Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Fluctuations and optimal control in a Floquet Quantum Thermal Transistor

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Shaping the drive boosts quantum thermal transistor gain.

desk verdict Competent FCS extension of the group's Floquet transistor, but the pi-flip harmonic truncation is uncontrolled and the CRAB results are not reproducible. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.16920 v1 pith:PSKNVCXN submitted 2024-12-22 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech

Samir Das , Shishira Mahunta , Nikhil Gupt , Victor Mukherjee , Arnab Ghosh This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords quantumthermaltransistorfullcountingstatisticsFloquetmasterequationFanofactoroptimalcontrolCRABheatcurrentfluctuationsthree-terminaldevice
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

The paper studies heat currents and their fluctuations in a three-terminal quantum thermal transistor whose base qubit frequency is modulated periodically. Using full counting statistics on a Floquet master equation, it derives the average currents, current variances, and Fano factors for sinusoidal and pi-flip driving. It finds that the base current's variance is much smaller than the emitter's or collector's, while its Fano factor is larger, and that CRAB-optimized modulation can substantially increase the transistor's amplification. Optimizing instead for low emitter noise forces the base current to grow, revealing a trade-off between precision and the small control current that transistor operation requires.

What carries the argument

The central object is the counting-field Floquet Liouvillian $\mathcal{L}^{\chi}$, a 4×4 matrix whose largest eigenvalue gives the cumulant generating function in the long-time limit. Derivatives of that eigenvalue with respect to the counting fields $\chi_{\alpha}$ yield the average heat current $\langle J_{\alpha}\rangle$ and its variance, and hence the Fano factor $F_{\alpha}=\mathrm{Var}(J_{\alpha})/\langle J_{\alpha}\rangle$. The transistor action is carried by the dynamical amplification factors $\beta_{\pm}=\partial\langle J_{C,E}\rangle/\partial\langle J_{B}\rangle$, which measure how much an emitter or collector current changes per unit change in the base current. The Floquet drive enters through the weights $P_q$ of the harmonics of the base frequency modulation: sinusoidal driving keeps $q=0,\pm 1$, while pi-flip driving has $P_0=0$ and $P_{\pm1}=(2/\pi)^2$.

What would settle it

Recompute the amplification factors and Fano factors keeping the higher Floquet harmonics $q=\pm 3,\pm 5,\ldots$ in the base transition rates for pi-flip modulation; if the predictions move by more than the width of the paper's plotted curves, the first-harmonic truncation is not safe. An experimental measurement of the base-current Fano factor in a driven superconducting-qubit thermal transistor, finding $F_B$ near unity rather than the predicted $F_B\geq 2$, would also count against the central claims.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in a Floquet quantum thermal transistor, periodic modulation of the base qubit frequency changes the fluctuation structure of the three heat currents: the base current carries the least variance but the largest Fano factor, while the emitter and collector currents show the reverse. Working from a counting-field Floquet master equation reduced to a 4-state Liouvillian, the authors derive analytic expressions for the average currents, the dynamical amplification factors β+ and β−, and the Fano factors. They then apply the CRAB optimal-control protocol to the modulation waveform and report that the amplification can be significantly enhanced over both sinusoidal and pi-flip driving across a wide range of base temperatures. Attempts to minimize the emitter Fano factor, however, drive the base current up, which undermines the small-base-current condition that defines transistor action; the paper reads this as a trade-off between precision and base-current amplitude.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative predictions assume that only the first two Floquet harmonics of the base-frequency modulation contribute to the transition rates; for pi-flip driving the retained harmonics carry only about 81% of the modulation weight, and the neglected higher odd harmonics are dropped without an error estimate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Periodic modulation allows thermal transistor action even as the base bath temperature tends to zero, a regime where the unmodulated device fails to operate as a heat modulator.
  • CRAB-optimized waveforms yield larger amplification factors $\beta_+$ than either sinusoidal or pi-flip driving over a wide range of base temperatures, with the largest gain appearing near $0.1 \lesssim T_B/\Delta \lesssim 0.12$.
  • Pi-flip modulation gives higher amplification than sinusoidal modulation at low base temperature, although its base current noise amplitude is also higher in that regime.
  • Minimizing the emitter Fano factor through optimal control raises the mean base current, so precision and a small control current cannot be optimized simultaneously.
  • The expressions for $\beta_\pm$ show that the amplification grows roughly as $e^{\hbar\Delta/k_B T_E}$, so the transistor effect is exponentially sensitive to the emitter temperature at fixed base and collector temperatures.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the first-harmonic truncation is quantitatively accurate, the same counting-field machinery could optimize other performance metrics, such as the cooling power of a refrigerator mode or the simultaneous precision of multiple terminal currents.
  • The observed trade-off between emitter Fano factor and base current hints at a thermodynamic-uncertainty-type bound linking noise, amplification, and the control power supplied by the drive; proving such a bound would connect these numerics to general fluctuation theorems.
  • Because two-point measurement protocols have already been used in driven qubit experiments, the predicted hierarchy (base Fano factor around 2, emitter and collector near 1) is directly testable with current superconducting-qubit or NV-center setups.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies a three-qubit Floquet quantum thermal transistor using full counting statistics (FCS). Starting from a Born-Markov Floquet master equation, the authors derive a 4x4 counting-field Liouvillian, compute mean currents, variances, Fano factors, and dynamical amplification factors for sinusoidal and pi-flip modulations of the base qubit frequency. They then apply CRAB optimal control to enhance the amplification and to minimize the emitter Fano factor, reporting a trade-off between reduced fluctuations and a large base current. The central qualitative claims are that the base current has a much smaller variance than the emitter and collector currents while having a larger Fano factor, and that optimal control can significantly improve the transistor amplification.

