Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Two-time weak measurement protocol for ergotropy protection in open quantum batteries

T0 review · 3 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 Two weak measurements can shield a quantum battery from discharge.

desk verdict Competent, internally consistent theory paper on weak-measurement reversal for quantum battery self-discharge; the central 'no extra net recharging' claim is conditional on post-selection, but the authors are upfront about success probabilities. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16633 v2 pith:GLLQFID7 submitted 2024-11-25 quant-ph

André H. A. Malavazi , Rishav Sagar , Borhan Ahmadi , Pedro R. Dieguez This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords quantumbatteryergotropyweakmeasurementreversalopensystemdecoherencemitigationcoherencethermalization
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 two selective weak measurements, one applied immediately after charging and a reversal measurement applied after a period of thermal dissipation, can slow the discharge of an open quantum battery. The nontrivial part of the claim is that this protection need not come from net recharging: the measurement strengths can be chosen, via an explicit analytic condition, so that the measurement-induced changes in total energy and in ergotropy are both exactly zero, while the final ergotropy still exceeds that of an unmeasured battery. If true, this gives a concrete, experimentally accessible way to stabilise stored work in systems such as NMR and superconducting qubits, and it separates the protection into an incoherent part and a coherence-assisted part. The authors demonstrate the effect for single-qubit and two-qubit batteries and give the generalisation to N-cell batteries.

What carries the argument

The central object is the pair of selective weak measurements $\hat M_m=|g\rangle\langle g|+\sqrt{1-m}\,|e\rangle\langle e|$ and $\hat W_w=\sqrt{1-w}\,|g\rangle\langle g|+|e\rangle\langle e|$, applied before and after the dissipation interval. The first gently projects the battery toward the ground state, lowering its energy and ergotropy; the second reverses this by projecting toward the excited state. Because both operators commute with the bare Hamiltonian, the population dynamics decouple from the coherences, which lets the authors solve analytically for the reversal strength $\tilde w$ that makes the net energy shift vanish, and then impose the ergotropy-shift condition to select operational points. The complementary object is the split of ergotropy into incoherent and coherent parts, $R=R_{\rm inc}+R_{\rm coh}$, where the incoherent part follows the populations and the coherent part is a function of purity and off-diagonal coherence; this split lets the paper attribute the gain to each resource separately.

What would settle it

In a single-qubit thermalisation experiment (NMR or superconducting circuit), fix the dissipation time and choose the weak measurement strength and the reversal strength according to Eq. (24); if the measured ergotropy at the end is not greater than that of an identical qubit that simply thermalised for the same time, the central claim is refuted. A second decisive check is to include the work invested in the measurement apparatus and the cost of post-selection: if that total exceeds the measured ergotropy saving, the zero-shift statement holds for the battery alone but not as a net thermodynamic advantage.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that the discharging of a quantum battery can be mitigated by a two-time weak measurement (TWM) sequence whose operating points are defined by two thermodynamic constraints: the net energy shift $\varepsilon_{mw}(\tau)$ and the net ergotropy shift $W_{mw}(\tau)$ induced by the two measurements both vanish, while the ergotropy gain $\mathcal{R}_{mw}(\tau)$ is positive. For a single qubit in a thermal bath the reversal strength $\tilde w$ that zeroes the energy shift is given in closed form; along the equal-strength curve $\eta_2$ the diagonal state is driven to the thermal state and then back to the initial state, making the transformation cyclic for incoherent states. The gain appears because a partially discharged state thermalises more slowly than a fully charged one, an effect the authors link to the ergotropic Mpemba effect, and the reversal measurement restores population without a net energy cost. For a two-qubit X-state sharing a common bath, the same constraints identify operational points where the protocol saves ergotropy both with and without initial entanglement; in the entangled case collective dissipation can even leave the final ergotropy slightly above the initial value, at the price of a low success probability.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the weak measurements and the successful post-selection cost nothing thermodynamically: the protocol only guarantees the battery itself receives no net energy or ergotropy, not that the measurement apparatus and discarded branches come for free.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A battery need not be fully charged to benefit: because partially charged states dissipate more slowly, the protocol can be seen as deliberately staging the discharge through a lower-energy state and then restoring population with the reversal measurement.
  • Initial coherence changes the coherent part of the gain while leaving the success probability untouched, so coherently prepared batteries can improve the gain without reducing reliability.
  • In the two-qubit collective-bath case, initially entangled cells can convert environment-assisted charging into a net ergotropy increase (about 75.8% of the initial charge saved in the example), but the post-selection probability is low, around 0.09.
  • The protocol scales to N cells by applying local weak measurements per cell, and not every cell needs to be measured as long as the net energy and ergotropy shifts cancel.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: allowing a small positive ergotropy shift rather than exactly zero would open more of the parameter space and could buy larger gains, but then the measurements are genuinely doing part of the charging.
  • A full resource ledger would count the discarded failure branches and the thermodynamic cost of implementing the measurements; the zero-shift constraint ensures the battery itself is not net-charged, but it does not by itself establish a favourable net resource balance for the whole protocol.
  • Since the mechanism leans on state-dependent discharge rates, a direct comparison against preparing the same partially charged state with no measurements would isolate how much of the gain is due to the reversal measurement rather than to state preparation.
  • Applying the protocol to non-Markovian environments would test whether the reversal symmetry that produces zero net shifts survives non-exponential memory effects.
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 manuscript proposes a two-time weak measurement (TWM) protocol to mitigate ergotropy loss in open quantum batteries. A weak measurement M_m is applied immediately after charging, the battery then dissipates for a time τ, and a reversal measurement W_w is applied; the measurement strengths are chosen so that the energy shift εmw(τ) and ergotropy shift Wmw(τ) induced by the measurements on the successful branch vanish. The authors derive analytical expressions for the single-qubit case, identify operational points where the gain is positive, analyze the coherent and incoherent contributions separately, and extend the protocol to two-qubit X-states in a common environment. The central claim is that the protocol yields a positive ergotropy gain without extra net recharging of the battery.

