Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Experimental observation of multimode quantum phase transitions in a superconducting Bose-Hubbard simulator

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Pumping one site of a 21-resonator Bose-Hubbard chain makes all modes jump at once—a multimode dissipative first-order phase transition.

desk verdict Solid, well-scoped experiment on a multimode dissipative phase transition in a 21-site circuit QED chain; the main caveat is the single-mode model's unstated validity range. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.20116 v1 pith:T3OR2GVQ submitted 2025-08-21 cond-mat.quant-gas quant-ph

Claudia Castillo-Moreno , Théo Sépulcre , Timo Hillmann , Kazi Rafsanjani Amin , Mikael Kervinen , Simone Gasparinetti This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gasquant-ph
keywords multimodedissipativephasetransitionsuperconductingBose-Hubbardchaindriven-dissipativesystemsKerrnonlinearityfirst-ordermetastableswitchingquantummetamaterialmicrowaveresonators
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

The paper reports the first experimental observation of a multimode dissipative first-order phase transition in a one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard chain built from 21 superconducting resonators. When a single mode is driven, the entire chain jumps between a dim and a bright phase: the resonance frequencies of all 21 modes shift abruptly and simultaneously as the pump frequency or power is swept. The authors map the phase boundary in two independent ways—from the emitted power spectrum and from the statistics of switching times between the two metastable states—and find both agree with a minimal theory that reduces the chain to one effectively driven Kerr oscillator, with other modes only frequency-shifted by cross-Kerr interactions. The single free parameter, the pump-amplitude scale, fixes the whole transition line. The longest measured switching time, 143 seconds, shows how metastable the bright state can be.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a single-mode reduction of the Bose-Hubbard Hamiltonian in the Fourier-mode basis. The reduction postulates that only the quasi-resonant mode acquires a photon population (all other modes keep α=0 and are shifted only through cross-Kerr interactions), and that photon-conversion terms, which would transfer population between modes, can be neglected because they are not energy conserving. The resulting effective driven-dissipative Kerr oscillator has its mean-field photon amplitude fixed by the self-consistency equation |α|² [1 + (Δ/γ + |α|²)²] = ε²/γ², and the renormalized mode frequencies are read off from the pole of the response function, ω* = sqrt((Δ + 2γ|α|²)²

What would settle it

Measure the photon population of an off-resonant mode directly at a pump power just above the onset of the extra multimode emission (around ε/γ ≈ 9.5). If that mode shows a clear emission peak—a nonzero α—while the model predicts α=0, the single-mode reduction is violated and the reported agreement on the transition line would need a collective description. A less direct check is to measure the frequency-shift ratio between two non-resonant modes in a chain with engineered disorder; the closed-boundary prediction 4/3 should break in a calculable way.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that a driven 1D Bose-Hubbard chain with 21 sites exhibits a genuine first-order dissipative phase transition with multimode character: driving a single site renormalizes the frequencies of all modes through cross-Kerr coupling, and at the transition the system switches collectively between a dim state with near-zero photon population and a bright state with a macroscopic population. The transition line obtained from the emission spectrum and from the crossing of dim and bright dwell-time distributions is consistent with a single-mode mean-field model, and the frequency shifts of non-resonant modes follow the predicted 4/3 cross-Kerr ratio. The auth