Significance. The FCS formalism and the largest-eigenvalue cumulant method used here are standard and internally consistent, and the manuscript provides useful closed-form expressions in Appendix C that go beyond a purely numerical study. The combination of full counting statistics with CRAB optimal control for a thermal transistor is a timely idea, and the reported trade-off between precision and base current is interesting. However, the quantitative pi-flip results, which are a central part of the paper, rest on an unjustified truncation of the Floquet harmonic series. The Fano-factor sign issue also needs to be resolved. If the harmonic-truncation problem can be repaired with a proper error estimate or a physical cutoff, the paper would be a solid contribution; in its current form the main quantitative claims are not fully supported.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III.A, Eq. (9) and Appendix B, Eq. (B4)] The restriction to q = 0, ±1 for the high-frequency base transitions and to q' = ±1 for the low-frequency base transitions is not justified for pi-flip modulation. The pi-flip Fourier weights are P_{±1} = (2/pi)^2, P_{±3} = 4/(9 pi^2), and so on, so the retained modes have total weight 8/pi^2 ~ 0.81 rather than 1, and the statement that the drive results in only two primary harmonics is incorrect. More importantly, the low-frequency base rate in Eq. (B4) contains a sum over q' of q' P_{q'} nu [n_B(q' nu) - n_B(-q' nu)]. In the TB -> 0 limit this behaves as -nu sum_{odd q'} q' P_{q'}, which diverges logarithmically because P_{q'} ~ 1/q'^2; already the q' = ±3 terms contribute one-third as much as q' = ±1. Consequently the pi-flip base current variance, the Fano factors in Fig. 3(b), and the pi-flip and CRAB amplification results in Fig. 4 are finite only because of the truncation. The authors should either include the full harmonic sum up to a physical ultraviolet cutoff or provide a quantitative error estimate showing that the omitted odd harmonics are negligible.
  2. [Section IV.C, Eq. (27)] The Fano factor is defined as Var(J_alpha)/<J_alpha> using signed currents. Since the collector current is negative (<J_C> < 0 in Eq. (19)), this definition yields a negative Fano factor for the collector, which is inconsistent with the reported FE/C ~ 1 and with the positive lower bound in Eq. (28). The authors should define the Fano factor using |<J_alpha>| in the denominator, or otherwise explicitly discuss the sign convention. As written, the Fano-factor plots and the comparison with Eq. (28) are not interpretable.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] The word 'cumalants' should be 'cumulants'.
  2. [Section III.A, after Eq. (20)] The sentence 'In the limit of weak modulation (|lambda| << 1), one can the analysis to the first two harmonics' is missing a verb and should be rephrased, for example as 'one can restrict the analysis to the first two harmonics.'
  3. [Section III.A, around Eq. (23)] The phrase 'which results in only two primary harmonics q = ±1, with [38].' is incomplete; the citation should be integrated into the sentence.
  4. [Appendix C, Eqs. (C18)-(C20)] The typeset formulas for the Fano factors appear garbled, with unbalanced parentheses and unclear notation such as 'ℏ∆− 1'. Please re-check these expressions and ensure they are readable and dimensionally consistent.
  5. [Section V] The CRAB optimization section would benefit from specifying the number of Fourier harmonics N, the initial guesses for {a_n, b_n}, and the convergence criteria, so that the optimization results are reproducible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: fluctuation and CRAB results are computed from an explicit counting-field Liouvillian with no fitted target data or self-citation chain forcing the outputs.