Significance. If the conditional nature of the scheme is made explicit, the paper is a useful contribution to quantum battery protection: the single-qubit formulas are internally consistent, the protocol connects to existing weak-measurement-reversal experiments, and the separation into coherent and incoherent ergotropy is informative. The authors also report success probabilities throughout, so the post-selected nature of the protocol is not hidden. However, the headline claim is currently overstated: the thermodynamic constraints are imposed only on the branch in which both measurement outcomes occur, and for the presented single-qubit example the outcome-averaged final state shows no gain. With a reframed claim and an explicit unconditional analysis, the work is publishable.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II.B, Eqs. (19)-(23) and Fig. 10] The bookkeeping in the central claim is incomplete because εmw(τ), Wmw(τ), and the gain Rmw(τ) are defined only for the branch in which both weak-measurement outcomes occur; the complementary Kraus outcomes (for example √m|e⟩⟨e| after M_m and √w|g⟩⟨g| after W_w) are never included in the energy or ergotropy balance. For the Fig. 10 example (P0=0.9, m=0.4, w≈0.202, τ=τγ, Π≈0.57), completing the POVM in the natural way yields final excited populations of roughly 0.5575 for the first-failure branch and 0 for the second-failure branch, and the outcome-averaged final population is approximately 0.52, essentially the no-protocol value P(τ)≈0.5207. The reported 8.57% saved charge is therefore a conditional, post-selected gain. Please reformulate the abstract and Section II.B to state explicitly that the zero-shift constraints and the gain apply to the successful branch, and provide an unconditional analysis so that the reader can see the average over all measurement outcomes.
  2. [Section V (Discussion) and Eqs. (19)-(21)] The 'no extra net recharging' claim refers only to the energy and ergotropy changes of the battery state on the successful branch, not to the thermodynamic cost of implementing the weak measurements or of discarding the failed branches. The paper acknowledges in Section V that 'Examining the energetic cost of measurements, following Landauer's principle, would also be important,' but this cost is part of the resource balance if the claim is presented as a thermodynamic statement. Please qualify the central claim: either restrict it to the post-selected battery state or extend the resource analysis to include the measurement apparatus and the unselected outcomes.
  3. [Section IV.A, Figs. 13-15] The two-qubit extension inherits the same post-selection caveat, but the manuscript does not state this explicitly in Section IV. The operational points in Fig. 13 are intersections of the ε(τγ)=0 and W(τγ)=0 curves, and the reported gains and success probabilities are conditional on both local measurements succeeding. Please state this explicitly and provide the success-probability formula analogous to Eq. (12) for the multi-cell case.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (16)] Equation (16) uses the same symbol Rmw on both sides for the final ergotropy and for the gain; please introduce a distinct notation, such as a script R or ΔR, to avoid confusion.
  2. [Eq. (24) and Appendix B] The derivation leading to Eq. (24) is not shown; the text only states that the relation can be inverted. Please include the inversion steps or give a clear derivation in Appendix B.
  3. [Fig. 5] The white line marking zero coherent ergotropy gain in Fig. 5 is difficult to distinguish from the background; please increase its contrast or use a dashed line.
  4. [Section II.B, after Eq. (23)] The chain 'Wmw(τ) = −εp_mw(τ) = 0' is easy to misread as a definition; please rephrase it to make clear that Wmw=0 is equivalent to εp_mw(τ)=0 after imposing εmw=0.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the ergotropy gain is computed from the model dynamics after imposing the paper's own operational constraints, not fitted or assumed.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that a two-time weak measurement protocol can yield a positive ergotropy gain while satisfying zero net energy and ergotropy shifts. These operational points are obtained by solving the constraint equations epsilon_mw(τ)=0 and W_mw(τ)=0, e.g., Eq. (24) for the reversal strength w-tilde, and the gain R_mw(τ) is then evaluated from the GKLS dynamics in Eqs. (7)-(16). Nothing in this derivation forces the gain to be positive: the figures show large parameter regions where the gain is negative or null, and positive gain emerges only because the weakly measured state discharges more slowly than the unmeasured one. The zero-shift constraints are the authors' own definition of "no extra net recharging," which is a legitimate modeling choice rather than a circular input. The protocol does rely on post-selection, and the paper explicitly reports the success probability Π_mw(τ), so the conditional nature of the result is disclosed. Any concern that averaging over the discarded measurement branches cancels the gain is a physical bookkeeping caveat about selective measurements, not a circular derivation. Likewise, the paper's statement in Sec. V that the thermodynamic cost of the measurements themselves remains to be examined is an acknowledged limitation, not a hidden assumption of the result. Self-citations appear only as contextual references to prior work by the same authors and are not load-bearing; the weak-measurement reversal mechanism is attributed to independent earlier works [124,125,133-139]. No step reduces to its own input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The derivation is self-contained once the stated measurement scheme and master equation are accepted.

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

The central claim rests on standard Markovian open quantum dynamics, instantaneous and cost-free weak measurements, post-selection, and, for the multi-qubit extension, a local master equation valid for weak inter-cell coupling. No new entities or fitted parameters are introduced; the protocol's parameters are chosen to satisfy the paper's own constraints.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The open battery dynamics is governed by the GKLS master equation with a thermal reservoir (Eq. 3).
    Standard Markovian approximation; the protocol's gain relies on the linear population dynamics and the thermal fixed point.
  • domain assumption Weak measurements are instantaneous and have no thermodynamic cost.
    Section II.A states 'the measurements are assumed to be instantaneous'; Section V acknowledges Landauer cost is not included.
  • domain assumption The local master equation (Eq. 37) with collective dissipators is valid for the two-qubit system with J << ω.
    Section IV states J << ω is required for the local approach; stronger couplings are outside validity.
  • domain assumption Post-selection on the successful measurement branch is allowed without additional resource accounting.
    The protocol's success probability is finite; failed branches are not analyzed, and no unconditioned average gain is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two-time weak measurement protocol for ergotropy protection in open quantum batteries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GLLQFID7

@misc{pith2026241116633,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two-time weak measurement protocol for ergotropy protection in open quantum batteries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GLLQFID7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16633}
}
abstract

