Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Distributing entanglement at the quantum speed limit in Rydberg chains

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A chain of neutral atoms excited to Rydberg states can be tuned to transport a single excitation from end to end at the quantum speed limit, distributing entanglement across chains of more than fifty atoms.

desk verdict Solid numerical design study for Rydberg perfect transport — the short-chain optimization and the n* = 71 trade-off hold up, but the L_c = 54/90 claims rest on a scalar decay factor and an unquantified extrapolation. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.19228 v1 pith:Y5BMJRJP submitted 2025-06-24 quant-ph

Kent Ueno , Alexandre Cooper This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph PACS 03.67.Hk03.67.Mn32.80.Ee
keywords RydbergatomarraysperfectstatetransferquantumspeedlimitspinchainsentanglementdistributionHeisenbergXXmodelblockadetransport
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 claims that a chain of neutral atoms excited to Rydberg states can be used as a coherent quantum channel that transfers a single excitation from one end to the other at the quantum speed limit, thereby distributing entanglement across the chain. The authors show that by tuning interatomic distances and site-selective detunings, the native Rydberg spin model maps onto the Heisenberg XX model with the linear-spectrum coupling profile known to give perfect state transfer. Numerical simulations then optimize the transport probability over the global detuning and the principal quantum number, balancing faster transport against the breakdown of perturbation theory and the growth of next-nearest-neighbor couplings. The central quantitative result is that optimal transport probabilities exceed 50%—the threshold for nonzero concurrence—for chains up to an extrapolated 54 atoms at 300 K and 90 atoms at 4 K, spanning hundreds of microns.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the linear-spectrum solution for perfect state transfer in the Heisenberg XX chain: couplings $J_{l,l+1}$ proportional to $\sqrt{l(L-l)}$ with a constant on-site potential make a single excitation from site $l$ perfectly refocus at the mirror site $L+1-l$ at time $t_\pi=\pi\bar{L}/(4J_{\max})$, saturating the quantum speed limit. The paper's contribution is to solve the inversion problem that realizes this profile using Rydberg interactions: the effective flip-flop rate $J_{ll'}$ from second-order perturbation theory is matched to the linear-spectrum values by varying interatomic distances and atom-selective detunings, with the central spacing fixed at the minimum and the central detunings set to zero. The effective Hamiltonian is the Heisenberg XX model $\hat{H}_{\rm XX}=\sum_l \mu_l \hat{n}_l + \sum_{l<l'} J_{ll'}(\hat{\sigma}_l^+\hat{\sigma}_{l'}^- + \hat{\sigma}_l^-\hat{\sigma}_{l'}^+)$, whose single-excitation sector is equivalent to a tight-binding chain. The numerical optimization then sweeps the global detuning and principal quantum number to maximize $p_\pi$.

What would settle it

Measure the optimal transport probability $p_\pi^*$ in a Rydberg chain of $L\approx 30$ atoms using the reported control parameters; if the result lies significantly below the extrapolated curve $p_\pi^*(L)\sim\exp(-t_\pi^*(L)/\tau(n^*))$ derived from $L\le 20$, then the decay-factorization assumption or the extrapolation to $L_c=54$ and $90$ is wrong. A more direct test would be to build a chain of $L_c$ atoms at 300 K and check whether the two-spin concurrence is actually positive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the perfect-transport condition of spin-chain quantum communication can be physically realized in Rydberg atom chains, not just assumed as a coupling profile. Solving the inversion problem for the set of control parameters $\{\Delta_l, V_{ll'}\}$ under the mirror-symmetry constraint produces chains whose spacings and local detunings reproduce the linear-spectrum couplings $J_{l,l+1}=2J_{\max}\sqrt{l(L-l)}/\bar{L}$ with uniform on-site potential. Under realistic driving powers and minimum spacing, the transport probability $p_\pi$ is maximized at an optimal global detuning $\delta_0^*$ that trades the speedup $t_\pi\sim\delta_0^{-2}$ against excitation injection, and at an optimal principal quantum number $n^*$ that trades lifetime, interaction strength, and driving strength. For $L=16$ the optimum is $n^*=71$; the degradation at larger $n$ is attributed to next-nearest-neighbor couplings whose relative strength $\lambda(n)$ diverges. With radiative decay included as $\exp(-\Gamma(n,\theta)t_\pi)$, the probability decays exponentially with chain length, giving the extrapolated critical lengths $L_c=54$ (300 K) and $L_c=90$ (4 K).

