pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.23476 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-26 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: unknown

From Independent to Joint: Enhancing Quantum Phase and Correlation Factor Estimation by Squeezed Reservoir Engineering

Cai-Hong Liao , Yan-Ling Li , Long Huang , Xing Xiao
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 06:33 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum metrologyreservoir engineeringsqueezed statesquantum Fisher informationparameter estimationjoint estimationphase matchingcorrelation factor
0
0 comments X

The pith

A correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir with optimized squeezing phase enhances precision for separate and joint estimation of quantum phase and correlation factor.

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

The paper establishes that engineering interactions with a shared squeezed-thermal reservoir can raise the precision of measuring a phase shift φ and a correlation strength μ. Tuning the squeezing phase Φ produces phase-matching relations that increase the quantum Fisher information for each parameter when estimated alone and that keep the combined variance low when both are estimated together. A sympathetic reader would care because quantum metrology often faces resource trade-offs in multi-parameter tasks, and this reservoir approach offers a way to mitigate them by controlling environmental squeezing. The work shows that joint estimation remains efficient when the phase is chosen to favor the phase-parameter Fisher information, even though the two parameters are formally incompatible.

Core claim

We derive the near-optimal phase-matching relations aimed at maximizing the quantum Fisher information (QFI) for both φ and μ, as well as minimizing the total variance Δ_sim in joint estimation. Furthermore, we show that the joint estimation variance is dominated by F_φ, which motivates our search for the phase-matching conditions that minimize Δ_sim. Through the ratio R of variances, we demonstrate that joint estimation conserves quantum resources and maintains high precision when the squeezing phase is optimized for F_φ, despite the inherent incompatibility of the parameters.

What carries the argument

The correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir with controllable squeezing phase Φ, whose phase-matching conditions are extracted from the QFI expressions to raise estimation precision for φ and μ.

Load-bearing premise

The approach assumes that a correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir with controllable squeezing phase Φ can be realized and that the derived phase-matching conditions remain valid under realistic noise and decoherence.

