. [End Matter / SI spontaneous emission] End Matter and SI (spontaneous-emission section, Eqs. 29–32): All trajectory data (Figs. 2–4) and the derived dissipators presuppose that spontaneous-emission recoil keeps atoms inside the truncated orbital manifold that defines the random fermionic model. While a gapped optical-lattice spectrum is proposed to freeze higher bands, no quantitative estimate of residual heating rate Γ_heat∼(2/3)η^{2}Γ_eff versus the coherent scale E (or versus the 10–30 ms simulation window) is given for any concrete lattice geometry. This comparison is load-bearing: if population leaves the manifold on the experimental timescale, both Ĥ_eff and the jump operators cease to describe the system.
  2. [Figs. 2–3 / Quantum many-body dynamics] Figs. 2–3 and main-text claims on linear observables: The preservation of integrable-versus-chaotic signatures under cavity dephasing is demonstrated only for product half-filling initial states and single-orbital occupations. Robustness for other initial states, for two-point correlators that remain linear in ρ, or for the long-time approach to the thermal value under residual spontaneous emission (footnote 73) is not shown; without it the claim that cavity loss “preserves signatures” remains incompletely supported.
  3. [Fig. 4(d) / Quantum many-body entanglement] Fig. 4(d) and the C-scaling discussion: The relative Page deficit δS_N/2 is reported only up to N=14 and is said to approach ∼1/√C asymptotically. Because both monitoring channels are extensive, finite-size corrections to the prefactor and to the C required for 1 % recovery may be substantial; an explicit N-scaling analysis (or at least data for one larger N) is needed before the experimental bound C∼ O(10^4) can be regarded as quantitative.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figs. 2–3] Figs. 2–3 captions and main text repeatedly write “black-dahsed” (missing ‘s’) and “N traj” (missing subscript formatting).
  2. [SI Sec. II] SI Fig. 7 caption and surrounding text: the variance of the Gaussian couplings for the f-RQC versus Trotterized protocols is stated inconsistently (g^{2}/2N versus g^{2}/N^{2}); a single clarifying sentence would remove ambiguity.
  3. [End Matter Table I] Table I (End Matter) lists η=2.81 for 6Li at x0=300 nm, yet the main-text simulations use x0=100 nm (η≃0.94); a brief cross-reference would avoid reader confusion.
  4. [Abstract / System and protocols] The acronym f-RQC is introduced without expansion in the abstract; a parenthetical “fermionic random quantum circuit” on first use would improve accessibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: dissipator ranks and chaos signatures follow from microscopic adiabatic elimination plus external benchmarks (thermal occupation, Page entropy), not from fitted or self-defined inputs.

full rationale

The central distinction (cavity loss o single low-rank dephasing channel preserving linear-observable integrability/chaos contrast; spontaneous emission at η∼ O(1) o high-rank nonlocal dephasing erasing it) is obtained by adiabatic elimination of the cavity mode and of the atomic excited state, followed by expansion of the photon-coherence kernel j0(k0|r-r′|) in the orbital basis (main-text Eqs. 5–6 and SI Eqs. 29–38). The resulting Lindblad operators are not fitted to any target signature; their rank structure is fixed by the microscopic recoil kernel and the Lamb-Dicke parameter. Chaos diagnostics themselves are external: half-filling thermal occupation ⟨c†j cj⟩ o1/2, Page entropy for a U(1)-symmetric half-system, and OTOC decay, all compared against the unitary effective model and against SYK/Trotterized references (SI Fig. 7). Self-citations to the group’s prior cavity-SYK proposals and disorder-engineering experiments supply motivation and experimental context but are not used to force the rank distinction or the numerical outcomes. The finite-orbital-manifold assumption is an acknowledged modeling limitation (End Matter), not a circular step. Consequently the derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular.

