Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 60 references

Resonance-enhanced Floquet cavity electromagnonics

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A series capacitor that forms a tunable LC resonator at 10–27 MHz boosts the effective Floquet drive strength in a cavity electromagnonics device by about a factor of six.

desk verdict A solid engineering advance with a clear qualitative effect, but the headline sixfold enhancement and 10 Oe field rest on uncalibrated fits and an equation with a missing factor of 2. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.17489 v1 pith:HBLO4WXO submitted 2025-05-23 cond-mat.mes-hall

Amin Pishehvar , Zixin Yan , Zhaoyou Wang , Yu Jiang , Yizhong Huang , Josep M. Jornet , Liang Jiang , Xufeng Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords Floquetengineeringcavityelectromagnonicsmagnon-photoncouplingAutler-TownessplittingLCresonatorfrequencymodulationtwo-tonedrivemagnoniclogic
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

Floquet engineering in cavity electromagnonics has been limited by inefficient driving: a MHz-range drive coil couples weakly to the magnon mode and produces only small spectral changes. This paper shows that adding a variable capacitor in series with the driving coil forms a 10–27 MHz LC resonator, and that operating the Floquet drive near that resonance sharply increases the effective drive strength. The result is a roughly six-fold boost in the extracted drive amplitude, up to eight magnon sidebands, strongly enhanced Autler-Townes splitting, and eye-shaped spectra with mode merging and inversion that earlier demonstrations lacked. Because the LC resonance is narrow, a GHz-scale beat note from two microwave tones can also serve as the Floquet drive, letting GHz signals control the magnonic device. If the central claim holds, this turns Floquet cavity electromagnonics from a weak perturbation into a practical control mechanism for magnonic circuits and logic.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the LC resonator photon mode $\hat b$, coupled to the magnon mode $\hat m$ (the collective magnetization excitation in a YIG sphere) by the parametric interaction $g_{bm}\hat m^\dagger\hat m(\hat b+\hat b^\dagger)$, the same form used in optomechanics. Because the external drive $E$ is much stronger than the magnon-induced drive, $\hat b$ is treated classically; its steady-state amplitude is proportional to $E/[i(\omega_b-\omega_D)+\kappa_b]$ and is resonantly enhanced when the drive frequency $\omega_D$ approaches the LC resonance $\omega_b$. This turns the Hamiltonian into an effective magnon drive $\Omega\hat m^\dagger\hat m\cos(\omega_D t)$ with $\Omega = g_{bm}E/\sqrt{(\omega_b-\omega_D)^2+\kappa_b^2}$. The magnon then undergoes frequency modulation, $\cos(\omega_m t + (\Omega/\omega_D)\sin(\omega_D t))$, so sideband amplitudes follow Bessel functions $J_n(\Omega/\omega_D)$ and the carrier vanishes at the first root $\Omega/\omega_D = 2.4$. When the same enhanced drive is applied to the two cavity–magnon hybrid modes separated by $\Delta$, it produces Autler-Townes splitting (the drive-induced doubling of each hybrid mode into a doublet), with spectral shapes set by the LC resonance linewidth.

