Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 58 references

Acceleration-driven dynamics of Josephson vortices in coplanar superfluid rings

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a coplanar double-ring Bose–Einstein condensate with Josephson vortices can measure linear acceleration, because the vortex-lattice centroid shifts proportionally to the applied acceleration.

desk verdict Solid numerical extension of prior double-ring JV work; the linear d-a sensing relation is plausible but conditional on the co-moving thermal cloud assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09186 v1 pith:XXQ7VV5Z submitted 2024-11-14 cond-mat.quant-gas

Yurii Borysenko , Nataliia Bazhan , Olena Prykhodko , Dominik Pfeiffer , Ludwig Lind , Gerhard Birkl , Alexander Yakimenko This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords Josephsonvorticesatomtroniccircuitsdouble-ringBose-EinsteincondensateaccelerationsensingpersistentcurrentsGross-Pitaevskiiequationquantumeffect
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues theoretically that a coplanar double-ring atomic Bose–Einstein condensate, with persistent currents in each ring and Josephson vortices trapped in the barrier between them, can act as an acceleration sensor. When the rings carry different winding numbers, the tunneling superflow is suppressed and multiple Josephson vortices form; a constant linear acceleration breaks azimuthal symmetry and, with weak dissipation, drives the vortex lattice to a new equilibrium in which the centroid of the vortices is displaced toward the acceleration. The displacement is found to grow linearly with acceleration magnitude, $d = 3.52\times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{s^2/mm}\,\times a$ for small accelerations, and the direction of the displacement tracks the direction of acceleration. If this holds, imaging the vortex positions in an atomtronic circuit would yield both the magnitude and the direction of the acceleration from a single relaxed configuration.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the phase-winding relation between the two rings combined with an acceleration-induced effective potential. For rings with vorticities $m_1$ and $m_2$, the two-mode ansatz yields the radial tunneling current $j_r = j_0 \sin(\Delta\mu t - \Delta m\varphi)$; the $\varphi$-dependence forces $|\Delta m|$ zeros in the flow, which are the Josephson vortices. A linear acceleration enters as $V_a = M a x$, tilting the density and creating a nucleation-energy well $E_{JV}(\varphi)$ whose minimum lies along the acceleration direction. The vortex asymmetry parameter $d = \frac{1}{R_b N_{JV}} \sum_{n=1}^{N_{JV}} r_n$ quantifies the centroid displacement of the relaxed vortex chain, and the linear $d$ versus $a$ relation emerges from balancing the acceleration-induced well against vortex–vortex repulsion during dissipative relaxation.

What would settle it

Take a coplanar double-ring $^{87}$Rb condensate with ring radii 14 µm and 24 µm and a barrier width of about 1.43 µm, prepare a state with, say, six Josephson vortices, apply a known horizontal acceleration in the range 0 to $4.5\,\mathrm{mm/s^2}$, ramp the barrier down as in Fig. 5(b), wait for equilibration, and image density and phase to locate vortex cores. Compute $d$ from Eq. (22): if the equilibrium centroid does not point along the acceleration, or if $d$ does not follow the stated linear law, or if varying the dissipation rate $\gamma$ changes the equilibrium $d$, the central claim is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the equilibrium configuration of Josephson vortices in a double-ring atomic condensate is a reproducible readout of linear acceleration. In a symmetric double ring with vorticity difference $\Delta m = m_1 - m_2$, the radial superflow takes the form $j_r = j_0 \sin(\Delta\mu t - \Delta m\varphi)$, so for $\Delta m \neq 0$ the net tunneling current vanishes and $|\Delta m|$ Josephson vortices sit at the vertices of a regular polygon. Adding an effective potential $V_a = M a x$ breaks azimuthal symmetry and creates an energy minimum for each vortex along the acceleration direction; in the presence of dissipation modeled by the dissipative Gross–Pitaevskii equation, the vortices relax to that minimum, and their mutual repulsion spreads them into an asymmetric chain whose centroid shift $d$ is proportional to $|a|$ for small accelerations. The paper also shows that for a single vortex the equilibrium angular position aligns with the acceleration direction, and that the final equilibrium value of $d$ is independent of the dissipation rate $\gamma$. These results are presented as a mechanism for quantum acceleration sensing based on topologically protected vortex positions.