What would settle it

Prepare the squeezed reservoir in an experiment, apply the derived phase-matching conditions for several values of μ, and check whether the observed estimation variances reach the predicted QFI bounds for both individual and joint estimation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.23476 by Cai-Hong Liao, Long Huang, Xing Xiao, Yan-Ling Li.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (color online) (a) The theoretical model of two initially entangled qubits passing through the squeezed thermal reservoir successively at view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (color online) Fϕ as a function of γ0t with (a) µ = 0, r = 0, (b) T = 0.3, r = 0, and (c) T = 0.3, µ = 0.9. The other parameters are Φ = 0, α = √ 2 2 , and ϕ = π/2. The numerical results for Fϕ are presented in view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (color online) The behaviors of Fϕ in different cases. (a) Fϕ as a function of γ0t for different squeezed phases Φ. (b) The coloured surface represents Fϕ as a function of Φ and r at γ0t = 1, while the grey plane serves as the reference plane for the results in a correlated thermal reservoir (without squeezing). The other parameters are T = 0.3, µ = 0.9, α = √ 2 2 , and ϕ = π/2. In order to specify the pha… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (color online) F imp ϕ as a function of Φ and ϕ with (a) µ = 0.1 and (b) µ = 0.9. The other parameters are γ0t = 1, T = 0.3, r = 1, and α = √ 2 2 . Satisfying the phase-matching conditions outlined in Eqs. (17) and (18) will enhance the efficacy of utilizing squeezing to improve the estimation precision of the parameter ϕ within the squeezed reservoir. Failure to meet these conditions may degrade the phase… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (color online) F imp ϕ as a function of Φ and µ with (a) ϕ = 0 and (b) ϕ = π/2. The other parameters are γ0t = 1, T = 0.3, r = 1, and α = √ 2 2 . 4. Enhancing the Independent Estimation of Correlation Factor Accurately estimating the correlation factor facilitates better utilization of channel correlations in the implementa￾tion of quantum information tasks. In this section, we turn to consider how to enha… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (color online) Fµ as a function of γ0t with (a) µ = 0.9, (b) T = 1, µ = 0.9, and (c) T = 1, r = 1. The other parameters are Φ = π, α = √ 2 2 , and ϕ = π/2. The numerical results in view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (color online) The behaviors of Fµ in different cases. (a) Fµ as a function of γ0t for different squeezed phase Φ. (b) The coloured surface presents Fµ as a function of Φ and r at γ0t = 1, and the gray reference plane corresponds to the results obtained in a correlated thermal reservoir (without squeezing). The other parameters are T = 1, µ = 0.9, α = √ 2 2 , and ϕ = π/2. Building on the discussions in Sec… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (color online) F imp µ as a function of Φ and ϕ with (a) µ = 0.1 and (b) µ = 0.9. The other parameters are γ0t = 1, T = 1, r = 1, and α = √ 2 2 . Whereas for a large value of µ, the corresponding phase-matching condition for F imp µ can be obtained from view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: is that, even under the conditions of phase mismatch, F imp µ remains positive, indicating an enhancement of Fµ. Meeting the phase-matching conditions will be instrumental in maximizing the potential of squeezing to improve the estimation of the parameter µ within the context of a correlated squeezed reservoir view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (color online) ∆sim as a function of γ0t with (a) r = 1.0 and (b) T = 0.3. The other parameters are µ = 0.9, Φ = 0, α = √ 2 2 , and ϕ = π/2. As illustrated in view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (color online) 1/∆sim as a function of ϕ with the squeezing phase Φ varying from 0 to 2π at (a) µ = 0.1 and (b) µ = 0.9. The black and red curves denote 1/∆sim under the near-optimal phase-matching conditions with respect to ϕ and µ, respectively. The other parameters are γ0t = 1, T = 0.3, r = 1, and α = √ 2 2 . Given that the analytical expression for ∆sim is complex and offers limited intuitive insight,… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (color online) R as a function of ϕ with the squeezing phase Φ varying from 0 to 2π at (a) µ = 0.1 and (b) µ = 0.9; The black curves denote R under the near-optimal phase-matching conditions with respect to ϕ. The other parameters are γ0t = 1, T = 0.3, r = 1, and α = √ 2 2 . Although the parameters ϕ and µ are incompatible - failing to satisfy conditions (ii) and (iii) - simultaneous estimation of both pa… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

High-precision quantum parameter estimation is fundamental to the advancement of quantum metrology. Although reservoir engineering provides a powerful approach to improve estimation by tailoring system-environment interactions, the role of the squeezing phase and correlations arising from the sequential utilization of the same squeezed reservoir remains inadequately explored. In this work, we employ a correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir to enhance the precision of estimating the phase parameter $\phi$ and the correlation factor $\mu$, both individually and simultaneously. We show that the squeezing phase $\Phi$ is crucial for achieving quantum-enhanced precision, with optimal phase-matching conditions that depend strongly on $\mu$. Specifically, we derive the near-optimal phase-matching relations aimed at maximizing the quantum Fisher information (QFI) for both $\phi$ and $\mu$, as well as minimizing the total variance $\Delta_{\rm sim}$ in joint estimation. Furthermore, we show that the joint estimation variance is dominated by $F_{\phi}$, which motivates our search for the phase-matching conditions that minimize $\Delta_{\text{sim}}$. Through the ratio $R$ of variances, we demonstrate that joint estimation conserves quantum resources and maintains high precision when the squeezing phase is optimized for $F_{\phi}$, despite the inherent incompatibility of the parameters. These findings provide practical insights into reservoir engineering strategies for high-precision quantum sensing and information processing.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the use of a correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir to improve the precision of estimating a phase parameter φ and a correlation factor μ, both individually and in joint estimation. It derives phase-matching conditions on the squeezing phase Φ that maximize the quantum Fisher information (QFI) for each parameter and minimize the joint variance Δ_sim, showing that the joint variance is dominated by F_φ and that resource-efficient joint estimation is possible when Φ is optimized for F_φ despite parameter incompatibility.

