Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Time series learning in a many-body Rydberg system with emergent collective amplification

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A many-body Rydberg system learns time series better near a phase transition.

desk verdict A well-executed first demonstration that a Rydberg-vapour reservoir predicts time series better near a bistable transition, but the paper leaves the mechanism—collective computation vs. higher output SNR—untested. read the letter →

arxiv 2511.15047 v3 pith:CG6VFJCW submitted 2025-11-19 quant-ph physics.atom-ph

Zongkai Liu , Qiming Ren , Chris Nill , Albert Cabot , Wei Xia , Yanjie Tong , Huizhen Wang , Wenguang Yang
show 7 more authors
Junyao Xie Mingyong Jing Hao Zhang Liantuan Xiao Suotang Jia Igor Lesanovsky Linjie Zhang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.atom-ph
keywords Rydbergvaportimeseriespredictionreservoircomputingbistabilityphasetransitioncriticalslowingdownmean-fieldmodelelectromagneticallyinducedtransparency
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

This paper tries to establish that a hot Rydberg vapor, when driven near a non-equilibrium phase transition (a bistable region), becomes a better physical reservoir for time-series prediction. The input signal is encoded in the laser's Rabi frequency, and the probe transmission is used to forecast future values of Lorenz and temperature data. The prediction error dips inside the bistable window, and a mean-field model reproduces this dip. If the claim holds, it shows that emergent collective effects close to criticality can enhance the computational power of a noisy many-body system.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on a mean-field equation for the average Rydberg population n(t), obtained by adiabatic elimination of the optical coherence from a driven-dissipative two-level model with all-to-all interactions. This equation displays bistability and spinodal lines with long relaxation times; the paper connects the enhanced prediction to the strong nonlinear response and critical slowing down in this region, with the experimental hysteresis loop as the operational signature.

What would settle it

Measure the prediction MSE near bistability while controlling for signal amplitude and noise level, or compare against a trivial baseline that repeats the last input value; if the MSE dip disappears or the baseline matches the performance, the collective-enhancement claim would be undermined. Alternatively, scan the mean-field parameters and check whether the MSE dip persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the learning capability of the Rydberg vapor is enhanced close to the bistable phase transition: the mean-squared error for predicting future values of the Lorenz and temperature time series is minimized inside the hysteresis loop of the EIT spectrum. The authors argue that this correlates with strong nonlinearity and critical slowing down, and they support the observation with a mean-field model that shows the same qualitative MSE dip. On the paper's own terms, the result establishes emergent collective response, rather than single-atom physics, as the resource for improved forecasting.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes the lowered prediction error near bistability is caused by collective computational enhancement rather than by the larger, cleaner transmission signal that is also present there.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Operating the vapor inside the bistable region reduces the mean-squared prediction error for both chaotic (Lorenz) and stochastic (temperature) time series.
  • The improvement is correlated with the hysteresis loop, indicating collective effects rather than single-atom dynamics are responsible.
  • The mean-field model reproduces the MSE dip, suggesting critical slowing down and strong nonlinearity are the underlying mechanisms.
  • The effect appears for two different data types, pointing to a generic enhancement of learning near phase transitions.
  • The authors note the overall accuracy is not yet competitive with established reservoir-computing methods, but the collective enhancement is a proof of principle.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A likely confound is the increased signal-to-noise ratio near bistability; a control experiment that matches SNR or uses a persistence baseline would isolate whether the improvement is genuinely computational.
  • If the effect is real, it suggests a design principle: physical reservoirs for machine learning may be optimized by tuning them close to a phase transition, which could apply to other driven-dissipative platforms.
  • The relationship between critical slowing down and reservoir memory capacity could be tested by measuring the echo-state property or memory function as a function of detuning.
  • The theoretical MSE dip is shown for a single parameter set; scanning Ω/γ, V/γ, and noise strength would test the robustness of the mechanism.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experimental demonstration of time-series prediction using a room-temperature Rydberg vapour as a physical reservoir. The input (Lorenz or Beijing temperature data) is encoded in the amplitude modulation of the coupling laser Rabi frequency; the probe transmission is measured, downsampled into 20 sub-series, and fed through a linear regression readout to predict future values of the input. The authors report that the mean-squared prediction error is minimized when the system is operated inside the bistable region of the EIT spectrum, and they attribute this improvement to emergent collective effects. A mean-field model with a stochastic term yields a qualitatively similar MSE dip near the bistable boundary, which is interpreted as support for the experimental claim. The paper also reports increased relaxation times inside the bistable region, consistent with critical slowing down.