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

The central claim rests on standard open-system and cavity-QED machinery plus a few platform-specific modeling choices (fixed C, truncated orbitals, f-RQC as chaos generator, η∼O(1) spontaneous-emission tensor). No new particles or forces are postulated; free parameters are experimental knobs fixed to realistic values rather than fitted to produce the chaos distinction.

free parameters (5)
  • single-atom cooperativity C = 20 (main text); scanned 20–10^4 in Fig. 4(d)
    Fixed to C=20 throughout main simulations as a realistic experimental value; entanglement deficit vs C is scanned later. Central qualitative claim does not require a fit of C.
  • cavity loss rate κ/2π = 200 kHz
    Fixed to 200 kHz for all main figures; sets absolute time unit and E/κ_eff ratio together with Δ_cd.
  • Lamb-Dicke parameter η (via trap length x0) = η≃0.94 (main); η=0.047 (End Matter)
    Main text uses x0∼100 nm (η≃0.94) as experimentally relevant; End Matter contrasts η≪1. Structure of spontaneous-emission dissipator depends strongly on this choice.
  • number of disorder patterns n in f-RQC = n=2N+1
    Chosen as n=2N+1; controls how thoroughly the circuit explores disorder. Not fitted to data but ad hoc for chaos generation.
  • drive and detuning set (Ω_d, Δ_cd, Δ_da) = e.g. Δ_cd=κ/2 or 5κ; Ω_d/2π=12–38 MHz; Δ_da/2π=3 GHz
    Tuned so that E is matched across cavity-dominated and emission-dominated regimes; free experimental knobs, not data fits.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Dispersive adiabatic elimination of atomic excited states and of the cavity mode yields the effective fermionic Hamiltonian and the effective jump operators used throughout.
    Standard cavity-QED Schrieffer–Wolff / Heisenberg elimination (SI §§I.A, I.C); validity requires |Δ_da|,|Δ_cd| large compared with rates, assumed in all main-text regimes.
  • domain assumption The f-RQC protocol (product of n∼O(N) short evolutions under independent disorder realizations of the low-rank effective Hamiltonian) generates many-body quantum chaos in the closed system.
    Supported by SI comparison to SYK and Trotterized protocols (thermalization, Page entropy, OTOC decay) but not proved; main claim about open-system preservation of chaos signatures inherits this.
  • domain assumption Spontaneous emission after adiabatic elimination is fully captured by the nonlocal dephasing tensor K_jkℓm built from the photon-coherence kernel j0(k0|r−r′|) on the truncated orbital basis.
    SI §I.B; neglects cavity-assisted spontaneous emission and continuum loss outside the orbital manifold.
  • standard math Monte Carlo quantum trajectories correctly sample the Lindblad master equation for the combined cavity and spontaneous-emission dissipators.
    Standard open-systems method (Dalibard–Castin–Mølmer); used for all dynamical figures.
  • ad hoc to paper Trap Hamiltonian and photon-number-dependent quadratic terms can be dropped or separately controlled without changing the qualitative dissipation distinction.
    Main text drops them; End Matter shows trap term freezes dynamics for light atoms (6Li) unless trap is engineered. Load-bearing for claiming experimental accessibility.
invented entities (1)
  • fermionic random quantum circuit (f-RQC) protocol
    purpose: Simplified time-dependent disorder protocol claimed to generate many-body chaos without the laboratory-time overhead of Trotterized SYK simulation.
    Named and defined in the paper (Eq. 3); SI shows it thermalizes and reaches Page entropy but scrambles more slowly than SYK/Trotterization. Independent evidence is numerical within the paper, not external experiment.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Controlling many-body quantum chaos in a dissipative optical cavity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WDEBACCD

@misc{pith2026260704455,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Controlling many-body quantum chaos in a dissipative optical cavity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WDEBACCD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.04455}
}
read the original abstract

Cavity quantum electrodynamics (QED) with ultracold fermions provides a promising platform for realizing many-body quantum chaos through disordered, photon-mediated long-range interactions. Such setups are inherently open and are therefore subject to dissipation arising from cavity photon loss and atomic spontaneous emission. In this article, we study the driven-dissipative dynamics of a typical cavity QED setting including controllable disorder and long-range interactions. We find that the two dissipation sources have qualitatively different structures. Cavity loss reduces to a single dephasing channel, whereas spontaneous emission in the experimentally relevant regime generates a collection of nonlocal dephasing channels. Cavity-induced dephasing preserves signatures distinguishing integrable from chaotic Hamiltonian dynamics in observables that depend linearly on the density matrix, while spontaneous emission suppresses these signatures. By contrast, quantities that probe the structure of the many-body state, such as the entanglement entropy, are strongly affected by both dissipation mechanisms. Assuming experimentally realistic parameters, we derive quantitative constraints for the observation and control of many-body quantum chaos in cavity-QED platforms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.04455 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Sketch of the experimental setup: a high-finesse op [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a-b) Averaged dynamics of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Same as in Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Entanglement entropy dynamics for (a) the effective model in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Quantum many-body dynamics with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison among the SYK dynamics generated by the Hamiltonian in Eq. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Time evolution of the cavity photon number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Relative distance from Page entropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Quantum many-body dynamics with cavity dissipation as the sole decoherence channel for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Behavior of the spontaneous emission couplings with the Lamb-Dicke parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