Load-bearing premise

The relaxation calculation assumes the thermal cloud that provides dissipation moves together with the condensate in the accelerating frame; if the thermal component does not co-move, the effective damping changes and the equilibrium vortex positions, hence the claimed $d$-versus-$a$ relation, could shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the relation holds, a single absorption image of the relaxed double-ring condensate yields the acceleration vector: the vortex-lattice centroid direction gives the acceleration axis and the measured $d$ gives the magnitude via the stated linear slope.
  • For $\Delta m = 1$, acceleration restores population-imbalance oscillations with amplitude reduced by the small density-bias factor $\delta_a$, while $\Delta m = 0$ oscillations remain present; both are observable signatures of the same acceleration-induced symmetry breaking.
  • The equilibrium asymmetry $d$ is independent of the dissipation rate $\gamma$ (for $\gamma$ up to $3\times 10^{-2}$), so the sensing readout does not require precise control of temperature or damping.
  • Rings with different winding numbers have zero net tunneling current in the absence of acceleration, making the acceleration signal a background-free geometric displacement rather than a transport current.
  • For accelerations above roughly $4.5\,\mathrm{mm/s^2}$ the linear response breaks down and very high density bias can break the ring condensate apart, defining the operable sensing range of the proposed device.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because $d$ is a geometric centroid of topological defects rather than a transport current, the scheme could in principle be read out from a single destructive image; the paper does not discuss recycling or continuous operation.
  • The slope $3.52\times 10^{-2}\,\mathrm{s^2/mm}$ is reported for one barrier geometry and atom number; a natural next step would be to compute how the slope scales with barrier width, barrier height, ring radii, and total atom number.
  • The co-moving thermal-cloud assumption implies the prediction may fail for strong relative motion between the condensate and the thermal component; a controlled temperature-dependent experiment could map where the linear relation breaks down.
  • For a single vortex, the equilibrium azimuthal position alone already gives the acceleration direction, so a minimal directional alarm could be built from detecting only the vortex angle rather than the full lattice centroid.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a two-dimensional coplanar double-ring Bose-Einstein condensate separated by a radial barrier, focusing on Josephson oscillations and Josephson vortices (JVs). Using a two-mode ansatz, the authors derive the radial tunneling current j_r = j0 sin(Δμ t − Δm φ), and show numerically that persistent currents with different winding numbers suppress population-imbalance oscillations, while a linear acceleration can restore them. In the second part, the authors introduce dissipative Gross-Pitaevskii dynamics, define an asymmetry parameter d for the equilibrated JV lattice, and report a linear calibration d = 3.52 × 10⁻² s²/mm × a for small accelerations, proposing this as an acceleration-sensing mechanism.