full rationale

Walked the derivation chain. The central objects—mean currents (Eqs. C6–C8), variances and Fano factors (Eqs. C18–C20), and CRAB-optimized amplification (Sec. V)—are obtained from the counting-field Liouvillian Eq. (9) via the standard FCS relation Eq. (12) and the characteristic polynomial Eq. (13). No parameter in these formulas is fitted to the plotted variances or Fano factors; the only inputs are the physical parameters (temperatures, detuning, modulation amplitude and frequency) and the published P_q coefficients. The paper's use of its own prior work [11] supplies the model Hamiltonian and the degenerate four-level reduction; that is published, externally checkable scaffolding rather than a restatement of the target fluctuation or control claims. Ref. [31] is cited for the CRAB procedure, an established optimization method, and Ref. [52] for an independent Fano-factor bound; neither is used to force the reported effects. The potential concern about pi-flip harmonics (dropping q=±3, ±5, ... after retaining P_0=0 and P_±1=(2/pi)^2) is an approximation-accuracy issue, not circularity: the paper explicitly states the truncation, and the missing weight does not create an identity between the input modulation coefficients and the output Fano factors. The optimization-based enhancement of beta+ is by construction a maximization of beta+, but the paper openly defines the cost function as beta+, so this is a standard optimal-control statement, not a hidden fit presented as a prediction. No self-definitional, fitted-input, self-citation-chain, or renaming step reduces the derivation to its inputs. Verdict: no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results rest on a standard weak-coupling Floquet master equation plus several modeling choices inherited from the authors' prior papers: equal Ohmic baths, a degenerate four-state manifold, and a truncated harmonic expansion. None of these are derived in this paper. The most fragile is the Floquet harmonic truncation, because it directly affects the base-bath rates and hence the currents, Fano factors, and optimal-control results.