98 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Ritsch, P

    H. Ritsch, P. Domokos, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Cold atoms in cavity-generated dynamical optical poten- tials, Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 553 (2013)

    2013

  2. [2]

    Georgescu, S

    I. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Quantum simula- tion, Rev. Mod. Phys.86, 153 (2014)

    2014

  3. [3]

    Mivehvar, F

    F. Mivehvar, F. Piazza, T. Donner, and H. Ritsch, Cavity QED with quantum gases: new paradigms in many-body physics, Adv. Phys.70, 1 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    Altman, K

    E. Altman, K. R. Brown, G. Carleo, L. D. Carr, E. Dem- ler, C. Chin, B. DeMarco, S. E. Economou, M. A. Eriks- son, K.-M. C. Fu, M. Greiner, K. R. Hazzard, R. G. Hulet, A. J. Koll´ ar, B. L. Lev, M. D. Lukin, R. Ma, X. Mi, S. Misra, C. Monroe, K. Murch, Z. Nazario, K.-K. Ni, A. C. Potter, P. Roushan, M. Saffman, M. Schleier- Smith, I. Siddiqi, R. Simmonds,...

    2021

  5. [5]

    Baumann, C

    K. Baumann, C. Guerlin, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Dicke quantum phase transition with a superfluid gas in an optical cavity, Nature464, 1301 (2010)

    2010

  6. [6]

    Baumann, R

    K. Baumann, R. Mottl, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Exploring Symmetry Breaking at the Dicke Quantum Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 140402 (2011)

    2011

  7. [7]

    Mottl, F

    R. Mottl, F. Brennecke, K. Baumann, R. Landig, T. Don- ner, and T. Esslinger, Roton-Type Mode Softening in a Quantum Gas with Cavity-Mediated Long-Range Inter- actions, Science336, 1570 (2012)

    2012

  8. [8]

    Landig, L

    R. Landig, L. Hruby, N. Dogra, M. Landini, R. Mottl, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Quantum phases from com- peting short- and long-range interactions in an optical lattice, Nature532, 476 (2016)

    2016

Show all 98 references
  1. [9]

    L´ eonard, A

    J. L´ eonard, A. Morales, P. Zupancic, T. Esslinger, and T. Donner, Supersolid formation in a quantum gas break- ing a continuous translational symmetry, Nature543, 87 (2017)

    2017

  2. [10]

    Zhang, Y

    X. Zhang, Y. Chen, Z. Wu, J. Wang, J. Fan, S. Deng, and H. Wu, Observation of a superradiant quantum phase transition in an intracavity degenerate Fermi gas, Science 373, 1359 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Helson, T

    V. Helson, T. Zwettler, F. Mivehvar, E. Colella, K. Roux, H. Konishi, H. Ritsch, and J.-P. Brantut, Density-wave ordering in a unitary Fermi gas with photon-mediated interactions, Nature618, 716 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Zwettler, F

    T. Zwettler, F. Marijanovic, T. B¨ uhler, S. Chattopad- hyay, G. Del Pace, L. Skolc, V. Helson, S. Uchino, E. Demler, and J.-P. Brantut, Cavity-mediated charge and pair-density waves in a unitary Fermi gas, Nat. Com- mun.17, 496 (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    B¨ uhler, A

    T. B¨ uhler, A. Fabre, G. Bolognini, Z. Xue, T. Zwettler, G. Del Pace, and J.-P. Brantut, Microscopy of Cavity- Induced Density-Wave Ordering in Ultracold Gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 143401 (2026)