What would settle it

Measure the modulation field at the YIG sphere directly with a calibrated pickup loop while sweeping the 12 MHz drive amplitude across the LC resonance; if the field is not about 10 Oe when the carrier extinction ratio reaches its minimum near 14 V, or if the measured sideband ratios do not follow the Bessel functions $J_n(\Omega/\omega_D)$ with the fitted drive strength, the central enhancement claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a low-frequency LC resonator, formed by a variable capacitor in series with the driving coil, acts as a resonant amplifier for the Floquet drive in a cavity electromagnonic device. With the drive frequency tuned to the LC resonance, the classical LC photon amplitude is resonantly enhanced, so the parametric drive term $\Omega \hat{m}^\dagger\hat{m}\cos(\omega_D t)$ is roughly six times larger than the maximum achievable without the capacitor. This produces qualitatively new spectra: up to eight magnon sidebands with a fully suppressed carrier, Autler-Townes splittings that exceed the hybrid-mode splitting, eye-shaped avoided crossings whose width grows with drive amplitude, and branch crossings that lead to mode merging and inversion. The paper further claims that the same LC resonator can convert the MHz beat note of two GHz tones into an efficient Floquet drive, so a device's GHz signals can control its own or another device's transmission.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative six-fold enhancement rests on the assumption that the drive strength $\Omega$ extracted by fitting a simplified linear model to the measured reflection spectra, with assumed damping rates and no background, is reliable; if unmodeled frequency-dependent hardware response, magnon nonlinearity, or an omitted numerical factor in the model's drive-strength formula shifts that fit, the enhancement factor would not be established even though the raw sideband enhancement is visible.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • With the LC resonance matched to the hybrid-mode spacing, the same 20 V drive that produced a barely visible anti-crossing without the capacitor produces Autler-Townes splittings that exceed the mode spacing, with eye patterns that widen as the drive amplitude increases.
  • The magnon response follows frequency-modulation physics: sideband amplitudes are Bessel functions $J_n(\Omega/\omega_D)$, so the carrier can be fully suppressed (first observed at 14 V), and up to eight sidebands become visible at 18–20 V.
  • Because the LC resonator accepts any drive within its roughly 4 MHz linewidth, a MHz Floquet drive can be generated by mixing two GHz tones whose difference matches the LC resonance, so GHz signals can control the device.
  • This two-tone control enables self-regulating attenuation (input power regulates its own attenuation) and controlled transmission (a separate control signal sets the output), which the paper argues can be cascaded to build magnonic logic.
  • The enhancement also works when the LC resonance is detuned from the hybrid-mode splitting, for example a 15 MHz LC drive still strongly couples modes split by 10 MHz.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An implication left implicit is that the series-capacitance enhancement should transfer to other parametrically driven magnonic systems, such as magnomechanical or magnon-spoof-plasmon devices, wherever the drive coil rather than the intrinsic coupling limits the Floquet strength.
  • Because the enhancement is resonant with a finite linewidth, it offers a natural addressing mechanism: different devices in a cascade or different magnon modes on one chip could be selected by tuning their LC resonance frequencies, enabling frequency-multiplexed control without additional switches.
  • The observed carrier null at $\Omega/\omega_D = 2.4$ means the device already operates in a regime where high-order sidebands dominate; pushing the drive further should reveal richer Floquet spectra and eventually a regime where the simple linear fit used to extract $\Omega$ would need revisiting.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes and demonstrates a resonance-enhanced Floquet drive for cavity electromagnonics. A YIG sphere is coupled to a 3D cavity through a coaxial cable, and a coil around the sphere is fed through a series capacitor that forms a tunable LC resonator at 10-27 MHz. The authors report that tuning the LC resonance to the Floquet drive frequency produces much stronger magnon sidebands (up to eight), larger Autler-Townes splitting with eye patterns and mode merging/inversion, an approximately sixfold increase in extracted drive strength, and the ability to derive the MHz Floquet drive from a difference frequency of two GHz tones. They support the experiments with a three-mode Hamiltonian and input-output calculations, and they demonstrate two signal-processing operations, self-regulating attenuation and controlled transmission.

Significance. The qualitative finding is significant and clearly supported: the raw sideband spectra in Fig. 2 and the ATS/eye-pattern data in Figs. 3-5 show a genuinely stronger Floquet response when the LC resonance is tuned to the drive frequency, and the two-tone demonstration is a practical step toward cascading magnonic devices. The paper also gives a simple and generally applicable mechanism (an impedance-matched LC resonator) rather than a device-specific tweak. The quantitative headline, however, is not yet established to the same standard. The extracted sixfold enhancement and the inferred 10 Oe modulation field depend on fitting the model to the same spectra used for validation, with no independent calibration, error bars, or fit-quality metrics, and the theoretical relation in Eq. (5) contains a factor-of-2 error. With those points addressed, the paper would be a strong contribution.

