Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 1 minor 65 references

Entanglement-assisted multiparameter estimation with a solid-state quantum sensor

T0 review · 1 major / 1 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single NV center simultaneously estimates the amplitude, detuning, and phase of a microwave drive, with per-parameter sensitivity scaling as 1/T.

desk verdict Careful sensitivity characterization that overclaims the 'simultaneous estimation' headline. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.14578 v1 pith:Y7XU4LAA submitted 2025-05-20 quant-ph

Takuya Isogawa , Guoqing Wang , Boning Li , Zhiyao Hu , Shunsuke Nishimura , Ayumi Kanamoto , Haidong Yuan , Paola Cappellaro This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords nitrogen-vacancycentermultiparameterquantumestimationBellstatemeasurementsequentialcontrolFisherinformationerrorpropagationRabifrequencysolid-statesensing
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 an experimental demonstration of genuine multiparameter estimation in a solid-state quantum sensor. Using one nitrogen-vacancy center's electron spin as the sensor and its nitrogen nuclear spin as an ancilla, the authors simultaneously estimate the amplitude, detuning, and phase of a real microwave field from a single measurement sequence. The central claim is that, despite always-on hyperfine coupling, imperfect nuclear polarization, and photon-shot-noise-limited ensemble readout, the uncertainty in each of the three parameters improves linearly with interrogation time, $\delta \hat{\theta}_j \propto 1/T$. This matters because it moves multiparameter estimation from ideal circuits and simulated interactions to a practical, widely used sensor, suggesting that one entangled measurement sequence can replace several separate single-parameter measurements.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the sequential control scheme: the target evolution $U_t$ is immediately followed by a control gate $U_c \approx U_t^\dagger$, and this pair is repeated $N$ times, creating an effective bias point where the three parameters can be estimated with linear $T$ scaling. Because the always-on hyperfine interaction $\frac{A}{4}\sigma_e^z\sigma_n^z$ cannot be switched off, the control uses electronic-spin $\pi$ pulses and a phase choice $2\pi\Delta_t T$ to reverse the signs of the interaction and frame-change terms. The other key component is the Bell-state measurement, which uses the nuclear spin's extra $m_I=-1$ level as a classical memory to determine all three outcome populations from ensemble-averaged fluorescence, with a calibrated leakage model $p' = M p$ accounting for laser-induced nuclear-spin transitions.

What would settle it

Measure the reported sensitivities $\delta\Omega_t$, $\delta\Delta_t$, and $\delta\Phi_t$ for repetition counts $N>8$ at fixed $t=30$ ns, or re-extract the Jacobian after independently calibrating finite pulse durations and pulse errors; if the log-log slopes depart from $-1$ or the corrected Jacobian no longer reproduces the measured signals, the linear-scaling claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that a single NV center at room temperature can simultaneously extract three physically meaningful microwave-field parameters—amplitude, detuning, and phase—from one sensing sequence, with each parameter's estimation uncertainty scaling as the inverse of the interrogation time. The authors implement this by entangling the electronic sensor spin with the nitrogen nuclear ancilla spin, applying a sequential control loop that repeats a target evolution followed by an approximate inverse, and completing the sequence with a Bell-state measurement realized through three optical readouts augmented by nuclear-spin shelving. The experimentally measured sensitivities agree with a simulation that includes calibrated state-preparation and measurement errors, and the scaling holds from $N=1$ to $N=8$ repetitions. The work thereby claims to bridge foundational quantum estimation theory and practical solid-state sensing.

Load-bearing premise

The claimed $1/T$ scaling assumes that the control gate $U_c$ exactly reverses the target-plus-hyperfine evolution, which requires ideal instantaneous $\pi$ pulses and exact phase matching $2\pi\Delta_t T$; finite-duration pulses and calibration errors are only approximately compensated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Amplitude, detuning, and phase of a microwave drive can be read out simultaneously from a single measurement sequence, with each uncertainty scaling as $1/T$ in the interrogation time.
  • For a fixed total resource, simultaneous multiparameter estimation with averaged readout yields a total sensitivity figure of merit $6\sigma_0^2/(nT^2)$, better than the $9\sigma_0^2/(nT^2)$ of three separate single-parameter estimations.
  • The same sequential-control plus Bell-measurement recipe can be extended to any three parameters encoded in a sensor-ancilla Hamiltonian, not only microwave drive parameters.
  • When both sensor and ancilla permit single-shot readout, the Bell-state readout overhead becomes comparable to or better than the cost of three separate single-parameter sequences.
  • Classical readout noise, rather than quantum projection noise, sets the optimal operating point, and a suitable rotation of the Bell measurement basis restores the optimal sensitivity at the zero-field point.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same analysis applied to a static vector field should yield simultaneous estimates of $B_x$, $B_y$, and $B_z$ with $1/T$ scaling, since the ideal vector-field model is the theoretical foundation of the protocol.
  • The exact optimal basis rotation derived in the supplementary material predicts a minimal averaged-readout figure of merit of approximately $5.598\,\sigma_0^2/(nT^2)$; an experimental test of this bound would directly check the optimality of the chosen rotation.
  • The paper notes that AC-frequency estimation can reach quadratic scaling in $T$, so combining amplitude and phase estimation with frequency-optimized sequences may expose trade-offs not addressed here.
  • For NV ensembles rather than a single center, the photon-shot-noise statistics and the optimal Bell-basis rotation would likely change, which is a testable extension the paper does not cover.
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

