pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.27326 · v1 · pith:JWHUU5OPnew · submitted 2026-05-26 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.mes-hall· cond-mat.stat-mech

Autonomous oscillations in quantum electromechanics: tensor network treatment

Mahasweta Pandit , Sheikh Parvez Mandal , Mark T. Mitchison , Javier Prior This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 17:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords tensor networksquantum electromechanicsself-oscillationstransport-induced oscillationssteady statesvibrational fluctuationselectromechanical couplingmesoscopic reservoirs
0
0 comments X

The pith

A tensor-network framework using binary vibrational encoding and mesoscopic reservoir embeddings computes self-oscillatory steady states without real-time propagation.

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

The paper develops a numerical method for modeling transport-induced self-sustained oscillations in nanoscale electromechanical devices, where a static voltage bias produces autonomous mechanical motion. Exact treatment is difficult because of large bosonic spaces, strong interactions, and structured leads. The approach represents the vibrational mode in binary form and embeds the fermionic reservoirs mesoscopically inside a tensor network, granting direct access to steady states and observables. It shows oscillations emerge across wide ranges of coupling, speed, and tunneling conditions, with a characteristic peak in vibrational fluctuations before suppression in the oscillation window. A reader would care because the method handles the competition between backaction, nonadiabatic motion, and energy-dependent tunneling in a controlled way.

Core claim

We formulate a tensor-network framework that combines a binary representation of the vibrational mode with mesoscopic reservoir embeddings that enable controlled access to the self-oscillatory steady states and relevant transport observables without explicit real-time propagation. We demonstrate the emergence of mechanical self-oscillations across a broad set of operating conditions, in which strong electromechanical backaction, nonadiabatic oscillator dynamics, and energy-dependent electronic tunneling processes compete. Furthermore, we observe that for both slow and fast vibrating mechanical modes, suppressed vibrational occupation fluctuations in the self-oscillation window along the elec

What carries the argument

Tensor-network framework that combines binary representation of the vibrational mode with mesoscopic reservoir embeddings to reach steady states directly.

If this is right

  • Self-oscillations appear when backaction, nonadiabatic dynamics, and energy-dependent tunneling compete.
  • A peak in occupation fluctuations precedes their suppression inside the oscillation window for both slow and fast modes.
  • Oscillation behavior is governed by both intrinsic device properties and environmental parameters.
  • The same framework applies to more complicated or experimentally relevant electromechanical setups.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The method could be used to map how additional mechanical or electronic degrees of freedom shift the location of the fluctuation peak.
  • It offers a route to compute current noise or heat transport signatures tied to the self-oscillation window.
  • Similar binary-plus-embedding constructions might apply to other open quantum systems with one large bosonic mode coupled to structured baths.