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative channel lengths rest on modeling radiative decay as a scalar factor $\exp(-\Gamma(n,\theta)t_\pi)$ applied after the no-decay evolution, which assumes decay removes population uniformly from the single-excitation subspace and that no population leaks back into it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a fixed chain length, the optimal transport probability is a single-peaked function of the global detuning; approaching resonance speeds up transport but injects population into high-excitation manifolds, while moving off resonance slows transport and increases radiative loss.
  • The optimal principal quantum number is not the largest one; long-range interactions, specifically next-nearest-neighbor couplings, degrade the perfect refocusing beyond $n^*\approx 71$ for $L=16$.
  • As the chain grows, the optimal $n^*$ drifts upward in a piecewise-continuous way while the optimal detuning stays roughly constant, so the transport time grows approximately linearly with $L$ and the optimal probability decays approximately exponentially.
  • At 300 K the channel supports entanglement distribution up to $L_c=54$ atoms; cooling to 4 K extends this to $L_c=90$ atoms, purely by suppressing blackbody-radiation-induced decay.
  • A transport probability above 50% certifies that the auxiliary and end spins share distillable entanglement, so the same measurement that demonstrates transport also demonstrates entanglement distribution.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same inversion strategy could in principle be applied to other effective exchange mechanisms the paper lists, such as resonant dipole-dipole interactions or Rydberg dressing; the paper does not compute the resulting $p_\pi$, so this is an open quantitative question.
  • If the transport probability is used as a certification metric for realizing the Heisenberg XX model, then a single experimental measurement of $p_\pi$ would simultaneously certify the effective Hamiltonian and the entanglement channel, a convenient diagnostic for Rydberg quantum simulators.
  • The degradation at large $n$ from next-nearest-neighbor couplings suggests that including NNN terms in the inversion problem—an inverse eigenvalue problem the paper mentions but does not solve—should push the optimal $n$ higher and may extend $L_c$ beyond the reported extrapolations.
  • The reported $L_c$ values are extrapolations of the exponential decay seen up to $L=20$; direct measurement at intermediate lengths would test whether the scaling persists or new decoherence mechanisms cut in.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies single-Rydberg-excitation transport along one-dimensional chains of 87Rb atoms. The authors solve the inverse problem of choosing atom positions and site-selective detunings so that the effective XX model generated by the off-resonantly driven Rydberg Hamiltonian reproduces the linear-spectrum perfect-transport couplings of Christandl et al. They then compare the transport probability p_pi for the Heisenberg XX model, the Rydberg model with nearest-neighbor interactions, and the full long-range Rydberg model, optimizing the global detuning delta_0 and principal quantum number n under fixed experimental constraints (Delta x_min = 3 micrometers, P_er = 4 W). Radiative decay is included by multiplying the no-decay transport probabilities by exp(-Gamma(n,theta) t_pi). They report optimal probabilities above 50% for chains up to L = 20 and extrapolate a maximum useful channel length L_c = 54 at 300 K and L_c = 90 at 4 K, corresponding to entanglement distribution over hundreds of microns.