major comments (3)
  1. [Theoretical Modeling, Eq. (5)] Starting from the coupling term g_bm m^dag m (b + b^dag) in Eq. (1) and the steady-state solution b(t) in Eq. (3), the magnon-modulation term in Eq. (4) has coefficient 2 g_bm |beta| cos(omega_D t + phi), with |beta| = E / sqrt((omega_b - omega_D)^2 + kappa_b^2). Equation (5) is therefore missing a factor of 2 and understates the effective drive strength in terms of the LC photon amplitude. If Eq. (5) is used to predict Omega from drive power or to extract g_bm, those numbers are wrong by a factor of 2; if Omega is instead treated as a free fit parameter, the paper should say so explicitly and remove the implication that Eq. (5) calibrates the drive strength.
  2. [Resonance-enhanced Floquet magnonics, Fig. 4(c)] The claim of 'an enhancement of around six times' rests entirely on the red dots in Fig. 4(c), which are obtained by numerically fitting reflection spectra computed from the linear input-output model with assumed damping rates and no background. No independent measurement of the coil-to-magnon conversion, the LC photon amplitude, or the modulation field is provided, and no error bars, residuals, or parameter-uncertainty estimates are shown. Given the factor-of-2 issue in Eq. (5) and the absence of a fit-quality metric, the fitted Omega values cannot be distinguished from absorbing model errors. The authors should add an independent calibration (for example a measured coil constant or calibrated pickup signal) or at least a detailed sensitivity analysis with published parameter values, so that the sixfold enhancement is not inferred from the same spectra it is used to explain.
  3. [Resonance-enhanced magnon modulation, Eq. (8) and Fig. 2(g)] The 10 Oe estimate is obtained by identifying the minimum of the carrier mode at 14 V with the first zero of J0, assuming the undamped frequency-modulation model of Eq. (6). The model omits damping, magnon nonlinearity, and possible drive-dependent impedance changes, and the minimum in Fig. 2(g) is not shown to be an exact zero. The paper should present a fit of the full sideband pattern to the Bessel model and report uncertainty in the extracted Omega and h, rather than reading a single null.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Theoretical Modeling, Eq. (8)] Equation (8) states m(t) + m^dag(t) = cos(omega_m t + ...), but the left-hand side is 2 cos(...) if m(t) is given by Eq. (7); if an overall output normalization is intended, this should be stated.
  2. [Throughout] Several typos should be corrected: 'antihalation' in Eq. (1) should be 'annihilation', 'quation' in the theoretical modeling section should be 'equation', 'compromises' in the system configuration section should be 'comprises', and 'arbitarily' in the two-tone drive section should be 'arbitrarily'.
  3. [Fig. 2(c) and 2(f)] The text reports eight sidebands in Fig. 2(c) at 20 V and six sidebands in Fig. 2(f) at 12 V; the panels should be labeled with the drive amplitude or the caption should reconcile the different sideband counts.
  4. [Fig. 4(c)] The dashed horizontal line representing the maximum non-resonant drive strength should be accompanied by its numerical value and a description of how that value was extracted, rather than left as a visual comparison.
  5. [Fig. 5(c)] The eye-pattern width or splitting used in Fig. 5(c) is not defined in the text; the authors should specify how the eye width is measured from the reflection spectra.
  6. [Data availability] No data or code availability statement is included; given the fitting-based quantitative claims, releasing the raw spectra and fitting code would substantially improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Qualitative LC-resonance enhancement rests on direct spectra, but the quantitative sixfold enhancement and the 'agrees well' validation reduce to fitted model parameters.

  1. fitted input called prediction [RESONANCE-ENHANCED FLOQUET MAGNONICS, Fig. 4(c) and surrounding text]
    "The drive strength Ω for each hybrid mode is extracted from our numerical model and plotted in Fig. 4(c) (red dots) as a function of the drive amplitude. As a comparison, the maximum drive strength induced by the same Floquet drives (up to 20 V) without the LC resonance enhancement is also plotted (dashed horizontal line), showing an enhancement of around six times when a LC resonance is adopted."

    The headline 'around six times' enhancement is not independently predicted or measured; it is the ratio of two values of Ω that are themselves obtained by fitting the same linear input-output model to the measured reflection spectra. The functional form of Ω is fixed by the model's Eq. (5), and the fit returns the numerical values, so the enhancement factor is a restatement of fitted parameters rather than a first-principles result. The raw sideband counts (eight with the LC capacitor vs two without) independently support a qualitative enhancement, so the circularity is confined to the quantitative factor and any derived quantities such as the 10 Oe modulation field estimate.

  2. fitted input called prediction [RESONANCE-ENHANCED FLOQUET MAGNONICS, paragraph after Fig. 4(a)]
    "Our experimental results agree well with the theoretical calculation [middle row in Fig. 4(a)], which utilize the actual linewidths for the hybrid modes extracted from numerical fitting of the experimental data."