free parameters (3)
  • Sinusoidal modulation amplitude lambda = 0.8 in Figs. 2-3
    Chosen by hand for the plots. The harmonic weights P0=1-lambda^2/2, P±1=lambda^2/4 assume |lambda| << 1, but lambda=0.8 is not small, so the validity of the weak-modulation expansion is questionable.
  • CRAB Fourier coefficients {a_n,b_n} and mu = Not reported (optimized numerically)
    The optimal pulses in Figs. 4-6 are obtained by numerical optimization, but the resulting coefficients, the number of harmonics N, and the exact constraints are not given, so the enhancement claim cannot be independently reproduced.
  • System-bath coupling strength kappa = Implicitly set to one in natural units
    The rates in Eq. (9) are expressed in units of Delta with no explicit kappa, so the overall coupling strength is fixed to 1. This scale cancels in the Fano factor and amplification, but the choice is not stated.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Born-Markov and secular approximations are valid for the driven three-qubit system.
    Used in Section III.A to obtain the counting-field Lindblad master equation (Eqs. 4-6). The paper itself notes that the approximation breaks down as TB approaches TE (Fig. 2 caption).
  • ad hoc to paper Only the first two Floquet harmonics (q=0,±1) need to be kept in the base transition rates.
    Stated just before Eq. (9). For pi-flip modulation the retained weights sum to about 0.81, so this truncation is not a controlled approximation without an error estimate.
  • domain assumption Baths are Ohmic with identical coupling constant G0(omega)=kappa*omega for all three reservoirs.
    Section III.A. This is a modeling convenience, not a derived result, and it affects the quantitative rates.
  • ad hoc to paper The energy degeneracies omega_E=omega_C=omega_CE=0 and Delta >> omega_B reduce the 8-level system to a 4-level manifold.
    Section III.A after Eq. (8). This reduction is inherited from the prior Floquet transistor paper [11] and is essential for the closed 4x4 Liouvillian.
  • standard math The long-time cumulant generating function is dominated by the largest eigenvalue of L_chi, so C_chi(t) is approximately lambda_chi t.
    Eq. (11). This is a standard FCS result, but the eigenvalue gap that justifies it is not checked.
  • domain assumption The initial state is a product state rho_S(0) tensor rho_R with thermal reservoirs.
    Section III.A. This is needed for the two-point measurement generating function and the counting-field master equation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fluctuations and optimal control in a Floquet Quantum Thermal Transistor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PSKNVCXN

@misc{pith2026241216920,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fluctuations and optimal control in a Floquet Quantum Thermal Transistor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PSKNVCXN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.16920}
}
read the original abstract

We use Full Counting Statistics to study fluctuations and optimal control in a three-terminal Floquet quantum thermal transistor. We model the setup using three qubits (termed as the emitter, collector and base) coupled to three thermal baths. As shown in Phys. Rev. E 106, 024110 (2022), one can achieve significant change in the emitter and collector currents through a small change in the base current, thereby achieving a thermal transistor operation. Using sinusoidal and pi-flip modulations of the base qubit frequency, we show that the variance of the base current is much less compared to those of the emitter and collector currents, while the opposite is true in case of the Fano factor. We then apply optimal control through the Chopped Random Basis optimization protocol, in order to significantly enhance the amplification obtained in the transistor. In contrast, a reduction in the Fano factor of the setup through optimal control is associated with a large base current, thereby suggesting a trade-off between precision and base current. We expect our results will be relevant for developing heat modulation devices in near-term quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.16920 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of Floquet quantum thermal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure showing current variance Var(J) as a function of (a) TB/∆ for the unmodulated case, (b) ν/∆ under sinusoidal and pi-flip modulation for finite temperatures TB = 0.118∆ and λ = 0.8, and (c) ν/∆ for sinusoidal (S) and pi (π)-modulation for TB → 0 and λ = 0.8. Here ωC = ω0 = ωE = 0, ωEC = 0,∆ = 1, ωEB = ωBC = ∆, TE = 0.2∆, and TC = 0.02∆. Here I represents the identity matrix. Upon expanding the above equation i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) The plot shows the Fano factor as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Variation of β+ corresponding to the optimal mod￾ulations (Oβ+ ) , sinusoidal modulation (Sβ+ ) and the pi-flip modulation (Πβ+ ) with TB ∆ . The parameters used are the fol￾lowing: ∆ = 1, TE = 0.2∆, TC = 0.02∆, ν = 0.001, ω0 = 0. CRAB modulation Eq. (29) significantly…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The main plot shows the variation of the opti [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (a) Average heat currents plot against TB/∆ for the unmodulated case. Parameter are ωC = ω0 = ωE = 0, ωEC = 0, ωEB = ωBC = ∆, ∆ = 1, TE = 0.2∆, and TC = 0.02∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (a)The plot shows β+ and β− against TB/∆ for the unmodulated scenario. Parameters include ωC = ω0 = ωE = 0, ωEC = 0,∆ = 1, ωEB = ωBC = ∆, TE = 0.2∆, and TC = 0.02∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Fluctuation in energy extraction from quantum batteries: How open should the system be to control it?

