Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 52 references

Dynamical freezing and enhanced magnetometry in an interacting spin ensemble

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports the first experimental observation of dynamical freezing in a dense ensemble of about $10^4$ interacting nitrogen-vacancy spins, where the total magnetization is stroboscopically conserved at the freezing points $h_z T…

desk verdict Solid first observation of dynamical freezing, but the headline sensing claim is over-attributed: the best sensitivity is achieved away from the freezing points. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.22982 v1 pith:G43EIUCK submitted 2025-07-30 quant-ph cond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-el

Ya-Nan Lu , Dong Yuan , Yixuan Ma , Yan-Qing Liu , Si Jiang , Xiang-Qian Meng , Yi-Jie Xu , Xiu-Ying Chang
show 5 more authors
Chong Zu Hong-Zheng Zhao Dong-Ling Deng Lu-Ming Duan Pan-Yu Hou
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.dis-nncond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.str-el
keywords dynamicalfreezingemergentconservationlawFloquetdrivingnitrogen-vacancycentersquantummagnetometrythermalizationbreakdownmany-bodyspindynamics
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 reports the first experimental observation of dynamical freezing, a predicted breakdown of thermalization in periodically driven many-body systems, in a dense ensemble of about $10^4$ interacting nitrogen-vacancy spins in diamond. At specific detunings where $h_z T = 4\pi k$, the total $z$-magnetization is stroboscopically conserved by an emergent $U(1)$ conservation law, and the paper shows this magnetization persists for more than an order of magnitude longer than the interaction-limited coherence time $T_2$. The same emergent conservation suppresses decoherence well past $T_2$, and the paper uses this to build an ac magnetometry sequence that outperforms conventional dynamical-decoupling magnetometry by 4.3 dB in sensitivity. A sympathetic reader should care because this is a concrete demonstration, in a mesoscopic solid-state system, that interaction-induced thermalization can be tamed not by disorder or high frequency but by a drive-induced symmetry, and that this taming can be used directly for a practical sensing task.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the strong-drive Floquet-Magnus expansion in a moving frame, applied to the alternating Hamiltonian $H(t) = H_0 + \Omega \hat{S}_x \pm h_z \hat{S}_z$. The zeroth-order effective Floquet Hamiltonian $H_F^{(0)}$ is $H_0$ plus a term proportional to $(2\Omega/h_z T)(\sin(h_z T/2)\hat{S}_x - (1 - \cos(h_z T/2))\hat{S}_y)$, the first-order correction vanishes by the reflection symmetry of the drive, and at the freezing condition $h_z T = 4\pi k$ the remaining leading symmetry-breaking term is proportional to $\Omega^3/(4h_z^2)\hat{S}_x$. This structure produces an emergent approximate conservation of $\langle \hat{S}_z \rangle$ that fractures the Hilbert space into sectors, while the intra-period micromotions are governed by the first-order Floquet kick operator $K_F^{(1)}(t)$, whose predicted frequencies match the observed spectra. The same expansion gives the field-response formula $H_F^{(0)} \approx H_0 + (\Omega/h_z)(2\gamma_{\mathrm{NV}} B_{\mathrm{ac}}/\pi)\hat{S}_x$ used to predict and optimize the sensing slopes.

What would settle it

Run the same Floquet sequence on a small, exactly solvable system with deterministic couplings, or on a larger system with translation-invariant couplings, and check whether the freezing peaks at $h_z T = 4\pi k$ appear and persist with micromotion spectra matching $K_F^{(1)}$; if the freezing disappears or shifts, the effect in the NV ensemble is driven by static randomness rather than by the emergent $U(1)$ conservation sector.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a strongly driven, interacting ensemble of about $10^4$ NV spins exhibits dynamical freezing: at detunings satisfying $h_z T = 4\pi k$ ($k = \pm 1, \pm 2, \ldots$), the stroboscopic dynamics conserve $\langle \hat{S}_z \rangle$ even though the undriven system is interacting and would thermalize. The evidence is threefold: the time-averaged $\langle \hat{S}_z \rangle$ shows sharp peaks at exactly these freezing points and remains near unity for hundreds of driving cycles; the intra-period micromotions of $\langle \hat{S}_x \rangle$, $\langle \hat{S}_y \rangle$, and $\langle \hat{S}_z \rangle$ have spectral peaks at the frequencies predicted by the leading Floquet kick operator; and the early-time relaxation rates for different drive parameters collapse when plotted against $\Omega^3/h_z^2$, the coefficient of the leading symmetry-breaking term in the effective Floquet Hamiltonian. The paper further claims that this frozen dynamics can be converted into an ac magnetometry protocol: at sensing times far beyond $T_2$, the dynamical-freezing sequence retains a steep field response, yielding a best sensitivity of $6.5(6)\ \mathrm{nT}/\sqrt{\mathrm{Hz}}$, a 4.3 dB improvement over conventional PDD magnetometry under identical conditions.