Significance. The work is useful because it turns the known perfect-transport solution into a concrete, experimentally actionable parameter recipe for Rydberg arrays, and the comparison among XX, NN-Rydberg, and LRI-Rydberg models cleanly exposes the delta_0 trade-off between perturbation-theory breakdown and decay-induced loss. The use of ARC interaction data and explicit experimental constraints (trap spacing, laser power, temperature-dependent lifetimes) makes the predictions falsifiable and provides a concrete baseline for experiments. However, the headline length scale L_c rests on a post-hoc decay factor and on an extrapolation beyond the simulated chain lengths, so the quantitative claims need stronger support before they can be taken at face value.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III A] The treatment of radiative decay by multiplying no-decay transport probabilities by exp(-Gamma(n,theta) t_pi) is not a controlled approximation for the parameters optimized here. The native Hamiltonian contains Omega/2 sigma^x terms, and Fig. 3b shows substantial excursions into the m=0 and m>=2 subspaces at the optimal delta_0; the dynamics is therefore not confined to the single-excitation subspace. Under a Lindblad master equation with jump operators sqrt(Gamma)|g><r|, population that decays to the ground state can be re-excited by the same off-resonant drive, and population passing through the doubly excited sector decays at a rate 2Gamma. A scalar multiplier applied at the final time ignores both effects, and the error is not controlled by an explicitly identified small parameter at the optimized detuning. Because L_c in Sec. IV is extracted from the exponential decay of p*_pi(L), this approximation propagates directly into the central quantitative claim. Please benchmark the scalar factor against full master-equation simulations for representative L, n, and delta_0, or provide a rigorous bound on the resulting error.
  2. [Sec. IV, Fig. 6d] The extrapolated values L_c = 54 (300 K) and L_c = 90 (4 K) are obtained from fits to data for L <= 20. This extrapolation assumes that the approximately exponential decay of p*_pi(L) continues without new degradation mechanisms and that a physical solution of the inversion problem exists at those chain lengths. The manuscript should either simulate larger chains, report the fit form with confidence intervals, or explicitly present L_c as an indicative extrapolation rather than a quantitative prediction. As written, the claim that entanglement can be distributed over 'more than fifty atoms' is not supported by direct simulation.
  3. [Sec. III B, Eq. (11)] The statement that 'as delta_0 approaches resonance, the effective interaction coefficients increase as J_max ~ delta_0^2' is inconsistent with Eq. (11). For fixed Omega, Eq. (11) gives |J_max| proportional to 1/(|delta_0|(1+|delta_0|/V_max)), which grows only as 1/|delta_0| near resonance and as 1/delta_0^2 far from resonance. The scaling narrative in Sec. III B should be corrected, since it is used to motivate the central trade-off between transport speed and excitation injection.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. II] In the sentence 'when the state of the chain is initialized in an eigenstate of the N_j sigma_j^z operator', N_j is undefined; the operator is presumably the product over sites of sigma_j^z, and the notation should be corrected.
  2. [Fig. 2] The colors used for 'approximation errors', 'radiative decay', and 'long-range interactions' are not identified in the caption or in the main text; the hierarchy diagram would be clearer if each source were explicitly labeled with its color.
  3. [Sec. IV, Fig. 6d] Please report the functional form and parameters of the exponential fit used to obtain L_c, together with confidence intervals, so that the extrapolation is reproducible and its uncertainty is visible.
  4. [Eqs. (12)-(13)] The approximate expression for lambda(n) in Eq. (13) should be checked for consistency: if lambda is J_NNN_max / J_NN_max, the denominator should be evaluated with the NN values and the numerator with the NNN values in a way that is explicit about which optimized detunings are used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported Rydberg transport probabilities are obtained by direct numerical evolution of the native model, so they do not reduce to the perfect-transport input.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is self-contained relative to its inputs. It imports the linear-spectrum perfect-transport couplings from Christandl et al. and the second-order effective XX mapping from Yang et al. as external theoretical ingredients, but the headline quantities (p*_pi, n*, L_c) are computed by numerically evolving the native Rydberg Hamiltonian, Eq. (1), with long-range interactions and then applying an exp(-Gamma t_pi) decay factor. That computation is an independent check rather than a restatement of the effective XX model. The inversion problem in Sec. II B is a genuine numerical solve for detunings and positions given Eqs. (3)-(4), and the optimization over delta0 and n is parameter optimization, not a fitted-input-called-prediction step. The L_c estimate in Sec. IV is an extrapolation from simulated data, not a quantity equivalent to the model inputs by construction. The only self-citations are background references ([15] and [35]) and are not load-bearing. The scalar decay-factor approximation and the extrapolation from L<=20 to L_c=54/90 are accuracy or modeling concerns for a correctness pass, but they do not constitute circularity under the definitions in scope.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new entities are introduced; the effective flip-flop interaction is a derived low-energy description, not a new mediator or particle. The parameter ledger is dominated by control choices and the decay-factorization ansatz.