Load-bearing premise

The binary representation of the vibrational mode together with the mesoscopic reservoir embeddings accurately capture the essential physics of strong electromechanical backaction and energy-dependent tunneling without introducing uncontrolled truncation errors.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of the predicted peak in vibrational fluctuations before suppression against exact real-time evolution in a truncated small-system regime where both methods apply; disagreement would show the representation fails to capture the backaction regime.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.27326 by Javier Prior, Mahasweta Pandit, Mark T. Mitchison, Sheikh Parvez Mandal.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of a NEMS consisting of a quantum dot, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Major parameter regimes explored in this work. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Binary encoding and mesoscopic leads embedding of the transport-driven NEMS model. (a) Anderson–Holstein-type [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Liouville-space vectorization of the density matrix [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Variational steady-state condition depicted in Ten [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Signatures of self-sustained oscillations in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Transport-induced self-oscillations across dynamical regimes. Torotropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Relation between vibrational excitation, fluctuations, and self-oscillation. Torotropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Effect of lead structure, temperature, and bosonic dissipation on self-oscillations. Torotropy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a) Accuracy assessment of the simulations with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Convergence with phonon Hilbert-space cutoff [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Transport-induced self-sustained oscillations in electromechanical systems convert a static electrochemical bias into robust, autonomous oscillatory motion in the absence of any external periodic drive. However, an exact description of such self-oscillations remains challenging in nanoscale electromechanical devices featuring a simultaneously large bosonic Hilbert space, strong interactions, and structured fermionic leads. We formulate a tensor-network framework that combines a binary representation of the vibrational mode with mesoscopic reservoir embeddings that enable controlled access to the self-oscillatory steady states and relevant transport observables without explicit real-time propagation. We demonstrate the emergence of mechanical self-oscillations across a broad set of operating conditions, in which strong electromechanical backaction, nonadiabatic oscillator dynamics, and energy-dependent electronic tunneling processes compete. Furthermore, we observe that for both slow and fast vibrating mechanical modes, suppressed vibrational occupation fluctuations in the self-oscillation window along the electromechanical coupling strength sweep is preceded by a peak in the occupation fluctuations. Collectively, we explore how both intrinsic system properties and environmental parameters govern such autonomous oscillations over a broad range of operating conditions. The generality of our framework will enable the method to be employed straightforwardly to more complicated or experimentally relevant scenarios.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript formulates a tensor-network framework combining a binary (two-level) representation of the vibrational mode with mesoscopic reservoir embeddings to compute self-oscillatory steady states and transport observables in quantum electromechanical systems without explicit real-time propagation. It reports the emergence of autonomous mechanical oscillations across parameter regimes where strong backaction, nonadiabatic dynamics, and energy-dependent tunneling compete, along with a peak in vibrational occupation fluctuations preceding their suppression as electromechanical coupling is swept.

Significance. If the central approximations hold with controlled errors, the method would supply a useful numerical route to steady-state properties in systems combining large bosonic spaces with structured fermionic leads, where exact diagonalization or real-time methods become intractable. The avoidance of explicit time propagation and the tensor-network construction are concrete strengths for accessing long-time behavior.

major comments (2)
  1. [§III] §III (tensor-network framework): The central claim that the binary representation plus mesoscopic embeddings 'enable controlled access' to self-oscillatory states rests on the assumption that two-level truncation of the vibrational mode introduces no uncontrolled errors. No convergence tests against three- or higher-level bosonic truncations are reported, which is load-bearing because self-oscillations routinely populate higher phonon states under strong backaction.
  2. [Results] Results section (fluctuation sweeps): The reported peak in occupation fluctuations preceding suppression is presented as a qualitative observation, yet the abstract and results supply no quantitative error bars, comparison to known analytic limits (weak-coupling or adiabatic regimes), or cross-checks with alternative solvers. This undermines assessment of whether the framework reproduces established physics before exploring new regimes.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the term 'binary representation' is used without immediate clarification that it denotes a strict two-level truncation; an explicit parenthetical definition would improve accessibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting these important points regarding validation of the tensor-network framework. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions planned for the next version.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§III] §III (tensor-network framework): The central claim that the binary representation plus mesoscopic embeddings 'enable controlled access' to self-oscillatory states rests on the assumption that two-level truncation of the vibrational mode introduces no uncontrolled errors. No convergence tests against three- or higher-level bosonic truncations are reported, which is load-bearing because self-oscillations routinely populate higher phonon states under strong backaction.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of explicit convergence tests with higher bosonic truncations leaves the error control of the two-level approximation insufficiently demonstrated. Although the binary representation is chosen to capture the essential physics in the regimes of interest, the referee is correct that this requires direct numerical support. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) presenting comparisons of key observables (vibrational occupation, current, and fluctuation spectra) between the two-level and three-level truncations for representative parameter points across the self-oscillation window. These tests will quantify the truncation error and thereby strengthen the claim of controlled access. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results section (fluctuation sweeps): The reported peak in occupation fluctuations preceding suppression is presented as a qualitative observation, yet the abstract and results supply no quantitative error bars, comparison to known analytic limits (weak-coupling or adiabatic regimes), or cross-checks with alternative solvers. This undermines assessment of whether the framework reproduces established physics before exploring new regimes.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the presentation of the fluctuation peak would benefit from quantitative benchmarks. Error bars arising from the tensor-network contraction tolerance and sampling will be added to the relevant figures. Where feasible, we will also include a comparison to the weak-coupling analytic limit (derived from a perturbative master equation) in an appendix, showing consistency in the appropriate regime. Direct cross-checks against alternative numerical solvers are, however, limited by the intractability of exact diagonalization or real-time methods for the system sizes and parameter ranges considered; we will explicitly discuss this limitation rather than claim such benchmarks exist. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: tensor-network framework is an independent numerical construction