Load-bearing premise

The interpretation stands on the assumption that the observed long-lived magnetization is produced by the predicted emergent conservation law of dynamical freezing, and not by disorder-induced localization or another prethermalization mechanism that the measurements cannot fully rule out.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Freezing is not tied to a specially prepared state: the paper observes conserved magnetization and state-dependent micromotion amplitudes for initial states with different polar angles, so the effect is a property of the drive, not of a scar subspace.
  • The emergent conservation law protects $\langle \hat{S}_z \rangle$ for over 200 driving cycles while $\langle \hat{S}_x \rangle$ and $\langle \hat{S}_y \rangle$ decay to their thermal values, making the system a long-lived single-axis quantum memory or sensor axis.
  • The two-stage decay at freezing points, with an early-time rate governed by $\Omega^3/h_z^2$ and a late-time decay driven by residual disorder, gives experimental control knobs for how long and how rigidly the frozen sector survives.
  • The 4.3 dB sensitivity gain over PDD is achieved with only global microwave control, so the protocol transfers to other spin ensembles or platforms without single-site addressing.
  • Operating away from the exact freezing points yields even lower sensitivity than at the freezing points while still extending coherence, suggesting the useful sensing regime is broader than the strict freezing condition.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural test beyond the paper would be to repeat the freezing measurement in an array with deterministic, translation-invariant couplings, for example a one-dimensional chain, where disorder-induced localization cannot occur; if the freezing peaks at $h_z T = 4\pi k$ persist, the emergent-conservation interpretation would be directly confirmed.
  • The paper's sensitivity analysis is based on slopes extracted from $\langle \hat{S}_z \rangle$ versus $B_{\mathrm{ac}}$; a full quantum-Fisher-information optimization over Floquet parameters and pulse sequences could reveal a larger performance gap than the reported 4.3 dB.
  • Because freezing points appear at every even multiple of the driving frequency, the same protocol could be adapted for multi-frequency ac magnetometry or noise spectroscopy, selecting different harmonics by changing $h_z$ rather than by changing the $\pi$-pulse train.
  • The paper's outlook connects dynamical freezing to Floquet time crystals and symmetry-protected topological phases; an explicit bridge would be to test whether the frozen sector survives quasiperiodic or amplitude-modulated drives, probing the robustness of the emergent conservation law beyond strict periodicity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports experiments on a dense ensemble of about 10^4 nitrogen-vacancy spins driven by a periodic sequence with alternating detunings. It observes long-lived stroboscopic magnetization at discrete freezing points hzT = 4πk, coherent micromotions whose dominant frequencies match Floquet-Magnus kick-operator predictions, and a collapse of early-time decay curves under the scaling variable Ω^3/hz^2. It then proposes an ac magnetometry protocol based on the same Floquet sequence and reports a 4.3 dB sensitivity improvement over periodic dynamical decoupling (PDD). The freezing observation is presented as the first experimental realization of dynamical freezing, and the sensing result is presented as an application enabled by that mechanism.

Significance. If the claims are taken as stated, the paper would constitute a first experimental observation of dynamical freezing in an interacting many-body system, together with a practical sensing application. The freezing observation itself is well supported: the freezing condition and the micromotion frequencies are parameter-free predictions of an independently published theory, the Ω^3/hz^2 collapse of the decay curves is a nontrivial predictive test, and the DTWA simulations plus the data/code availability commitments strengthen the presentation. The sensing claim, however, is not yet supported in the regime that the manuscript identifies with dynamical freezing. The reported 4.3 dB improvement is obtained away from the freezing points, in a regime the authors explicitly state is not theoretically understood. The paper therefore needs a substantial revision of the sensing claim, but the core freezing observation is credible and significant.