    quant-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    For fixed quantum batteries, random unitary, CPTP, and general quantum maps extract the same average energy, but fluctuations vanish only in a Cesàro limit over auxiliary dimensions; finite-ancilla scalings are 1/n (C...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [52]

    Segal, Current fluctuations in quantum absorption re- frigerators, Phys

    D. Segal, Current fluctuations in quantum absorption re- frigerators, Phys. Rev. E97, 052145 (2018)

    work page 2018

  2. [1]

    (29), the dynamical amplifi- cation β+ ≈ −β− [Eq.(25)] becomes a function of the parameters an,bn

    Optimization method: For ω(t) given by Eq. (29), the dynamical amplifi- cation β+ ≈ −β− [Eq.(25)] becomes a function of the parameters an,bn. We numerically optimize the set of coefficients{an,bn} such thatβ+ in maximized. As seen in Fig. 4, the CRAB optimization protocol re- sults in significantly higher amplifications, as compared to those obtained thro...

    work page 2021

  3. [2]

    = 1, andQ =−4∆ (see Eq. (9)). This yields [11] ⟨JE⟩≃ ℏ∆2 Y2 (kBTB ℏ∆ )e− ℏ∆ kBTE, (C10) ⟨JB⟩≃ ℏ∆2 Y2 (kBTB ℏ∆ )(3e− 2ℏ∆ kBTB−e− 2ℏ∆ kBTE ), (C11) ⟨JC⟩≃− ℏ∆2 Y2 (kBTB ℏ∆ )e− ℏ∆ kBTE, (C12) whereY2 = 1 + (kBTB ℏ∆ )− (kBTB ℏ∆ )2. The average heat currents result for sinusoidal and pi-modulation are shown in Fig. 7(b) forTB = 0.118∆. 11 E B C E B C E B C Figu...

    work page

  4. [3]

    L. M. Cangemi, C. Bhadra, and A. Levy, Quantum en- gines and refrigerators, Physics Reports1087, 1 (2024), quantum engines and refrigerators

    2024

  5. [4]

    Bhattacharjee and A

    S. Bhattacharjee and A. Dutta, Quantum thermal ma- chines and batteries, The European Physical Journal B 94, 239 (2021)

    2021

  6. [5]

    Joulain, J

    K. Joulain, J. Drevillon, Y. Ezzahri, and J. Ordonez- Miranda, Quantum thermal transistor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 200601 (2016)

    work page 2016

  7. [6]

    M. N. Bera, A. Riera, M. Lewenstein, and A. Winter, Generalized laws of thermodynamics in the presence of correlations, Nature Communications8, 2180 (2017)

    2017

  8. [7]

    Saryal, M

    S. Saryal, M. Gerry, I. Khait, D. Segal, and B. K. Agar- walla, Universal bounds on fluctuations in continuous thermal machines, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 190603 (2021)

    2021

Show all 64 references
  1. [8]

    H. E. D. Scovil and E. O. Schulz-DuBois, Three-level masers as heat engines, Phys. Rev. Lett.2, 262 (1959)

    1959

  2. [9]

    M. Qin, H. Z. Shen, X. L. Zhao, and X. X. Yi, Effects of system-bath coupling on a photosynthetic heat engine: 13 A polaron master-equation approach, Phys. Rev. A96, 012125 (2017)

    2017

  3. [10]

    Ghosh, D

    A. Ghosh, D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, W. Niedenzu, A. I. Lvovsky, I. Mazets, M. O. Scully, and G. Kurizki, Two- level masers as heat-to-work converters, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences115, 9941 (2018)

    2018

  4. [11]

    S. Lee, M. Ha, J.-M. Park, and H. Jeong, Finite-time quantum otto engine: Surpassing the quasistatic effi- ciency due to friction, Phys. Rev. E101, 022127 (2020)

    2020

  5. [12]

    Bhandari and A

    B. Bhandari and A. N. Jordan, Minimal two-body quan- tum absorption refrigerator, Phys. Rev. B104, 075442 (2021)

    2021

  6. [13]