Load-bearing premise

The theory's quantitative agreement rests on the assumption that only the mode closest to the pump holds photons, that all other modes only have their frequencies pushed by cross-Kerr effects, and that photon-conversion processes can be ignored; if those processes matter at the powers used to map the phase diagram, the agreement is not explained by the claimed mechanism.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single pump tone can act as a collective switch: all 21 modes jump coherently between dim and bright states, so the chain may function as a multimode bistable element with one drive.
  • Two independent measurements—integrated emission spectrum and switching-rate statistics—locate the same transition line, meaning the phase boundary is a reproducible feature of the steady state, not an artifact of a particular readout.
  • Dwell times grow exponentially with pump strength up to 143 s, far beyond the intrinsic decay timescale, demonstrating metastability that could be exploited as a classical or quantum memory.
  • The single-mode mean-field theory, calibrated with one free parameter (the pump amplitude scale), reproduces the observed transition line across detunings and powers at moderate drive; this makes the model predictive within that regime.
  • The critical endpoint of the first-order line, where bistability disappears, is predicted to show critical behavior; the authors place it out of reach of time-resolved measurements but accessible to PSD, guiding future lower-nonlinearity experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the single-mode reduction is the right effective description, then increasing the chain length N should make the transition sharper because the effective nonlinearity U/(γN) shrinks; the same device with more sites should display longer dwell times and a sharper jump, approaching the thermodynamic limit.
  • The additional multimode emission seen at high pump powers (ε/γ ≳ 9.5) may be the signature of the neglected photon-conversion terms becoming energy-conserving once the modes shift with power; if so, that regime is a natural place to look for true many-body corrections to mean-field theory.
  • The measured probe effect—where adding a few probe photons shifts the apparent transition—implies that any readout scheme perturbs the phase boundary; a probe-free or single-shot measurement protocol would be needed to confirm the intrinsic transition line.
  • The 4/3 cross-Kerr ratio was derived for closed boundary conditions; repeating the frequency-shift measurement on a chain with engineered disorder or open boundaries would provide a quantitative test of the mode-structure assumption.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first experimental observation of a multimode dissipative first-order phase transition in a one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard chain of 21 superconducting nonlinear resonators. When a single mode is pumped, the measured resonance frequencies of all modes shift abruptly, with hysteresis, as the pump frequency or power is varied. The authors characterize the dim-to-bright transition using transmission spectroscopy, power spectral density measurements, and time-resolved switching statistics, obtaining dwell times from milliseconds to 143 s. They propose a single-mode mean-field model with self- and cross-Kerr nonlinearities and show that it reproduces the observed frequency shifts and the phase boundary, with the global pump amplitude scale as the only fitted parameter. A parameter-free prediction for the ratio of non-resonant mode shifts (4/3) is also confirmed. The paper concludes that this is the first observation of a multimode dissipative first-order phase transition in a Bose-Hubbard metamaterial and discusses the platform's potential for collective switching and sensing.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is a significant advance in driven-dissipative many-body physics: a 21-site Bose-Hubbard array is one of the largest circuit-QED lattices to show a first-order dissipative transition, and the multimode character with cross-Kerr-mediated coupling is novel. The paper's strengths include three complementary experimental probes (frequency-jump spectroscopy with hysteresis, PSD phase diagrams, and switching-time statistics), an exceedingly long observed metastable lifetime, and at least one parameter-free prediction (the 4/3 cross-Kerr shift ratio) that matches the data. The analytical response-function framework and the careful statistical treatment of dwell times are also positive features. However, the central quantitative claim hinges on the single-mode reduction of the 21-mode model, and the manuscript does not yet establish the range of validity of that reduction over the parameter region used for the phase-diagram comparison.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, between Eq. (2) and Eq. (3); footnote 1] The model reduction sets the mean-field amplitude of every non-resonant mode to zero and neglects photon-conversion terms as 'not energy conserving.' Every quantitative prediction shown in Figs. 2(b), 3(e), and 4(f) follows from this reduction. Yet the paper itself reports that at epsilon/gamma = 9.5 additional emission peaks appear at other mode frequencies (Fig. 3(b)) and concedes in Section VI that high pump powers give 'additional multimode emission not captured by our current model.' The text never states the maximum epsilon/gamma included in the fits of Figs. 3(e) and 4(f), nor does it report the measured population of non-resonant modes along the phase boundary. Please specify the exact parameter range used in the quantitative comparison, quantify the non-resonant mode occupations within that range, and estimate the magnitude of the neglected conversion terms for the fitted parame
  2. [Sections III, IV, and Appendix G] The claim that the theory 'quantitatively reproduces the transition line' with 'pump amplitude as the only free parameter' is weakened by the calibration procedure. The global epsilon scale is fitted to the frequency-shift measurements in Section III, and an additional 4 dBm offset between PSD and spectroscopy/jump-rate data is introduced in Appendix G and 'accounted for' in the fitting of Fig. 4(d). Thus the absolute position of the transition line in the (Delta/gamma, epsilon/gamma) plane is not a parameter-free prediction. Please state explicitly every parameter that is adjusted (global pump scale, 4 dBm offset, any additional offsets) and show the raw, unshifted PSD transition points alongside the theory line. The shape of the line can still be a meaningful test, but the present text overstates the predictive content.
  3. [Section IV and Fig. 3(e)] The phase diagram in Fig. 3(e) is compared with a 'numerically computed transition line' obtained from exact diagonalization of the Liouvillian in the U/(gamma N) -> 0 limit, while the analytical boundary used in Fig. 4(f) is attributed to Ref. [53], which is cited as 'In preparation.' The central quantitative comparison therefore relies partly on an unpublished derivation. Please include the derivation of the analytical phase boundary in an appendix or cite a published version, so that the agreement is independently verifiable.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (1) and surrounding text] There is a notation inconsistency: the Hamiltonian in Eq. (1) uses omega_r for the bare resonator frequency, but the text says 'omega_0 is the resonant frequency of each cavity,' and Eq. (3) defines Delta = omega_p - omega_0. Please unify the symbols.
  2. [Section V, Anderson-Darling test] The sentence 'we conducted an Anderson-Darling test and rejected time traces failing at 15%' is ambiguous. Is 15% a significance level or a p-value threshold? Please state the exact rejection criterion and how many traces were rejected.
  3. [Fig. 2(b)] The color bar for pump amplitudes would be easier to read if the numerical values of epsilon/gamma were given in the caption. Also, adding representative error bars would help the reader judge the agreement with the theory.
  4. [Appendix F, Fig. 8] The hysteresis loops are convincing, but adding vertical dashed lines marking the predicted bistability boundaries would make the comparison with the model quantitative.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the single-mode model is an explicit ansatz, the pump scale is a stated fit parameter, and the phase-diagram and switching-rate comparisons are independent observables.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is not circular. The single-mode reduction in Section III ('We postulate that only the quasi-resonant mode... is effectively driven... other modes are only shifted in frequency by cross-Kerr effect') is presented as an explicit postulate, not as a consequence of the theory, and it is tested against data rather than assumed into existence. The global pump-amplitude scale epsilon is openly fitted to frequency-shift measurements ('The global scale of epsilon is treated as a single fit parameter'), and the same calibrated scale is then used to compare the PSD phase diagram and the dwell-time transition line; this is a one-parameter validation, not a constructed equivalence, because the boundary shape and the switching dynamics are independent, multi-point data sets that a single vertical rescaling cannot force. The self-citation [53] (Sépulcre, 'In preparation') is invoked for the thermodynamic-limit interpretation and the exponential switching form, but the experimental evidence for exponential dwell times and the 143-s timescale is direct time-domain data, and the exponential form is also supported by the external reference [4]; thus the self-citation is not load-bearing for the main claim. The acknowledged limitation at high pump power ('additional multimode emission not captured by our current model') is an honest domain-of-validity statement, not an indication that the central agreement is circular. Therefore no specific circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard Lindblad open-system description; a strong single-mode reduction in which all non-pumped modes have zero population and respond only through cross-Kerr shifts; and an activation-rate theory that is currently an unpublished co-author manuscript. The model's key quantitative agreement is obtained after fitting a global pump-amplitude scale and after correcting a 4 dBm probe-induced offset. No new particles, mediators, dimensions, or forces are introduced; the mean-field amplitude alpha and rescaled pump epsilon are standard constructs.