major comments (3)
  1. [Dynamical-freezing enhanced magnetometry; Fig. 3e] The abstract and conclusion attribute the 4.3 dB sensitivity improvement to dynamical freezing, but the optimal sensitivity of 6.5(6) nT/√Hz is obtained at the pink circles, which are explicitly labeled 'away from freezing' in Fig. 3e. The text states that in this regime 'the system is not frozen' and that the detailed relationship between Floquet parameters, coherence, and slopes is left to 'future theoretical works.' The best sensitivity at the blue near-freezing points is 12.9(6) nT/√Hz, corresponding to a much smaller ~1.5 dB improvement over the PDD optimum of 18(3) nT/√Hz. Thus the causal statement 'dynamical-freezing-enhanced ac magnetometry' is an over-attribution. The claim should either be reworded to describe a Floquet-PDD protocol whose high-sensitivity regime lies away from freezing, or the away-from-freezing regime needs a theoretical analysis before the enhancement can be attributed to dynamical freezing.
  2. [Methods, Experimental sensitivity and Eq. (7)] The sensitivity comparison uses different data processing for the two protocols: PDD slopes are obtained from sinusoidal fits, while D.F. slopes are obtained by moving-average smoothing over three consecutive points followed by numerical differentiation. This asymmetry can bias the relative sensitivity estimate, particularly in the oscillatory away-from-freezing regions of Fig. 3c. The authors should apply a common fitting and processing procedure to both protocols, or quantify the systematic uncertainty introduced by the smoothing, before the 4.3 dB figure can be taken at face value.
  3. [Observation of dynamical freezing; Conclusion] The identification of the observed non-thermalizing dynamics with emergent-conservation dynamical freezing, rather than with Floquet many-body localization, is supported by the discrete freezing-point structure and the Ω^3/hz^2 scaling. However, the manuscript does not explicitly discuss whether the residual disordered on-site fields and random couplings could produce a localization-like contribution. A short supplementary analysis, or a direct statement explaining why the freezing-point condition and the Ω^3/hz^2 collapse are incompatible with a disorder-dominated scenario, would make the central interpretation more robust. As written, the claim that the effect is independent of disorder is slightly stronger than what is directly demonstrated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 and Fig. 3 captions] The notation Ω0 and h0 is used in the Fig. 3 caption but not defined in the main text; please define these on first use.
  2. [Methods, Eqs. (3)-(4)] The kick-operator expressions are given in the moving frame, but the transformation between the moving frame and the laboratory frame is not shown; without it, a reader cannot reproduce the micromotion expressions in Eq. (4).
  3. [Sensitivity comparison, Fig. 3e] The 4.3 dB improvement is consistent with 10 log10(η_PDD/η_DF) rather than 20 log10; please state explicitly which convention is used.
  4. [Fig. 2d] The legend labels 'Ω^3/(2π hz^2) 0.9 kHz 3.6 kHz 6.4 kHz' are ambiguous; please specify the exact units and whether these are values of Ω^3/(2π hz^2) or of Ω^3/hz^2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: freezing points, micromotion frequencies, and Ω^3/hz^2 scaling are parameter-free Floquet-Magnus predictions confirmed without fitting; the sensing comparison is empirical, though the best sensitivity lies outside the freezing regime.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing claims are the freezing condition hzT=4πk, the micromotion frequencies, and the Ω^3/hz^2 scaling of the early decay. These are parameter-free predictions from the Floquet-Magnus expansion of external references [15,16,44]; the experiment measures peaks at hzT/(2π)=2,4,6 and matches kick-operator frequencies without fitting. The Ω^3/hz^2 collapse is a predictive test, not a fitted input. The dynamical-freezing sensitivity is measured directly via Eq. (7) and compared to measured PDD sensitivities; T2 and α entering the PDD theoretical line are standard fitted coherence parameters for the benchmark, not inputs to the dynamical-freezing claim. The only caveat is interpretive, not circular: the best sensitivity of 6.5(6) nT/√Hz occurs away from the freezing points, and the paper itself states 'the system is not frozen' there and defers theory of that regime to 'future theoretical works'. This weakens the 'dynamical-freezing-enhanced' label but does not make any prediction reduce to a fit or to a self-citation. No load-bearing step is equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The theoretical predictions use measured experimental parameters (Ω, hz, T, T2, α, C); no free parameters are fitted to produce the central predictions. The analysis uses data smoothing (three-point moving average) but this is a processing choice, not a fitted parameter. No new physical entities are introduced; the emergent U(1) conservation is a theoretical property of the model, not a new postulated object.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Floquet-Magnus expansion truncated at leading order is valid at the intermediate drive frequency hz ≈ 2ω.
    The freezing condition hzT = 4πk and the micromotion frequencies are derived from this expansion (Methods 'Micromotion dynamics', Eq. 3). Its convergence at moderate drive strengths is not proven.
  • domain assumption The NV ensemble is effectively isolated and described by the dipolar XXZ Hamiltonian H0 in the rotating frame, with other decoherence sources negligible on the observed timescale.
    The model Hamiltonian Eq. (1) is used throughout; any coupling to phonons, laser noise, or microwave inhomogeneity that is not captured would affect the freezing dynamics.
  • domain assumption The Ω=0 reference measurement correctly factorizes pulse errors from the intrinsic spin dynamics.
    Data in Fig. 1d and 2d are normalized as ⟨Sz⟩_c = ⟨Sz(t)⟩/⟨Sz(t, Ω=0)⟩ (Methods 'Experimental data analysis'). If pulse errors depend on the Floquet drive parameters, the normalization would not fully isolate the intrinsic effect.
  • domain assumption The discrete truncated Wigner approximation faithfully reproduces the many-body dynamics of the mesoscopic spin ensemble.
    DTWA is used for the 'Sim.' curves in Figs. 2b and Extended Data Fig. 2b; it is a semiclassical method and may miss purely quantum effects such as entanglement dynamics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical freezing and enhanced magnetometry in an interacting spin ensemble." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G43EIUCK