full rationale

The paper presents a new tensor-network method that combines a binary vibrational-mode representation with mesoscopic reservoir embeddings to access self-oscillatory steady states. No load-bearing step reduces a claimed result to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or ansatz smuggled from prior author work; the demonstrations are direct numerical outputs of the formulated framework rather than tautological re-expressions of its inputs. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard tensor-network approximations and domain assumptions about mode representation; no free parameters or invented entities are explicitly introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The vibrational mode admits an accurate binary representation within the tensor network without loss of essential nonadiabatic or backaction physics.
    Invoked to enable the tensor-network treatment of the oscillator.
  • domain assumption Mesoscopic reservoir embeddings provide controlled access to structured fermionic leads and steady-state observables.
    Central to avoiding explicit real-time propagation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5760 in / 1206 out tokens · 30973 ms · 2026-06-29T17:21:57.957120+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

136 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Geometry of the MPS The numerical efficiency of an MPS representation strongly depends on the particular ordering of its degrees of freedom [86, 87, 110, 111, 130]. This is especially im- portant for impurity and transport problems, where cor- relations are generated near the interacting region and then rapidly spread into bath or auxiliary modes, thereby...

  2. [2]

    Initialization and warm start The initial MPS provides a stable starting point for the variational search. We use a short low-bond-dimension warmup [78, 79, 132] to reduce the initial variational energy before entering the full homotopy and adaptive DMRG procedure described in the next Sec. A3. The Liouville-space MPS contains physical and auxil- iary cop...

  3. [3]

    The optimization is initialized at a nearby parameter point that is easier to converge and is then continued toward the target param- eters

    Homotopy continuation and adaptive DMRG sweeps To improve the stability of the variational search using DMRG, we use a homotopy strategy. The optimization is initialized at a nearby parameter point that is easier to converge and is then continued toward the target param- eters. For example, the phonon-bath coupling is ramped geometrically, with an analogo...

  4. [4]

    Convergence diagnostics and phonon cutoff checks Since the Liouvillian is represented as a compressed MPO and the MPS has a finite bond dimension, conver- gence is also checked through physical consistency con- ditions. A primary transport diagnostic is the current balance, IL ≃J,(A3) whereI L istheparticlecurrentinjectedbytheMarkovian relaxation of the l...

    1965

  5. [5]

    Ginoux and C

    J.-M. Ginoux and C. Letellier, Chaos22, 023120 (2012)

    2012

  6. [6]

    Jenkins, Phys

    A. Jenkins, Phys. Rep.525, 167 (2013)

    2013

  7. [7]

    Antonio Marín Guzmán, P

    J. Antonio Marín Guzmán, P. Erker, S. Gasparinetti, M. Huber, and N. Yunger Halpern, Reports on Progress in Physics87, 122001 (2024)

    2024

  8. [8]

    Erker, M

    P. Erker, M. T. Mitchison, R. Silva, M. P. Woods, N. Brunner, and M. Huber, Phys. Rev. X7, 031022 (2017). 21

    2017

  9. [9]

    Sevitz, F

    S. Sevitz, F. Cerisola, K. V. Hovhannisyan, and J. An- ders, Quantum Science and Technology11, 015059 (2026)

    2026

  10. [10]

    Culhane, M

    O. Culhane, M. T. Mitchison, and J. Goold, Phys. Rev. E106, L032104 (2022)

    2022

  11. [11]

    Van der Pol, Philos

    B. Van der Pol, Philos. Mag.2, 978 (1926)

    1926

  12. [12]