    2026

  6. [14]

    Y. Guo, R. M. Kroeze, V. D. Vaidya, J. Keeling, and B. L. Lev, Sign-Changing Photon-Mediated Atom Interactions in Multimode Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 193601 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    R. M. Kroeze, B. P. Marsh, D. Atri Schuller, H. S. Hunt, A. N. Bourzutschky, M. Winer, S. Gopalakrishnan, J. Keeling, and B. L. Lev, Directly observing replica sym- metry breaking in a vector quantum-optical spin glass, Science389, 1122 (2025)

    2025

  8. [16]

    B. P. Marsh, D. A. Schuller, Y. Ji, H. S. Hunt, G. Z. Socolof, D. P. Bowman, J. Keeling, and B. L. Lev, Mul- timode Cavity QED Ising Spin Glass, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 160403 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    Keßler, P

    H. Keßler, P. Kongkhambut, C. Georges, L. Mathey, J. G. Cosme, and A. Hemmerich, Observation of a Dis- sipative Time Crystal, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 043602 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Kongkhambut, J

    P. Kongkhambut, J. Skulte, L. Mathey, J. G. Cosme, A. Hemmerich, and H. Keßler, Observation of a continu- ous time crystal, Science377, 670 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    I. D. Leroux, M. H. Schleier-Smith, and V. Vuleti´ c, Im- plementation of Cavity Squeezing of a Collective Atomic Spin, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 073602 (2010)

    2010

  12. [20]

    Z. Chen, J. G. Bohnet, S. R. Sankar, J. Dai, and J. K. Thompson, Conditional Spin Squeezing of a Large En- semble via the Vacuum Rabi Splitting, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 133601 (2011)

    2011

  13. [21]

    Hosten, N

    O. Hosten, N. J. Engelsen, R. Krishnakumar, and M. A. Kasevich, Measurement noise 100 times lower than the quantum-projection limit using entangled atoms, Nature 529, 505 (2016)

    2016

  14. [22]

    Huang, J

    M.-Z. Huang, J. A. De La Paz, T. Mazzoni, K. Ott, P. Rosenbusch, A. Sinatra, C. L. Garrido Alzar, and J. Reichel, Observing Spin-Squeezed States under Spin- Exchange Collisions for a Second, PRX Quantum4, 020322 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    J. M. Robinson, M. Miklos, Y. M. Tso, C. J. Kennedy, T. Bothwell, D. Kedar, J. K. Thompson, and J. Ye, Direct comparison of two spin-squeezed optical clock ensembles at the 10-17 level, Nat. Phys.20, 208 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Brennecke, R

    F. Brennecke, R. Mottl, K. Baumann, R. Landig, T. Don- ner, and T. Esslinger, Real-time observation of fluctu- ations at the driven-dissipative Dicke phase transition, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.110, 11763 (2013)

    2013

  17. [25]

    Klinder, H

    J. Klinder, H. Keßler, M. Wolke, L. Mathey, and A. Hem- merich, Dynamical phase transition in the open Dicke model, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.112, 3290 (2015)

    2015

  18. [26]

    Dogra, M

    N. Dogra, M. Landini, K. Kroeger, L. Hruby, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Dissipation-induced structural instabil- ity and chiral dynamics in a quantum gas, Science366, 1496 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    J. A. Muniz, D. Barberena, R. J. Lewis-Swan, D. J. Young, J. R. K. Cline, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, Exploring dynamical phase transitions with cold atoms in an optical cavity, Nature580, 602 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Ferri, R

    F. Ferri, R. Rosa-Medina, F. Finger, N. Dogra, M. Sori- ente, O. Zilberberg, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Emerg- ing Dissipative Phases in a Superradiant Quantum Gas with Tunable Decay, Phys. Rev. X11, 041046 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    D. J. Young, A. Chu, E. Y. Song, D. Barberena, D. Well- nitz, Z. Niu, V. M. Sch¨ afer, R. J. Lewis-Swan, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, Observing dynamical phases of BCS superconductors in a cavity QED simulator, Na- ture625, 679 (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    E. Y. Song, D. Barberena, D. J. Young, E. Chaparro, A. Chu, S. Agarwal, Z. Niu, J. T. Young, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, A dissipation-induced superradiant transition in a strontium cavity-QED system, Sci. Adv. 11, eadu5799 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Domokos and H