    The 'theoretical calculation' used for validation is not an independent prediction: its linewidths are extracted from the very experimental data to which it is compared. Agreement is therefore partly enforced by the fitting procedure rather than constituting an external test of the model. This is a validation-by-construction issue for the quantitative agreement claim, although the underlying measured spectra remain direct evidence of the qualitative resonance-enhancement effect.

full rationale

The central qualitative claim — that inserting a series capacitor to form an LC resonance enhances the Floquet drive — is supported by direct, raw experimental data: the magnon reflection spectra show eight enhanced sidebands with the capacitor versus only two without it, and the cavity reflection spectra show LC-frequency-dependent ATS, eye patterns, mode merging, and mode inversion. Those observations are not equivalent to any fitted parameter, so the paper's main physics is not circular overall. However, the paper's quantitative headline ('around six times' enhancement) is derived from Ω values 'extracted from our numerical model' rather than from an independent calibration of g_bm, the coil field, or the drive amplitude. The enhancement factor is thus a ratio of fitted parameters, which by construction cannot serve as a first-principles check of the model. Similarly, the statement that experiment 'agrees well' with theory is weakened because the theory uses linewidths extracted from the same experimental data. The factor-of-2 issue in Eq. (5) is a correctness or model-specification concern rather than a circularity; it affects the quantitative interpretation of Ω and the inferred 10 Oe field but does not make the qualitative enhancement circular. Self-citations to the authors' prior Floquet magnonics work appear only as context and are not load-bearing for the central claim. Overall, the partial circularity is confined to the quantitative validation chain, while the qualitative demonstration remains independent, supporting a score of 4 rather than a higher score.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger lists three measured or fitted parameters, four domain assumptions, and no invented entities. The main burden is that Ω is not derived from independently measured g_bm and E; it is fitted, so the quantitative magnitude of the reported enhancement is model-dependent. The classical, linearized treatment of the LC mode and the magnon is standard for strong drives but is assumed rather than verified at the highest drive amplitudes.

free parameters (3)
  • Effective Floquet drive strength Ω = Up to about 2π × 28.8 MHz at 14 V inferred from the J0 minimum; per-amplitude values in Fig. 4(c)
    Ω is not predicted from independently measured g_bm and E; it is extracted by numerical fitting of measured reflection spectra, then used to quantify the enhancement factor and the 10 Oe modulation field.
  • Magnon-photon coupling g_cm = 2π × 22 MHz
    Extracted from the measured anti-crossing spectrum and sets the hybrid mode splitting Δ = 2g_cm used throughout. It is a measured system parameter, not tuned to force the result, but it is an input to the model.
  • Dissipation rates κ_c, κ_b, κ± = κ_c/2π = 2.5 MHz, κ_b/2π = 1.5 to 2.5 MHz, hybrid linewidths about 4 MHz
    Used in the 'realistic dissipation' calculations; values come from fits to spectra. The calculations with 10x reduced dissipation are clearly marked as illustrative.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The LC resonator mode b can be treated classically and undepleted: E >> g_bm ⟨m†m⟩, so b follows the linear equation of motion Eq. (2) and is eliminated at steady state.
    Invoked after Eq. (1) in 'Theoretical modeling'; if the drive is not much stronger than the magnon-induced drive, the effective Hamiltonian Eq. (4) and drive strength Ω Eq. (5) do not follow.
  • domain assumption The magnon mode is a harmonic oscillator with linear damping, and the drive enters only as a phase/frequency modulation of ωm via the term Ω m†m cos(ωDt); magnon nonlinearities and amplitude modulation are neglected.
    Used to solve Eq. (6) and predict Bessel sidebands; if nonlinearities at 20 V drive are significant, the Bessel-function interpretation and the Ω extraction fail.
  • domain assumption Reflection spectra can be computed from standard input-output theory with Markovian baths and the quoted dissipation rates, including frequency-independent coupling to the ports.
    Underlies the numerical calculations labeled 'calculation using realistic dissipation' and the fitted Ω values; no full input-output derivation or code is provided.
  • domain assumption The YIG sphere stays at a fixed bias field and the driving coil's field is uniform over the sphere, so the modulation is a single-tone cos term; cable and amplifier frequency responses do not distort the drive.
    Invoked implicitly when interpreting sidebands as pure frequency modulation and when attributing enhancement to the LC resonator rather than other frequency-dependent hardware.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Resonance-enhanced Floquet cavity electromagnonics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HBLO4WXO