Significance. If the central claim is upheld, the work would provide a clear experimental example of a driven-dissipative many-body system whose computational performance is enhanced near a nonequilibrium phase transition. This would be of interest to both the quantum reservoir computing and the broader quantum sensing/metrology communities. The experiment is simple, the data are from two qualitatively different benchmarks, and the mean-field model offers an interpretable mechanism. However, the paper currently lacks the controls needed to distinguish improved prediction due to collective computational enhancement from improved prediction due to a larger, cleaner output signal. The theoretical model is also not probed in regimes that would falsify the collective-mechanism interpretation. The core question—whether the MSE dip is caused by collective dynamics—remains open, and the manuscript needs additional experiments or simulations to close this gap.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II, Fig. 2(j) and 'In summary' paragraph] The central causal claim is not separated from a trivial amplification mechanism. The text and Fig. 2(b-d) explicitly note increased signal-to-noise ratio and peak-to-peak amplitude inside the bistable region, and a linear readout's MSE depends directly on output SNR. No persistence or autoregressive baseline is provided, and no SNR-controlled comparison (e.g., rescaling the output or using a noninteracting reservoir) is made. I request a trivial baseline and an SNR-controlled test to support the attribution to collective effects rather than to transduction gain alone.
  2. [Section III, Fig. 3(d)] The theoretical MSE dip is computed for a single parameter set (Omega/gamma=1.1, V/gamma=100, gamma_d/gamma=10, D/gamma=0.0001, gamma T=20). No V=0 or non-interacting control is shown, and no parameter scan is performed. Thus the model does not establish that the dip arises from collective effects; a single-atom nonlinear response with enhanced gain could produce the same behavior. Additionally, the simulated readout is not fully specified: which variables serve as output features, how many training samples are used, and how the predictions are generated. These details are needed to interpret Fig. 3(d).
  3. [Section II, Fig. 2(j) caption and text near Eq. (3)] The error bars are standard deviations over 20 interleaved downsampled sub-series from a single experimental run. These sub-series share a common raw record and are generated after Savitzky-Golay filtering, so they are not statistically independent. Consequently, the error bars do not capture run-to-run variability, and it is unclear whether the MSE differences across detuning are significant. Please report the number of independent experimental runs and provide a reproducibility check, e.g., bootstrapping over runs or at least showing the dip is stable across repeated measurements.
  4. [Section III and concluding paragraph] The support for the 'collective enhancement' claim is partly circular: the model parameters are chosen to place the system near the bistable boundary, and the MSE dip is then presented as confirming the experimental hypothesis. The model is not fit to the experimental MSE curve, and no falsifiable prediction is made (e.g., how the position or depth of the MSE dip should shift when V, Omega, or gamma_d are varied). A concrete test, such as showing that the dip moves with the spinodal lines under parameter variation, would substantially strengthen the claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Methods, Fig. 4 caption] Typo: 'transimission' should be 'transmission'. Also, 'modification depth' is likely meant to be 'modulation depth'.
  2. [Reference [38]] The data/code repository DOI is a placeholder (10.5281/zenodo.XXXXXXX). If a repository exists, please provide the actual DOI; if not, the statement in the Methods should be removed or qualified.
  3. [Section II and Fig. 2(j)] The definition of the gray-shaded 'bistable region' is qualitative. Please state how its boundaries are determined from the hysteresis loop (e.g., the detuning interval where the two scan directions differ by more than a threshold) so the reader can reproduce the analysis.
  4. [Eq. (3) and surrounding text] It is not stated whether the reported MSE is evaluated on the held-out 30% or on the entire test set, nor whether the MSE is normalized (e.g., by the variance of the target). This should be specified for comparability with other reservoir computing benchmarks.