Quantum batteries are emerging as highly efficient energy storage devices that can exceed classical performance limits. Although there have been significant advancements in controlling these systems, challenges remain in stabilizing stored energy and minimizing losses due to inevitable environmental interaction. In this paper, we propose a protocol that employs selective weak measurements to protect quantum states from such influence and mitigate battery discharging, that is feasible in state-of-the-art technologies. We establish thermodynamic constraints that allow this method to be implemented without disrupting the overall energy and ergotropy balance of the system, i.e., with no extra net recharging. Our findings demonstrate that appropriately chosen measurement intensity can reduce unwanted discharging effects, thereby preserving ergotropy and improving the stability of quantum batteries. We illustrate the protocol with single and two-qubit systems and establish the generalization for $N$-cell batteries. Additionally, we explore how weak measurements influence the coherent and incoherent components of ergotropy, providing new insights into the practical application of quantum coherence in energy storage technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16633 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (19 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: illustrates the coherent ergotropy as a func￾tion of population P and coherence |Q| 2 , highlighting these key properties. Any dynamical evolution follows a trajectory within this landscape. Specifically, under the evolution governed by Eq. (3), the behavior of Rcoh[ˆρ…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: c by showing how the coherent ergotropy gain be￾haves in terms of τ for different measurement strengths m and w˜ ∈ [0, 1], assuming maximum coherence allowed for each P0, given by |Q0| 2 = |Qmax| 2 := P0(1 − P0) for (a) P0 = 0.6, (b) P0 = 0.9. It is possible to see tha…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: FIG. 21 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: FIG. 22 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_22.png]
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: FIG. 23 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_23.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Anomalous discharging of quantum batteries: the ergotropic Mpemba effect

    quant-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Squeezing-charged single-mode quantum batteries discharge their extractable work faster than displacement-charged batteries with identical initial charge, an effect the authors derive exactly.

  2. Efficient wireless charging of a quantum battery

    quant-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Wireless quantum battery charging through a common reservoir is fastest in strong coupling, where charging time is nearly independent of charger state, and multiple chargers help only in weak or moderate coupling.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

173 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    (21) presents the ergotropy shift profile atτγ for dif- ferent parameter settings

    To illustrate this and the influence of temperature, Fig. (21) presents the ergotropy shift profile atτγ for dif- ferent parameter settings. Figures (21)a–c show how the ergotropy shift depends on the initial populationP0 and measurement strength m, assuming maximal initial co- herence |Q0|2 = |Qmax|2 = P0(1−P0). These plots corre- spond to different temp...

  2. [2]

    Alicki and M

    R. Alicki and M. Fannes, Entanglement boost for ex- tractable work from ensembles of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E87, 042123 (2013)

    2013

  3. [3]

    F. C. Binder, S. Vinjanampathy, K. Modi, and J. Goold, Quantacell: powerful charging of quantum batteries, New Journal of Physics17, 075015 (2015)

    2015

  4. [4]

    Campaioli, S

    F. Campaioli, S. Gherardini, J. Q. Quach, M. Polini, and G. M. Andolina, Colloquium: Quantum batteries, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 031001 (2024)

    2024

  5. [5]

    J. Q. Quach, K. E. McGhee, L. Ganzer, D. M. Rouse, B. W. Lovett, E. M. Gauger, J. Keeling, G. Cerullo, D. G. Lidzey, and T. Virgili, Superabsorption in an or- ganic microcavity: Toward a quantum battery, Science advances 8, 3160 (2022). 23

    2022

  6. [6]

    G. M. Andolina, D. Farina, A. Mari, V. Pellegrini, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Charger-mediated en- ergy transfer in exactly solvable models for quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. B98, 205423 (2018)

    2018

  7. [7]

    G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Quantum versus classical many-body batter- ies, Phys. Rev. B99, 205437 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    Gyhm and U

    J.-Y. Gyhm and U. R. Fischer, Beneficial and detrimen- tal entanglement for quantum battery charging, AVS Quantum Science 6, 012001 (2024)

    2024

Show all 173 references
  1. [9]

    Monsel, M

    J. Monsel, M. Fellous-Asiani, B. Huard, and A. Auf- fèves, The energetic cost of work extraction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 130601 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Zhang, T.-R

    Y.-Y. Zhang, T.-R. Yang, L. Fu, and X. Wang, Powerful harmonic charging in a quantum battery, Phys. Rev. E 99, 052106 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Çakmak, Ergotropy from coherences in an open quantum system, Phys

    B. Çakmak, Ergotropy from coherences in an open quantum system, Phys. Rev. E102, 042111 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Ferraro, M

    D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V. Pellegrini, and M. Polini, High-power collective charging of a solid- state quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 117702 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Campaioli, F

    F. Campaioli, F. A. Pollock, F. C. Binder, L. Céleri, J. Goold, S. Vinjanampathy, and K. Modi, Enhancing the charging power of quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 150601 (2017)

    2017

  6. [14]

    Dou, Y.-J

    F.-Q. Dou, Y.-J. Wang, and J.-A. Sun, Highly effi- cient charging and discharging of three-level quantum batteries through shortcuts to adiabaticity, Frontiers of Physics 17, 31503 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    F.-Q. Dou, H. Zhou, and J.-A. Sun, Cavity heisenberg- spin-chain quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A106, 032212 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Dou, Y.-Q

    F.-Q. Dou, Y.-Q. Lu, Y.-J. Wang, and J.-A. Sun, Ex- tended dicke quantum battery with interatomic interac- tionsanddrivingfield,Phys.Rev.B 105,115405(2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    J.-Y. Gyhm, D. Šafránek, and D. Rosa, Quantum charg- ing advantage cannot be extensive without global oper- ations, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 140501 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    L. F. C. de Moraes, A. C. Duriez, A. Saguia, A. C. San- tos, and M. S. Sarandy, Quantum battery supercharging via counter-diabatic dynamics, Quantum Science and Technology 9, 045033 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Zhang and M

    X. Zhang and M. Blaauboer, Enhanced energy transfer in a dicke quantum battery, Frontiers in Physics 10, 1097564 (2023)

    2023

  12. [20]

    Guo, F.-M

    W.-X. Guo, F.-M. Yang, and F.-Q. Dou, Analytically solvablemany-body rosen-zenerquantumbattery, Phys. Rev. A 109, 032201 (2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    T. P. Le, J. Levinsen, K. Modi, M. M. Parish, and F. A. Pollock, Spin-chain model of a many-body quan- tum battery, Phys. Rev. A97, 022106 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    F.Zhao, F.-Q.Dou,andQ.Zhao,Chargingperformance of the su-schrieffer-heeger quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013172 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Dou, Y.-J

    F.-Q. Dou, Y.-J. Wang, and J.-A. Sun, Closed-loop three-level charged quantum battery, Europhysics Let- ters 131, 43001 (2020)

    2020

  16. [24]

    Yang, F.-M

    D.-L. Yang, F.-M. Yang, and F.-Q. Dou, Three-level dicke quantum battery, Phys. Rev. B 109, 235432 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    A. Ali, S. Al-Kuwari, M. I. Hussain, T. Byrnes, M. T. Rahim, J. Q. Quach, M. Ghominejad, and S. Haddadi, Ergotropy and capacity optimization in heisenberg spin- chain quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. A 110, 052404 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Hadipour and S

