pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.31011 · v1 · pith:C5SU2LLAnew · submitted 2026-06-30 · 🪐 quant-ph

Qubit Readout via State-Dependent Radiative Linewidths

Yiming Yu , Xinyu Zhao , Jia-Wen Yu , Ke-Xiong Yan , Wei Qin , Ye-Hong Chen , Yan Xia , Franco Nori This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 00:57 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords qubit readoutquantum nondemolition measurementdissipative readoutstate-dependent linewidthLindblad jump operatorcavity QEDfast readoutradiative decay
0
0 comments X

The pith

A state-dependent radiative linewidth imprints qubit information on the output field at linear order in time from an empty cavity.

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

The paper formulates a quantum nondemolition readout channel in which the qubit state modulates the cavity's radiative decay rate rather than its resonance frequency. Because the information enters through the amplitude of the leaking field, the distinguishability between qubit states appears immediately at order t when the cavity starts empty. Conventional dispersive readout instead requires intracavity photon buildup followed by conditional phase accumulation, so its signal begins only at order t squared. The linear scaling produces faster growth of matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio and survives comparisons that hold photon number, external linewidth, and cavity depletion fixed. An auxiliary-mode construction is sketched that converts a state-dependent susceptibility into the required state-dependent jump operator.

Core claim

The central claim is that a qubit-state-dependent Lindblad jump operator for cavity decay encodes the qubit state directly into the external radiative amplitude. Starting from vacuum, this dissipative channel therefore imprints measurable state information on the output field at O(t). Standard dispersive readout, by contrast, must first build up an intracavity field and then accumulate a conditional phase, so its signal appears only at O(t squared). The short-time advantage remains under finite-resource constraints that include photon-number limits, external-linewidth budgets, cavity depletion, and pulse-optimized dispersive baselines.

What carries the argument

The state-dependent radiative jump operator, which makes the cavity decay rate depend on the qubit state and thereby encodes information directly in the amplitude of the outgoing field.

If this is right

  • Matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio accumulates faster at short times than in dispersive readout.
  • The linear-time advantage persists under photon-number limits and external-linewidth budgets.
  • The advantage also survives cavity depletion and comparisons against pulse-optimized dispersive baselines.
  • An auxiliary-mode construction converts a state-dependent auxiliary susceptibility into the required state-dependent linewidth.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the required jump-operator engineering can be realized in circuit QED, the same dissipative encoding might extend to other open-system measurement tasks where loss channels are already present.
  • Hybrid protocols could combine the fast initial linear accumulation with later dispersive phase information to optimize total readout fidelity.
  • The scaling argument suggests testing the method first in systems where tunable loss rates are easier to control than dispersive shifts.

Load-bearing premise

The qubit-state dependence can be engineered into the radiative jump operator without introducing additional decoherence, unwanted couplings, or deviations from the Markovian Lindblad form.

What would settle it

A short-time experiment that measures the output-field correlation functions or matched-filter SNR and finds linear rather than quadratic growth in state distinguishability when the cavity begins in vacuum.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.31011 by Franco Nori, Jia-Wen Yu, Ke-Xiong Yan, Wei Qin, Xinyu Zhao, Yan Xia, Ye-Hong Chen, Yiming Yu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Conceptual comparison of linewidth-encoded dissi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Dynamical output response and SNR buildup. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Pulse-optimized SNR and residual photons. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Finite-resource SNR scans. (a) SNR versus the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Fast qubit readout conventionally encodes state information in a dispersive frequency shift. Here we formulate a linewidth-encoded quantum non-demolition measurement channel in which the qubit state enters the external radiative amplitude, equivalently a state-dependent Lindblad jump operator. Starting from an empty cavity, we show analytically that this dissipative channel imprints state information on the output field at $O(t)$, whereas standard dispersive readout starts at $O(t^2)$ because it requires intracavity buildup and conditional phase accumulation. This short-time scaling produces faster matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio accumulation and persists in finite-resource comparisons, including photon-number limits, external-linewidth budgets, cavity depletion, and pulse-optimized dispersive baselines. We further outline an auxiliary-mode route that converts a qubit-state-dependent auxiliary susceptibility into a state-dependent linewidth. These results identify engineered dissipation as an information-carrying resource for fast quantum non-demolition readout.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a linewidth-encoded QND readout channel in which the qubit state modulates the amplitude of an external radiative jump operator in the Lindblad master equation. Starting from an empty cavity, analytic arguments show that state information imprints on the output field at linear order in time, O(t), in contrast to the quadratic O(t^2) onset of standard dispersive readout that requires intracavity photon buildup and conditional phase accumulation. An auxiliary-mode construction is outlined to realize the state-dependent linewidth, and the O(t) advantage is shown to persist under photon-number limits, external-linewidth budgets, cavity depletion, and optimized dispersive baselines.