  5. [Section III, stochastic equation] The noise strength D appears in the equation dot_n = F(n) + sqrt(n) D xi(t), but the units and the relationship to experimental noise are not discussed. A sentence on the origin and magnitude of D would help the reader assess the model's realism.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: experimental MSE and mean-field simulation are independently computed; self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central empirical claim is a correlation between an independently measured hysteresis/bistability window (Fig. 2(i)) and a separately computed prediction MSE (Fig. 2(j)); the MSE is not defined to be minimized inside the bistable region, nor is any fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The prediction target y_k is the future input value, and the linear readout is trained on measured transmission windows, so the experimental result is a genuine benchmark rather than a restatement of the input. The mean-field model (Eq. 4) is derived in Methods from a Lindblad master equation, not imported by self-citation; the parameter choice (Ω/γ=1.1, V/γ=100, γ_d/γ=10, D/γ=0.0001, γT=20) places the model near the lower critical point, but the theoretical MSE in Fig. 3(d) is obtained by simulating the stochastic dynamics and training a readout, so the dip is a genuine—though parameter-dependent—prediction. Citations to Refs. [27,31,35,44] for bistability and critical slowing down are contextual; the paper also measures relaxation times directly in Fig. 4. The absence of a trivial baseline or SNR-controlled comparison weakens the causal attribution to 'emergent collective learning' rather than amplification, but that is a confound/correctness risk, not a circular reduction, and under the hard rules it does not raise the circularity score. The conclusion's explicit admission that performance is not yet competitive is a limitation, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The theoretical model is a mean-field reduction with an ad hoc noise term; the experimental inference relies on the hysteresis-bistability identification; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • V/γ (mean-field interaction) = 100
    Interaction strength relative to decay in Eq. (4); set to a typical strongly-interacting Rydberg value, not fit to the MSE curve, but controls the bistable region's location.
  • γ_d/γ (dephasing rate) = 10
    Used in the Lindblad model and justifies adiabatic elimination; chosen as standard for hot Rydberg vapours; affects the phase diagram.
  • δΩ/Ω (modulation depth) = 0.1
    Input amplitude modulation in the theory; chosen to match the experimental Rabi-frequency range (2.56–3.14 MHz around ~?), the learning result may depend on it.
  • γT (modulation period) = 20
    Duration of each input bit in units of 1/γ; set to mimic the 4 kHz modulation in the experiment; controls how much memory the reservoir has.
  • D/γ (noise strength) = 0.0001
    Amplitude of the multiplicative noise added to Eq. (4) in Section III; chosen small; the MSE dip might shift with D.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Mean-field factorization: atom-atom correlations factorize in the thermodynamic limit, yielding Eq. (4) from the Lindblad master equation.
    Invoked in Methods Eq. (8) to reduce the N-body problem to a single population variable; central to the theoretical model.
  • domain assumption Adiabatic elimination of the optical coherence (γ_d ≫ γ, Ω), setting q̇=0 in Eq. (8).
    Assumed in Methods after Eq. (8); requires dephasing to dominate; the experiment's parameters are not directly verified.
  • domain assumption Noise model: stochastic term √(nD)ξ(t) added to Eq. (4) to represent thermal fluctuations.
    Section III; the multiplicative form and D value are chosen ad hoc; no microscopic justification given.
  • domain assumption Hysteresis loop in the probe transmission indicates a bistable regime of the atomic vapour.
    Section II and Fig. 2(i); the identification underpins the choice of detuning regions used to define the 'bistable' window.
  • domain assumption The 20 downsampled transmission sub-series are treated as independent samples for computing MSE statistics.
    Section II; the sub-series are interleaved from a single continuous record and are not independent, so error bars are likely underestimated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Time series learning in a many-body Rydberg system with emergent collective amplification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CG6VFJCW