    M. Hadipour and S. Haseli, Nonequilibrium quantum batteries: Amplified work extraction through thermal bath modulation, arXiv:2502.05508 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  19. [27]

    S. Seah, M. Perarnau-Llobet, G. Haack, N. Brunner, and S. Nimmrichter, Quantum speed-up in collisional battery charging, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 100601 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    Salvia, M

    R. Salvia, M. Perarnau-Llobet, G. Haack, N. Brunner, and S. Nimmrichter, Quantum advantage in charging cavity and spin batteries by repeated interactions, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 013155 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Glicenstein, G

    A. Glicenstein, G. Ferioli, A. Browaeys, and I. Ferrier- Barbut, From superradiance to subradiance: exploring the many-body dicke ladder, Opt. Lett.47, 1541 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    Ahmadi, P

    B. Ahmadi, P. Mazurek, P. Horodecki, and S. Barzan- jeh, Nonreciprocal quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 210402 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Ahmadi, P

    B. Ahmadi, P. Mazurek, S. Barzanjeh, and P. Horodecki, Superoptimal charging of quantum batteries via reservoir engineering: Arbitrary energy transfer unlocked, Phys. Rev. Appl.23, 024010 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    Barra, K

    F. Barra, K. V. Hovhannisyan, and A. Imparato, Quan- tum batteries at the verge of a phase transition, New Journal of Physics24, 015003 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Shaghaghi, V

    V. Shaghaghi, V. Singh, G. Benenti, and D. Rosa, Mi- cromasers as quantum batteries, Quantum Science and Technology 7, 04LT01 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Shaghaghi, V

    V. Shaghaghi, V. Singh, M. Carrega, D. Rosa, and G. Benenti, Lossy micromaser battery: Almost pure states in the jaynes–cummings regime, Entropy25, 430 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Z.-G. Lu, G. Tian, X.-Y. Lü, and C. Shang, Topological quantum batteries, arXiv:2405.03675 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Dennis, A

    E. Dennis, A. Kitaev, A. Landahl, and J. Preskill, Topological quantum memory, Journal of Mathemati- cal Physics 43, 4452 (2002)

    2002

  29. [37]

    R. R. Rodríguez, B. Ahmadi, P. Mazurek, S. Barzan- jeh, R. Alicki, and P. Horodecki, Catalysis in charging quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. A107, 042419 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    Kamin, F

    F. Kamin, F. Tabesh, S. Salimi, F. Kheirandish, and A. C. Santos, Non-markovian effects on charging and self-discharging process of quantum batteries, New Journal of Physics22, 083007 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Song, H.-B

    W.-L. Song, H.-B. Liu, B. Zhou, W.-L. Yang, and J.- H. An, Remote charging and degradation suppression for the quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 090401 (2024)

    2024

  32. [40]

    Mojaveri, R

    B. Mojaveri, R. Jafarzadeh Bahrbeig, and M. A. Fasihi, Charging a quantum battery mediated by parity- deformed fields, Phys. Rev. E110, 064107 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    M.-L. Hu, T. Gao, and H. Fan, Efficient wireless charg- ing of a quantum battery, arXiv:2501.08843 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  34. [42]

    P.-Y. Sun, H. Zhou, and F.-Q. Dou, Cavity-heisenberg spin-j chain quantum battery and reinforcement learn- ing optimization, arXiv:2412.01442 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    P. A. Erdman, G. M. Andolina, V. Giovannetti, and F. Noé, Reinforcement learning optimization of the charging of a dicke quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 243602 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Yan and J

    J.-s. Yan and J. Jing, Charging by quantum measure- ment, Phys. Rev. Appl.19, 064069 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    R. R. Rodríguez, B. Ahmadi, G. Suárez, P. Mazurek, S. Barzanjeh, and P. Horodecki, Optimal quantum con- 24 trol of charging quantum batteries, New Journal of Physics 26, 043004 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    Mazzoncini, V

    F. Mazzoncini, V. Cavina, G. M. Andolina, P. A. Erd- man, and V. Giovannetti, Optimal control methods for quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. A107, 032218 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    C.-K. Hu, J. Qiu, P. J. P. Souza, J. Yuan, Y. Zhou, L. Zhang, J. Chu, X. Pan, L. Hu, J. Li, Y. Xu, Y. Zhong, S. Liu, F. Yan, D. Tan, R. Bachelard, C. J. Villas-Boas, A. C. Santos, and D. Yu, Optimal charging of a su- perconducting quantum battery, Quantum Science and Technolog...

    2022

  40. [48]

    Blais, A

    A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 025005 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Yang, H.-L

    H.-Y. Yang, H.-L. Shi, Q.-K. Wan, K. Zhang, X.-H. Wang, and W.-L. Yang, Optimal energy storage in the tavis-cummings quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A 109, 012204 (2024)

    2024

  42. [50]

    Gemme, M

    G. Gemme, M. Grossi, D. Ferraro, S. Vallecorsa, and M. Sassetti, Ibm quantum platforms: A quantum bat- tery perspective, Batteries8, 43 (2022)

    2022

  43. [51]

    Dou and F.-M

    F.-Q. Dou and F.-M. Yang, Superconducting transmon qubit-resonator quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A 107, 023725 (2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    Yang and F.-Q

    F.-M. Yang and F.-Q. Dou, Resonator-qutrit quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A109, 062432 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Zheng, W

    R.-H. Zheng, W. Ning, Z.-B. Yang, Y. Xia, and S.-B. Zheng, Demonstration of dynamical control of three- level open systems with a superconducting qutrit, New Journal of Physics24, 063031 (2022)

    2022

  46. [54]

    Maillette de Buy Wenniger, S

    I. Maillette de Buy Wenniger, S. E. Thomas, M. Maffei, S. C. Wein, M. Pont, N. Belabas, S. Prasad, A. Harouri, A. Lemaître, I. Sagnes, N. Somaschi, A. Auffèves, and P. Senellart, Experimental analysis of energy transfers between a quantum emitter and light fields, Phys. Rev. L...