@misc{pith2026250722982,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical freezing and enhanced magnetometry in an interacting spin ensemble},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G43EIUCK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.22982}
}
abstract

Understanding and controlling non-equilibrium dynamics in quantum many-body systems is a fundamental challenge in modern physics, with profound implications for advancing quantum technologies. Typically, periodically driven systems in the absence of conservation laws thermalize to a featureless "infinite-temperature" state, erasing all memory of their initial conditions. However, this paradigm can break down through mechanisms such as integrability, many-body localization, quantum many-body scars, and Hilbert space fragmentation. Here, we report the experimental observation of dynamical freezing, a distinct mechanism of thermalization breakdown in driven systems, and demonstrate its application in quantum sensing using an ensemble of approximately $10^4$ interacting nitrogen-vacancy spins in diamond. By precisely controlling the driving frequency and detuning, we observe emergent long-lived spin magnetization and coherent oscillatory micromotions, persisting over timescales exceeding the interaction-limited coherence time ($T_2$) by more than an order of magnitude. Leveraging these unconventional dynamics, we develop a dynamical-freezing-enhanced ac magnetometry that extends optimal sensing times far beyond $T_2$, outperforming conventional dynamical decoupling magnetometry with a 4.3 dB sensitivity enhancement. Our results not only provide clear experimental observation of dynamical freezing -- a peculiar mechanism defying thermalization through emergent conservation laws -- but also establish a robust control method generally applicable to diverse physical platforms, with broad implications in quantum metrology and beyond.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.22982 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. a, the applied field is synchronized with, and thus recti￾fied by, the π-pulse train. As the driving detuning in the mod￾ified sequence is always positive, the rectified ac field intro￾duces additional detuning to the Floquet driving system. We characterize this method and compare its sensing performance with conventional ac magnetometry using a PDD sequence (middle-right panel in Fig. 3a). Our experimental results … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Rigol, V

    M. Rigol, V . Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum systems, Nature 452, 854 (2008)

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Nandkishore and D

    R. Nandkishore and D. A. Huse, Many-body localization and thermalization in quantum statistical mechanics, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 6, 15 (2015)

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    2 a shows the temporal evolution of ⟨ ˆSµ⟩ (µ ∈ {x, y, z}) for the first freezing point (see Extended Data Fig

    Fig. 2 a shows the temporal evolution of ⟨ ˆSµ⟩ (µ ∈ {x, y, z}) for the first freezing point (see Extended Data Fig. 2 for results at the second freezing point). From this figure, the mean value of ⟨ ˆSz⟩ maintains finite for a long time due to the emergent U (1) conservation law, whereas those for ⟨ ˆSx⟩ and ⟨ ˆSy⟩ decay to zero rapidly due to the lack o...

    work page

  4. [4]

    D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Collo- quium: Many-body localization, thermalization, and entangle- ment, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 021001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a review, Rep

    M. Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 054001 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Serbyn, D