Significance. If the analytical derivations hold, the work offers concrete, μ-dependent phase-matching relations that can guide reservoir engineering in quantum metrology. The parameter-free character of the optimal conditions and the explicit demonstration that joint estimation conserves resources when tuned to the dominant QFI term constitute useful, falsifiable guidance for multi-parameter sensing protocols.

minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract refers to 'near-optimal' phase-matching relations without indicating the approximation criterion or the deviation from the exact QFI maximum; a brief statement in the introduction or §3 would clarify the scope of the optimality claim.
  2. Notation for the total variance Δ_sim and the ratio R is introduced in the abstract but not defined until later; an early inline definition or a small notation table would improve readability for readers outside the immediate subfield.
  3. The manuscript would benefit from a short paragraph discussing the experimental feasibility of realizing the assumed correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir with controllable Φ, even if only at the level of existing cavity-QED or circuit-QED platforms.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive summary of our manuscript, recognition of its significance for reservoir engineering in quantum metrology, and recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivations are self-contained analytical constructions

full rationale

The paper derives near-optimal phase-matching relations for the squeezing phase Φ directly from the quantum Fisher information (QFI) expressions for parameters φ and μ in a correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir model. These relations are obtained via standard quantum-metrology calculations for open systems, with no fitted inputs renamed as predictions, no self-definitional loops, and no load-bearing self-citations. The joint variance minimization and resource conservation claims follow from the same QFI framework without reducing to the target results by construction. The work is parameter-free and rests on external quantum-optics benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard quantum Fisher information formalism applied to a phenomenological model of a correlated squeezed-thermal reservoir; no new entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Quantum Fisher information provides the ultimate precision bound for unbiased estimators of the parameters φ and μ.
    Invoked throughout the abstract to quantify estimation precision.
  • domain assumption The system-reservoir interaction can be engineered to produce a correlated squeezed-thermal state with controllable squeezing phase Φ.
    Required for the phase-matching conditions to be experimentally relevant.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5543 in / 1311 out tokens · 43266 ms · 2026-05-08T06:33:55.563783+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Pezz` e, A

    L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M.K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (2018) 035005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.90.035005

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.90.035005 2018

  2. [2]

    Braun, G

    D. Braun, G. Adesso, F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, U. Marzolino, M.W. Mitchell, S. Pirandola, Quantum-enhanced measurements without entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (2018) 035006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.90.035006

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.90.035006 2018

  3. [3]

    , year = 1981, month = apr, volume =

    C.M. Caves, Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer, Phys. Rev. D. 23 (1981) 1693. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.23.1693 15

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.23.1693 1981

  4. [4]

    Gardner, T

    J.W. Gardner, T. Gefen, S.A. Haine, J.J. Hope, Y . Chen, Achieving the fundamental quantum limit of linear waveform estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 130801. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.132.130801

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.132.130801 2024

  5. [5]

    An elementary quantum network of entangled optical atomic clocks

    B.C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, D.P. Nadlinger, P. Drmota, D. Main, G. Araneda, C.J. Ballance, D.M. Lu- cas, An elementary quantum network of entangled optical atomic clocks, Nature 609 (2022) 689. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05088-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05088-z 2022

  6. [6]

    Zaheer, N.J

    M.H. Zaheer, N.J. Matjelo, D.B. Hume, M.S. Safronova, D.R. Leibrandt, Quantum metrol- ogy algorithms for dark matter searches with clocks, Phys. Rev. A. 111 (2025) 012601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.111.012601

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.111.012601 2025

  7. [7]

    Tsang, Quantum imaging beyond the diffraction limit by optical centroid measurements, Phys

    M. Tsang, Quantum imaging beyond the diffraction limit by optical centroid measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 253601. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.253601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.253601 2009

  8. [8]

    Albarelli, M

    F. Albarelli, M. Barbieri, M.G. Genoni, I. Gianani, A perspective on multiparameter quantum metrol- ogy: from theoretical tools to applications in quantum imaging, Phys. Lett. A. 384 (2020) 126311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2020.126311

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2020.126311 2020

  9. [9]

    Escher, R.L

    B.M. Escher, R.L. de Matos Filho, L. Davidovich, General framework for estimating the ultimate precision limit in noisy quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Phys. 7 (2011) 406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys1958

    work page doi:10.1038/nphys1958 2011

  10. [10]

    Kołody´nski, R

    J. Kołody´nski, R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´nski, Efficient tools for quantum metrology with uncorrelated noise, New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 073043. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/15/7/073043