@misc{pith2026251115047,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Time series learning in a many-body Rydberg system with emergent collective amplification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CG6VFJCW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2511.15047}
}
read the original abstract

Interacting Rydberg atoms constitute a versatile platform for the realization of non-equilibrium states of matter. Close to phase transitions, they respond collectively to external perturbations, which can be harnessed for technological applications in the domain of quantum metrology and sensing. Owing to the controllable complexity and straightforward interpretability of Rydberg atoms, we can observe and tune the emergent collective amplification. Here, we investigate the application of an interacting Rydberg vapour for the purpose of time series prediction. The vapour is driven by a laser field whose Rabi frequency is modulated in order to input the time series. We find that close to a non-equilibrium phase transition, where collective effects are amplified, the capability of the system to learn the input becomes enhanced. This is reflected in an increase of the accuracy with which future values of the time series can be predicted. Using the Lorenz time series and temperature data as examples, our work demonstrates how emergent phenomena enhance the capability of noisy many-body systems for data processing and forecasting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.15047 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Time series prediction with a Rydberg vapour. The time-dependent input signal x(t) is sampled at discrete time steps tn, yielding a step-wise constant function with values xn = x(tn). The signal is converted into the Rabi frequency Ωc(tn) of the coupling laser, which couples the intermediate state 6P3/2 to the Rydberg state 48D5/2 detuned by ∆c. This Rabi frequency ranges within the interval [Ωmin, Ωmax]. The caesiu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Time series prediction. (a) Amplitude modulated signal Ωc/2π in MHz which is input into the Rydberg system. (b-d) Output transmission signal T(t) in arbitrary units recorded for different detunings ∆c. The detuning is chosen such that the system is out of (panel b) and within the bistable region (panels c-d). (e, f) Time series prediction for the Lorenz series xLor. A Rydberg vapour operating in the bistable region … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Mean-field dynamical response and learning capacity. (a) Phase diagram of the mean-field equation (4). The blue region marks the bistable domain where two stable stationary solutions exist. The yellow (green) horizontal lines indicate the minimum (maximum) Rabi frequency of the in￾put signal of the learning protocol, see panel (d). The gray shadowed area indicates the region in which collective effects are most prom… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Experimental analysis of the relaxation times. Measurement of the transmission of the probe laser when the Rabi frequency Ωc of the coupling light is amplitude modulated by a square pulse with frequency 1 kHz, duty cycle 50%, and modification depth 15%. In panel (a), t…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Measuring Interaction-Induced Energy Shifts of Rydberg Atoms in Hot Vapor

    physics.atom-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Balancing the two minima of a split EIA feature by retuning the coupling laser measures interaction-induced Rydberg-level energy shifts in a hot rubidium vapor.

  2. Many-Body Physics with Rydberg Atoms: Quantum Simulation and Non-equilibrium Dynamics

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

    Rydberg atoms form a versatile platform for quantum simulation of Ising/XY models, topological phases, and nonequilibrium effects like bistability, time crystals, and self-organized criticality.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Krotov, A new frontier for hopfield networks, Nat Rev Phys5, 366 (2023)

    D. Krotov, A new frontier for hopfield networks, Nat Rev Phys5, 366 (2023)

    2023

  2. [2]

    Kennedy and R

    J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, Particle swarm optimiza- tion, ICNN’954, 1942 (1995)

    1942

  3. [3]

    Parsopoulos and M

    K. Parsopoulos and M. Vrahatis, Recent approaches to global optimization problems through particle swarm op- timization, Nat Comput1, 235 (2002)