    2023

  47. [55]

    Rojo-Francàs, F

    A. Rojo-Francàs, F. Isaule, A. C. Santos, B. Juliá-Díaz, and N. T. Zinner, Stable collective charging of ultracold- atom quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. A 110, 032205 (2024)

    2024

  48. [56]

    Yang, Y.-H

    X. Yang, Y.-H. Yang, X.-Z. Liu, J.-L. Jiang, X.-Z. Zheng, S.-M. Fei, and M.-X. Luo, Experimental verifica- tion of quantum battery capacity with an optical plat- form, Cell Reports Physical Science5, 102300 (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    J. F. Barry, J. M. Schloss, E. Bauch, M. J. Turner, C. A. Hart, L. M. Pham, and R. L. Walsworth, Sensitivity optimization for nv-diamond magnetometry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 015004 (2020)

    2020

  50. [58]

    Joshi and T

    J. Joshi and T. S. Mahesh, Experimental investigation of a quantum battery using star-topology nmr spin sys- tems, Phys. Rev. A106, 042601 (2022)

    2022

  51. [59]

    C. Cruz, M. F. Anka, M. S. Reis, R. Bachelard, and A. C. Santos, Quantum battery based on quantum dis- cord at room temperature, Quantum Science and Tech- nology 7, 025020 (2022)

    2022

  52. [60]

    Breuer, F

    H.-P. Breuer, F. Petruccione,et al., The theory of open quantum systems (Oxford University, Oxford, 2007)

    2007

  53. [61]

    Pirmoradian and K

    F. Pirmoradian and K. Molmer, Aging of a quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A100, 043833 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    A. C. Santos, Quantum advantage of two-level batter- ies in the self-discharging process, Phys. Rev. E103, 042118 (2021)

    2021

  55. [63]

    C. A. Downing and M. S. Ukhtary, Hyperbolic enhance- ment of a quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A109, 052206 (2024)

    2024

  56. [64]

    A. C. Santos, B. Çakmak, S. Campbell, and N. T. Zin- ner, Stable adiabatic quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E 100, 032107 (2019)

    2019

  57. [65]

    M. T. Mitchison, J. Goold, and J. Prior, Charging a quantum battery with linear feedback control, Quantum 5, 500 (2021)

    2021

  58. [66]

    J. Liu, D. Segal, and G. Hanna, Loss-free excitonic quantum battery, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 123, 18303 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    Xu, H.-G

    K. Xu, H.-G. Li, H.-J. Zhu, and W.-M. Liu, Inhibiting theself-dischargingprocessofquantumbatteriesinnon- markovian noises, Phys. Rev. E109, 054132 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    J. Q. Quach and W. J. Munro, Using dark states to charge and stabilize open quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 024092 (2020)

    2020

  61. [69]

    Carrega, A

    M. Carrega, A. Crescente, D. Ferraro, and M. Sassetti, Dissipative dynamics of an open quantum battery, New Journal of Physics22, 083085 (2020)

    2020

  62. [70]

    Barra, Dissipative charging of a quantum battery, Phys

    F. Barra, Dissipative charging of a quantum battery, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 210601 (2019)

    2019

  63. [71]

    Farina, G

    D. Farina, G. M. Andolina, A. Mari, M. Polini, and V. Giovannetti, Charger-mediated energy transfer for quantum batteries: An open-system approach, Phys. Rev. B 99, 035421 (2019)

    2019

  64. [72]

    Bai and J.-H

    S.-Y. Bai and J.-H. An, Floquet engineering to reacti- vate a dissipative quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A102, 060201 (2020)

    2020

  65. [73]

    Zhao, F.-Q

    F. Zhao, F.-Q. Dou, and Q. Zhao, Quantum battery of interacting spins with environmental noise, Phys. Rev. A 103, 033715 (2021)

    2021

  66. [74]

    A. E. Allahverdyan, R. Balian, and T. M. Nieuwen- huizen, Maximal work extraction from finite quantum systems, Europhysics Letters67, 565 (2004)

    2004

  67. [75]

    Pusz and S

    W. Pusz and S. L. Woronowicz, Passive states and kms states for general quantum systems, Communications in Mathematical Physics 58, 273 (1978)

    1978

  68. [76]

    Z. Cai, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, W. J. Huggins, Y. Li, J. R. McClean, and T. E. O’Brien, Quantum error mitigation, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 045005 (2023)

    2023

  69. [77]

    Galve, A

    F. Galve, A. Mandarino, M. G. A. Paris, C. Benedetti, and R. Zambrini, Microscopic description for the emer- gence of collective dissipation in extended quantum sys- tems, Scientific Reports7, 42050 (2017)

    2017

  70. [78]

    Etxezarreta Martinez, P

    J. Etxezarreta Martinez, P. Fuentes, P. M. Crespo, and J. Garcia-Frias, Quantum outage probability for time- varying quantum channels, Phys. Rev. A105, 012432 (2022)

    2022

  71. [79]

    O. A. D. Molitor, A. H. A. Malavazi, R. D. Baldijão, A. C. Orthey, I. L. Paiva, and P. R. Dieguez, Quantum switch instabilities with an open control, Communica- tions Physics 7, 373 (2024)

    2024

  72. [80]

    S. Aziz, A. H. Malavazi, and P. R. Dieguez, Revival and instabilities of entanglement in monitoring maps with indefinite causal order, arXiv:2503.13373 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Gherardini, F

    S. Gherardini, F. Campaioli, F. Caruso, and F. C. Binder, Stabilizing open quantum batteries by sequen- tial measurements, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 013095 (2020)

    2020

  74. [82]

    W. M. Itano, D. J. Heinzen, J. J. Bollinger, and D. J. Wineland, Quantum zeno effect, Phys. Rev. A41, 2295 (1990)

    1990

  75. [83]

    J. Yi, P. Talkner, and Y. W. Kim, Single-temperature quantum engine without feedback control, Phys. Rev. E 25 96, 022108 (2017)

    2017

  76. [84]

    Elouard, D

    C. Elouard, D. A. Herrera-Martí, M. Clusel, and A. Auf- feves, The role of quantum measurement in stochastic thermodynamics, npj Quan. Inf.3, 1 (2017)

    2017

  77. [85]

    Brandner, M

    K. Brandner, M. Bauer, M. T. Schmid, and U. Seifert, Coherence-enhanced efficiency of feedback-driven quan- tum engines, New J. of Phys.17, 065006 (2015)

    2015

  78. [86]

    Campisi, J

    M. Campisi, J. Pekola, and R. Fazio, Feedback- controlled heat transport in quantum devices: theory and solid-state experimental proposal, New J. Phys.19, 053027 (2017)

    2017

  79. [87]

    Chand and A

    S. Chand and A. Biswas, Single-ion quantum Otto en- gine with always-on bath interaction, Europhys. Lett. 118, 60003 (2017)

    2017

  80. [88]