Significance. If the scaling result is confirmed without leading-order contamination from auxiliary-induced shifts or decoherence, the work identifies engineered dissipation as an information-carrying resource that can accelerate matched-filter SNR accumulation for qubit readout. The parameter-free character of the O(t) versus O(t^2) comparison and its persistence across finite-resource constraints constitute clear strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. [auxiliary-mode route and analytic scaling argument] The central O(t) scaling advantage is load-bearing on the assumption that the qubit state enters solely the amplitude of the external radiative jump operator while preserving the Markovian Lindblad form and QND character from t=0. The auxiliary-mode construction must be accompanied by an explicit effective master equation (or output-field expansion) demonstrating the absence of residual dispersive shifts, state-dependent frequency pulls, or auxiliary-induced decoherence at leading order; any such term would either require subtraction or revert the information accumulation to O(t^2).
  2. [analytic derivation of scaling] The analytic claim that information imprints at O(t) versus O(t^2) is stated but requires the step-by-step short-time expansion of the output field or integrated homodyne signal, together with an error analysis confirming the regime of validity, to be fully transparent and reproducible.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the state-dependent jump operator should be introduced once and used consistently; any auxiliary susceptibility parameters should be clearly distinguished from the primary cavity parameters.
  2. Finite-resource comparisons would benefit from tabulated numerical values (e.g., SNR at fixed photon number or fixed external linewidth) rather than summary statements alone.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. The comments correctly identify areas where the analytic arguments can be made more explicit and reproducible. We address each point below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [auxiliary-mode route and analytic scaling argument] The central O(t) scaling advantage is load-bearing on the assumption that the qubit state enters solely the amplitude of the external radiative jump operator while preserving the Markovian Lindblad form and QND character from t=0. The auxiliary-mode construction must be accompanied by an explicit effective master equation (or output-field expansion) demonstrating the absence of residual dispersive shifts, state-dependent frequency pulls, or auxiliary-induced decoherence at leading order; any such term would either require subtraction or revert the information accumulation to O(t^2).

    Authors: We agree that the auxiliary-mode construction requires an explicit effective master equation to confirm the absence of leading-order contaminating terms. In the revision we will add a dedicated derivation section that adiabatically eliminates the auxiliary mode, yielding the target Lindblad form with state dependence appearing exclusively in the radiative jump-operator amplitude. The expansion will explicitly track all orders and demonstrate cancellation of dispersive shifts and auxiliary-induced decoherence to the order relevant for the O(t) scaling. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [analytic derivation of scaling] The analytic claim that information imprints at O(t) versus O(t^2) is stated but requires the step-by-step short-time expansion of the output field or integrated homodyne signal, together with an error analysis confirming the regime of validity, to be fully transparent and reproducible.

    Authors: We accept that the short-time expansion needs to be presented with full intermediate steps and error bounds. The revised manuscript will include a self-contained appendix deriving the output-field expectation value for both channels, showing the linear term for the linewidth-encoded case and the quadratic onset for the dispersive case, together with a remainder estimate that identifies the temporal window of validity. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; scaling follows directly from Lindblad structure