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/15/7/073043 2013

  11. [11]

    Streltsov, G

    A. Streltsov, G. Adesso, M.B. Plenio, Quantum coherence as a resource, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89 (2017) 041003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.89.041003

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.89.041003 2017

  12. [12]

    Zwierz, C.A

    M. Zwierz, C.A. Pérez-Delgado, P. Kok, Ultimate limits to quantum metrology and the meaning of the Heisen- berg limit, Phys. Rev. A. 85 (2012) 042112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.85.042112

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.85.042112 2012

  13. [13]

    Braunstein, C.M

    S.L. Braunstein, C.M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994)

    1994

  14. [14]

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.3439

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.72.3439

  15. [15]

    G. Tóth, I. Apellaniz, Quantum metrology from a quantum information science perspective, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47 (2014) 424006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/47/42/424006

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8113/47/42/424006 2014

  16. [16]

    Bagan, M

    E. Bagan, M. Baig, R. Muñoz-Tapia, Aligning reference frames with quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 257903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.257903

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.87.257903 2001

  17. [17]

    Crowley, A

    P.J.D. Crowley, A. Datta, M. Barbieri, I.A. Walmsley, Tradeoffin simultaneous quantum-limited phase and loss estimation in interferometry, Phys. Rev. A. 89 (2014) 023845. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.023845

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.89.023845 2014

  18. [18]

    Monras, F

    A. Monras, F. Illuminati, Measurement of damping and temperature: Precision bounds in Gaussian dissipative channels, Phys. Rev. A. 83 (2011) 012315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.83.012315

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.83.012315 2011

  19. [19]

    Szczykulska, T

    M. Szczykulska, T. Baumgratz, A. Datta, Multi-parameter quantum metrology, Adv. Phys.: X 1 (2016) 621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23746149.2016.1230476

    work page doi:10.1080/23746149.2016.1230476 2016

  20. [20]

    Multi- parameter estimation beyond quantum Fisher information.J

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrza ´nski, W. Górecki, M. Gu¸ tˇa, Multi-parameter estimation beyond quantum Fisher informa- tion, J. Phys. A 53 (2020) 363001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab8ef3

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab8ef3 2020

  21. [21]

    Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory, J

    C.W. Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory, J. Stat. Phys. 1 (1969) 231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01007479

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01007479 1969

  22. [22]

    Degen, F

    C.L. Degen, F. Reinhard, P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89 (2017) 035002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.89.035002 16

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.89.035002 2017

  23. [23]

    Nielsen, I.L

    M.A. Nielsen, I.L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2019

    2019

  24. [24]

    Dynamical Decoupling of Open Quantum Systems

    L. Viola, E. Knill, S. Lloyd, Dynamical decoupling of open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 2417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.2417

    work page Pith review doi:10.1103/physrevlett.82.2417 1999

  25. [25]

    de Lange, Z.H

    G. de Lange, Z.H. Wang, D. Ristè, V .V . Dobrovitski, R. Hanson, Universal dynamical decoupling of a single solid state spin from a spin bath, Science 330 (2010) 6000. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1192739

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1192739 2010

  26. [26]

    Chiaverini, D

    J. Chiaverini, D. Leibfried, T. Schaetz, M.D. Barrett, R.B. Blakestad, J. Britton, W.M. Itano, J.D. Jost, E. Knill, C. Langer, R. Ozeri, D.J. Wineland, Realization of quantum error correction, Nature 432 (2004) 602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature03074

    work page doi:10.1038/nature03074 2004

  27. [27]

    Kessler, I

    E.M. Kessler, I. Lovchinsky, A.O. Sushkov, M.D. Lukin, Quantum error correction for metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 150802. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.150802

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.150802 2014

  28. [28]

    Q. Sun, M. Al-Amri, L. Davidovich, M.S. Zubairy, Reversing entanglement change by a weak measurement, Phys. Rev. A. 82 (2010) 052323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.82.052323

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.82.052323 2010

  29. [29]

    Kim, J.C

    Y .S. Kim, J.C. Lee, O. Kwon, Y .H. Kim, Protecting entanglement from decoherence using weak measurement and quantum measurement reversal, Nat. Phys. 8 (2012) 117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphys2178

    work page doi:10.1038/nphys2178 2012

  30. [30]