    P. Domokos and H. Ritsch, Collective Cooling and Self- Organization of Atoms in a Cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 253003 (2002)

    2002

  24. [32]

    D. Nagy, G. K´ onya, G. Szirmai, and P. Domokos, Dicke- Model Phase Transition in the Quantum Motion of a Bose-Einstein Condensate in an Optical Cavity, Phys. 7 Rev. Lett.104, 130401 (2010)

    2010

  25. [33]

    Dogra, F

    N. Dogra, F. Brennecke, S. D. Huber, and T. Donner, Phase transitions in a Bose-Hubbard model with cavity- mediated global-range interactions, Phys. Rev. A94, 023632 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    S. B. J¨ ager, S. Sch¨ utz, and G. Morigi, Mean-field theory of atomic self-organization in optical cavities, Phys. Rev. A94, 023807 (2016)

    2016

  27. [35]

    Himbert, C

    L. Himbert, C. Cormick, R. Kraus, S. Sharma, and G. Morigi, Mean-field phase diagram of the extended Bose-Hubbard model of many-body cavity quantum elec- trodynamics, Phys. Rev. A99, 043633 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    Defenu, T

    N. Defenu, T. Donner, T. Macr` ı, G. Pagano, S. Ruffo, and A. Trombettoni, Long-range interacting quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 035002 (2023)

    2023

  29. [37]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Adv. Phys. 65, 239 (2016)

    2016

  30. [38]

    Haake, S

    F. Haake, S. Gnutzmann, and M. Ku´ s,Quantum Signa- tures of Chaos, Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018)

    2018

  31. [39]

    Sachdev and J

    S. Sachdev and J. Ye, Gapless spin-fluid ground state in a random quantum Heisenberg magnet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3339 (1993)

    1993

  32. [40]

    Kitaev, A simple model of quantum holography (2015), talk at Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, California

    A. Kitaev, A simple model of quantum holography (2015), talk at Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, California

    2015

  33. [41]

    Maldacena, S

    J. Maldacena, S. H. Shenker, and D. Stanford, A bound on chaos, J. High Energy Phys.2016(8), 106

    2016

  34. [42]

    Maldacena and D

    J. Maldacena and D. Stanford, Remarks on the Sachdev- Ye-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. D94, 106002 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    Rosenhaus, An introduction to the SYK model, J

    V. Rosenhaus, An introduction to the SYK model, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.52, 323001 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Sachdev, Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy and Strange Metals, Phys

    S. Sachdev, Bekenstein-Hawking Entropy and Strange Metals, Phys. Rev. X5, 041025 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    R. A. Davison, W. Fu, A. Georges, Y. Gu, K. Jensen, and S. Sachdev, Thermoelectric transport in disordered metals without quasiparticles: The Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models and holography, Phys. Rev. B95, 155131 (2017)

    2017

  38. [46]

    Song, C.-M

    X.-Y. Song, C.-M. Jian, and L. Balents, Strongly Corre- lated Metal Built from Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev Models, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 216601 (2017)

    2017

  39. [47]

    Esterlis and J

    I. Esterlis and J. Schmalian, Cooper pairing of incoherent electrons: An electron-phonon version of the Sachdev-Ye- Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. B100, 115132 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Wang, Solvable Strong-Coupling Quantum-Dot Model with a Non-Fermi-Liquid Pairing Transition, Phys

    Y. Wang, Solvable Strong-Coupling Quantum-Dot Model with a Non-Fermi-Liquid Pairing Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 017002 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Chowdhury, A

    D. Chowdhury, A. Georges, O. Parcollet, and S. Sachdev, Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev models and beyond: Window into non-Fermi liquids, Rev. Mod. Phys.94, 035004 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    A. A. Patel, H. Guo, I. Esterlis, and S. Sachdev, Uni- versal theory of strange metals from spatially random interactions, Science381, 790 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Sonner and M

    J. Sonner and M. Vielma, Eigenstate thermalization in the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, J. High Energy Phys. 2017(11), 149

    2017

  44. [52]