@misc{pith2026250517489,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Resonance-enhanced Floquet cavity electromagnonics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HBLO4WXO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.17489}
}
read the original abstract

Floquet engineering has been recently recognized as an important tool for manipulating the coherent magnon-photon interaction in cavity electromagnonics systems at microwave frequencies. In spite of the novel hybrid magnonic functionalities that have been demonstrated, the effect of the Floquet drive has been relatively weak due to the limited driving efficiency, limiting its broader application. This work shows that by utilizing LC resonances, the Floquet drive in our cavity electromagnonic device can be drastically enhanced, giving rise to drastically boosted interaction between hybrid modes with fundamentally different spectral characteristics compared with previous demonstrations. In addition, the Floquet drives can also be obtained from GHz signals on such a system, allowing the demonstration of more advanced signal operations. Our novel resonance-enhanced Floquet cavity electromagnonics points to a new direction to fully unleash the potential of Floquet hybrid magnonics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.17489 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic drawing of the resonance-enhanced [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Measured reflection spectra of the magnon mode [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Cavity reflection spectra obtained from measurement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Cavity reflection spectra with LC resonance enhancement at different driving amplitudes. Top row: measurement; [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (a) Schematics of the Floquet drive experiment using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Schematics of the experimental setup for demon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Measured spectra at different amplitudes of a sin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Y. Li, W. Zhang, V. Tyberkevych, W.-K. Kwok, A. Hoff- mann, and V. Novosad, Hybrid magnonics: Physics, cir- cuits, and applications for coherent information process- ing, Journal of Applied Physics 128, 130902 (2020)

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Tabuchi, T

    Y. Tabuchi, T. Ishikawa, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Hybrid quantum device in which a superconducting qubit is coupled to a sur- face acoustic wave resonator, Applied Physics Express 12, 073001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    A. V. Chumak, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Quan- tum engineering with hybrid magnonic systems and ma- terials (invited paper), IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 57, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Lachance-Quirion, Y

    D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Tabuchi, A. Gloppe, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Hybrid quantum systems based on magnonics, Physics Reports 979, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Zhang, A review of common materials for hybrid quan- tum magnonics, Materials Today Electronics 5, 100044 (2023)

    X. Zhang, A review of common materials for hybrid quan- tum magnonics, Materials Today Electronics 5, 100044 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Zare Rameshti, S

    B. Zare Rameshti, S. Viola Kusminskiy, J. A. Haigh, K. Usami, D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Nakamura, C.-M. Hu, H. X. Tang, G. E. W. Bauer, and Y. M. Blanter, Cavity magnonics, Phys. Rep. 979, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Harder and C.-M

    M. Harder and C.-M. Hu, Chapter two - cavity spintron- ics: An early review of recent progress in the study of magnon–photon level repulsion (Academic Press, 2018) pp. 47–121

    2018

  8. [8]

    Bhoi and S.-K

    B. Bhoi and S.-K. Kim, Chapter two - roadmap for photon-magnon coupling and its applications (Academic Press, 2020) pp. 39–71

    2020

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Zhang, C.-L

    X. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Strongly coupled magnons and cavity microwave photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 156401 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Hybridizing ferromagnetic magnons and microwave photons in the quantum limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 083603 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    Goryachev, W

    M. Goryachev, W. G. Farr, D. L. Creedon, Y. Fan, M. Kostylev, and M. E. Tobar, High-cooperativity cavity qed with magnons at microwave frequencies, Phys. Rev. Appl. 2, 054002 (2014)

    2014

  4. [12]

    L. Bai, M. Harder, Y. P. Chen, X. Fan, J. Q. Xiao, and C.-M. Hu, Spin pumping in electrodynamically coupled magnon-photon systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 227201 (2015)

    2015

  5. [14]

    Osada, R

    A. Osada, R. Hisatomi, A. Noguchi, Y. Tabuchi, R. Ya- mazaki, K. Usami, M. Sadgrove, R. Yalla, M. Nomura, and Y. Nakamura, Cavity optomagnonics with spin-orbit coupled photons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 223601 (2016)

    2016

  6. [15]

    J. A. Haigh, A. Nunnenkamp, A. J. Ramsay, and A. J. Ferguson, Triple-resonant brillouin light scattering in magneto-optical cavities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 133602 (2016)