    Y .L. Li, C.H. Liao, L. Yao, X. Xiao, Enhancing the teleportation of quantum Fisher infor- mation under correlated generalized amplitude damping noise, Results Phys. 53 (2023) 107010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2023.107010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2023.107010 2023

  31. [31]

    Goldstein, P

    G. Goldstein, P. Cappellaro, J.R. Maze, J.S. Hodges, L. Jiang, A.S. Sørensen, M.D. Lukin, Environment-assisted precision measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 140502. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.106.140502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.140502 2011

  32. [32]

    Zhao, S.R

    X. Zhao, S.R. Hedemann, T. Yu, Restoration of a quantum state in a dephasing channel via environment-assisted error correction, Phys. Rev. A. 88 (2013) 022321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.88.022321

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.88.022321 2013

  33. [33]

    Muessel, H

    W. Muessel, H. Strobel, D. Linnemann, D.B. Hume, M.K. Oberthaler , Scalable spin squeezing for quantum-enhanced magnetometry with Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 103004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.103004

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.103004 2014

  34. [34]

    Adesso, T.R

    G. Adesso, T.R. Bromley, M. Cianciaruso, Measures and applications of quantum correlations, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 49 (2016) 473001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/49/47/473001

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8113/49/47/473001 2016

  35. [35]

    Jeong, H

    Y . Jeong, H. Shin, Quantum correlation in squeezed generalized amplitude damping channels with memory, Sci. Rep. 9 (2019) 4035. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-40652-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-019-40652-0 2019

  36. [36]

    C. Xu, L. Zhang, S. Huang, T. Ma, F. Liu, H. Yonezawa, Y . Zhang, M. Xiao, Sensing and tracking enhanced by quantum squeezing, Photon. Res. 7 (2019) A14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/prj.7.000a14

    work page doi:10.1364/prj.7.000a14 2019

  37. [37]

    Nat Commun , title =

    M. Gessner, A. Smerzi, L. Pezzè, Multiparameter squeezing for optimal quantum enhancements in sensor net- works, Nat. Commun. 11 (2020) 3817. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17471-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17471-3 2020

  38. [38]

    Wang, X.H

    S. Wang, X.H. Han, W.C. Li, T. Qian, X. Fan, Y . Xiao, Y .J. Gu, Protecting nonlocal quantum cor- relations in correlated squeezed generalized amplitude damping channel, Sci. Rep. 12 (2022) 20481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24789-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-022-24789-z 2022

  39. [39]

    Lan, M.L

    Y .T. Lan, M.L. Hu, Protecting steered coherence in squeezed generalized amplitude damping channel with mem- ory, Results Phys. 54 (2023) 107050. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2023.107050

    work page doi:10.1016/j.rinp.2023.107050 2023

  40. [40]

    Woolley, A.A

    M.J. Woolley, A.A. Clerk, Two-mode squeezed states in cavity optomechanics via engineering of a single reser- voir, Phys. Rev. A. 89 (2014) 063805. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.063805 17

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.89.063805 2014

  41. [41]

    Kienzler, H.Y

    D. Kienzler, H.Y . Lo, B. Keitch, L. de Clercq, F. Leupold, F. Lindenfelser, M. Marinelli, V . Negnevitsky, J. P. Home, Quantum harmonic oscillator state synthesis by reservoir engineering, Science 347 (2015) 53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1261033

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1261033 2015

  42. [42]

    Yang, J.H

    C.J. Yang, J.H. An, W. Yang, Y . Li, Generation of stable entanglement between two cavity mirrors by squeezed- reservoir engineering, Phys. Rev. A. 92 (2015) 062311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.92.062311

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.92.062311 2015

  43. [43]

    Didier, J

    N. Didier, J. Guillaud, S. Shankar, M. Mirrahimi, Remote entanglement stabilization and concentration by quan- tum reservoir engineering, Phys. Rev. A. 98 (2018) 012329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.98.012329

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.98.012329 2018

  44. [44]