free parameters (3)
  • Pump amplitude scale epsilon (global scale) = epsilon/gamma from 0.14 to 28.08 in experiment; absolute scale fixed by fit
    Sole free parameter of the model; fitted to reproduce frequency-shift data across pump powers and modes (Section III), then used to draw the 'predicted' transition line (Section IV).
  • PSD-to-spectroscopy power offset = 4 dBm
    PSD transition frequencies sit 4 dBm below spectroscopy and jump-rate values; attributed to probe removal (App. G) and 'accounted for in our fitting in 4(d)', a post hoc correction before comparing data to theory.
  • Device parameters omega_r, J, gamma, kappa, gamma_nr = omega_r/2pi ~ 5.43 GHz; J/2pi ~ 209 MHz; gamma/2pi ~ 1 MHz; gamma_nr/2pi = 10.25 kHz
    Fitted from low-power transmission (App. C). Standard calibration rather than ad hoc, but the model's transition line depends on gamma and on the uniform-resonator assumption.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Lindblad master equation with single-photon loss rate gamma for each resonator
    Standard open-quantum-system description of superconducting microwave resonators; invoked in Section II and used for Eq. (3).
  • domain assumption Identical resonators: uniform omega_r, J, U despite measured disorder
    Section II and App. C extract single values by 'assuming identical resonators'; disorder from Josephson junctions is acknowledged but neglected in the model.
  • ad hoc to paper Only the quasi-resonant mode carries finite photon population; alpha = 0 for all other modes
    Footnote 1 and the reduction from Eq. (2) to Eq. (3). This single-mode reduction is the load-bearing premise of the model and is contradicted at high power by the observed multimode emission.
  • ad hoc to paper Photon-conversion (non-energy-conserving) Kerr terms are neglected
    Section III: neglected 'on the basis that they are not energy conserving'; the paper concedes they become relevant at high pump power (Section VI).
  • domain assumption Mean-field saddle point plus Gaussian fluctuations; response pole gives Eq. (4) and the emission spectrum
    Section III and App. D use the standard Keldysh technique (ref. [59]); the thermodynamic-limit justification is delegated to ref. [53].
  • domain assumption Closed boundary conditions yield the 4/3 cross-Kerr frequency-shift ratio
    App. D computation; verified against central modes in Fig. 2(c), with the quasi-resonant mode excluded.
  • domain assumption Switching events are Poisson with exponential dwell times and a linear activation barrier E(Delta,epsilon) near the transition
    Section V: exponential form 1/tau proportional to exp(-E/U) and the linear-barrier assumption are attributed to ref. [53], an unpublished co-author manuscript.
  • domain assumption The U/(gamma N) -> 0 limit acts as a thermodynamic limit sharpening the transition
    Section III; made 'rigorous' by a path integral computation in ref. [53], which is not publicly available.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Experimental observation of multimode quantum phase transitions in a superconducting Bose-Hubbard simulator." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T3OR2GVQ