    Ghosh, Floquet quantum thermal transistor, Phys

    N.Gupt, S.Bhattacharyya, B.Das, S.Datta, V.Mukher- jee, and A. Ghosh, Floquet quantum thermal transistor, Phys. Rev. E106, 024110 (2022)

    2022

  7. [14]

    Ghosh, A

    R. Ghosh, A. Ghoshal, and U. Sen, Quantum thermal transistors: Operation characteristics in steady state ver- sus transient regimes, Phys. Rev. A103, 052613 (2021)

    2021

  8. [15]

    U. N. Ekanayake, S. D. Gunapala, and M. Premaratne, Improving quantum thermal transistors through feedback-controlled baths, APL Quantum 1, 036126 (2024)

    2024

  9. [16]

    R. T. Wijesekara, S. D. Gunapala, M. I. Stockman, and M. Premaratne, Optically controlled quantum thermal gate, Phys. Rev. B101, 245402 (2020)

    2020

  10. [17]

    Sothmann, F

    B. Sothmann, F. Giazotto, and E. M. Hankiewicz, High- efficiency thermal switch based on topological josephson junctions, New Journal of Physics19, 023056 (2017)

    2017

  11. [18]

    A. H. A. Malavazi, B. Ahmadi, P. Mazurek, and A. Man- darino, Detuning effects for heat-current control in quan- tum thermal devices, Phys. Rev. E109, 064146 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    Sánchez, H

    R. Sánchez, H. Thierschmann, and L. W. Molenkamp, All-thermal transistor based on stochastic switching, Phys. Rev. B95, 241401 (2017)

    2017

  13. [20]

    Karg ı, M

    C. Karg ı, M. T. Naseem, T. c. v. Opatrný, O. E. Müste- caplıoğlu, and G. Kurizki, Quantum optical two-atom thermal diode, Phys. Rev. E99, 042121 (2019)

    2019

  14. [21]

    J. Lu, R. Wang, J. Ren, M. Kulkarni, and J.-H. Jiang, Quantum-dot circuit-qed thermoelectric diodes and tran- sistors, Phys. Rev. B99, 035129 (2019)

    2019

  15. [22]

    Ghosh, N

    S. Ghosh, N. Gupt, and A. Ghosh, Universal behavior of the coulomb-coupled fermionic thermal diode, Entropy 24, 10.3390/e24121810 (2022)

    2022 doi

  16. [23]

    Ghosh, C

    A. Ghosh, C. L. Latune, L. Davidovich, and G. Kur- izki, Catalysis of heat-to-work conversion in quantum machines, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences 114, 12156 (2017)

    2017

  17. [24]

    Ghosh, V

    A. Ghosh, V. Mukherjee, W. Niedenzu, and G. Kurizki, Are quantum thermodynamic machines better than their classical counterparts?, The European Physical Journal Special Topics227, 2043 (2019)

    2019

  18. [25]

    N. M. Myers, O. Abah, and S. Deffner, Quantum thermo- dynamic devices: From theoretical proposals to experi- mental reality, AVS Quantum Science4, 027101 (2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    Mandel, Sub-poissonian photon statistics in resonance fluorescence, Opt

    L. Mandel, Sub-poissonian photon statistics in resonance fluorescence, Opt. Lett.4, 205 (1979)

    1979

  20. [27]

    L. S. Levitov, H. Lee, and G. B. Lesovik, Electron count- ing statistics and coherent states of electric current, Jour- nal of Mathematical Physics37, 4845 (1996)

    1996

  21. [28]

    Luo, Noise suppression of transport through double quantum dots by feedback control, Phys

    J.Xu, S.Wang, J.Wu, Y.Yan, J.Hu, G.Engelhardt,and J. Luo, Noise suppression of transport through double quantum dots by feedback control, Phys. Rev. B107, 125113 (2023)

    2023

  22. [29]

    Bouton, J

    Q. Bouton, J. Nettersheim, S. Burgardt, D. Adam, E. Lutz, and A. Widera, A quantum heat engine driven by atomic collisions, Nature Communications12, 2063 (2021)