    2002

  4. [4]

    D. Wang, D. Tan, and L. Liu, Particle swarm optimiza- tion algorithm: an overview, Soft comput22, 387 (2018)

    2018

  5. [5]

    Dorigo, M

    M. Dorigo, M. Birattari, and T. Stutzle, Ant colony op- timization, IEEE Comput Intell Mag1, 28 (2006)

    2006

  6. [6]

    Dorigo and C

    M. Dorigo and C. Blum, Ant colony optimization theory: A survey, Theor Comput Sci344, 243 (2005)

    2005

  7. [7]

    Ghys, The Lorenz Attractor, a Paradigm for Chaos, in Chaos: Poincar´ e Seminar 2010, edited by B

    ´E. Ghys, The Lorenz Attractor, a Paradigm for Chaos, in Chaos: Poincar´ e Seminar 2010, edited by B. Duplantier, S. Nonnenmacher, and V. Rivasseau (Springer, Basel,

    2010

  8. [8]

    Shen, A Review of Lorenz’s Models from 1960 to 2008, Int J Bifurcat Chaos33, 2330024 (2023)

    B.-W. Shen, A Review of Lorenz’s Models from 1960 to 2008, Int J Bifurcat Chaos33, 2330024 (2023)

    1960

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    Y. D. Mammedov, E. U. Olugu, and G. A. Farah, Weather forecasting based on data-driven and physics- informed reservoir computing models, Environ Sci Pollut Res Int29, 24131 (2022)

    2022

  2. [10]

    Jaeger, Short term memory in echo state net- works, Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft 10.24406/publica-fhg- 291107 (2001)

    H. Jaeger, Short term memory in echo state net- works, Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft 10.24406/publica-fhg- 291107 (2001)

    2001 doi

  3. [11]

    Tanaka, T

    G. Tanaka, T. Yamane, J. B. H´ eroux, R. Nakane, N. Kanazawa, S. Takeda, H. Numata, D. Nakano, and A. Hirose, Recent advances in physical reservoir comput- ing: A review, Neural Networks115, 100 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Nakajima, Physical reservoir computing—an intro- ductory perspective, Jpn J Appl Phys59, 060501 (2020)

    K. Nakajima, Physical reservoir computing—an intro- ductory perspective, Jpn J Appl Phys59, 060501 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    Wringe, M

    C. Wringe, M. Trefzer, and S. Stepney, Reservoir com- puting benchmarks: A tutorial review and critique, Int J Parallel Emergent Distrib Syst40, 313 (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    M. Dale, J. F. Miller, S. Stepney, and M. A. Trefzer, A substrate-independent framework to characterize reser- voir computers, P Roy Soc A-math Phy475, 20180723 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    T. L. Carroll, Optimizing memory in reservoir computers, Chaos32, 023123 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    D. J. Gauthier, E. Bollt, A. Griffith, and W. A. Barbosa, Next generation reservoir computing, Nat commun12, 5564 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    M. C. Ozturk, D. Xu, and J. C. Pr ´ ıncipe, Analysis and design of echo state networks, Neural Comput19, 111 (2007)

    2007

  10. [18]

    C. Sun, M. Song, D. Cai, B. Zhang, S. Hong, and H. Li, A systematic review of echo state networks from design to application, IEEE Trans Artif Intell5, 23 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Jaeger and H

    H. Jaeger and H. Haas, Harnessing nonlinearity: Predict- ing chaotic systems and saving energy in wireless com- munication, Science304, 78 (2004)

    2004

  12. [20]

    Maass, Computability in Context (Computer Sci- ence, 2011) pp

    W. Maass, Computability in Context (Computer Sci- ence, 2011) pp. 275–296

    2011

  13. [21]