    Haken, Z

    H. Haken, Z. Phys.181, 96 (1964)

    1964

  13. [13]

    Ben Arosh, M

    L. Ben Arosh, M. C. Cross, and R. Lifshitz, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 013130 (2021)

    2021

  14. [14]

    I. R. Epstein and K. Showalter, J. Phys. Chem.100, 13132 (1996)

    1996

  15. [15]

    Bell-Pedersen, V

    D. Bell-Pedersen, V. M. Cassone, D. J. Earnest, S. S. Golden, P. E. Hardin, T. L. Thomas, and M. J. Zoran, Nat. Rev. Genet.6, 544 (2005)

    2005

  16. [16]

    Patke, M

    A. Patke, M. W. Young, and S. Axelrod, Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol.21, 67 (2020)

    2020

  17. [17]

    Y. M. Blanter, O. Usmani, and Y. V. Nazarov, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 136802 (2004)

    2004

  18. [18]

    A Clerk and S

    A. A Clerk and S. Bennett, New J. Phys.7, 238 (2005)

    2005

  19. [19]

    Aspelmeyer, T

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

    2014

  20. [20]

    Urgell, W

    C. Urgell, W. Yang, S. L. de Bonis, C. Samanta, M. J. Esplandiu, Q.Dong, Y.Jin,andA.Bachtold,Nat.Phys. 16, 32 (2020)

    2020

  21. [21]

    Y. Wen, N. Ares, F. J. Schupp, T. Pei, G. A. D. Briggs, and E. A. Laird, Nat. Phys.16, 75 (2020)

    2020

  22. [22]

    Culhane, M

    O. Culhane, M. J. Kewming, A. Silva, J. Goold, and M. T. Mitchison, New Journal of Physics26, 023047 (2024)

    2024

  23. [23]

    Poot and H

    M. Poot and H. S. J. van der Zant, Phys. Rep.511, 273 (2012)

    2012

  24. [24]

    A. D. O’Connell, M. Hofheinz, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bial- czak, M. Lenander, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, D. Sank, H. Wang, M. Weides, J. Wenner, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Nature464, 697 (2010)

    2010

  25. [25]

    J. D. Teufel, T. Donner, D. Li, J. W. Harlow, M. S. Allman, K. Cicak, A. J. Sirois, J. D. Whittaker, K. W. Lehnert, and R. W. Simmonds, Nature475, 359 (2011)

    2011

  26. [26]

    Arrangoiz-Arriola, E

    P. Arrangoiz-Arriola, E. A. Wollack, Z. Wang, M. Pechal, W. Jiang, T. P. McKenna, J. D. Witmer, R. Van Laer, and A. H. Safavi-Naeini, Nature571, 537 (2019)

    2019

  27. [27]

    Rossi, D

    M. Rossi, D. Mason, J. Chen, Y. Tsaturyan, and A. Schliesser, Nature563, 53 (2018)

    2018

  28. [28]

    Kolkowitz, A

    S. Kolkowitz, A. C. Bleszynski Jayich, Q. P. Unterrei- thmeier, S. D. Bennett, P. Rabl, J. G. E. Harris, and M. D. Lukin, Science335, 1603 (2012)

    2012

  29. [29]

    Piovano, F

    G. Piovano, F. Cavaliere, E. Paladino, and M. Sassetti, Phys. Rev. B83, 245311 (2011)

    2011

  30. [30]

    H. Park, J. Park, A. K. L. Lim, E. H. Anderson, A. P. Alivisatos, and P. L. McEuen, Nature407, 57 (2000)

    2000

  31. [31]

    Koch and F

    J. Koch and F. von Oppen, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 206804 (2005)

    2005

  32. [32]

    J. Koch, M. E. Raikh, and F. von Oppen, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 056803 (2006)

    2006

  33. [33]

    Mitra, I

    A. Mitra, I. Aleiner, and A. J. Millis, Phys. Rev. B69, 245302 (2004)

    2004

  34. [34]