free parameters (4)
  • global detuning delta0* = optimized per (n, L, T); not tabulated, Fig. 6b shows roughly 60-120 MHz
    Grid-searched to maximize p_pi. It is a control parameter selected for best performance, not derived from first principles.
  • principal quantum number n* = n* = 71 for L = 16 at 300 K; increases piecewise with L up to about 75
    Optimized per chain length and temperature; higher n gives longer lifetime but weaker driving and stronger NNN interactions.
  • minimum interatomic spacing x_min = 3 um
    Chosen to avoid parametric heating from neighboring optical traps; fixes V_max and therefore the maximum J.
  • maximum er transition power P_er = 4 W
    Assumed experimental limit; sets peak intensity and effective Rabi frequency, constraining J_max.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Second-order perturbation theory maps H_Ryd (Eq. 1) to the effective XX model (Eq. 2) with coefficients Eqs. (3)-(4) in the limit Omega_l << |delta0|, |delta0 + V| and delta_l << delta0.
    This is the foundation of the transport design; the validity is only checked indirectly through the p_pi comparison between models.
  • domain assumption The transport design can ignore next-nearest-neighbor and longer couplings when setting Delta_l and V_ll' to satisfy the linear-spectrum condition.
    The inversion uses the NN-restricted H_NN_XX (Eq. 5), while the full model includes long-range interactions; NNN effects are later quantified as a degradation (Sec. III C).
  • ad hoc to paper Radiative decay can be accounted for by multiplying no-decay results by exp(-Gamma(n,theta) t_pi).
    Applied in Sec. III A without derivation; assumes decay is a uniform loss from the single-excitation manifold with no recycling from higher manifolds.
  • standard math The intermediate state |e> can be adiabatically eliminated, and its residual population and decoherence can be neglected for the dressed states.
    Standard dressed-state approximation, stated with residual admixture estimates in Sec. II.
  • domain assumption Spatial disorder and motional dephasing are neglected in the simulations.
    The authors note in the conclusion that such imperfections degrade performance in practical settings, so the simulated p* values are best-case estimates.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Distributing entanglement at the quantum speed limit in Rydberg chains." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y5BMJRJP

@misc{pith2026250619228,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Distributing entanglement at the quantum speed limit in Rydberg chains},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y5BMJRJP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.19228}
}
read the original abstract

We numerically study the transport of Rydberg excitations in chains of neutral atoms. We realize an effective flip-flop interaction using off-resonant driving fields. By tuning the relative distances between atoms and applying atom-selective detuning fields, we realize the perfect transport condition. This condition enables the transfer of a single Rydberg excitation from one end of the chain to the other, allowing the distribution of entanglement across the chain at the quantum speed limit. Through numerical simulations, we identify the set of control parameters that maximize the transport probability for experimentally relevant parameters. We study the various competing trade-offs involved in the hierarchy of approximations used to map the native Rydberg spin model onto the effective model driving spin transport. Our results suggest that entanglement can be distributed over chains of more than fifty atoms spanning hundreds of microns at room temperature. This study informs the selection of parameters for the experimental realization of perfect transport in Rydberg chains, providing a new approach to distribute entanglement among distant atoms in quantum processors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.19228 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Perfect transport in a Rydberg chain. (Top) A single-spin excitation prepared at one end of the chain is coherently transported to the other end at time tπ. The probability of measuring the single-spin excitation on the first (left) and last (right) spins undergoes collapses and re￾vivals, which are damped by radiative decay (dashed line) and the loss of coherence caused by approximation errors and long￾range intera… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Hierarchy of approximations. The per￾fect transport condition is realized for the Heisenberg XX Hamiltonian with nearest-neighbor (NN) interactions in the absence of radiative decay (blue). Its mapping onto the experimentally-relevant Rydberg model incurs errors due to approximation errors (green), long-range interactions (LRI, purple), and radiative decay. detuning of the optical field driving the |g⟩ to |e⟩ tran￾s… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Optimizing over the global detuning. (a) The transport time for the Rydberg model, which approximately overlaps for both nearest-neighbor (NN) interactions and long-range interactions (LRI), decreases as the detuning approaches resonance. (b) Fractional populations in the excitation subspaces containing m = 0 (dot), m = 1 (solid), and m ≥ 2 (dash-dot) spin excitations computed for LˆLRI Ryd at tπ. The maximum transp… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Optimizing over the principal quan￾tum number. (a) Maximum transport probability, p ∗ π(n), achieved for each principal quantum number n in the ab￾sence (dashed) and presence (solid) of radiative decay for the Heisenberg XX model (blue) and the Rydberg model with neare…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Relative contribution of next-nearest￾neighbor interactions. (a) Maximum effective interaction strength, |Jmax(n)|, between nearest-neighbors (NN, green) and next-nearest-neighbor (NNN, purple) interactions for the Rydberg model. (b) The ratio λ(n) = J NNN max (n)/JNN …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Scaling with chain length. (a-b) Optimal principal quantum number n ∗ and detuning δ ∗ 0 for the Ry￾dberg model with long-range interactions (LRI) and decay, computed as a function of the chain length L at temperatures of 300 K (blue disks) and 4 K (orange diamonds). (…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Quantum channel for modeling spin-motion dephasing in Rydberg chains