    Hou, J.B

    Q.Z. Hou, J.B. You, W.L. Yang, J.H. An, C.Y . Chen, M. Feng, Generation of multiqubit steady-state quantum correlation by squeezed-reservoir engineering, Opt. Express 26 (2018) 20459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/oe.26.020459

    work page doi:10.1364/oe.26.020459 2018

  45. [45]

    Hou, C.J

    Q.Z. Hou, C.J. Yang, C.Y . Chen, J.H. An, W.L. Yang, M. Feng, Preservation of quantum correlation be- tween nitrogen-vacancy-center ensembles by squeezed-reservoir engineering, Phys. Rev. A. 100 (2019) 032302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.100.032302

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.100.032302 2019

  46. [46]

    Bai, J.H

    S.Y . Bai, J.H. An, Generating stable spin squeezing by squeezed-reservoir engineering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 083602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.127.083602

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.083602 2021

  47. [47]

    Groszkowski, M

    P. Groszkowski, M. Koppenhöfer, H.K. Lau, A.A. Clerk, Reservoir-engineered spin squeezing: Macro- scopic even-odd effects and hybrid-systems implementations, Phys. Rev. X. 12 (2022) 011015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevx.12.011015

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.12.011015 2022

  48. [48]

    Y . Li, X. Cheng, L.N. Wang, X. Zhao, W. Hou, Y . Li, K. Rehan, M. Zhu, L. Yan, X. Qin, X. Peng, H. Yuan, Y . Lin, J. Du, Multi-parameter quantum metrology with stabilized multi-mode squeezed state, arXiv 2312 (2023) 10379. http://dx.doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.10379

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.10379 2023

  49. [49]

    J. Liu, X. Jing, X. Wang, Phase-matching condition for enhancement of phase sensitivity in quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A. 88 (2013) 042316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.88.042316

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.88.042316 2013

  50. [50]

    Turchette, N.Ph

    Q.A. Turchette, N.Ph. Georgiades, C.J. Hood, H.J. Kimble, A.S. Parkins, Squeezed excitation in cavity QED: Experiment and theory, Phys. Rev. A. 58 (1998) 4056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.58.4056

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.58.4056 1998

  51. [51]

    Srikanth, S

    R. Srikanth, S. Banerjee, Squeezed generalized amplitude damping channel, Phys. Rev. A. 77 (2008) 012318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.77.012318

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.77.012318 2008

  52. [52]

    Y . Yeo, A. Skeen, Time-correlated quantum amplitude-damping channel, Phys. Rev. A. 67 (2003) 064301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.67.064301

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.67.064301 2003

  53. [53]

    L., Girvin, S

    A. Blais, A.L. Grimsmo, S.M. Girvin, A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93 (2021) 025005. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025005

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.93.025005 2021

  54. [54]

    Barends et al., Nature 508, 500 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13171

    R. Barends, J. Kelly, A. Megrant, A. Veitia, D. Sank, E. Jeffrey, T.C. White, J. Mutus, A.G. Fowler, B. Campbell, Y . Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, C. Neill, P. O’Malley, P. Roushan, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, A.N. Korotkov, A.N. Cleland, J.M. Martinis, Superconducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance, Nature 50...

    work page doi:10.1038/nature13171 2014

  55. [55]

    Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges,

    C.D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, J.M. Sage, Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and chal- lenges, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6 (2019) 021314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.5088164

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5088164 2019

  56. [56]

    Ballance, T.P

    C.J. Ballance, T.P. Harty, N.M. Linke, M.A. Sepiol, D.M. Lucas, High-fidelity quan- tum logic gates using trapped-ion hyperfine qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 060504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.060504

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.060504 2016

  57. [57]

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X.M. Lu, X. Wang, Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estimation, J. Phys. A 53 (2020) 023001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab5d4d 18

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab5d4d 2020

  58. [58]

    Yousefjani, R

    R. Yousefjani, R. Nichols, S. Salimi, G. Adesso, Estimating phase with a random generator: Strategies and resources in multiparameter quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A. 95 (2017) 062307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.95.062307

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.95.062307 2017

  59. [59]

    S. Ragy, M. Jarzyna, R. Demkowicz-Dobrza ´nski, Compatibility in multiparameter quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A. 94 (2016) 052108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.94.052108 19

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.94.052108 2016