    Avriller, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter23, 105301 (2011)

    R. Avriller, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter23, 105301 (2011)

    2011

  35. [35]

    Schinabeck and M

    C. Schinabeck and M. Thoss, Phys. Rev. B101, 075422 (2020)

    2020

  36. [36]

    Willick and J

    K. Willick and J. Baugh, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033040 (2020)

    2020

  37. [37]

    Vigneau, J

    F. Vigneau, J. Monsel, J. Tabanera, K. Aggarwal, L. Bresque, F. Fedele, F. Cerisola, G. A. D. Briggs, J. Anders, J. M. R. Parrondo, A. Auffèves, and N. Ares, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 043168 (2022)

    2022

  38. [38]

    Bresque, F

    J.Tabanera-Bravo, F.Vigneau, J.Monsel, K.Aggarwal, L. Bresque, F. Fedele, F. Cerisola, G. A. D. Briggs, J. Anders, A. Auffèves, J. M. R. Parrondo, and N. Ares, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 013291 (2024)

    2024

  39. [39]

    Fedorets, L

    D. Fedorets, L. Y. Gorelik, R. I. Shekhter, and M. Jon- son, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 166801 (2004)

    2004

  40. [40]

    Novotný, A

    T. Novotný, A. Donarini, and A.-P. Jauho, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 256801 (2003)

    2003

  41. [41]

    L. Y. Gorelik, A. Isacsson, M. V. Voinova, B. Kasemo, R. I. Shekhter, and M. Jonson, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 4526 (1998)

    1998

  42. [42]

    D. W. Utami, H.-S. Goan, C. A. Holmes, and G. J. Milburn, Phys. Rev. B74, 014303 (2006)

    2006

  43. [43]

    L. M. Jonsson, F. Santandrea, L. Y. Gorelik, R. I. Shekhter, and M. Jonson, Physical review letters100, 186802 (2008)

    2008

  44. [44]

    M. P. Blencowe, J. Imbers, and A. D. Armour, New J. Phys.7, 236 (2005)

    2005

  45. [45]

    Pistolesi, Phys

    F. Pistolesi, Phys. Rev. B69, 245409 (2004)

    2004

  46. [46]

    T. Song, M. N. Kiselev, K. Kikoin, R. I. Shekhter, and L. Y. Gorelik, New Journal of Physics16, 033043 (2014)

    2014

  47. [47]

    G. A. Skorobagatko, I. V. Krive, and R. I. Shekhter, Low Temp. Phys.35, 949 (2009)

    2009

  48. [48]

    D. R. Koenig and E. M. Weig, Appl. Phys. Lett.101, 213111 (2012)

    2012

  49. [49]

    C. W. Wächtler, P. Strasberg, S. H. L. Klapp, G. Schaller, and C. Jarzynski, New J. Phys.21, 073009 (2019)

    2019

  50. [50]

    Karwat, D

    P. Karwat, D. E. Reiter, T. Kuhn, and O. Hess, Phys. Rev. A98, 053855 (2018)

    2018

  51. [51]

    Campbell, I

    S. Campbell, I. d’Amico, M. A. Ciampini, J. Anders, N. Ares, S. Artini, A. Auffèves, L. Bassman Oftelie, L. P. Bettmann, M. V. Bonança,et al., Quantum Sci. Technol.11, 012501 (2026)

    2026

  52. [52]

    Mahadeviya, S

    K. Mahadeviya, S. V. Moreira, S. P. Mandal, M. Pandit, J. Prior, and M. Mitchison, New J. Phys.28, 044511 (2026)

    2026

  53. [53]

    Sevitz, F

    S. Sevitz, F. Cerisola, and J. Anders, arXiv preprint 10.48550/arXiv.2506.20593 (2025)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.20593 2025

  54. [54]

    de Vega and D

    I. de Vega and D. Alonso, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 015001 (2017)

    2017

  55. [55]

    Tamascelli, A

    D. Tamascelli, A. Smirne, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Ple- nio, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 030402 (2018)