    quant-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A quantum channel computed from perturbation theory and Gaussian wavepacket propagation models spin-motion dephasing in Rydberg chains and predicts a maximum chain length for entanglement transport.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The problem is further simplified by exploiting the mir- ror symmetry of the perfect transport condition, which imposes ∆l = ∆L+1−l andx l =x L+1−l

    All data are computed forL= 16,n= 70, andV max = 188.3 MHz for ∆x min = 3µm. The problem is further simplified by exploiting the mir- ror symmetry of the perfect transport condition, which imposes ∆l = ∆L+1−l andx l =x L+1−l. A representative numerical solution for a chain of L= 10 atoms excited to then= 70 Rydberg state is shown in Fig. 1. Both the atom-...

    work page

  2. [2]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information(Cambridge University Press, 2000)

    2000

  3. [3]

    Schumacher, Sending entanglement through noisy quantum channels, Phys

    B. Schumacher, Sending entanglement through noisy quantum channels, Phys. Rev. A54, 2614 (1996)

    1996

  4. [4]

    Bose, Quantum communication through an unmodu- lated spin chain, Phys

    S. Bose, Quantum communication through an unmodu- lated spin chain, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 207901 (2003)

    2003

  5. [5]

    N. Y. Yao, L. Jiang, A. V. Gorshkov, Z.-X. Gong, A. Zhai, L.-M. Duan, and M. D. Lukin, Robust quan- tum state transfer in random unpolarized spin chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 040505 (2011)

    work page 2011

  6. [6]

    Christandl, N

    M. Christandl, N. Datta, A. Ekert, and A. J. Landahl, Perfect state transfer in quantum spin networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 187902 (2004)

    2004

  7. [7]

    Christandl, N

    M. Christandl, N. Datta, T. C. Dorlas, A. Ekert, A. Kay, and A. J. Landahl, Perfect transfer of arbitrary states in quantum spin networks, Phys. Rev. A71, 032312 (2005)

    2005

  8. [8]

    Yung, Quantum speed limit for perfect state trans- fer in one dimension, Phys

    M.-H. Yung, Quantum speed limit for perfect state trans- fer in one dimension, Phys. Rev. A74, 030303 (2006)

    work page 2006

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein-Podolsky- Rosen channels, Physical Review Letters70, 1895 (1993)

    1993

  2. [10]

    Ciaramicoli, I

    G. Ciaramicoli, I. Marzoli, and P. Tombesi, Spin chains with electrons in Penning traps, Phys. Rev. A75, 032348 (2007)

    2007

  3. [11]