    Chand and A

    S. Chand and A. Biswas, Measurement-induced opera- tion of two-ion quantum heat machines, Phys. Rev. E 95, 032111 (2017)

    2017

  81. [89]

    M. H. Mohammady and J. Anders, A quantum Szilárd engine without heat from a thermal reservoir, New J. Phys. 19, 113026 (2017)

    2017

  82. [90]

    Elouard, D

    C. Elouard, D. Herrera-Martí, B. Huard, and A. Auf- feves, Extracting work from quantum measurement in Maxwell’s demon engines, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 260603 (2017)

    2017

  83. [91]

    Chand and A

    S. Chand and A. Biswas, Critical-point behavior of a measurement-based quantum heat engine, Phys. Rev. E 98, 052147 (2018)

    2018

  84. [92]

    X. Ding, J. Yi, Y. W. Kim, and P. Talkner, Measurement-driven single temperature engine, Phys. Rev. E 98, 042122 (2018)

    2018

  85. [93]

    Elouard and A

    C. Elouard and A. N. Jordan, Efficient quantum mea- surement engines, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 260601 (2018)

    2018

  86. [94]

    Buffoni, A

    L. Buffoni, A. Solfanelli, P. Verrucchi, A. Cuccoli, and M. Campisi, Quantum measurement cooling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 070603 (2019)

    2019

  87. [95]

    Solfanelli, L

    A. Solfanelli, L. Buffoni, A. Cuccoli, and M. Campisi, Maximal energy extraction via quantum measurement, J. Stat. Mech.2019, 094003 (2019)

    2019

  88. [96]

    A. N. Jordan, C. Elouard, and A. Auffèves, Quantum measurement engines and their relevance for quantum interpretations, Quantum Stud. Math. and Found. 7, 203 (2020)

    2020

  89. [97]

    Behzadi, Quantum engine based on general mea- surements, J

    N. Behzadi, Quantum engine based on general mea- surements, J. of Phys. A: Math. and Theo.54, 015304 (2020)

    2020

  90. [98]

    S. Seah, S. Nimmrichter, and V. Scarani, Maxwell’s lesser demon: A quantum engine driven by pointer mea- surements, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 100603 (2020)

    2020

  91. [99]

    Bresque, P

    L. Bresque, P. A. Camati, S. Rogers, K. Murch, A. N. Jordan, and A. Auffèves, Two-qubit engine fueled by entanglement and local measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 120605 (2021)

    2021

  92. [100]

    Chand, S

    S. Chand, S. Dasgupta, and A. Biswas, Finite-time per- formance of a single-ion quantum Otto engine, Phys. Rev. E 103, 032144 (2021)

    2021

  93. [101]

    Z. Lin, S. Su, J. Chen, J. Chen, and J. F. Santos, Sup- pressing coherence effects in quantum-measurement- based engines, Phys. Rev. A104, 062210 (2021)

    2021

  94. [102]

    Naghiloo, D

    M. Naghiloo, D. Tan, P. M. Harrington, J. J. Alonso, E. Lutz, A. Romito, and K. W. Murch, Heat and work along individual trajectories of a quantum bit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110604 (2020)

    2020

  95. [103]

    Naghiloo, J

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

    2018

  96. [104]

    Hernández-Gómez, S

    S. Hernández-Gómez, S. Gherardini, N. Staudenmaier, F. Poggiali, M. Campisi, A. Trombettoni, F. Cataliotti, P. Cappellaro, and N. Fabbri, Autonomous dissipative Maxwell’s demon in a diamond spin qutrit, PRX Quan- tum 3, 020329 (2022)

    2022

  97. [105]

    P. A. Camati, J. P. S. Peterson, T. B. Batalhão, K. Mi- cadei, A. M. Souza, R. S. Sarthour, I. S. Oliveira, and R. M. Serra, Experimental rectification of entropy production by Maxwell’s demon in a quantum system, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 240502 (2016)

    2016

  98. [106]

    M. F. Anka, T. R. de Oliveira, and D. Jonathan, Measurement-based quantum heat engine in a multi- level system, Phys. Rev. E104, 054128 (2021)

    2021

  99. [107]

    M. S. Alam and B. P. Venkatesh, Two-stroke quantum measurement heat engine, arXiv:2201.06303 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  100. [108]

    S. K. Manikandan, C. Elouard, K. W. Murch, A. Auf- fèves, and A. N. Jordan, Efficiently fueling a quantum engine with incompatible measurements, Phys. Rev. E 105, 044137 (2022)

    2022

  101. [109]

    N. M. Myers, O. Abah, and S. Deffner, Quantum ther- modynamic devices: From theoretical proposals to ex- perimental reality, AVS Quantum Sci.4, 027101 (2022)

    2022

  102. [110]

    Lisboa, P

    V. Lisboa, P. Dieguez, J. Guimarães, J. Santos, and R. Serra, Experimental investigation of a quantum heat engine powered by generalized measurements, Phys. Rev. A 106, 022436 (2022)

    2022

  103. [111]

    P. R. Dieguez, V. F. Lisboa, and R. M. Serra, Thermal devices powered by generalized measurements with in- definite causal order, Phys. Rev. A107, 012423 (2023)

    2023

  104. [112]

    Oreshkov and T

    O. Oreshkov and T. A. Brun, Weak measurements are universal, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 110409 (2005)

    2005

  105. [113]

    P. R. Dieguez and R. M. Angelo, Information-reality complementarity: The role of measurements and quan- tum reference frames, Phys. Rev. A97, 022107 (2018)

    2018

  106. [114]

    Y. Pan, J. Zhang, E. Cohen, C.-w. Wu, P.-X. Chen, and N. Davidson, Weak-to-strong transition of quantum measurement in a trapped-ion system, Nature Physics 16, 1206 (2020)

    2020

  107. [115]

    Mancino, M

    L. Mancino, M. Sbroscia, E. Roccia, I. Gianani, F. Somma, P. Mataloni, M. Paternostro, and M. Barbi- eri, The entropic cost of quantum generalized measure- ments, npj Quan. Inf.4, 1 (2018)

    2018

  108. [116]

    J. J. Alonso, E. Lutz, and A. Romito, Thermodynamics of weakly measured quantum systems, Physical review letters 116, 080403 (2016)

    2016

  109. [117]

    Vieira, J

    C. Vieira, J. de Oliveira, J. Santos, P. Dieguez, and R. Serra, Exploring quantum thermodynamics with nmr, Journal of Magnetic Resonance Open 16-17, 100105 (2023)

    2023

  110. [118]