    M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papi ´c, Quantum many-body scars and weak breaking of ergodicity, Nat. Phys. 17, 675 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    M. P. Zaletel, M. Lukin, C. Monroe, C. Nayak, F. Wilczek, and N. Y . Yao, Colloquium: Quantum and classical discrete time crystals, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 031001 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Lazarides, A

    A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, Periodic thermodynam- ics of isolated quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 150401 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    Lazarides, A

    A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, Equilibrium states of generic quantum systems subject to periodic driving, Phys. Rev. E 90, 012110 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    D’Alessio and M

    L. D’Alessio and M. Rigol, Long-time behavior of isolated pe- riodically driven interacting lattice systems, Phys. Rev. X 4, 041048 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    Sutherland, Beautiful models: 70 years of exactly solved quantum many-body problems (World Scientific, 2004)

    B. Sutherland, Beautiful models: 70 years of exactly solved quantum many-body problems (World Scientific, 2004)

    2004

  4. [12]

    Ponte, Z

    P. Ponte, Z. Papi ´c, F. Huveneers, and D. A. Abanin, Many- body localization in periodically driven systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 140401 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    Lazarides, A

    A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, Fate of many-body lo- calization under periodic driving, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 030402 (2015)

    2015

  6. [14]

    P. Sala, T. Rakovszky, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Pollmann, Ergodicity breaking arising from Hilbert space fragmentation in dipole-conserving hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. X 10, 011047 (2020)

    2020

  7. [15]

    Adler, D

    D. Adler, D. Wei, M. Will, K. Srakaew, S. Agrawal, P. Weckesser, R. Moessner, F. Pollmann, I. Bloch, and J. Zei- her, Observation of Hilbert space fragmentation and fractonic excitations in 2D, Nature 636, 80 (2024)

    2024

  8. [16]

    Haldar, D

    A. Haldar, D. Sen, R. Moessner, and A. Das, Dynamical freez- ing and scar points in strongly driven Floquet matter: Reso- nance vs emergent conservation laws, Phys. Rev. X11, 021008 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Haldar, A

    A. Haldar, A. Das, S. Chaudhuri, L. Staszewski, A. Wietek, F. Pollmann, R. Moessner, and A. Das, Dynamical freezing in the thermodynamic limit: the strongly driven ensemble, arXiv:2410.11050 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    H. Guo, R. Mukherjee, and D. Chowdhury, Dynamical freez- ing in exactly solvable models of driven chaotic quantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 226501 (2025)

    2025

  11. [19]

    Mukherjee, H

    R. Mukherjee, H. Guo, and D. Chowdhury, Floquet- thermalization via instantons near dynamical freezing, arXiv:2412.10498 (2024)

    2024

  12. [20]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed sys- tem, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991)

    1991

  13. [21]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994)

    1994

  14. [22]

    Polkovnikov, K

    A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Vengalattore, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interacting quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 863 (2011)

    2011

  15. [23]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Quantum many-body systems out of equilibrium, Nat. Phys. 11, 124 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    Hayden and J

    P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: quantum in- formation in random subsystems, J. High Energy Phys. 2007 (09), 120

    2007

  17. [25]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Omran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner,et al., Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature 551, 579 (2017)

    2017

  18. [26]

    Bluvstein, A

    D. Bluvstein, A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, A. A. Michailidis, N. Maskara, W. W. Ho, et al., Controlling quantum many-body dynamics in driven rydberg atom arrays, Science 371, 1355 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´c, Weak ergodicity breaking from quantum many-body scars, Nat. Phys. 14, 745 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    Khemani, A

    V . Khemani, A. Lazarides, R. Moessner, and S. L. Sondhi, Phase structure of driven quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 250401 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    D. V . Else, B. Bauer, and C. Nayak, Floquet time crystals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 090402 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    N. Y . Yao, A. C. Potter, I.-D. Potirniche, and A. Vishwanath, Discrete time crystals: Rigidity, criticality, and realizations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 030401 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    Y . Guo, S. Dhar, A. Yang, Z. Chen, H. Yao, M. Horvath, L. Ying, M. Landini, and H.-C. N ¨agerl, Observation of many- body dynamical localization, arXiv:2312.13880 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    D. A. Abanin, W. De Roeck, and F. Huveneers, Exponentially slow heating in periodically driven many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 256803 (2015)

    2015

  25. [33]

    Kuwahara, T

    T. Kuwahara, T. Mori, and K. Saito, Floquet–magnus theory and generic transient dynamics in periodically driven many- body quantum systems, Ann. Phys. 367, 96 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    Abanin, W