    Hayden and J

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: quan- tum information in random subsystems, J. High Energy Phys.2007(09), 120

    2007

  45. [53]

    Maldacena, D

    J. Maldacena, D. Stanford, and Z. Yang, Conformal sym- metry and its breaking in two-dimensional nearly anti- de Sitter space, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2016, 12C104 (2016)

    2016

  46. [54]

    J. S. Cotler, G. Gur-Ari, M. Hanada, J. Polchinski, P. Saad, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford, A. Streicher, and M. Tezuka, Black holes and random matrices, J. High Energy Phys.2017(5), 118

    2017

  47. [55]

    Kitaev and S

    A. Kitaev and S. J. Suh, The soft mode in the Sachdev- Ye-Kitaev model and its gravity dual, J. High Energy Phys.2018(5), 183

    2018

  48. [56]

    Sauerwein, F

    N. Sauerwein, F. Orsi, P. Uhrich, S. Bandyopadhyay, F. Mattiotti, T. Cantat-Moltrecht, G. Pupillo, P. Hauke, and J.-P. Brantut, Engineering random spin models with atoms in a high-finesse cavity, Nat. Phys.19, 1128 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    F. Orsi, N. Sauerwein, R. P. Bhatt, J. Faltinath, E. Fe- dotova, N. Reiter, T. Cantat-Moltrecht, and J.-P. Bran- tut, Cavity Microscope for Micrometer-Scale Control of Atom-Photon Interactions, PRX Quantum5, 040333 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    Uhrich, S

    P. Uhrich, S. Bandyopadhyay, N. Sauerwein, J. Sonner, J.-P. Brantut, and P. Hauke, A cavity quantum elec- trodynamics implementation of the sachdev–ye–kitaev model (2023), arXiv:2303.11343 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Baumgartner, P

    R. Baumgartner, P. Pelliconi, S. Bandyopadhyay, F. Orsi, N. Sauerwein, P. Hauke, J.-P. Brantut, and J. Sonner, Quantum simulation of the sachdev-ye-kitaev model us- ing time-dependent disorder in optical cavities (2024), arXiv:2411.17802 [quant-ph]

    2024

  52. [60]

    R. L. Baumgartner, P. Pelliconi, S. Bandyopadhyay, F. Orsi, P. Hauke, J.-P. Brantut, and J. Sonner, Quan- tum simulation using trotterized disorder hamiltonians in a single-mode optical cavity (2025), arXiv:2512.13774 [quant-ph]

    2025

  53. [61]

    D. P. Solis, A. Windey, S. Bandyopadhyay, A. Legra- mandi, and P. Hauke, From single-particle to many-body chaos in the Yukawa-Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model: Theory and a cavity-QED proposal, Phys. Rev. B113, 184121 (2026)

    2026

  54. [62]

    G. S. Bolognini, Z. Xue, M. A. Eichenberger, N. Sauer- wein, F. Orsi, E. Fedotova, R. P. Bhatt, and J. P. Bran- tut, Design and assembly of a cavity microscope with high numerical aperture for quantum simulations, Opt. Express33, 44051 (2025)

    2025

  55. [63]

    J. W. Goodman, Some fundamental properties of speckle*, J. Opt. Soc. Am.66, 1145 (1976)

    1976

  56. [64]

    For more details, see the Supplementary Information

  57. [65]

    J. Kim, X. Cao, and E. Altman, Low-rank Sachdev-Ye- Kitaev models, Phys. Rev. B101, 125112 (2020)

    2020

  58. [66]

    (2) the two-body term ˆc† jˆc† ℓˆckˆcm is medi- ated byg jk gℓm, which is not the rank-4 tensor of SYK- type modelsg jkℓm [49]

    Namely, in Eq. (2) the two-body term ˆc† jˆc† ℓˆckˆcm is medi- ated byg jk gℓm, which is not the rank-4 tensor of SYK- type modelsg jkℓm [49]. This makes the model nonchaotic

  59. [67]

    Dalibard, Y

    J. Dalibard, Y. Castin, and K. Mølmer, Wave-function approach to dissipative processes in quantum optics, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 580 (1992)

    1992

  60. [68]

    Mølmer, Y

    K. Mølmer, Y. Castin, and J. Dalibard, Monte Carlo wave-function method in quantum optics, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B10, 524 (1993)

    1993

  61. [69]

    A. J. Daley, Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems, Adv. Phys.63, 77 (2014)

    2014

  62. [70]

    Throughout the paper, we always work within a finite set of orbitals, which encodes the sitesjof the random fermionic model in Eq. (2). A detrimental effect of heat- ing is atom loss, i.e., the ejection of atoms outside the trap. In the End Matter we argue that this effect can...