Significance. If the central calibration holds, the work provides a concrete and experimentally plausible atomtronic acceleration sensor with directional sensitivity. The analytic two-mode expression for the tunneling current is clean and useful, and the numerical demonstration that the equilibrium asymmetry is independent of the dissipation rate is a valuable check. However, the quantitative sensing claim rests on an empirical linear fit to simulation data and on a dissipative model whose accelerating-frame formulation is conditional on an untested co-moving thermal-cloud assumption. These issues prevent the paper, in its present form, from fully supporting the accelerometer claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III, Eq. (21)] The dissipative Gross-Pitaevskii equation (21) is written directly in the accelerating frame, and the steady-state condition is therefore simply ĤΨ = μΨ. The sentence 'the thermal cloud is assumed to co-move with the condensate' acknowledges that a physically more standard lab-frame damping term would transform differently, introducing additional acceleration-dependent terms. Since all equilibrium vortex configurations, and hence the d vs. a calibration in Fig. 9, are obtained from this equation, the central sensing result is conditional on an assumption that is deferred to Ref. [50] and is not tested in the double-ring geometry. I ask the authors to derive the transformed equation for a non-co-moving thermal cloud, or to compare against an explicit microscopic model, and to discuss how the equilibrium vortex positions could change.
  2. [Section III, Fig. 9] The relation d = 3.52 × 10⁻² s²/mm × a is the main quantitative result of the paper, but it is a linear fit to simulation data for a single parameter set (lb = 1.43 µm, N = 5 × 10⁴). No error bars, fit residuals, number of data points, or convergence tests in grid resolution, time step, relaxation duration, or barrier-ramp protocol are reported, and the sensitivity to N, lb, Ub, and γ is not quantified. The claim of linearity 'for small accelerations' and deviation above a ≈ 4.5 mm/s² is therefore not yet a predictive calibration. A parameter scan and an error analysis are needed before this can be used as a sensor response.
  3. [Section II, Eqs. (16)–(17)] The two-mode derivation gives a transparent expression for j_r, but the acceleration correction j0(1 − δa cos φ) inserts an undetermined parameter δa. The subsequent result J = (1/2)δa J0 sin(Δμ t) for Δm = ±1 therefore does not by itself predict the linear sensing coefficient: δa is never connected to the acceleration magnitude a. Either δa should be derived from the density profile generated by Va = M a x, or the two-mode model should be explicitly labeled as phenomenological and not as an explanation of the calibrated linear dependence.
  4. [Section III, Figs. 5 and 7] The vortex-detection protocol lowers the barrier from 1.5 µ0 to 0.75 µ0 and reads out the vortex positions in the modified potential. The measured asymmetry d is therefore defined for the detection configuration, not for the original sensing configuration with the high barrier. The paper does not show that d is converged during the measurement window or that the barrier ramp itself does not bias the reported vortex positions. A convergence check in ramp rate and final barrier height is required to establish that the calibration corresponds to a physically meaningful observable.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'suppresssed', 'thes-wave', 'along thez direction', and 'independen'; these should be corrected in a revision.
  2. [References [30] and [51]] References [30] and [51] are both listed with the arXiv identifier 2410.17318 but correspond to different titles and authors; one citation identifier is likely incorrect and should be checked.
  3. [Eq. (22)] The summation notation in Eq. (22) is difficult to read ('NJV X'); please clarify the upper limit of the sum and the definition of the vortex-centroid vector rn.
  4. [Figs. 5 and 7] The vortex cores are identified 'in the density and phase distributions', but the detection criterion is not specified; stating the numerical criterion (e.g., phase winding or density minimum) would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the d(a) sensing relation is a numerically fitted calibration from stated GPE/DGPE dynamics, not an input assumed as the conclusion.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The two-mode ansatz (16) produces Eq. (17); the acceleration-induced bias is introduced explicitly as a modification of the amplitude factor, j0(r)(1 - δa cos φ), and the resulting nonzero net current for Δm = ±1 follows by integration, not by assuming the target sensing relation. The central sensing result is the equilibrium asymmetry parameter d(a) computed from DGPE simulations and reported in Fig. 9; the quoted relation d = 3.52e-2 s^2/mm * a is a fitted calibration curve, not a first-principles prediction whose conclusion was presupposed. The DGPE (21) is a standard phenomenological damping model, and the paper explicitly verifies that the equilibrium d is independent of γ (Fig. 8), so the linear d(a) relation is controlled by the static Hamiltonian (including Va = M a x) rather than by the dissipation assumption. The co-moving-thermal-cloud assumption is openly stated and cited to Ref. [50] (which overlaps with author Yakimenko), but it is a modeling condition, not an input that is later relabeled as the conclusion; it affects the relaxation path, not the γ-independent equilibrium value. Self-citations to Refs [41-43,50,52] provide context from prior work and are not used to establish the d(a) relation. No equation or parameter is defined in terms of the target result, so no circular step can be quoted.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or conserved quantities. Its free parameters are the phenomenological density-bias amplitude δa and the linear-fit coefficient k; the main load-bearing axiom is the co-moving thermal cloud assumption in the dissipative model.

free parameters (2)
  • delta_a (density bias amplitude) = not quantified; assumed small (δa << 1)
    Introduced in Section II to modify the radial flow amplitude as j0(r)(1 - δa cos φ) when acceleration is present; it is a phenomenological parameter, not derived.
  • linear fit coefficient k = 3.52 × 10^-2 s^2/mm
    Obtained from a linear fit to the numerically computed equilibrium asymmetry parameter d versus acceleration a in Fig. 9; no uncertainty given.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Mean-field Gross-Pitaevskii description at zero temperature
    Equation (1) governs the dynamics; assumes a weakly interacting BEC at T=0, standard for this system.
  • domain assumption Separation of variables for z-confinement and 2D reduction
    Equations (7)-(8) factor the wave function as ψ(x,y)ζ(z), neglecting out-of-plane dynamics; this is valid only under tight z-trapping.
  • domain assumption Two-mode ansatz for the tunneling analysis
    Equation (16) assumes the wave function is a superposition of two ring states with chemical potentials μ1, μ2 and vorticities m1, m2; used to derive the radial current j_r.
  • domain assumption Dissipative GPE with co-moving thermal cloud
    Equation (21) plus the statement in Section III that the thermal cloud is assumed to co-move with the condensate in the accelerating frame; the relaxation dynamics and final vortex configurations depend on this.
  • domain assumption Vortex profile tanh(r/ξ) with constant local density
    Equation (18) models the vortex wave function as a tanh profile of a homogeneous condensate multiplied by the unperturbed ground state; used for the nucleation energy calculation in Figure 4.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Acceleration-driven dynamics of Josephson vortices in coplanar superfluid rings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XXQ7VV5Z