    D. Abanin, W. De Roeck, W. W. Ho, and F. Huveneers, A rig- orous theory of many-body prethermalization for periodically driven and closed quantum systems, Commun. Math. Phys. 354, 809 (2017)

    2017

  27. [35]

    D. V . Else, B. Bauer, and C. Nayak, Prethermal phases of matter protected by time-translation symmetry, Phys. Rev. X7, 011026 (2017)

    2017

  28. [36]

    D. V . Else, W. W. Ho, and P. T. Dumitrescu, Long-lived inter- acting phases of matter protected by multiple time-translation symmetries in quasiperiodically driven systems, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021032 (2020)

    2020

  29. [37]

    D. J. Luitz, R. Moessner, S. L. Sondhi, and V . Khemani, Prethermalization without temperature, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021046 (2020). 8

    2020

  30. [38]

    Schirhagl, K

    R. Schirhagl, K. Chang, M. Loretz, and C. L. Degen, Nitrogen- vacancy centers in diamond: nanoscale sensors for physics and biology, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem.65, 83 (2014)

    2014

  31. [39]

    Casola, T

    F. Casola, T. Van Der Sar, and A. Yacoby, Probing condensed matter physics with magnetometry based on nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamond, Nat. Rev. Mater.3, 17088 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Rovny, S

    J. Rovny, S. Gopalakrishnan, A. C. B. Jayich, P. Maletinsky, E. Demler, and N. P. de Leon, Nanoscale diamond quantum sensors for many-body physics, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 753 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Aslam, H

    N. Aslam, H. Zhou, E. K. Urbach, M. J. Turner, R. L. Walsworth, M. D. Lukin, and H. Park, Quantum sensors for biomedical applications, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 157 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    J. Du, F. Shi, X. Kong, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, Single- molecule scale magnetic resonance spectroscopy using quan- tum diamond sensors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 025001 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    M. W. Doherty, N. B. Manson, P. Delaney, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, and L. C. Hollenberg, The nitrogen-vacancy colour centre in diamond, Phys. Rep. 528, 1 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    De Lange, Z.-H

    G. De Lange, Z.-H. Wang, D. Riste, V . Dobrovitski, and R. Hanson, Universal dynamical decoupling of a single solid- state spin from a spin bath, Science 330, 60 (2010)

    2010

  37. [45]

    Bukov, L

    M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Universal high- frequency behavior of periodically driven systems: from dy- namical stabilization to Floquet engineering, Adv. Phys. 64, 139 (2015)

    2015

  38. [46]

    Schachenmayer, A

    J. Schachenmayer, A. Pikovski, and A. M. Rey, Many-body quantum spin dynamics with Monte Carlo trajectories on a dis- crete phase space, Phys. Rev. X 5, 011022 (2015)

    2015

  39. [47]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 035002 (2017)

    2017

  40. [48]

    L. M. Pham, N. Bar-Gill, C. Belthangady, D. Le Sage, P. Cap- pellaro, M. D. Lukin, A. Yacoby, and R. L. Walsworth, En- hanced solid-state multispin metrology using dynamical decou- pling, Phys. Rev. B 86, 045214 (2012)

    2012

  41. [49]

    N. Zhao, J. Honert, B. Schmid, M. Klas, J. Isoya, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, F. Jelezko, R.-B. Liu, H. Fedder, et al. , Sensing single remote nuclear spins, Nat. Nanotechnol. 7, 657 (2012)

    2012

  42. [50]

    Zhang, W

    X. Zhang, W. Jiang, J. Deng, K. Wang, J. Chen, P. Zhang, W. Ren, H. Dong, S. Xu, Y . Gao,et al., Digital quantum simula- tion of floquet symmetry-protected topological phases, Nature 607, 468 (2022)

    2022

  43. [51]

    P. T. Dumitrescu, J. G. Bohnet, J. P. Gaebler, A. Hankin, D. Hayes, A. Kumar, B. Neyenhuis, R. Vasseur, and A. C. Potter, Dynamical topological phase realized in a trapped-ion quantum simulator, Nature 607, 463 (2022)

    2022

  44. [52]

    J. F. Barry, J. M. Schloss, E. Bauch, M. J. Turner, C. A. Hart, L. M. Pham, and R. L. Walsworth, Sensitivity optimization for NV-diamond magnetometry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 015004 (2020). Methods Micromotion dynamics By applying the Floquet-Magnus expansion [44] to the Hamiltoni...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.