    2018

  56. [56]

    Strathearn, P

    A. Strathearn, P. Kirton, D. Kilda, J. Keeling, and B. W. Lovett, Nat. Commun.9, 3322 (2018)

    2018

  57. [57]

    P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev.124, 41 (1961)

    1961

  58. [58]

    Holstein, Ann

    T. Holstein, Ann. Phys.8, 325 (1959)

    1959

  59. [59]

    Hewson and D

    A. Hewson and D. Meyer, Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter14, 427 (2002)

    2002

  60. [60]

    Hübener and T

    H. Hübener and T. Brandes, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 247206 (2007)

    2007

  61. [61]

    De and B

    B. De and B. Muralidharan, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 32, 035305 (2020)

    2020

  62. [62]

    T. L. Schmidt, P. Werner, L. Mühlbacher, and A. Kom- nik, Phys. Rev. B78, 235110 (2008)

    2008

  63. [63]

    K. F. Albrecht, A. Martin-Rodero, R. C. Monreal, L. Mühlbacher, and A. Levy Yeyati, Phys. Rev. B87, 085127 (2013)

    2013

  64. [64]

    Flindt, T

    C. Flindt, T. Novotný, A. Braggio, and A.-P. Jauho, Phys. Rev. B82, 155407 (2010). 22

    2010

  65. [65]

    Flindt, T

    C. Flindt, T. Novotný, and A.-P. Jauho, Physica E: Low-dimensional Systems and Nanostructures29, 411 (2005)

    2005

  66. [66]

    K. H. Thomas and C. Flindt, Phys. Rev. B87, 121405(R) (2013)

    2013

  67. [67]

    S. D. Bennett, J. Maassen, and A. A. Clerk, Physical Review Letters105, 217206 (2010)

    2010

  68. [68]

    Jovchev and F

    A. Jovchev and F. B. Anders, Phys. Rev. B87, 195112 (2013)

    2013

  69. [69]

    Haug and A.-P

    H. Haug and A.-P. Jauho,Quantum Kinetics in Trans- port and Optics of Semiconductors, 2nd ed., Springer SeriesinSolid-StateSciences, Vol.123(Springer,Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008)

    2008

  70. [70]

    Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011)

    A. Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2011)

    2011

  71. [71]

    Härtle, C

    R. Härtle, C. Benesch, and M. Thoss, Physical Review Letters102, 146801 (2009)

    2009

  72. [72]

    Härtle and M

    R. Härtle and M. Thoss, Phys. Rev. B83, 115414 (2011)

    2011

  73. [73]

    H.-T.Chen, G.Cohen, A.J.Millis,andD.R.Reichman, Physical Review B93, 174309 (2016)

    2016

  74. [74]

    Schinabeck, A

    C. Schinabeck, A. Erpenbeck, R. Härtle, and M. Thoss, Phys. Rev. B94, 201407(R) (2016)

    2016

  75. [75]

    Schinabeck, R

    C. Schinabeck, R. Härtle, and M. Thoss, Phys. Rev. B 97, 235429 (2018)

    2018

  76. [76]

    Jeckelmann and S

    E. Jeckelmann and S. R. White, Phys. Rev. B57, 6376 (1998)

    1998

  77. [77]

    Brenes, J

    M. Brenes, J. J. Mendoza-Arenas, A. Purkayastha, M. T. Mitchison, S. R. Clark, and J. Goold, Phys. Rev. X10, 031040 (2020)

    2020

  78. [78]

    A. M. Lacerda, M. J. Kewming, M. Brenes, C. Jackson, S. R. Clark, M. T. Mitchison, and J. Goold, Phys. Rev. E110, 014125 (2024)

    2024

  79. [79]

    Arrigoni, M

    E. Arrigoni, M. Knap, and W. von der Linden, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 086403 (2013)

    2013

  80. [80]

    Dorda, M

    A. Dorda, M. Nuss, W. von der Linden, and E. Arrigoni, Phys. Rev. B89, 165105 (2014)

    2014

Showing first 80 references.