    Zhang, H

    T. Zhang, H. Yang, and S.-M. Fei, Local-projective- measurement-enhanced quantum battery capacity, Phys. Rev. A109, 042424 (2024)

    2024

  111. [119]

    M. A. Balkanlu, E. Faizi, and B. Ahansaz, Selective weak measurement reveals super-ergotropy, Results in Physics 57, 107308 (2024)

    2024

  112. [120]

    Francica, J

    G. Francica, J. Goold, F. Plastina, and M. Paternostro, Daemonic ergotropy: enhanced work extraction from quantum correlations, npj Quan. Inf.3, 12 (2017)

    2017

  113. [121]

    D. Lu, A. Brodutch, J. Li, H. Li, and R. Laflamme, Ex- perimental realization of post-selected weak measure- ments on an nmr quantum processor, New Journal of Physics 16, 053015 (2014)

    2014

  114. [122]

    Singh, A

    G. Singh, A. Gaikwad, Arvind, and K. Dorai, 26 Experimental decoherence mitigation using a weak measurement-based scheme and the duality quantum al- gorithm, arXiv:2409.12752 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  115. [123]

    K. S. Cujia, J. M. Boss, K. Herb, J. Zopes, and C. L. Degen, Tracking the precession of single nuclear spins by weak measurements, Nature571, 230 (2019)

    2019

  116. [124]

    Kim, Y.-W

    Y.-S. Kim, Y.-W. Cho, Y.-S. Ra, and Y.-H. Kim, Re- versing the weak quantum measurement for a photonic qubit, Opt. Express17, 11978 (2009)

    2009

  117. [125]

    Kim, J.-C

    Y.-S. Kim, J.-C. Lee, O. Kwon, and Y.-H. Kim, Pro- tecting entanglement from decoherence using weak mea- surement and quantum measurement reversal, Nature Physics 8, 117 (2012)

    2012

  118. [126]

    Zou, Y.-H

    W.-J. Zou, Y.-H. Li, S.-C. Wang, Y. Cao, J.-G. Ren, J. Yin, C.-Z. Peng, X.-B. Wang, and J.-W. Pan, Pro- tecting entanglement from finite-temperature thermal noise via weak measurement and quantum measurement reversal, Phys. Rev. A95, 042342 (2017)

    2017

  119. [127]

    N. Katz, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, E. Lucero, R.McDermott, M.Neeley, M.Steffen, E.M.Weig, A.N. Cleland, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Korotkov, Coherent state evolution in a superconducting qubit from partial- collapse measurement, Science312, 1498 (2006)

    2006

  120. [128]

    N. Katz, M. Neeley, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, M. Hofheinz, E. Lucero, A. O’Connell, H. Wang, A. N. Cleland, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Korotkov, Reversal of the weak measurement of a quantum state in a super- conducting phase qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 200401 (2008)

    2008

  121. [129]

    Y. P. Zhong, Z. L. Wang, J. M. Martinis, A. N. Cle- land, A. N. Korotkov, and H. Wang, Reducing the im- pact of intrinsic dissipation in a superconducting circuit by quantum error detection, Nature Communications5, 3135 (2014)

    2014

  122. [130]

    S. J. Weber, A. Chantasri, J. Dressel, A. N. Jordan, K. W. Murch, and I. Siddiqi, Mapping the optimal route between two quantum states, Nature511, 570 (2014)

    2014

  123. [131]

    J. T. Monroe, N. Yunger Halpern, T. Lee, and K. W. Murch, Weak measurement of a superconducting qubit reconciles incompatible operators, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 100403 (2021)

    2021

  124. [132]

    C.L.LatuneandC.Elouard,Athermodynamicallycon- sistent approach to the energy costs of quantum mea- surements, Quantum 9, 1614 (2025)

    2025

  125. [133]

    L. B. Ferraz and C. Elouard, Weak continuous measurements require more work than strong ones, arXiv:2502.09732 (2025)

    2025

  126. [134]

    Xiao and Y.-L

    X. Xiao and Y.-L. Li, Protecting qutrit-qutrit entangle- ment by weak measurement and reversal, The European Physical Journal D67, 204 (2013)

    2013

  127. [135]

    A. N. Korotkov and K. Keane, Decoherence suppression by quantum measurement reversal, Phys. Rev. A 81, 040103 (2010)

    2010

  128. [136]

    Wang, Z.-W

    S.-C. Wang, Z.-W. Yu, W.-J. Zou, and X.-B. Wang, Protecting quantum states from decoherence of finite temperature using weak measurement, Phys. Rev. A89, 022318 (2014)

    2014

  129. [137]

    K. Wang, X. Zhao, and T. Yu, Environment-assisted quantum state restoration via weak measurements, Phys. Rev. A89, 042320 (2014)

    2014

  130. [138]

    Lee, Y.-C

    J.-C. Lee, Y.-C. Jeong, Y.-S. Kim, and Y.-H. Kim, Ex- perimental demonstration of decoherence suppression via quantum measurement reversal, Opt. Express 19, 16309 (2011)

    2011

  131. [139]

    Lalita and S

    J. Lalita and S. Banerjee, Protecting quantum correla- tions of negative quantum states using weak measure- ment under non-markovian noise, Physica Scripta99, 035116 (2024)

    2024

  132. [140]

    M. Wang, H. Liu, L. Cao, Y. Yang, X. Liu, B. Sun, and J. Zhao, Protecting the entanglement of x-type systems via weak measurement and reversal in the generalized amplitude damping channel, Entropy 27, 10.3390/e27040350 (2025)

    2025 doi

  133. [141]

    E. B. Mpemba and D. G. Osborne, Cool?, Physics Ed- ucation 4, 172 (1969)

    1969

  134. [142]

    Medina, O

    I. Medina, O. Culhane, F. C. Binder, G. T. Landi, and J. Goold, Anomalous discharging of quantum batteries: the ergotropic mpemba effect, arXiv:2412.13259 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  135. [143]

    Streltsov, G

    A. Streltsov, G. Adesso, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Quantum coherence as a resource, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 041003 (2017)

    2017

  136. [144]

    Francica, F

    G. Francica, F. C. Binder, G. Guarnieri, M. T. Mitchi- son, J. Goold, and F. Plastina, Quantum coherence and ergotropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 180603 (2020)

    2020

  137. [145]

    T. Guha, S. Roy, K. Simonov, and Z. Zimborás, Activa- tion of thermal states by quantum switch-driven ther- malization and its limits, arXiv:2208.04034 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  138. [146]