@misc{pith2026250820116,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Experimental observation of multimode quantum phase transitions in a superconducting Bose-Hubbard simulator},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T3OR2GVQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.20116}
}
read the original abstract

The study of phase transitions and critical phenomena arising in quantum driven-dissipative systems, and whether a correspondence can be drawn to their equilibrium counterparts, is a pressing question in contemporary physics. The development of large-scale superconducting circuits provides an experimental platform for these theoretical models. We report an experimental study of a multi-mode dissipative first-order phase transition in a 1D Bose-Hubbard chain consisting of 21 superconducting resonators. This phase transition manifests itself as a simultaneous frequency jump in all resonator modes as the frequency or power of a pump tone is swept. By measuring the system's emission spectrum through the transition, we characterize the dim-to-bright phase transition and construct the full phase diagram. We further perform time-dependent measurements of the switching between the two phases in the transition region, from which we corroborate the transition line and extract transition times ranging from a few ms up to 143~s. Our model, based on single-mode mean-field theory and cross-Kerr interactions, captures the features at moderate pump powers and quantitatively reproduces the transition line. Our results open a new window into non-equilibrium quantum many-body physics and mark a step toward realizing and understanding dissipative phase transitions in the thermodynamic limit using superconducting quantum circuits.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Quantum Simulation of Strongly Correlated Fermion-Phonon Models in Circuit QED