full rationale

The central claim derives the O(t) information imprint analytically from the structure of the Lindblad master equation with a state-dependent jump operator L, starting from an empty cavity. This is a direct consequence of the dissipative term in the master equation and does not rely on fitted parameters, self-citations, or reductions to prior results by the same authors. The auxiliary-mode construction is presented as an outline for engineering the state dependence, not as a load-bearing premise that collapses the scaling argument. No self-definitional loops, renamed empirical patterns, or uniqueness theorems imported via self-citation appear in the provided text. The derivation remains self-contained against the stated Markovian assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract relies on standard open-quantum-system assumptions (Markovian Lindblad form, empty initial cavity, external radiative amplitude as the information carrier) without introducing new fitted constants or postulated entities.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The system obeys a Markovian master equation with a state-dependent jump operator whose form is given by the engineered radiative channel.
    Invoked when the dissipative channel is introduced as the measurement resource.
  • domain assumption The output field can be treated as the primary information carrier without significant back-action or non-Markovian corrections on the short-time scale of interest.
    Required for the O(t) scaling claim to hold against the O(t^2) dispersive baseline.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5698 in / 1476 out tokens · 29455 ms · 2026-07-01T00:57:03.428113+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

63 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    V. B. Braginsky, F. Y. Khalili, and K. S. Thorne,Quan- tum Measurement(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1992)

    1992

  2. [2]

    V. B. Braginsky and F. Y. Khalili, Quantum nondemo- lition measurements: the route from toys to tools, Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 1 (1996)

    1996

  3. [3]

    H. M. Wiseman and G. J. Milburn,Quantum Measure- ment and Control(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 2009)

    2009

  4. [4]

    Gorini, A

    V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups of N-level sys- tems, J. Math. Phys.17, 821 (1976)

    1976

  5. [5]

    Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun

    G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys.48, 119 (1976)

    1976

  6. [6]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The Theory of Open Quantum Systems(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002)

    2002

  7. [7]

    D. A. Lidar, Lecture notes on the theory of open quantum systems (2019), arXiv:1902.00967 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    C. W. Gardiner and M. J. Collett, Input and output in damped quantum systems: Quantum stochastic differen- tial equations and the master equation, Phys. Rev. A31, 3761 (1985)

    1985

  9. [9]

    C. W. Gardiner, Driving a quantum system with the output field from another driven quantum system, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 2269 (1993)

    1993

  10. [10]

    J. Q. You and F. Nori, Quantum information processing with superconducting qubits in a microwave field, Phys. Rev. B68, 064509 (2003)

    2003

  11. [11]

    J. Q. You and F. Nori, Superconducting circuits and quantum information, Phys. Today58, 42 (2005)

    2005

  12. [12]

    X. Gu, A. F. Kockum, A. Miranowicz, Y.-x. Liu, and F. Nori, Microwave photonics with superconducting quantum circuits, Phys. Rep.718–719, 1 (2017)

    2017

  13. [13]

    A. F. Kockum and F. Nori, Quantum bits with josephson junctions, inFundamentals and Frontiers of the Joseph- son Effect, Springer Series in Materials Science, Vol. 286, edited by F. Tafuri (Springer, Cham, 2019) pp. 703–741

    2019

  14. [14]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gus- tavsson, and W. D. Oliver, A quantum engineer’s guide to superconducting qubits, Appl. Phys. Rev.6, 021318 (2019)

    2019

  15. [15]

    Kjaergaard, M

    M. Kjaergaard, M. E. Schwartz, J. Braum¨ uller, P. Krantz, J. I.-J. Wang, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Superconducting qubits: Current state of play, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.11, 369 (2020)

    2020

  16. [16]

    Jeffrey, D

    E. Jeffrey, D. Sank, J. Y. Mutus, T. C. White, J. Kelly, R. Barends, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, A. Megrant, P. J. J. O’Malley, C. Neill, P. Roushan, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Martinis, Fast accurate state measurement with super- conducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 190504 (2014)

    2014

  17. [17]

    Walter, P

    T. Walter, P. Kurpiers, S. Gasparinetti, P. Mag- nard, A. Potoˇ cnik, Y. Salath´ e, M. Pechal, M. Mondal, M. Oppliger, C. Eichler, and A. Wallraff, Rapid high- fidelity single-shot dispersive readout of superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Applied7, 054020 (2017)

    2017

  18. [18]

    Chen, H.-X

    L. Chen, H.-X. Li, Y. Lu, C. W. Warren, C. J. Kriˇ zan, S. Kosen, M. Rommel, S. Ahmed, A. Osman, J. Bizn´ arov´ a, A. Fadavi Roudsari, B. Lienhard, M. Ca- puto, K. Grigoras, L. Gr¨ onberg, J. Govenius, A. F. Kockum, P. Delsing, J. Bylander, and G. Tancredi, Transmon qubit readout fidelity at the threshold for quantum error correction without a quantum-lim...