    2016

  7. [16]

    Viola Kusminskiy, H

    S. Viola Kusminskiy, H. X. Tang, and F. Marquardt, Coupled spin-light dynamics in cavity optomagnonics, Phys. Rev. A 94, 033821 (2016)

    2016

  8. [17]

    Zhang, C.-L

    X. Zhang, C.-L. Zou, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Cavity magnomechanics, Science Advances 2, e1501286 (2016)

    2016

  9. [18]

    C. A. Potts, E. Varga, V. A. S. V. Bittencourt, S. V. Kusminskiy, and J. P. Davis, Dynamical backaction mag- nomechanics, Phys. Rev. X 11, 031053 (2021)

    2021

  10. [19]

    Y.-P. Wang, J. W. Rao, Y. Yang, P.-C. Xu, Y. S. Gui, B. M. Yao, J. Q. You, and C.-M. Hu, Nonreciprocity and unidirectional invisibility in cavity magnonics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 127202 (2019)

    2019

  11. [20]

    Zhang, A

    X. Zhang, A. Galda, X. Han, D. Jin, and V. M. Vinokur, Broadband nonreciprocity enabled by strong coupling of magnons and microwave photons, Phys. Rev. Appl. 13, 044039 (2020)

    2020

  12. [21]

    Q. Wang, R. Verba, K. Dav ´ ıdkov´ a, B. Heinz, S. Tian, Y. Rao, M. Guo, X. Guo, C. Dubs, P. Pirro, and A. V. Chumak, All-magnonic repeater based on bistability, Na- ture Communications 15, 7577 (2024)

    2024

  13. [22]

    Wang, G.-Q

    Y.-P. Wang, G.-Q. Zhang, D. Zhang, T.-F. Li, C.-M. Hu, and J. Q. You, Bistability of cavity magnon polaritons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 057202 (2018)

    2018

  14. [23]

    Wang, G.-Q

    Y.-P. Wang, G.-Q. Zhang, D. Zhang, X.-Q. Luo, W. Xiong, S.-P. Wang, T.-F. Li, C.-M. Hu, and J. Q. You, Magnon kerr effect in a strongly coupled cavity- magnon system, Phys. Rev. B 94, 224410 (2016)

    2016

  15. [24]

    Braggio, G

    C. Braggio, G. Carugno, M. Guarise, A. Ortolan, and G. Ruoso, Optical manipulation of a magnon-photon hy- brid system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 107205 (2017). 9

    2017

  16. [25]

    J. Xu, C. Zhong, X. Han, D. Jin, L. Jiang, and X. Zhang, Floquet Cavity Electromagnonics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 237201 (2020)

    2020

  17. [26]

    K. Kato, R. Sasaki, K. Matsuura, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, High-cooperativity cavity magnon- polariton using a high-Q dielectric resonator, J. Appl. Phys. 134, 083901 (2023)

    2023

  18. [27]

    Huebl, C

    H. Huebl, C. W. Zollitsch, J. Lotze, F. Hocke, M. Greifen- stein, A. Marx, R. Gross, and S. T. B. Goennenwein, High Cooperativity in Coupled Microwave Resonator Ferrimagnetic Insulator Hybrids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 127003 (2013)

    2013

  19. [28]

    B. Bhoi, B. Kim, J. Kim, Y.-J. Cho, and S.-K. Kim, Robust magnon-photon coupling in a planar-geometry hybrid of inverted split-ring resonator and YIG film, Sci. Rep. 7, 1 (2017)

    2017

  20. [29]

    Y. Li, T. Polakovic, Y.-L. Wang, J. Xu, S. Lendinez, Z. Zhang, J. Ding, T. Khaire, H. Saglam, R. Di- van, J. Pearson, W.-K. Kwok, Z. Xiao, V. Novosad, A. Hoffmann, and W. Zhang, Strong coupling between magnons and microwave photons in on-chip ferromagnet- superconductor thin-f...