    M. C. Soriano, S. Ort ´ ın, L. Keuninckx, L. Appeltant, J. Danckaert, L. Pesquera, and G. van der Sande, Delay- based reservoir computing: Noise effects in a combined analog and digital implementation, IEEE Trans Neural Netw26, 388 (2015)

    2015

  14. [22]

    Fujii and K

    K. Fujii and K. Nakajima, Harnessing Disordered- Ensemble Quantum Dynamics for Machine Learning, Phys Rev Appl8, 024030 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Mujal, R

    P. Mujal, R. Mart ´ ınez-Pe˜ na, J. Nokkala, J. Garc ´ ıa-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Opportu- nities in quantum reservoir computing and extreme learn- ing machines, Adv Quantum Technol4, 2100027 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    Sannia, R

    A. Sannia, R. Mart ´ ınez-Pe˜ na, M. C. Soriano, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Dissipation as a resource for Quantum Reservoir Computing, Quantum8, 1291 (2024). 7

    2024

  17. [25]

    M. Yan, C. Huang, P. Bienstman, P. Tino, W. Lin, and J. Sun, Emerging opportunities and challenges for the future of reservoir computing, Nat Commun15, 2056 (2024)

  18. [26]

    C. Ates, T. Pohl, T. Pattard, and J. Rost, Strong inter- action effects on the atom counting statistics of ultracold Rydberg gases, J Phys B-at Mol Opt39, L233 (2006)

    2006

  19. [27]

    Marcuzzi, E

    M. Marcuzzi, E. Levi, S. Diehl, J. P. Garrahan, and I. Lesanovsky, Universal nonequilibrium properties of dissipative Rydberg gases, Phys Rev Lett113, 210401 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    Lesanovsky and J

    I. Lesanovsky and J. P. Garrahan, Out-of-equilibrium structures in strongly interacting Rydberg gases with dis- sipation, Phys Rev A90, 011603 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Z. Bai, C. S. Adams, G. Huang, and W. Li, Self-induced transparency in warm and strongly interacting Rydberg gases, Phys Rev Lett125, 263605 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Klocke, T

    K. Klocke, T. Wintermantel, G. Lochead, S. Whitlock, and M. Buchhold, Hydrodynamic stabilization of self- organized criticality in a driven Rydberg gas, Phys Rev Lett126, 123401 (2021)

    2021

  23. [31]

    C. Carr, R. Ritter, C. Wade, C. S. Adams, and K. J. Weatherill, Nonequilibrium phase transition in a dilute Rydberg ensemble, Phys Rev Lett111, 113901 (2013)

    2013

  24. [32]

    D.-S. Ding, H. Busche, B.-S. Shi, G.-C. Guo, and C. S. Adams, Phase diagram and self-organizing dynamics in a thermal ensemble of strongly interacting Rydberg atoms, Phys Rev X10, 021023 (2020)

    2020

  25. [33]

    Wadenpfuhl and C

    K. Wadenpfuhl and C. S. Adams, Emergence of synchro- nization in a driven-dissipative hot Rydberg vapor, Phys Rev Lett131, 143002 (2023)

    2023

  26. [34]

    X. Wu, Z. Wang, F. Yang, R. Gao, C. Liang, M. K. Tey, X. Li, T. Pohl, and L. You, Dissipative time crystal in a strongly interacting Rydberg gas, Nat Phys20, 1389 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Liu, K.-H

    Z.-K. Liu, K.-H. Sun, A. Cabot, F. Carollo, J. Zhang, Z.- Y. Zhang, L.-H. Zhang, B. Liu, T.-Y. Han, Q. Li, Y. Ma, H.-C. Chen, I. Lesanovsky, D.-S. Ding, and B.-S. Shi, Emergence of subharmonics in a microwave driven dissi- pative Rydberg gas, Phys Rev Res6, L032069 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    ˇSibali´ c, J

    N. ˇSibali´ c, J. D. Pritchard, C. S. Adams, and K. J. Weatherill, Arc: An open-source library for calculating properties of alkali Rydberg atoms, Comput Phys Com- mun220, 319 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Fleischhauer, A