@misc{pith2026241109186,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Acceleration-driven dynamics of Josephson vortices in coplanar superfluid rings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XXQ7VV5Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09186}
}
read the original abstract

Precise control of topologically protected excitations, such as quantum vortices in atomtronic circuits, opens new possibilities for future quantum technologies. We theoretically investigate the dynamics of Josephson vortices (rotational fluxons) induced by coupled persistent currents in a system of coplanar double-ring atomic Bose-Einstein condensates. We study the Josephson effect in an atomic Josephson junction formed by coaxial ring-shaped condensates. Tunneling superflows, initiated by an imbalance in atomic populations between the rings, are significantly influenced by the persistent currents in the inner and outer rings. This results in pronounced Josephson oscillations in the population imbalance for both co-rotating and non-rotating states. If a linear acceleration is applied to the system, our analysis reveals peculiar azimuthal tunneling patterns and dynamics of Josephson vortices which leads to non-zero net tunneling current and shows sensitivity to the acceleration magnitude. When multiple Josephson vortices are present, asymmetric vortex displacements that correlate with both the magnitude and direction of acceleration can be measured, offering potential for quantum sensing applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09186 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Schematic of the coplanar double-ring BEC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Oscillation frequency ω of the population imbalance vs. chemical potential difference ∆µ for (m1 = 0, m2 = 1) with a = 10 mm/s 2 (blue dots) and (m1 = m2 = 0) without acceleration (black circles), fitted linearly. JV rotation fre￾quencies for m1 = 0, m2 = 1 state are marked by red crosses. Ub = 7 ℏωr, lb = 1 µm, N = 5 × 104 . estimates align well with the results of numerical simu￾lations, as illustrated in [PITH_F… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Flow density snapshots for different angular mo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: illustrates the nucleation energy per particle EJV /N as the function of the angular coordinate of the JV core. In this scenario, the characteristics of the vortex energy are strongly influenced by the applied accelera￾tion. The energy minimum occurs in the direction o…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The vortex and antivortex circulate in opposite [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Dynamics of a single JV (red circle indicates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Angular dynamics of a single JV under constant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Density (upper row) and phase (lower row) snap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Equilibrium asymmetry parameter d as a function of linear acceleration a, illustrating a linear dependence at low accelerations for lb = 1.43 µm, N = 5 × 104 . (Inset) Time evolution of the asymmetry parameters for varying accelera￾tions a (solid lines) with their resp…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [50]

    Acceleration-induced transport of quantum vortices in joined atomtronic circuits

    A. Chaika, A. Oliinyk, I. Yatsuta, N. Proukakis, M. Ed- wards, A. Yakimenko, and T. Bland, Acceleration- induced transport of quantum vortices in joined atom- tronic circuits, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.23818 (2024)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    B. D. Josephson, Possible new effects in superconductive tunnelling, Phys. Lett. 1, 251 (1962)

    work page 1962

  3. [2]

    Barone and G

    A. Barone and G. Paterno, Physics and applications of the josephson effect, J. Vac. Sci. Technol.21, 1050 (1982)

    work page 1982

  4. [3]

    Tilley, Cylindrical josephson junctions, Physics Let- ters 20, 117 (1966)

    D. Tilley, Cylindrical josephson junctions, Physics Let- ters 20, 117 (1966)

    work page 1966

  5. [4]

    Burt and M

    P. Burt and M. Sherrill, The dc josephson current in cylindrical junctions, Physics Letters A 85, 97 (1981)

    work page 1981

  6. [5]