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    A Rabi-gate digital-analog circuit-QED architecture simulates Hubbard-Holstein and Yukawa-SYK fermion-phonon models, enabling probes of nonclassical phonons and quantum chaos on near-term hardware.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [53]

    S´ epulcre, Analytical phase boundary of a quantum driven-dissipative Kerr oscillator from classical stochastic instantons, In preparation (2025)

    T. S´ epulcre, Analytical phase boundary of a quantum driven-dissipative Kerr oscillator from classical stochastic instantons, In preparation (2025)

    work page 2025

  2. [1]

    Minganti, A

    F. Minganti, A. Biella, N. Bartolo, and C. Ciuti, Spectral theory of Liouvillians for dissipative phase transitions, Phys. Rev. A 98, 042118 (2018)

    2018

  3. [2]

    W. H. Zurek, U. Dorner, and P. Zoller, Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 105701 (2005)

    work page 2005

  4. [3]

    Rossini and E

    D. Rossini and E. Vicari, Coherent and dissipative dy- namics at quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rep. 936, 1 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [4]

    Risken, C

    H. Risken, C. Savage, F. Haake, and D. F. Walls, Quan- tum tunneling in dispersive optical bistability, Phys. Rev. A 35, 1729 (1987)

    work page 1987

  6. [5]

    O. V. Zhirov and D. L. Shepelyansky, Synchronization and Bistability of a Qubit Coupled to a Driven Dissipa- tive Oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 014101 (2008)

    work page 2008

  7. [6]

    K. C. Stitely, S. J. Masson, A. Giraldo, B. Krauskopf, and S. Parkins, Superradiant switching, quantum hysteresis, and oscillations in a generalized Dicke model, Phys. Rev. A 102, 063702 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [7]

    Caleffi, M

    F. Caleffi, M. Capone, and I. Carusotto, Collective Exci- tations of a Strongly Correlated Nonequilibrium Photon Fluid across the Insulator-Superfluid Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 193604 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 59 references
  1. [8]

    Minganti, I

    F. Minganti, I. I. Arkhipov, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Liouvillian spectral collapse in the Scully-Lamb laser model, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 043197 (2021)

    2021

  2. [9]

    Minganti, V

    F. Minganti, V. Savona, and A. Biella, Dissipative phase transitions in n-photon driven quantum nonlinear res- onators, Quantum 7, 1170 (2023)

    2023

  3. [10]

    Goncalves, L

    D. Goncalves, L. Bombieri, G. Ferioli, S. Pancaldi, I. Ferrier-Barbut, A. Browaeys, E. Shahmoon, and D. Chang, Driven-Dissipative Phase Separation in Free- Space Atomic Ensembles, PRX Quantum 6, 020303 (2025)

    2025

  4. [11]

    Soriente, T

    M. Soriente, T. Donner, R. Chitra, and O. Zilberberg, Dissipation-Induced Anomalous Multicritical Phenom- ena, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 183603 (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    Soriente, T

    M. Soriente, T. L. Heugel, K. Omiya, R. Chitra, and O. Zilberberg, Distinctive class of dissipation-induced phase transitions and their universal characteristics, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 023100 (2021)

    2021

  6. [13]

    Baumann, C

    K. Baumann, C. Guerlin, F. Brennecke, and T. Esslinger, Dicke quantum phase transition with a superfluid gas in an optical cavity, Nature 464, 1301 (2010)

    2010

  7. [14]

    Greiner, O

    M. Greiner, O. Mandel, T. Esslinger, T. W. H¨ ansch, and I. Bloch, Quantum phase transition from a superfluid to a Mott insulator in a gas of ultracold atoms, Nature 415, 39 (2002)

    2002

  8. [15]