    M. Fleischhauer, A. Imamoglu, and J. P. Marangos, Elec- tromagnetically induced transparency: Optics in coher- ent media, Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 633 (2005)

    2005

  30. [38]

    Repository containing all corresponding data and source code of this manuscript, 10.5281/zenodo.XXXXXXX (2025)

    2025 doi

  31. [39]

    J. Chen, P. J¨ onsson, M. Tamura, Z. Gu, B. Matsushita, and L. Eklundh, A simple method for reconstructing a high-quality ndvi time-series data set based on the sav- itzky–golay filter, Remote Sens Environ91, 332 (2004)

    2004

  32. [40]

    R. Cao, Y. Chen, M. Shen, J. Chen, J. Zhou, C. Wang, and W. Yang, A simple method to improve the quality of ndvi time-series data by integrating spatiotemporal information with the savitzky-golay filter, Remote Sens Environ217, 244 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Dakos, M

    V. Dakos, M. Scheffer, E. H. van Nes, V. Brovkin, V. Petoukhov, and H. Held, Slowing down as an early warning signal for abrupt climate change, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A105, 14308 (2008)

    2008

  34. [42]

    Scheffer, J

    M. Scheffer, J. Bascompte, W. A. Brock, V. Brovkin, S. R. Carpenter, V. Dakos, H. Held, E. H. van Nes, M. Ri- etkerk, and G. Sugihara, Early-warning signals for critical transitions, Nature461, 53 (2009)

    2009

  35. [43]

    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

  36. [44]

    Zhang, L.-H

    J. Zhang, L.-H. Zhang, B. Liu, Z.-Y. Zhang, S.-Y. Shao, Q. Li, H.-C. Chen, Z.-K. Liu, Y. Ma, T.-Y. Han, Q.-F. Wang, C. S. Adams, B.-S. Shi, and D.-S. Ding, Early warning signals of the tipping point in strongly interact- ing Rydberg atoms, Phys Rev Lett133, 243601 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    Y. Wang, T. Gao, Y. Niu, Y. Hu, L. Zhang, S. Jia, M. Jing, and Y. Xiao, Time delay of mean-field interac- tion in thermal Rydberg atomic gases, Opt Express33, 20829 (2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    Appeltant, M

    L. Appeltant, M. Soriano, G. Van der Sande, J. Danck- aert, S. Massar, J. Dambre, B. Schrauwen, C. Mirasso, and I. Fischer, Information processing using a single dy- namical node as complex system, Nat Commun2, 468 (2011)

    2011

  39. [47]

    Zhang, X

    H. Zhang, X. Feng, B. Li, Y. Wang, K. Cui, F. Liu, W. Dou, and Y. Huang, Integrated photonic reservoir computing based on hierarchical time-multiplexing struc- ture, Opt Express22, 31356 (2014)

    2014

  40. [48]

    Sugano, K

    C. Sugano, K. Kanno, and A. Uchida, Reservoir com- puting using multiple lasers with feedback on a photonic integrated circuit, IEEE J Sel Top Quantum Electron26, 1 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    E. D. Black, An introduction to Pound-Drever-Hall laser frequency stabilization, Am J Phys69, 79 (2001)

    2001

  42. [50]

    S. Juan, J. Mingxing, and J. Fei, Pound–Drever–Hall laser frequency locking technique based on orthogonal demodulation, Optik168, 348 (2018)

    2018

  43. [51]

    R. W. P. Drever, J. L. HALL, F. V. Kowalski, J. Hough, G. M. Ford, A. J. MUNLEY, and H. Ward, Laser phase and frequency stabilization using an optical resonator, Appl Phys B-Lasers O31, 97 (1983). AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS ST A TEMENT Z.L. conceived the idea for the study. Z.L. and...

    1983

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.