    2023

  19. [19]

    Y. Ye, J. B. Kline, S. Chen, A. Yen, and K. P. O’Brien, Ultrafast superconducting qubit readout with the quar- ton coupler, Sci. Adv.10, eado9094 (2024)

    2024

  20. [20]

    Bengtsson, A

    A. Bengtsson, A. Opremcak, M. Khezri, D. Sank, A. Bourassa, K. J. Satzinger, S. Hong, C. Erickson, B. J. Lester, K. C. Miao, A. N. Korotkov, J. Kelly, Z. Chen, and P. V. Klimov, Model-based optimization of super- conducting qubit readout, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 100603 (2024)

    2024

  21. [21]

    B. Abdo, O. Jinka, N. T. Bronn, S. Olivadese, and M. Brink, High-fidelity qubit readout using interfero- metric directional Josephson devices, PRX Quantum2, 040360 (2021)

    2021

  22. [22]

    Dassonneville, T

    R. Dassonneville, T. Ramos, V. Milchakov, L. Planat, ´E. Dumur, F. Foroughi, J. Puertas, S. Leger, K. Bharad- waj, J. Delaforce, C. Naud, W. Hasch-Guichard, J. J. Garc´ ıa-Ripoll, N. Roch, and O. Buisson, Fast high- fidelity quantum nondemolition qubit readout via a nonperturbative cross-Kerr coupling, Phys. Rev. X10, 011045 (2020)

    2020

  23. [23]

    W. Qin, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Exponentially improved dispersive qubit readout with squeezed light, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 233605 (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    B. T. Gard, Z. Parrott, K. Jacobs, J. Aumentado, and R. W. Simmonds, Fast high-fidelity quantum nondemo- lition readout of a superconducting qubit with tunable transverse couplings, Phys. Rev. Applied21, 024008 (2024)

    2024

  25. [25]

    T. V. Stefanski and C. K. Andersen, Flux-pulse-assisted readout of a fluxonium qubit, Phys. Rev. Applied22, 014079 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    A. A. Chapple, O. Benhayoune-Khadraoui, S. Richer, and A. Blais, Balanced cross-Kerr coupling for super- conducting qubit readout, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 256002 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    Hatridge, S

    M. Hatridge, S. Shankar, M. Mirrahimi, F. Schackert, K. Geerlings, T. Brecht, K. M. Sliwa, B. Abdo, L. Frun- zio, S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret, Quantum back-action of an individual variable-strength measurement, Science339, 178 (2013)

    2013

  28. [28]

    K. W. Murch, S. J. Weber, C. Macklin, and I. Siddiqi, Observing single quantum trajectories of a superconduct- ing quantum bit, Nature502, 211 (2013)

    2013

  29. [29]

    Vijay, C

    R. Vijay, C. Macklin, D. H. Slichter, S. J. Weber, K. W. Murch, R. Naik, A. N. Korotkov, and I. Siddiqi, Stabi- lizing Rabi oscillations in a superconducting qubit using quantum feedback, Nature490, 77 (2012)

    2012

  30. [30]

    Rist` e, M

    D. Rist` e, M. Dukalski, C. A. Watson, G. de Lange, M. J. Tiggelman, Y. M. Blanter, K. W. Lehnert, R. N. Schouten, and L. DiCarlo, Deterministic entanglement of superconducting qubits by parity measurement and feed- back, Nature502, 350 (2013)

    2013

  31. [31]

    Kelly, R

    J. Kelly, R. Barends, A. G. Fowler, A. Megrant, E. Jef- frey, T. C. White, D. Sank, J. Y. Mutus, B. Campbell, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, I.-C. Hoi, C. Neill, P. J. J. O’Malley, C. Quintana, P. Roushan, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, A. N. Cleland, and J. M. Martinis, State preservation by repetitive error detection in a superconducting quantum...