    Ferri, R

    F. Ferri, R. Rosa-Medina, F. Finger, N. Dogra, M. Sori- ente, O. Zilberberg, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Emerg- ing Dissipative Phases in a Superradiant Quantum Gas with Tunable Decay, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041046 (2021). 13

    2021

  9. [16]

    Labouvie, B

    R. Labouvie, B. Santra, S. Heun, and H. Ott, Bistability in a Driven-Dissipative Superfluid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 235302 (2016)

    2016

  10. [17]

    Schliemann, A

    J. Schliemann, A. Khaetskii, and D. Loss, Electron spin dynamics in quantum dots and related nanostructures due to hyperfine interaction with nuclei, J. Phys.: Con- dens. Matter 15, R1809 (2003)

    2003

  11. [18]

    Russell, V

    A. Russell, V. I. Fal’ko, A. I. Tartakovskii, and M. S. Skol- nick, Bistability of optically induced nuclear spin orien- tation in quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 76, 195310 (2007)

    2007

  12. [19]

    Krebs, P

    O. Krebs, P. Maletinsky, T. Amand, B. Urbaszek, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, P. Voisin, X. Marie, and A. Imamoglu, Anomalous Hanle Effect due to Optically Created Trans- verse Overhauser Field in Single InAs /GaAs Quantum Dots, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 056603 (2010)

    2010

  13. [20]

    E. M. Kessler, G. Giedke, A. Imamoglu, S. F. Yelin, M. D. Lukin, and J. I. Cirac, Dissipative phase transition in a central spin system, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012116 (2012)

    2012

  14. [21]

    Siddiqi, R

    I. Siddiqi, R. Vijay, F. Pierre, C. M. Wilson, L. Frunzio, M. Metcalfe, C. Rigetti, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. H. Devoret, D. Vion, and D. Esteve, Direct Observation of Dynamical Bifurcation between Two Driven Oscillation States of a Josephson Junction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 027005 (2005)

    2005

  15. [22]

    Krantz, Y

    P. Krantz, Y. Reshitnyk, W. Wustmann, J. Bylander, S. Gustavsson, W. D. Oliver, T. Duty, V. Shumeiko, and P. Delsing, Investigation of nonlinear effects in Josephson parametric oscillators used in circuit quantum electrody- namics, New J. Phys. 15, 105002 (2013)

    2013

  16. [23]

    Weißl, B

    T. Weißl, B. K¨ ung, E. Dumur, A. K. Feofanov, I. Matei, C. Naud, O. Buisson, F. W. J. Hekking, and W. Guichard, Kerr coefficients of plasma resonances in Josephson junction chains, Phys. Rev. B 92, 104508 (2015)

    2015

  17. [24]

    J. M. Fink, A. Dombi, A. Vukics, A. Wallraff, and P. Domokos, Observation of the Photon-Blockade Break- down Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. X 7, 011012 (2017)

    2017

  18. [25]

    Fitzpatrick, N

    M. Fitzpatrick, N. M. Sundaresan, A. C. Y. Li, J. Koch, and A. A. Houck, Observation of a Dissipative Phase Transition in a One-Dimensional Circuit QED Lattice, Phys. Rev. X 7, 011016 (2017)

    2017

  19. [26]

    Th. K. Mavrogordatos, G. Tancredi, M. Elliott, M. J. Peterer, A. Patterson, J. Rahamim, P. J. Leek, E. Gi- nossar, and M. H. Szyma´ nska, Simultaneous Bistability of a Qubit and Resonator in Circuit Quantum Electro- dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 040402 (2017)

    2017

  20. [27]

    P. R. Muppalla, O. Gargiulo, S. I. Mirzaei, B. P. Venkatesh, M. L. Juan, L. Gr¨ unhaupt, I. M. Pop, and G. Kirchmair, Bistability in a mesoscopic Josephson junc- tion array resonator, Phys. Rev. B 97, 024518 (2018)

    2018

  21. [28]