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper reports an NV-center experiment that implements a sequential two-qubit protocol, adapted from the theoretical scheme of Ref. [16], to estimate three parameters of a microwave drive: Rabi amplitude Ω_t, detuning Δ_t, and phase Φ_t. The protocol uses a Bell state of the electronic and nuclear spins, a repeated sensing/control cycle, and a room-temperature averaged fluorescence readout that they call a Bell state measurement. A SPAM model with nuclear polarization P and leakage rates ζ, γ, η is calibrated in separate measurements and then used, with no further free parameters, to simulate the signals and the sensitivity. The reported sensitivity is obtained via error propagation, Σ_θ = J^{-1} Σ_p (J^{-1})^T, with the Jacobian assembled from one-parameter response sweeps, and the paper claims linear sensitivity scaling, δθ_j ∝ 1/T, for all three parameters for N = 1 to 8.

Significance. If the main claims hold, this is a valuable experimental step: it is among the first solid-state demonstrations of a multiparameter estimation protocol in which a sensor qubit and an ancilla are entangled and a multi-outcome measurement provides information about several Hamiltonian parameters from one sequence. The treatment of classical readout noise is a genuine strength: the SPAM parameters are calibrated in separate measurements, the final comparison uses no free parameters, and the model reproduces the N = 0 Bell-state measurement and the N = 1 and N = 8 response curves. The theoretical import of the optimality of Bell states and sequential control from Ref. [16] is legitimate. The main weakness is that the experimental evidence supports a local sensitivity calculation but does not, as presented, demonstrate actual simultaneous estimation of the three parameters from measured data: no estimator is applied to measured (p1, p2, p3) triples with all three parameters unknown, and no empirical covariance of estimates is reported. That gap is central to the abstract's claim.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section IV and Supplementary Section II] The sensitivity analysis takes Σ_p ≈ σ^2 I with σ ≈ 0.02, justified by photon-shot-noise-limited readout. However, the measured covariance matrix of the three signals is not reported. Because the leakage model couples the populations through p' = M p and the three readouts are performed within the same sequence, off-diagonal correlations in Σ_p are not obviously negligible. Since Σ_θ = J^{-1} Σ_p (J^{-1})^T depends directly on Σ_p, reporting the empirical 3x3 covariance of the measured signals (or at least a quantitative bound on the off-diagonal elements) would make the comparison in Fig. 4 self-contained and would strengthen the claim that the diagonal approximation is valid.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and Section III] The abstract says the parameters are the amplitude, detuning, and phase of a microwave drive, which is accurate, but the text also refers to "frequency" and "detuning" interchangeably; please define the relation between Δ_t and the drive frequency explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the reported sensitivities rest on directly measured Jacobian slopes and separately calibrated SPAM parameters, not on fitting the claimed final result.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. The optimal Bell-state probe and Bell measurement for the vector-field model are re-derived in Supplementary Section I: the Bell-basis probabilities p1–p4 are shown to yield FIM = QFIMmax, and the sequential controls U_k = U_A^†(B,t) are shown to saturate the N^2-scaled bound, with only a reference to Ref. [16] for the original optimality statement. The experimental sensitivity analysis proceeds by directly measuring the Jacobian: the text states 'To extract the experimentally determined Jacobian matrix, we sweep the target parameters and measure the resulting signal variations' (Section IV, Fig. 3), and the covariance is computed by Σ_θ = J^{-1} Σ_p (J^{-1})^⊤ with Σ_p ≈ σ^2 I in the photon-shot-noise-dominated regime. The SPAM parameters P, ζ, γ, and η are calibrated in separate measurements (pulsed ODMR for P; laser-leakage linear regressions for ζ, γ, η in Supplementary Section IV), and the model then 'accurately reproduces the experimental data' without fitting the final sensitivities. The linear-in-N scaling claim is a fit to the simulation data (red lines) with which the independently measured experimental points agree. The shared-author citation Ref. [16] is not load-bearing in a circular way because the relevant QFIM and Bell-measurement saturation results are re-derived in the Supplementary Material and are experimentally testable outside the cited work. The abstract's 'simultaneously estimate ... from a single measurement sequence' is broader than what the one-parameter-sweep Jacobian data alone demonstrate, but that is an evidential/correctness gap rather than a circular reduction of the derivation to its inputs. No step was found in which a prediction is defined in terms of the quantity it claims to predict, or in which a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the NV two-qubit Hamiltonian, the inverted-control approximation, and a calibrated linear SPAM model. The free parameters are experimentally calibrated in separate measurements, and the control field operating point is a design choice rather than a fit parameter. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • nuclear spin polarization P = 0.85
    Measured via pulsed ODMR at 357 G; used in the initial mixed state rho = P|0,+1><0,+1| + (1-P)|0,0><0,0|.
  • nuclear leakage rate zeta = 0.20
    Fitted from laser-induced transfer mI=0 -> mI=+1; Supplementary Section IV and Fig. 8a.
  • nuclear leakage rate gamma = 0.15
    Fitted from laser-induced transfer mI=-1 -> mI=+1; Supplementary Section IV and Fig. 8b.
  • nuclear leakage rate eta = 0.025
    Fitted from laser-induced transfer mI=-1 -> mI=0; Supplementary Section IV and Fig. 8c.
  • readout noise sigma = approximately 0.02
    Standard deviation of measured signal from photon shot noise, used in the covariance matrix Sigma_p = sigma^2 I for error propagation.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption NV 14N Hamiltonian with zero-field splitting D, quadrupole Q, hyperfine coupling A, gyromagnetic ratios, and static field 357 G.
    Section I: defines the two-qubit system and all control design; assumes the six-level description with the stated parameters.
  • domain assumption Effective spin-1/2 reduction with interaction Hint = A(-sigma_e_z + sigma_n_z - sigma_e_z sigma_n_z)/4.
    Section I: relies on restricting to four levels and a rotating frame, with higher levels unpopulated during sensing.
  • domain assumption Sequential control U_c approximates U_t dagger via U_pi e^{-iH_c T} U_pi = U_t dagger, including the detuning frame factor correction.
    Section II: uses the identity sigma_x sigma_z sigma_x = -sigma_z and ideal instantaneous pi pulses; finite pulse errors are acknowledged as a degradation source.
  • standard math Bell states and Bell basis measurement are optimal for the ideal vector-field model.
    Supplementary Section I: imported from Ref. [16]; used to justify the probe state and measurement choice.
  • ad hoc to paper Linear SPAM leakage model p' = M p with rates zeta, gamma, eta.
    Supplementary Section V: a simplified linear approximation to nuclear spin evolution under laser irradiation, calibrated by fits; the paper states it is not a Lindblad master equation.
  • domain assumption Classical readout noise dominates and is isotropic, Sigma_p = sigma^2 I.
    Section IV and Supplementary Section II: valid for ensemble-averaged fluorescence readout where photon shot noise is the dominant error.
  • domain assumption Population shelving into the mI=-1 level and the three-readout sequence extract p1, p2, p3 without disturbing other populations.
    Section III: relies on mI=-1 being outside the qubit subspace and stable during the short laser readout pulses.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entanglement-assisted multiparameter estimation with a solid-state quantum sensor." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Y7XU4LAA