    Z. Niu, Y. Wu, Y. Wang, X. Rong, and J. Du, Exper- imental investigation of coherent ergotropy in a single spin system, arXiv:2409.06249 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  139. [147]

    Cattaneo, G

    M. Cattaneo, G. L. Giorgi, S. Maniscalco, and R. Zam- brini, Local versus global master equation with com- mon and separate baths: superiority of the global ap- proach in partial secular approximation, New Journal of Physics 21, 113045 (2019)

    2019

  140. [148]

    Cidrim, T

    A. Cidrim, T. S. do Espirito Santo, J. Schachen- mayer, R. Kaiser, and R. Bachelard, Photon blockade with ground-state neutral atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 073601 (2020)

    2020

  141. [149]

    S. J. Masson, I. Ferrier-Barbut, L. A. Orozco, A. Browaeys, and A. Asenjo-Garcia, Many-body signa- tures of collective decay in atomic chains, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 263601 (2020)

    2020

  142. [150]

    Benedetti, F

    C. Benedetti, F. Galve, A. Mandarino, M. G. A. Paris, and R. Zambrini, Minimal model for spontaneous quan- tum synchronization, Phys. Rev. A94, 052118 (2016)

    2016

  143. [151]

    Cattaneo, G

    M. Cattaneo, G. L. Giorgi, S. Maniscalco, G. S. Paraoanu, and R. Zambrini, Bath-induced collective phenomena on superconducting qubits: Synchroniza- tion, subradiance, and entanglement generation, An- nalen der Physik533, 2100038 (2021)

    2021

  144. [152]

    J. Ma, Z. Sun, X. Wang, and F. Nori, Entanglement dynamics of two qubits in a common bath, Phys. Rev. A 85, 062323 (2012)

    2012

  145. [153]

    Hu, Z.-X

    L.-Z. Hu, Z.-X. Man, and Y.-J. Xia, Steady-state en- tanglement and thermalization of coupled qubits in two common heat baths, Quantum Information Processing 17, 45 (2018)

    2018

  146. [154]

    Ghasemian and M

    E. Ghasemian and M. K. Tavassoly, Entanglement dy- namics of a dissipative two-qubit system under the in- fluence of a global environment, International Journal of Theoretical Physics59, 1742 (2020)

    2020

  147. [155]

    Hewgill, A

    A. Hewgill, A. Ferraro, and G. De Chiara, Quantum correlations and thermodynamic performances of two- qubit engines with local and common baths, Phys. Rev. A 98, 042102 (2018)

    2018

  148. [156]

    Manzano, G.-L

    G. Manzano, G.-L. Giorgi, R. Fazio, and R. Zambrini, Boosting the performance of small autonomous refrig- 27 erators via common environmental effects, New Journal of Physics 21, 123026 (2019)

    2019

  149. [157]

    Liu, D.-H

    Y.-Q. Liu, D.-H. Yu, and C.-S. Yu, Common environ- mental effects on quantum thermal transistor, Entropy 24, 32 (2022)

    2022

  150. [158]

    U. N. Ekanayake, S. D. Gunapala, and M. Premaratne, Engineeredcommonenvironmentaleffectsonmultitran- sistor systems, Phys. Rev. B107, 075440 (2023)

    2023

  151. [159]

    Rajapaksha, S

    A. Rajapaksha, S. D. Gunapala, and M. Premaratne, Enhanced thermal rectification in coupled qutrit–qubit quantum thermal diode, APL Quantum 1, 046123 (2024)

    2024

  152. [160]

    Behzadi, E

    N. Behzadi, E. Soltani, and E. Faizi, Thermodynamic cost of creating global quantum discord and local quan- tum uncertainty, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 57, 3207 (2018)

    2018

  153. [161]

    Gomes, P

    V. Gomes, P. Dieguez, and H. Vasconcelos, Realism- based nonlocality: Invariance under local unitary op- erations and asymptotic decay for thermal correlated states, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Appli- cations 601, 127568 (2022)

    2022

  154. [162]

    Vinjanampathy and J

    S. Vinjanampathy and J. Anders, Quantum thermody- namics, Contemporary Physics57, 545 (2016)

    2016

  155. [163]

    T.Werlang, M.A.Marchiori, M.F.Cornelio,andD.Va- lente, Optimal rectification in the ultrastrong coupling regime, Phys. Rev. E89, 062109 (2014)

    2014

  156. [164]

    Łobejko, P

    M. Łobejko, P. Mazurek, and M. Horodecki, Thermo- dynamics of Minimal Coupling Quantum Heat Engines, Quantum 4, 375 (2020)

    2020

  157. [165]

    Bhattacharjee and A

    S. Bhattacharjee and A. Dutta, Quantum thermal ma- chines and batteries, The European Physical Journal B 94, 239 (2021)

    2021

  158. [166]

    A.H.A.Malavazi, B.Ahmadi, P.Mazurek,andA.Man- darino, Detuning effects for heat-current control in quantum thermal devices, Phys. Rev. E 109, 064146 (2024)

    2024

  159. [167]

    Ollivier and W

    H. Ollivier and W. H. Zurek, Quantum discord: A mea- sureofthequantumnessofcorrelations,Phys.Rev.Lett. 88, 017901 (2001)

    2001

  160. [168]

    P. R. Dieguez and R. M. Angelo, Weak quantum dis- cord, Quantum Inf. Process.17, 1 (2018)

    2018

  161. [169]

    Castellano, R

    R. Castellano, R. Nery, K. Simonov, and D. Farina, Par- allel ergotropy: Maximum work extraction via parallel local unitary operations, arXiv:2407.20916 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  162. [170]

    Salvia, G

    R. Salvia, G. De Palma, and V. Giovannetti, Optimal local work extraction from bipartite quantum systems in the presence of hamiltonian couplings, Phys. Rev. A 107, 012405 (2023)

    2023

  163. [171]

    Di Bello, D

    G. Di Bello, D. Farina, D. Jansen, C. Perroni, V. Cataudella, and G. De Filippis, Local ergotropy and its fluctuations across a dissipative quantum phase tran- sition, arXiv:2408.02655 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  164. [172]

    Castellano, D

    R. Castellano, D. Farina, V. Giovannetti, and A. Acin, Extended local ergotropy, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 150402 (2024)

    2024

  165. [173]

    Georgescu, 60 years of landauer’s principle, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 770 (2021)

    I. Georgescu, 60 years of landauer’s principle, Nature Reviews Physics 3, 770 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

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