    2021

  23. [30]

    Restrepo, J

    S. Restrepo, J. Cerrillo, P. Strasberg, and G. Schaller, From quantum heat engines to laser cooling: Floquet theory beyond the born–markov approximation, New J. Phys. 20, 053063 (2018)

    2018

  24. [31]

    Engelhardt, J

    G. Engelhardt, J. Luo, V. M. Bastidas, and G. Platero, Photon-resolved floquet theory. i. full counting statistics of the driving field in floquet systems, Phys. Rev. A110, 063707 (2024)

    2024

  25. [32]

    T. D. Honeychurch and D. S. Kosov, Full counting statis- tics for electron transport in periodically driven quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B102, 195409 (2020)

    2020

  26. [33]

    A. Das, S. Mahunta, B. K. Agarwalla, and V. Mukher- jee, Precision bound and optimal control in periodically modulated continuous quantum thermal machines, Phys. Rev. E108, 014137 (2023)

    2023

  27. [34]

    L. S. Levitov and G. B. Lesovik, Charge distribution in quantum shot noise, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics Letters58, 230 (1993)

    1993

  28. [35]

    Cerrillo, M

    J. Cerrillo, M. Buser, and T. Brandes, Nonequilibrium quantum transport coefficients and transient dynamics of full counting statistics in the strong-coupling and non- markovian regimes, Phys. Rev. B94, 214308 (2016)

    2016

  29. [36]

    Zemach, A

    I. Zemach, A. Erpenbeck, E. Gull, and G. Cohen, Nonequilibrium steady state full counting statistics in the noncrossing approximation, The Journal of Chemi- cal Physics161, 164113 (2024)

    2024

  30. [37]

    Y. Ding, Y. Yan, J. Hu, G. Engelhardt, and J. Luo, Anomalous conditional counting statistics in an electron- spin-resonance quantum dot measured by a quantum point contact, Phys. Rev. B109, 115136 (2024)

    2024

  31. [38]

    Flindt, C

    C. Flindt, C. Fricke, F. Hohls, T. Novotný, K. Netočný, T. Brandes, and R. J. Haug, Universal oscillations in counting statistics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.106, 10116 (2009)

    2009

  32. [39]

    Dubost, M

    B. Dubost, M. Koschorreck, M. Napolitano, N. Behbood, R. J. Sewell, and M. W. Mitchell, Efficient quantification of non-gaussian spin distributions, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 183602 (2012)

    2012

  33. [40]

    Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, R

    D. Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, R. Alicki, and G. Kurizki, Min- imal universal quantum heat machine, Phys. Rev. E87, 012140 (2013)

    2013

  34. [41]

    P.Doria, T.Calarco,andS.Montangero,Optimalcontrol technique for many-body quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 190501 (2011)

    2011

  35. [42]

    Caneva, T

    T. Caneva, T. Calarco, and S. Montangero, Chopped random-basis quantum optimization, Phys. Rev. A84, 022326 (2011)

    2011

  36. [43]

    Shahmoon and G

    E. Shahmoon and G. Kurizki, Engineering a thermal squeezed reservoir by energy-level modulation, Phys. Rev. A87, 013841 (2013)

    2013

  37. [44]

    Talkner, E

    P. Talkner, E. Lutz, and P. Hänggi, Fluctuation theo- rems: Workisnotanobservable,Phys.Rev.E 75,050102 (2007)

    2007

  38. [45]

    Strasberg, Quantum Stochastic Thermodynamics: Foundations and Selected Applications(Oxford Univer- sity Press, 2021)

    P. Strasberg, Quantum Stochastic Thermodynamics: Foundations and Selected Applications(Oxford Univer- sity Press, 2021)

    2021

  39. [46]

    Esposito, U

    M. Esposito, U. Harbola, and S. Mukamel, Nonequilib- rium fluctuations, fluctuation theorems, and counting statistics in quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 1665 (2009). 14

    2009

  40. [47]