  63. [71]

    Holten, L

    M. Holten, L. Bayha, K. Subramanian, C. Heintze, P. M. Preiss, and S. Jochim, Observation of Pauli Crystals, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 020401 (2021)

    2021

  64. [72]

    Holten, L

    M. Holten, L. Bayha, K. Subramanian, S. Brandstetter, C. Heintze, P. Lunt, P. M. Preiss, and S. Jochim, Obser- vation of Cooper pairs in a mesoscopic two-dimensional Fermi gas, Nature606, 287 (2022)

    2022

  65. [73]

    As we show in the Supplementary Infor- mation, this is entirely due to the onset of spontaneous emission-induced dephasing an not to the cavity-induced dephasing

    For long times, we observe a decay of⟨ˆc † jˆcj⟩towards the thermal value. As we show in the Supplementary Infor- mation, this is entirely due to the onset of spontaneous emission-induced dephasing an not to the cavity-induced dephasing

  66. [74]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Systems, 1st ed. (Oxford University PressOx- ford, 2007)

    2007

  67. [75]

    Islam, R

    R. Islam, R. Ma, P. M. Preiss, M. Eric Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, and M. Greiner, Measuring entanglement en- tropy in a quantum many-body system, Nature528, 77 (2015)

    2015

  68. [76]

    A. M. Kaufman, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, P. M. Preiss, and M. Greiner, Quantum ther- malization through entanglement in an isolated many- body system, Science353, 794 (2016)

    2016

  69. [77]

    D. N. Page, Average entropy of a subsystem, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 1291 (1993)

    1993

  70. [78]

    Sen, Average Entropy of a Quantum Subsystem, Phys

    S. Sen, Average Entropy of a Quantum Subsystem, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 1 (1996)

    1996

  71. [79]

    Y. Yauk, R. Patil, Y. Zhang, M. Rigol, and L. Hackl, Typical entanglement entropy in systems with particle- number conservation, Phys. Rev. B110, 235154 (2024)

    2024

  72. [80]

    Skinner, J

    B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, Measurement- Induced Phase Transitions in the Dynamics of Entangle- ment, Phys. Rev. X9, 031009 (2019)

    2019

  73. [81]

    Jian, Y.-Z

    C.-M. Jian, Y.-Z. You, R. Vasseur, and A. W. W. Ludwig, Measurement-induced criticality in random quantum cir- cuits, Phys. Rev. B101, 104302 (2020)

    2020

  74. [82]

    A. S. Sørensen and K. Mølmer, Measurement Induced Entanglement and Quantum Computation with Atoms in Optical Cavities, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 097905 (2003)

    2003

  75. [83]

    D. P. Solis, A. Legramandi, S. Bandyopadhyay, and P. Hauke, Disorder-induced enhancement of fermionic su- perradiance (2026), arXiv:2606.30735 [quant-ph]

    2026 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Ferrari, L

    ´Oscar Rios Alves, F. Ferrari, L. Fioroni, A. Mercurio, and V. Savona, Density wave ordering with disordered ultra- cold fermions in optical cavities (2026), arXiv:2606.30769 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2026 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Mercurio, Y.-T

    A. Mercurio, Y.-T. Huang, L.-X. Cai, Y.-N. Chen, V. Savona, and F. Nori, QuantumToolbox.jl: An efficient Julia framework for simulating open quantum systems, Quantum9, 1866 (2025)

    2025

  78. [86]

    M. Born, E. Wolf, A. B. Bhatia, P. C. Clemmow, D. Ga- bor, A. R. Stokes, A. M. Taylor, P. A. Wayman, and W. L. Wilcock,Principles of Optics: Electromagnetic Theory of Propagation, Interference and Diffraction of Light, 7th ed. (Cambridge University Press, 1999)