    M. D. Sherrill and M. Bhushan, Cylindrical josephson tunneling, Phys. Rev. B 19, 1463 (1979)

    work page 1979

  7. [6]

    Davidson, B

    A. Davidson, B. Dueholm, and N. F. Pedersen, Experi- ments on soliton motion in annular josephson junctions, J. Appl. Phys. 60, 1447 (1986)

    work page 1986

  8. [7]

    A. V. Ustinov, T. Doderer, R. P. Huebner, N. F. Ped- ersen, B. Mayer, and V. A. Oboznov, Dynamics of sine- gordon solitons in the annular josephson junction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1815 (1992)

    work page 1992

Show all 58 references
  1. [8]

    Hermon, A

    Z. Hermon, A. Stern, and E. Ben-Jacob, Quantum dy- namics of a fluxon in a long circular josephson junction, Phys. Rev. B 49, 9757 (1994)

    1994

  2. [9]

    A. V. Ustinov, Observation of a radiation-induced soliton resonance in a josephson ring, JETP Lett.64, 191 (1996)

    1996

  3. [10]

    A. V. Ustinov, B. A. Malomed, and E. Goldobin, Back- bending current-voltage characteristic for an annular josephson junction in a magnetic field, Phys. Rev. B 60, 1365 (1999)

    1999

  4. [11]

    Watanabe, H

    S. Watanabe, H. S. van der Zant, S. H. Strogatz, and T. P. Orlando, Dynamics of circular arrays of josephson junctions and the discrete sine-gordon equation, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 97, 429 (1996)

    1996

  5. [12]

    Tr ´ ıas, J

    E. Tr ´ ıas, J. J. Mazo, F. Falo, and T. P. Orlando, Depin- ning of kinks in a josephson-junction ratchet array, Phys. Rev. E 61, 2257 (2000)

    2000

  6. [13]

    A. V. Ustinov, Fluxon insertion into annular josephson junctions, Appl. Phys. Lett. 80, 3153 (2002)

    2002

  7. [14]

    A. V. Ustinov, C. Coqui, A. Kemp, S. M. Anlage, Y. Zolotaryuk, and M. Salerno, Ratchet-like dynamics of fluxons in annular josephson junctions driven by bi- harmonic microwave fields, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 087001 (2004)

    2004

  8. [15]

    M. V. Fistul, A. Wallraff, Y. Koval, A. Lukashenko, B. A. Malomed, and A. V. Ustinov, Quantum dissociation of a vortex-antivortex pair in a long josephson junction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 257004 (2003)

    2003

  9. [16]

    S. Levy, E. Lahoud, I. Shomroni, and J. Steinhauer, The ac and dc josephson effects in a bose–einstein condensate, Nature 449, 579 (2007)

    2007

  10. [17]

    Pigneur, T

    M. Pigneur, T. Berrada, M. Bonneau, T. Schumm, E. Demler, and J. Schmiedmayer, Relaxation to a Phase- Locked Equilibrium State in a One-Dimensional Bosonic Josephson Junction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 173601 (2018). 9

    2018

  11. [18]

    C. Ryu, M. F. Andersen, P. Clad´ e, V. Natarajan, K. Helmerson, and W. D. Phillips, Observation of persis- tent flow of a bose-einstein condensate in a toroidal trap, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 260401 (2007)

    2007

  12. [19]

    C. Ryu, P. W. Blackburn, A. A. Blinova, and M. G. Boshier, Experimental realization of josephson junctions for an atom squid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 205301 (2013)

    2013

  13. [20]

    C. Ryu, E. C. Samson, and M. G. Boshier, Quantum interference of currents in an atomtronic SQUID, Nature Communications 11, 3338 (2020)

    2020

  14. [21]

    Moulder, S

    S. Moulder, S. Beattie, R. P. Smith, N. Tammuz, and Z. Hadzibabic, Quantized supercurrent decay in an an- nular bose-einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. A 86, 013629 (2012)

    2012

  15. [22]

    Piazza, L

    F. Piazza, L. A. Collins, and A. Smerzi, Vortex-induced phase-slip dissipation in a toroidal bose-einstein conden- sate flowing through a barrier, Phys. Rev. A 80, 021601 (2009)

    2009

  16. [23]