    Mukherjee, W

    V. Mukherjee, W. Niedenzu, A. G. Kofman, and G. Kur- izki, Speed and efficiency limits of multilevel incoherent heat engines, Phys. Rev. E94, 062109 (2016)

    2016

  41. [48]

    Y. M. Blanter and M. Büttiker, Shot noise in mesoscopic conductors, Physics Reports336, 1 (2000)

    2000

  42. [49]

    Sornette, Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences, 2nd ed

    D. Sornette, Critical Phenomena in Natural Sciences, 2nd ed. (Springer International Publishing, 2006)

    2006

  43. [50]

    Schaller, Open quantum systems far from equilibrium, in Lecture Notes in Physics(Springer International Pub- lishing, 2014)

    G. Schaller, Open quantum systems far from equilibrium, in Lecture Notes in Physics(Springer International Pub- lishing, 2014)

    2014

  44. [51]

    Prech, P

    K. Prech, P. Johansson, E. Nyholm, G. T. Landi, C. Ver- dozzi, P. Samuelsson, and P. P. Potts, Entanglement and thermokinetic uncertainty relations in coherent meso- scopic transport, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 023155 (2023)

    2023

  45. [53]

    Wagner, P

    T. Wagner, P. Talkner, J. C. Bayer, E. P. Rugerami- gabo, P. Hänggi, and R. J. Haug, Quantum stochastic resonance in an a.c.-driven single-electron quantum dot, Nature Physics15, 330 (2019)

    2019

  46. [54]

    Guarnieri, J

    G. Guarnieri, J. Eisert, and H. J. D. Miller, Generalized linear response theory for the full quantum work statis- tics, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 070405 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    Karimi and J

    B. Karimi and J. P. Pekola, Otto refrigerator based on a superconducting qubit: Classical and quantum perfor- mance, Phys. Rev. B94, 184503 (2016)

    2016

  48. [56]

    J. W. Lim, A. Majumder, R. Mittapally, A.-R. Gutierrez, Y. Luan, E. Meyhofer, and P. Reddy, A nanoscale pho- tonic thermal transistor for sub-second heat flow switch- ing, Nature Communications15, 5584 (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    Ordonez-Miranda, Y

    J. Ordonez-Miranda, Y. Ezzahri, J. Drevillon, and K. Joulain, Dynamical heat transport amplification in a far-field thermal transistor of vo2 excited with a laser of modulated intensity, Journal of Applied Physics119, 203105 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    Ordonez-Miranda, Y

    J. Ordonez-Miranda, Y. Ezzahri, J. A. Tiburcio-Moreno, K. Joulain, and J. Drevillon, Radiative thermal memris- tor, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 025901 (2019)

    2019

  51. [59]

    Castelli, Q

    L. Castelli, Q. Zhu, T. J. Shimokusu, and G. Wehmeyer, A three-terminal magnetic thermal transistor, Nature Communications 14, 393 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    S. Pal, S. Saryal, D. Segal, T. S. Mahesh, and B. K. Agar- walla, Experimental study of the thermodynamic uncer- tainty relation, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 022044 (2020)

    2020

  53. [61]

    Hernández-Gómez, N

    S. Hernández-Gómez, N. Staudenmaier, M. Campisi, and N. Fabbri, Experimental test of fluctuation relations for driven open quantum systems with an nv center, New Journal of Physics23, 065004 (2021)

    2021

  54. [62]

    A. Sood, F. Xiong, S. Chen, H. Wang, D. Selli, J. Zhang, C. J. McClellan, J. Sun, D. Donadio, Y. Cui, E. Pop, and K. E. Goodson, An electrochemical thermal transistor, Nature Communications9, 4510 (2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    Wang and B

    L. Wang and B. Li, Thermal logic gates: Computation with phonons, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 177208 (2007)

    2007

  56. [64]

    Basano, P

    L. Basano, P. Ottonello, and B. Torre, Bunching, an- tibunching, and the poisson limit of bose–einstein pro- cesses at low-degeneracy parameters, Journal of the Op- tical Society of America B22, 1314 (2005)

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.