    2019

  21. [30]

    J. T. Hou and L. Liu, Strong coupling between microwave photons and nanomagnet magnons, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 107702 (2019)

    2019

  22. [31]

    Xiong, A

    Y. Xiong, A. Christy, Y. Dong, A. H. Comstock, D. Sun, Y. Li, J. F. Cahoon, B. Yang, and W. Zhang, Combi- natorial split-ring and spiral metaresonator for efficient magnon-photon coupling, Phys. Rev. Appl. 21, 034034 (2024)

    2024

  23. [32]

    J. Xu, C. Zhong, S. Zhuang, C. Qian, Y. Jiang, A. Pishe- hvar, X. Han, D. Jin, J. M. Jornet, B. Zhen, J. Hu, L. Jiang, and X. Zhang, Slow-wave hybrid magnonics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 116701 (2024)

    2024

  24. [33]

    Jiang, J

    Y. Jiang, J. Xu, Z. Yan, A. Pishehvar, and X. Zhang, Broadband magnomechanics enabled by magnon–spoof plasmon hybridization, Phys. Rev. Appl. 23, 024003 (2025)

    2025

  25. [34]

    Tabuchi, S

    Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Ya- mazaki, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Coherent coupling between a ferromagnetic magnon and a superconducting qubit, Science 349, 405 (2015)

    2015

  26. [35]

    Lachance-Quirion, Y

    D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Tabuchi, S. Ishino, A. Noguchi, T. Ishikawa, R. Yamazaki, and Y. Nakamura, Resolving quanta of collective spin excitations in a millimeter-sized ferromagnet, Science Advances 3, e1603150 (2017)

    2017

  27. [36]

    Lachance-Quirion, S

    D. Lachance-Quirion, S. P. Wolski, Y. Tabuchi, S. Kono, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Entanglement-based single- shot detection of a single magnon with a superconducting qubit, Science 367, 425 (2020)

    2020

  28. [37]

    Xu, X.-K

    D. Xu, X.-K. Gu, H.-K. Li, Y.-C. Weng, Y.-P. Wang, J. Li, H. Wang, S.-Y. Zhu, and J. Q. You, Quantum control of a single magnon in a macroscopic spin system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 193603 (2023)

    2023

  29. [38]

    S. P. Wolski, D. Lachance-Quirion, Y. Tabuchi, S. Kono, A. Noguchi, K. Usami, and Y. Nakamura, Dissipation- based quantum sensing of magnons with a superconduct- ing qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 117701 (2020)

    2020

  30. [39]

    N. Zhu, X. Zhang, X. Han, C.-L. Zou, C. Zhong, C.-H. Wang, L. Jiang, and H. X. Tang, Waveguide cavity op- tomagnonics for microwave-to-optics conversion, Optica 7, 1291 (2020)

    2020

  31. [40]

    J. A. Haigh, S. Langenfeld, N. J. Lambert, J. J. Baum- berg, A. J. Ramsay, A. Nunnenkamp, and A. J. Fer- guson, Magneto-optical coupling in whispering-gallery- mode resonators, Phys. Rev. A 92, 063845 (2015)

    2015

  32. [41]

    Zhang, N

    X. Zhang, N. Zhu, C.-L. Zou, and H. X. Tang, Opto- magnonic whispering gallery microresonators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 123605 (2016)

    2016

  33. [42]

    Sivarajah, A

    P. Sivarajah, A. Steinbacher, B. Dastrup, J. Lu, M. Xi- ang, W. Ren, S. Kamba, S. Cao, and K. A. Nelson, Thz-frequency magnon-phonon-polaritons in the collec- tive strong-coupling regime, Journal of Applied Physics 125, 213103 (2019)

    2019

  34. [43]

    Crescini, C

    N. Crescini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, R. Di Vora, A. Or- tolan, and G. Ruoso, Magnon-driven dynamics of a hy- brid system excited with ultrafast optical pulses, Com- munications Physics 3, 164 (2020)

    2020

  35. [44]

    Rashedi, M

    A. Rashedi, M. Ebrahimi, Y. Huang, M. J. Rudd, and J. P. Davis, Yig photonic crystals, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05361 10.48550/arXiv.2412.05361 (2024)

    2024 doi

  36. [45]

    Haigh, R

    J. Haigh, R. Chakalov, and A. Ramsay, Subpicoliter mag- netoptical cavities, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 044005 (2020)

    2020

  37. [46]

    D. D. Yaremkevich, A. V. Scherbakov, L. De Clerk, S. M. Kukhtaruk, A. Nadzeyka, R. Campion, A. W. Rush- forth, S. Savel’ev, A. G. Balanov, and M. Bayer, On-chip phonon-magnon reservoir for neuromorphic computing, Nature Communications 14, 8296 (2023)