    Piazza, L

    F. Piazza, L. A. Collins, and A. Smerzi, Current-phase relation of a bose-einstein condensate flowing through a weak link, Phys. Rev. A 81, 033613 (2010)

    2010

  17. [24]

    Ramanathan, K

    A. Ramanathan, K. C. Wright, S. R. Muniz, M. Zelan, W. T. Hill, C. J. Lobb, K. Helmerson, W. D. Phillips, and G. K. Campbell, Superflow in a toroidal bose-einstein condensate: An atom circuit with a tunable weak link, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 130401 (2011)

    2011

  18. [25]

    Brand and W

    J. Brand and W. P. Reinhardt, LETTER TO THE ED- ITOR: Generating ring currents, solitons and svortices by stirring a Bose-Einstein condensate in a toroidal trap, Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular Physics 34, L113 (2001), arXiv:cond-mat/0101313 [cond-mat.soft]

    2001 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Modugno, C

    M. Modugno, C. Tozzo, and F. Dalfovo, Detecting phonons and persistent currents in toroidal bose-einstein condensates by means of pattern formation, Phys. Rev. A 74, 061601 (2006)

    2006

  20. [27]

    Beattie, S

    S. Beattie, S. Moulder, R. J. Fletcher, and Z. Hadz- ibabic, Persistent currents in spinor condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 025301 (2013)

    2013

  21. [28]

    A. I. Yakimenko, K. O. Isaieva, S. I. Vilchinskii, and M. Weyrauch, Stability of persistent currents in spinor bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A 88, 051602 (2013)

    2013

  22. [29]

    Tononi, L

    A. Tononi, L. Salasnich, and A. Yakimenko, Quantum vortices in curved geometries, A VS Quantum Science 6 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Lesanovsky and W

    I. Lesanovsky and W. von Klitzing, Spontaneous Emer- gence of Angular Momentum Josephson Oscillations in Coupled Annular Bose-Einstein Condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 050401 (2007)

    2007

  24. [32]

    Brand, T

    J. Brand, T. J. Haigh, and U. Z¨ ulicke, Rotational flux- ons of bose-einstein condensates in coplanar double-ring traps, Phys. Rev. A 80, 011602 (2009)

    2009

  25. [33]

    Brand, T

    J. Brand, T. J. Haigh, and U. Z¨ ulicke, Sign of coupling in barrier-separated bose-einstein condensates and stability of double-ring systems, Phys. Rev. A 81, 025602 (2010)

    2010

  26. [34]

    Su, S.-C

    S.-W. Su, S.-C. Gou, A. Bradley, O. Fialko, and J. Brand, Kibble-zurek scaling and its breakdown for spontaneous generation of josephson vortices in bose-einstein conden- sates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 215302 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    M. I. Qadir, H. Susanto, and P. C. Matthews, Fluxon analogues and dark solitons in linearly coupled Bose- Einstein condensates, Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular Physics 45, 035004 (2012)

    2012

  28. [36]

    Brand and S

    J. Brand and S. Shamailov, Quasiparticles of widely tune- able inertial mass: The dispersion relation of atomic Josephson vortices and related solitary waves, SciPost Physics 4, 018 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    Baals, H

    C. Baals, H. Ott, J. Brand, and A. M. n. Mateo, Non- linear standing waves in an array of coherently cou- pled bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A 98, 053603 (2018)

    2018

  30. [38]

    T. W. A. Montgomery, W. Li, and T. M. Fromhold, Spin josephson vortices in two tunnel-coupled spinor bose gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 105302 (2013)

    2013

  31. [39]

    Gallem ´ ı, M

    A. Gallem ´ ı, M. Guilleumas, R. Mayol, and A. M. n. Ma- teo, Multidimensional josephson vortices in spin-orbit- coupled bose-einstein condensates: Snake instability and decay through vortex dipoles, Phys. Rev. A 93, 033618 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Oliinyk, I

    A. Oliinyk, I. Yatsuta, B. Malomed, and A. Yakimenko, Symmetry breaking in interacting ring-shaped superflows of bose–einstein condensates, Symmetry 11 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Oliinyk, B

    A. Oliinyk, B. Malomed, and A. Yakimenko, Nonlin- ear dynamics of josephson vortices in merging superfluid rings, Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numer- ical Simulation 83, 105113 (2020)

    2020

  34. [42]