    Cappellaro, C

    P. Cappellaro, C. Ramanathan, and D. G. Cory, Simula- tions of information transport in spin chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 250506 (2007)

    2007

  4. [12]

    Blatt and C

    R. Blatt and C. F. Roos, Quantum simulations with trapped ions, Nature Physics8, 277 (2012). 8

    2012

  5. [13]

    P. M. Preiss, R. Ma, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, P. Zupancic, Y. Lahini, R. Islam, and M. Greiner, Strongly correlated quantum walks in optical lattices, Science347, 1229 (2015)

    2015

  6. [14]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms, Nature Physics 16, 132 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    A. H. Karamlou, J. Braum¨ uller, Y. Yanay, A. Di Paolo, P. M. Harrington, B. Kannan, D. Kim, M. Kjaer- gaard, A. Melville, S. Muschinske, B. M. Niedzielski, A. Veps¨ al¨ ainen, R. Winik, J. L. Yoder, M. Schwartz, C. Tahan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Quantu...

    2022

  8. [16]

    Ungar, P

    A. Ungar, P. Cappellaro, A. Cooper, and W. K. C. Sun, Control of an environmental spin defect beyond the co- herence limit of a central spin, PRX Quantum5, 010321 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Urban, T

    E. Urban, T. A. Johnson, T. Henage, L. Isenhower, D. D. Yavuz, T. G. Walker, and M. Saffman, Observation of Rydberg blockade between two atoms, Nature Physics5, 110 (2009)

    2009

  10. [18]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Probing many- body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature 551, 579 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    Barredo, V

    D. Barredo, V. Lienhard, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Synthetic three-dimensional atomic struc- tures assembled atom by atom, Nature561, 79 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature595, 227 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    F. Yang, S. Yang, and L. You, Quantum transport of Ry- dberg excitons with synthetic spin-exchange interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 063001 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    K. Kim, F. Yang, K. Mølmer, and J. Ahn, Realization of an extremely anisotropic heisenberg magnet in Rydberg atom arrays, Phys. Rev. X14, 011025 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    I. I. Beterov, I. I. Ryabtsev, D. B. Tretyakov, and V. M. Entin, Quasiclassical calculations of blackbody- radiation-induced depopulation rates and effective life- times of Rydbergns,np, andndalkali-metal atoms with n≤80, Phys. Rev. A79, 052504 (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    Di Franco, M

    C. Di Franco, M. Paternostro, D. I. Tsomokos, and S. F. Huelga, Control-limited perfect state transfer, quantum stochastic resonance, and many-body entangling gate in imperfect qubit registers, Phys. Rev. A77, 062337 (2008)

    2008

  17. [25]

    Di Franco, M

    C. Di Franco, M. Paternostro, and M. S. Kim, Perfect state transfer on a spin chain without state initialization, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 230502 (2008)

    2008

  18. [26]

    Holstein and H

    T. Holstein and H. Primakoff, Field dependence of the intrinsic domain magnetization of a ferromagnet, Phys. Rev.58, 1098 (1940)

    1940

  19. [27]

    Ben Dahan, E

    M. Ben Dahan, E. Peik, J. Reichel, Y. Castin, and C. Sa- lomon, Bloch oscillations of atoms in an optical potential, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 4508 (1996)

    1996

  20. [28]

    Jordan and E

    P. Jordan and E. Wigner, ¨Uber das paulische ¨Aquivalen- zverbot, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik47, 631 (1928)

    1928

  21. [29]

    E. Lieb, T. Schultz, and D. Mattis, Two soluble models of an antiferromagnetic chain, Annals of Physics16, 407 (1961)

    1961

  22. [30]

    Kay, Perfect state transfer: Beyond nearest-neighbor couplings, Phys

    A. Kay, Perfect state transfer: Beyond nearest-neighbor couplings, Phys. Rev. A73, 032306 (2006)

    2006

  23. [31]

    R. J. Cook and B. W. Shore, Coherent dynamics ofn- level atoms and molecules. iii. an analytically soluble pe- riodic case, Phys. Rev. A20, 539 (1979)

    1979

  24. [32]