    1999

  79. [87]

    Pichler, A

    H. Pichler, A. J. Daley, and P. Zoller, Nonequilibrium dynamics of bosonic atoms in optical lattices: Decoher- ence of many-body states due to spontaneous emission, Phys. Rev. A82, 063605 (2010)

    2010

  80. [88]

    Swingle, G

    B. Swingle, G. Bentsen, M. Schleier-Smith, and P. Hay- den, Measuring the scrambling of quantum information, Phys. Rev. A94, 040302 (2016)

    2016

  81. [89]

    Bohrdt, C

    A. Bohrdt, C. B. Mendl, M. Endres, and M. Knap, Scrambling and thermalization in a diffusive quantum many-body system, New J. Phys.19, 063001 (2017)

    2017

  82. [90]

    Hashimoto, K

    K. Hashimoto, K. Murata, and R. Yoshii, Out-of-time- order correlators in quantum mechanics, J. High Energy Phys.2017(10), 138

    2017

  83. [91]

    Xu and B

    S. Xu and B. Swingle, Scrambling Dynamics and Out-of- Time-Ordered Correlators in Quantum Many-Body Sys- tems, PRX Quantum5, 010201 (2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    Controlling many-body quantum chaos in a dissipative optical cavity

    P. Facchi and S. Pascazio, Quantum Zeno dynamics: mathematical and physical aspects, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.41, 493001 (2008). End Matter Quantum many-body dynamics in the Lamb-Dicke regime—. To demonstrate that the detrimental action of spontaneous emission on the quantum ma...

    2008

  85. [93]

    Adiabatic elimination of the atomic excited states We consider an ensemble of fermionic atoms harmonically trapped within a single-mode optical cavity. The full many-body Hamiltonian in the rotating wave approximation reads ˆH=ω cˆa†ˆa+ X s=e,g Z d2r ˆΨ† s(r) − ∇2 2mat +V(r) ˆ...

  86. [94]

    The single-particle wave functions depends on the trapping geometry

    Single-particle wave functions We now expand the fermionic field operator ˆΨg(r) in single-particle wave functions and many-body annihilation operators, ˆΨg(r) =PN j=1 φj(r) ˆcj. The single-particle wave functions depends on the trapping geometry. In this case, we assume a 2D ...

  87. [95]

    In practice, the cloud of fermionic atoms is subject to a spatially disordered AC-Stark shift that off-resonantly dresses the excited state|e⟩with an auxiliary state|a⟩

    Generation of the speckle potential The disorder in the system is implemented via the randomization of the drive-atom detuning ∆ da(r). In practice, the cloud of fermionic atoms is subject to a spatially disordered AC-Stark shift that off-resonantly dresses the excited state|e...

  88. [96]

    (1) in the main text

    Hamiltonian in second-quantization Finally, we explicitly express the Hamiltonian in second quantization, obtaining Eq. (1) in the main text. We get indeed ˆH= ∆ cdˆa†ˆa+ Z d2r ˆΨ† g(r) − ∇2 2mat +V(r) ˆΨg(r) + Ω2 d Z d2r g2 d(r) ∆da(r) ˆΨ† g(r) ˆΨg(r) + Ω2 4 Z d2r g2(r) ∆da(r...

  89. [97]

    Deep Lamb-Dicke regime:η≪1 If we fixλ c and thusk 0, tuningx 0 to zero allows us to reach the deep Lamb-Dicke regime whereη≪1 and j0(k0|r−r ′|)∼1 since|r−r ′| →0. This implies that the spontaneous emission dissipator reduces to Z d2rd2r′ ˆLa(r)ˆρˆL† a(r′) = Γ Ω2 d ∆2 da X jkℓm...

  90. [98]

    −i MX α=1 ˆH(α) eff t # ≃

    Recoil corrections:η≲1 To understand the recoil corrections that appear when leaving the deep Lamb-Dicke regimeη≪1 we consider the n-dependent jump operator in Eq. (24). We perform the adiabatic elimination on ˆΨ† g(r) ˆΨe(r) and expand ˆΨg(r) in the harmonic oscillator eigenf...

Pith tools

Reviewed July 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.