    Oliinyk, A

    A. Oliinyk, A. Yakimenko, and B. Malomed, Tunneling of persistent currents in coupled ring-shaped Bose–Einstein condensates, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 52, 225301 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Bazhan, A

    N. Bazhan, A. Svetlichnyi, D. Pfeiffer, D. Derr, G. Birkl, and A. Yakimenko, Generation of josephson vortices in stacked toroidal bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A 106, 043305 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Hern´ andez-Rajkov, N

    D. Hern´ andez-Rajkov, N. Grani, F. Scazza, G. Del Pace, W. Kwon, M. Inguscio, K. Xhani, C. Fort, M. Mod- ugno, F. Marino, et al., Connecting shear flow and vortex array instabilities in annular atomic superfluids, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    Pezz` e, K

    L. Pezz` e, K. Xhani, C. Daix, N. Grani, B. Donelli, F. Scazza, D. Hernandez-Rajkov, W. J. Kwon, G. D. Pace, and G. Roati, Stabilizing persistent currents in an atomtronic josephson junction necklace, Nature Commu- nications 15, 1 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    V. M. Kaurov and A. B. Kuklov, Josephson vortex be- tween two atomic bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A 71, 011601 (2005)

    2005

  39. [47]

    V. M. Kaurov and A. B. Kuklov, Atomic josephson vor- tices, Phys. Rev. A 73, 013627 (2006)

    2006

  40. [48]

    Amico, G

    L. Amico, G. Birkl, M. Boshier, and L.-C. Kwek, Fo- cus on atomtronics-enabled quantum technologies, New J. Phys. 19, 020201 (2017)

    2017

  41. [49]

    Amico, M

    L. Amico, M. Boshier, G. Birkl, A. Minguzzi, C. Miniatura, L.-C. Kwek, D. Aghamalyan, V. Ahufinger, D. Anderson, N. Andrei, et al., Roadmap on atomtronics: State of the art and perspective, A VS Quantum Science 3, 039201 (2021)

    2021

  42. [51]

    sensors, based on a threshold-driven vortex transfer approach previously introduced in [52]. In this setup, the barrier amplitude directly modulates vortex transi- tions, enabling discrete, measurable shifts that can be finely controlled, or even halted, by tuning the barrier ...

    2024 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Adeniji, C

    O. Adeniji, C. Henry, S. Thomas, R. C. Sapp, A. Goyal, C. W. Clark, and M. Edwards, Double-target bec atom- tronic rotation sensor, arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.17318 (2024). 10

    2024 arXiv

  44. [53]

    Bland, I

    T. Bland, I. V. Yatsuta, M. Edwards, Y. O. Nikolaieva, A. O. Oliinyk, A. I. Yakimenko, and N. P. Proukakis, Persistent current oscillations in a double-ring quantum gas, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043171 (2022)

    2022

  45. [54]

    S. Choi, S. A. Morgan, and K. Burnett, Phenomenolog- ical damping in trapped atomic Bose-Einstein conden- sates, Phys. Rev. A 57, 4057 (1998)

    1998

  46. [55]

    Pitaevskii, Phenomenological theory of superfluidity near the λ-point, Zh

    L. Pitaevskii, Phenomenological theory of superfluidity near the λ-point, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 35, 408 (1958), [Sov. Phys. JETP 35, 282 (1959)]

    1958

  47. [56]

    Kanai, W

    T. Kanai, W. Guo, and M. Tsubota, Merging of rotating bose–einstein condensates, Journal of Low Temperature Physics 195, 37 (2019)

    2019

  48. [57]

    N. G. Parker, N. P. Proukakis, C. F. Barenghi, and C. S. Adams, Controlled vortex-sound interactions in atomic bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 160403 (2004)

    2004

  49. [58]

    Simjanovski, G

    S. Simjanovski, G. Gauthier, M. J. Davis, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, and T. W. Neely, Optimiz- ing persistent currents in a ring-shaped bose-einstein condensate using machine learning, Phys. Rev. A 108, 063306 (2023)

    2023

  50. [59]

    Del Pace, K

    G. Del Pace, K. Xhani, A. Muzi Falconi, M. Fedrizzi, N. Grani, D. Hernandez Rajkov, M. Inguscio, F. Scazza, W. J. Kwon, and G. Roati, Imprinting persistent cur- rents in tunable fermionic rings, Phys. Rev. X 12, 041037 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.