    Q.-M. Chen, M. Fischer, Y. Nojiri, M. Renger, E. Xie, M. Partanen, S. Pogorzalek, K. G. Fedorov, A. Marx, F. Deppe, and R. Gross, Quantum behavior of the Duff- ing oscillator at the dissipative phase transition, Nat Commun 14, 2896 (2023)

    2023

  22. [29]

    R. Sett, F. Hassani, D. Phan, S. Barzanjeh, A. Vukics, and J. M. Fink, Emergent Macroscopic Bistability In- duced by a Single Superconducting Qubit, PRX Quan- tum 5, 010327 (2024)

    2024

  23. [30]

    Pausch, F

    L. Pausch, F. Damanet, T. Bastin, and J. Martin, Dis- sipative phase transition: From qubits to qudits, Phys. Rev. A 110, 062208 (2024)

    2024

  24. [31]

    Beaulieu, F

    G. Beaulieu, F. Minganti, S. Frasca, M. Scigliuzzo, S. Felicetti, R. Di Candia, and P. Scarlino, Criticality- Enhanced Quantum Sensing with a Parametric Super- conducting Resonator, PRX Quantum 6, 020301 (2025)

    2025

  25. [33]

    Berdou, A

    C. Berdou, A. Murani, U. R´ eglade, W. Smith, M. Villiers, J. Palomo, M. Rosticher, A. Denis, P. Morfin, M. Del- becq, T. Kontos, N. Pankratova, F. Rautschke, T. Per- onnin, L.-A. Sellem, P. Rouchon, A. Sarlette, M. Mir- rahimi, P. Campagne-Ibarcq, S. Jezouin, R. Lescanne, and...

    2023

  26. [34]

    Brookes, G

    P. Brookes, G. Tancredi, A. D. Patterson, J. Rahamim, M. Esposito, T. K. Mavrogordatos, P. J. Leek, E. Gi- nossar, and M. H. Szymanska, Critical slowing down in circuit quantum electrodynamics, Sci. Adv. 7, eabe9492 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    Fern´ andez-Lorenzo and D

    S. Fern´ andez-Lorenzo and D. Porras, Quantum sensing close to a dissipative phase transition: Symmetry break- ing and criticality as metrological resources, Phys. Rev. A 96, 013817 (2017)

    2017

  28. [36]

    Y. Chu, S. Zhang, B. Yu, and J. Cai, Dynamic Frame- work for Criticality-Enhanced Quantum Sensing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 010502 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    Di Candia, F

    R. Di Candia, F. Minganti, K. V. Petrovnin, G. S. Paraoanu, and S. Felicetti, Critical parametric quantum sensing, npj Quantum Inf 9, 1 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    Alushi, A

    U. Alushi, A. Coppo, V. Brosco, R. Di Candia, and S. Fe- licetti, Collective quantum enhancement in critical quan- tum sensing, Commun Phys 8, 1 (2025)

    2025

  31. [39]

    Petrovnin, J

    K. Petrovnin, J. Wang, M. Perelshtein, P. Hakonen, and G. S. Paraoanu, Microwave photon detection at paramet- ric criticality (2024), arXiv:2308.07084 [quant-ph]

    2024

  32. [40]

    R. Rota, F. Minganti, C. Ciuti, and V. Savona, Quan- tum critical regime in a quadratically driven nonlinear photonic lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 110405 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Gravina, F

    L. Gravina, F. Minganti, and V. Savona, Critical Schr\”odinger Cat Qubit, PRX Quantum 4, 020337 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    C. K. Andersen, A. Kamal, N. A. Masluk, I. M. Pop, A. Blais, and M. H. Devoret, Quantum Versus Classi- cal Switching Dynamics of Driven Dissipative Kerr Res- onators, Phys. Rev. Applied 13, 044017 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    T. K. Mavrogordatos, Quantum phase transitions in the driven dissipative Jaynes-Cummings oscillator: From the dispersive regime to resonance, EPL 116, 54001 (2016)

    2016

  36. [44]