    2023

  38. [47]

    Millet, H

    L. Millet, H. Jeon, B. Kim, B. Bhoi, and S.-K. Kim, Reservoir computing using photon-magnon coupling, Ap- plied Physics Letters 119, 182405 (2021)

    2021

  39. [48]

    Flower, J

    G. Flower, J. Bourhill, M. Goryachev, and M. E. To- bar, Broadening frequency range of a ferromagnetic ax- ion haloscope with strongly coupled cavity–magnon po- laritons, Physics of the Dark Universe 25, 100306 (2019)

    2019

  40. [49]

    Crescini, C

    N. Crescini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, A. Ortolan, and G. Ruoso, Cavity magnon polariton based precision mag- netometry, Applied Physics Letters 117, 144001 (2020)

    2020

  41. [50]

    Crescini, D

    N. Crescini, D. Alesini, C. Braggio, G. Carugno, D. Di Gioacchino, C. S. Gallo, U. Gambardella, C. Gatti, G. Iannone, G. Lamanna, C. Ligi, A. Lombardi, A. Or- tolan, S. Pagano, R. Pengo, G. Ruoso, C. C. Speake, and L. Taffarello, Operation of a ferromagnetic axion halo- scope ...

    2018

  42. [51]

    Potts, V

    C. Potts, V. Bittencourt, S. V. Kusminskiy, and J. Davis, Magnon-phonon quantum correlation thermom- etry, Phys. Rev. Appl. 13, 064001 (2020)

    2020

  43. [52]

    Pishehvar, Z

    A. Pishehvar, Z. Wang, Y. Zhu, Y. Jiang, Z. Yan, F. Li, J. M. Jornet, J.-M. Hu, L. Jiang, and X. Zhang, On- demand magnon resonance isolation in cavity magnonics, Phys. Rev. Appl. 23, 024053 (2025)

    2025

  44. [53]

    Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in pe- riodically driven optical lattices, Rev

    A. Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in pe- riodically driven optical lattices, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 011004 (2017)

    2017

  45. [54]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Quantum many- body systems out of equilibrium, Nature Physics 11, 124 (2015)

    2015

  46. [55]

    Lignier, C

    H. Lignier, C. Sias, D. Ciampini, Y. Singh, A. Zen- esini, O. Morsch, and E. Arimondo, Dynamical control of matter-wave tunneling in periodic potentials, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 220403 (2007)

    2007

  47. [56]

    Jiang, T

    L. Jiang, T. Kitagawa, J. Alicea, A. R. Akhmerov, D. Pekker, G. Refael, J. I. Cirac, E. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and P. Zoller, Majorana fermions in equilibrium and in driven cold-atom quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 10 220402 (2011)

    2011

  48. [57]

    Potirniche, A

    I.-D. Potirniche, A. C. Potter, M. Schleier-Smith, A. Vishwanath, and N. Y. Yao, Floquet symmetry- protected topological phases in cold-atom systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 123601 (2017)

    2017

  49. [58]

    Q. Wang, M. Kewenig, M. Schneider, R. Verba, F. Kohl, B. Heinz, M. Geilen, M. Mohseni, B. L¨ agel, F. Ciub- otaru, C. Adelmann, C. Dubs, S. D. Cotofana, O. V. Dobrovolskiy, T. Br¨ acher, P. Pirro, and A. V. Chumak, A magnonic directional coupler for integrated magnonic half-ad...

    2020

  50. [59]

    Cocconcelli, F

    M. Cocconcelli, F. Maspero, A. Micelli, A. Toniato, A. D. Giacco, N. Pellizzi, A. E. Plaza, A. Cattoni, M. Madami, R. Silvani, A. Hamadeh, C. Adelmann, P. Pirro, S. Tac- chi, F. Ciubotaru, and R. Bertacco, Self biased inte- grated magnonic device, arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.031...

    2025 doi arXiv

  51. [60]

    Aspelmeyer, T

    M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Cavity optomechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014)

    2014

  52. [61]

    Barzanjeh, A

    S. Barzanjeh, A. Xuereb, S. Gr¨ oblacher, M. Paternostro, C. A. Regal, and E. M. Weig, Optomechanics for quan- tum technologies, Nat. Phys. 18, 15 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.