    2015

  32. [32]

    Hinderling, S

    M. Hinderling, S. C. ten Kate, D. Z. Haxell, M. Coraiola, S. Paredes, E. Cheah, F. Krizek, R. Schott, W. Wegschei- der, D. Sabonis, and F. Nichele, Flip-chip-based fast in- ductive parity readout of a planar superconducting is- land, PRX Quantum5, 030337 (2024)

    2024

  33. [33]

    Touzard, A

    S. Touzard, A. Kou, N. E. Frattini, V. V. Sivak, S. Puri, A. Grimm, L. Frunzio, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Gated conditional displacement readout of superconduct- ing qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 080502 (2019)

    2019

  34. [34]

    Boissonneault, J

    M. Boissonneault, J. M. Gambetta, and A. Blais, Dis- persive regime of circuit qed: Photon-dependent qubit dephasing and relaxation rates, Phys. Rev. A79, 013819 (2009)

    2009

  35. [35]

    Shillito, A

    R. Shillito, A. Petrescu, J. Cohen, J. Beall, M. Hauru, M. Ganahl, A. G. M. Lewis, G. Vidal, and A. Blais, Dy- namics of transmon ionization, Phys. Rev. Applied18, 034031 (2022)

    2022

  36. [36]

    D. Sank, A. Opremcak, A. Bengtsson, M. Khezri, J. Chen, O. Naaman, and A. Korotkov, System character- ization of dispersive readout in superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Applied23, 024055 (2025)

    2025

  37. [37]

    Catelani, J

    G. Catelani, J. Koch, L. Frunzio, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. H. Devoret, and L. I. Glazman, Quasiparticle relaxation of superconducting qubits in the presence of flux, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 077002 (2011)

    2011

  38. [38]

    Catelani, R

    G. Catelani, R. J. Schoelkopf, M. H. Devoret, and L. I. Glazman, Relaxation and frequency shifts induced by quasiparticles in superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. B 84, 064517 (2011)

    2011

  39. [39]

    X. Wang, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Ideal quantum nondemolition readout of a flux qubit without Purcell limitations, Phys. Rev. Applied12, 064037 (2019)

    2019

  40. [40]

    Catelani, S

    G. Catelani, S. E. Nigg, S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and L. I. Glazman, Decoherence of superconducting qubits caused by quasiparticle tunneling, Phys. Rev. B 86, 184514 (2012)

    2012

  41. [41]

    Sunada, S

    Y. Sunada, S. Kono, J. Ilves, S. Tamate, T. Sugiyama, Y. Tabuchi, and Y. Nakamura, Fast readout and reset of a superconducting qubit coupled to a resonator with an intrinsic Purcell filter, Phys. Rev. Applied17, 044016 (2022)

    2022

  42. [42]

    E. A. Sete, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Korotkov, Quan- tum theory of a bandpass Purcell filter for qubit readout, Phys. Rev. A92, 012325 (2015)

    2015

  43. [43]

    Sunada, K

    Y. Sunada, K. Yuki, Z. Wang, T. Miyamura, J. Ilves, K. Matsuura, P. A. Spring, S. Tamate, S. Kono, and Y. Nakamura, Photon-noise-tolerant dispersive readout of a superconducting qubit using a nonlinear Purcell fil- ter, PRX Quantum5, 010307 (2024)

    2024

  44. [44]

    P. A. Spring, L. Milanovic, Y. Sunada, S. Wang, A. F. van Loo, S. Tamate, and Y. Nakamura, Fast multiplexed superconducting-qubit readout with intrinsic Purcell fil- tering using a multiconductor transmission line, PRX Quantum6, 020345 (2025)

    2025

  45. [45]

    L. C. G. Govia and A. A. Clerk, Enhanced qubit read- out using locally generated squeezing and inbuilt Purcell- decay suppression, New J. Phys.19, 023044 (2017)

    2017

  46. [46]

    S. Kono, K. Koshino, D. Lachance-Quirion, A. F. van Loo, Y. Tabuchi, A. Noguchi, and Y. Nakamura, Break- ing the trade-off between fast control and long lifetime of a superconducting qubit, Nature Communications11, 3683 (2020)

    2020

  47. [47]

    Didier, J

    N. Didier, J. Bourassa, and A. Blais, Fast quantum non- demolition readout by parametric modulation of longitu- dinal qubit-oscillator interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 203601 (2015). 7