    Beaulieu, F

    G. Beaulieu, F. Minganti, S. Frasca, V. Savona, S. Fe- licetti, R. Di Candia, and P. Scarlino, Observation of first- and second-order dissipative phase transitions in a two-photon driven kerr resonator, Nat. Commun. 16, 1954 (2025)

    1954

  37. [45]

    Vicentini, F

    F. Vicentini, F. Minganti, R. Rota, G. Orso, and C. Ciuti, Critical slowing down in driven-dissipative Bose-Hubbard lattices, Phys. Rev. A 97, 013853 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    Scigliuzzo, G

    M. Scigliuzzo, G. Calaj` o, F. Ciccarello, D. Perez Lozano, A. Bengtsson, P. Scarlino, A. Wallraff, D. Chang, P. Delsing, and S. Gasparinetti, Controlling Atom- Photon Bound States in an Array of Josephson-Junction Resonators, Phys. Rev. X 12, 031036 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    Castillo-Moreno, K

    C. Castillo-Moreno, K. R. Amin, I. Strandberg, M. Kervi- nen, A. Osman, and S. Gasparinetti, Dynamical Exci- tation Control and Multimode Emission of an Atom- 14 Photon Bound State, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 133601 (2025)

    2025

  40. [48]

    J. Koch, T. M. Yu, J. Gambetta, A. A. Houck, D. I. Schuster, J. Majer, A. Blais, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Charge-insensitive qubit design de- rived from the Cooper pair box, Phys. Rev. A 76, 042319 (2007)

    2007

  41. [49]

    Blais, A

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

    2021

  42. [50]

    Eichler and A

    C. Eichler and A. Wallraff, Controlling the dynamic range of a Josephson parametric amplifier, EPJ Quan- tum Technol. 1, 1 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    P. D. Drummond and D. F. Walls, Quantum theory of optical bistability. I. Nonlinear polarisability model, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 13, 725 (1980)

    1980

  44. [52]

    Nigro, On the uniqueness of the steady-state solution of the lindblad–gorini–kossakowski–sudarshan equation, J

    D. Nigro, On the uniqueness of the steady-state solution of the lindblad–gorini–kossakowski–sudarshan equation, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp. 2019 (4), 043202

    2019

  45. [54]

    Pechal, J.-C

    M. Pechal, J.-C. Besse, M. Mondal, M. Oppliger, S. Gas- parinetti, and A. Wallraff, Superconducting Switch for Fast On-Chip Routing of Quantum Microwave Fields, Phys Rev Appl. 6, 024009 (2016)

    2016

  46. [55]

    S. R. K. Rodriguez, W. Casteels, F. Storme, N. Car- lon Zambon, I. Sagnes, L. Le Gratiet, E. Galopin, A. Lema ˆ ıtre, A. Amo, C. Ciuti, and J. Bloch, Probing a Dissipative Phase Transition via Dynamical Optical Hys- teresis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 247402 (2017)

    2017

  47. [56]

    B. R. Mollow, Power Spectrum of Light Scattered by Two-Level Systems, Phys. Rev. 188, 1969 (1969)

    1969

  48. [57]

    T. W. Anderson and D. A. Darling, Asymptotic Theory of Certain ”Goodness of Fit” Criteria Based on Stochas- tic Processes, The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 23, 193 (1952)

    1952

  49. [58]

    N. A. Masluk, I. M. Pop, A. Kamal, Z. K. Minev, and M. H. Devoret, Microwave Characterization of Joseph- son Junction Arrays: Implementing a Low Loss Superin- ductance, Physical Review Letters 109, 137002 (2012), publisher: American Physical Society

    2012

  50. [59]

    L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Keldysh field theory for driven open quantum systems, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 96001 (2016)

    2016

  51. [60]

    X. H. H. Zhang and H. U. Baranger, Driven-dissipative phase transition in a Kerr oscillator: From semiclassical PT symmetry to quantum fluctuations, Phys. Rev. A 103, 033711 (2021), arXiv:2007.01422

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.