    ˇSibali´ c, J

    N. ˇSibali´ c, J. Pritchard, C. Adams, and K. Weatherill, Arc: An open-source library for calculating properties of alkali Rydberg atoms, Computer Physics Communica- tions220, 319 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, Qutip 2: A python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems, Computer Physics Communications184, 1234 (2013)

    2013

  26. [34]

    Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys

    A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 1413 (1996)

    1996

  27. [35]

    Horodecki, P

    M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Separa- bility of mixed states: necessary and sufficient conditions, Physics Letters A223, 1 (1996)

    1996

  28. [36]

    W. K. C. Sun, A. Cooper, and P. Cappellaro, Improved entanglement detection with subspace witnesses, Phys. Rev. A101, 012319 (2020)

    2020

  29. [37]

    W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of formation of an ar- bitrary state of two qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 2245 (1998)

    1998

  30. [38]

    Schymik, S

    K.-N. Schymik, S. Pancaldi, F. Nogrette, D. Barredo, J. Paris, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Single atoms with 6000-second trapping lifetimes in optical-tweezer arrays at cryogenic temperatures, Phys. Rev. Appl.16, 034013 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    G¨ unter, H

    G. G¨ unter, H. Schempp, M. R. de Saint-Vincent, V. Gavryusev, S. Helmrich, C. S. Hofmann, S. Whit- lock, and M. Weidem¨ uller, Observing the dynamics of dipole-mediated energy transport by interaction- enhanced imaging, Science342, 954 (2013)

    2013

  32. [40]

    D. W. Sch¨ onleber, A. Eisfeld, M. Genkin, S. Whitlock, and S. W¨ uster, Quantum simulation of energy transport with embedded Rydberg aggregates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 123005 (2015)

    2015

  33. [41]

    Barredo, H

    D. Barredo, H. Labuhn, S. Ravets, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, and C. S. Adams, Coherent excitation transfer in a spin chain of three Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 113002 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    A. P. n. Orioli, A. Signoles, H. Wildhagen, G. G¨ unter, J. Berges, S. Whitlock, and M. Weidem¨ uller, Relaxation of an isolated dipolar-interacting Rydberg quantum spin system, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 063601 (2018)

    2018

  35. [43]

    Schempp, G

    H. Schempp, G. G¨ unter, S. W¨ uster, M. Weidem¨ uller, and S. Whitlock, Correlated exciton transport in Rydberg- dressed-atom spin chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 093002 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    Letscher and D

    F. Letscher and D. Petrosyan, Mobile bound states of Rydberg excitations in a lattice, Phys. Rev. A97, 043415 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Y. Wang, J. Wang, A. Panja, X. Wang, and Q.-Y. Liang, Directional transport in Rydberg atom arrays via kinetic constraints and temporal modulation, Phys. Rev. Res.7, L022035 (2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    W¨ uster, C

    S. W¨ uster, C. Ates, A. Eisfeld, and J. M. Rost, Excita- tion transport through Rydberg dressing, New Journal of Physics13, 073044 (2011)

    2011

  39. [47]

    A. W. Glaetzle, M. Dalmonte, R. Nath, C. Gross, I. Bloch, and P. Zoller, Designing frustrated quantum magnets with laser-dressed Rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 173002 (2015). 9

    2015

  40. [48]

    R. M. W. van Bijnen and T. Pohl, Quantum mag- netism and topological ordering via Rydberg dressing near f¨ orster resonances, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 243002 (2015)

    2015

  41. [49]

    X. X. Li, J. B. You, X. Q. Shao, and W. Li, Coherent ground-state transport of neutral atoms, Phys. Rev. A 105, 032417 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    H. C. Po, L. Fidkowski, A. Vishwanath, and A. C. Potter, Radical chiral Floquet phases in a periodically driven Ki- taev model and beyond, Phys. Rev. B96, 245116 (2017)

    2017

  43. [51]

    Nishad, A

    N. Nishad, A. Keselman, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, and S. Tsesses, Quantum simulation of generic spin exchange models in Floquet-engineered Rydberg atom arrays, (2023), arXiv:2306.07041 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.