    2015

  48. [48]

    Billangeon, J

    P.-M. Billangeon, J. S. Tsai, and Y. Nakamura, Circuit- qed-based scalable architectures for quantum information processing with superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. B 91, 094517 (2015)

    2015

  49. [49]

    Richer and D

    S. Richer and D. DiVincenzo, Circuit design implement- ing longitudinal coupling: A scalable scheme for super- conducting qubits, Phys. Rev. B93, 134501 (2016)

    2016

  50. [50]

    Ikonen, J

    J. Ikonen, J. Goetz, J. Ilves, A. Ker¨ anen, A. M. Gunyho, M. Partanen, K. Y. Tan, D. Hazra, L. Gr¨ onberg, V. Vesterinen, S. Simbierowicz, J. Hassel, and M. M¨ ott¨ onen, Qubit measurement by multichannel driving, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 080503 (2019)

    2019

  51. [51]

    C. G. L. Bøttcher, S. P. Harvey, S. Fallahi, G. C. Gard- ner, M. J. Manfra, U. Vool, S. D. Bartlett, and A. Ya- coby, Parametric longitudinal coupling between a high- impedance superconducting resonator and a semiconduc- tor quantum dot singlet-triplet spin qubit, Nat. Commun. 13, 4773 (2022)

    2022

  52. [52]

    Harpt, J

    B. Harpt, J. Corrigan, N. Holman, P. Marciniec, D. Rosenberg, D. Yost, R. Das, R. Ruskov, C. Tahan, W. D. Oliver, R. McDermott, M. Friesen, and M. A. Eriksson, Ultra-dispersive resonator readout of a quantum-dot qubit using longitudinal coupling, npj Quantum Inf.11, 7 (2025)

    2025

  53. [53]

    Xu, J.-T

    S.-W. Xu, J.-T. Ye, H.-R. Chen, Y.-H. Chen, and Y. Xia, Nondestructive readout of cat-state qubits via longitudinal qubit-oscillator interaction, Commun. Phys. 10.1038/s42005-026-02657-w (2026)

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-026-02657-w 2026

  54. [54]

    J. F. Poyatos, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Quantum reser- voir engineering with laser cooled trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 4728 (1996)

    1996

  55. [55]

    Verstraete, M

    F. Verstraete, M. M. Wolf, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum computation and quantum-state engineering driven by dissipation, Nat. Phys.5, 633 (2009)

    2009

  56. [56]

    Krauter, C

    H. Krauter, C. A. Muschik, K. Jensen, W. Wasilewski, J. M. Petersen, J. I. Cirac, and E. S. Polzik, Entangle- ment generated by dissipation and steady state entangle- ment of two macroscopic objects, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 080503 (2011)

    2011

  57. [57]

    Shankar, M

    S. Shankar, M. Hatridge, Z. Leghtas, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, U. Vool, S. M. Girvin, L. Frunzio, M. Mir- rahimi, and M. H. Devoret, Autonomously stabilized en- tanglement between two superconducting quantum bits, Nature504, 419 (2013)

    2013

  58. [58]

    P. M. Harrington, E. J. Mueller, and K. W. Murch, Engi- neered dissipation for quantum information science, Nat. Rev. Phys.4, 660 (2022)

    2022

  59. [59]

    Wang, Y.-X

    Y.-Y. Wang, Y.-X. Wang, S. van Geldern, T. Connolly, A. A. Clerk, and C. Wang, Dispersive nonreciprocity be- tween a qubit and a cavity, Sci. Adv.10, eadj8796 (2024)

    2024

  60. [60]

    Gambetta, A

    J. Gambetta, A. Blais, D. I. Schuster, A. Wallraff, L. Frunzio, J. Majer, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Qubit-photon interactions in a cavity: Measurement-induced dephasing and number splitting, Phys. Rev. A74, 042318 (2006)

    2006

  61. [61]

    A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Introduction to quantum noise, measurement, and amplification, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1155 (2010)

    2010

  62. [62]

    (2026), supplemental Material of Dissipative Qubit Read- out via State-Dependent Linewidths

    2026

  63. [63]

    C. Zhu, R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, and J. Nocedal, Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization, ACM Trans. Math. Softw.23, 550 (1997)

    1997