@misc{pith2026250514578,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entanglement-assisted multiparameter estimation with a solid-state quantum sensor},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Y7XU4LAA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.14578}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum multiparameter estimation promises to extend quantum advantage to the simultaneous high-precision measurements of multiple physical quantities. However, realizing this capability in practical quantum sensors under realistic conditions remains challenging due to intrinsic system imperfections. Here, we experimentally demonstrate multiparameter estimation using a nitrogen-vacancy (NV) center in diamond, a widely adopted solid-state quantum sensor. Leveraging electronic-nuclear spin entanglement and optimized Bell state measurement at room temperature, we simultaneously estimate the amplitude, detuning, and phase of a microwave drive from a single measurement sequence. Despite practical constraints, our results achieve linear sensitivity scaling for all parameters with respect to interrogation time. This work bridges the gap between foundational quantum estimation theory and real-world quantum sensing, opening pathways toward enhanced multiparameter quantum sensors suitable for diverse scientific and technological applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.14578 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. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Contour plots of the figure of merit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Comparison of sensitivities between the quantum projection limit and the photon shot noise limit for the ideal vector [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Pulsed ODMR measurement as a function of the microwave frequency (GHz). A triple-Lorentzian model (red line) is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Normalized signal measurements with varying pumping times. In each panel, blue markers with error bars represent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    D. V. Vasilyev, A. Shankar, R. Kaubruegger, and P. Zoller, Optimal multiparameter metrology: The quan- tum compass solution (2024), arXiv:2404.14194 [quant- ph]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Giovannetti, S

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nature Photonics 5, 222 (2011)

    2011

  3. [2]

    For the measurement er- ror, we incorporate a simple linear model to capture the effects of nuclear spin population transfer during short laser pulses used for electron readout. The cumulative effect of ”leakage” on the state populations is described by the transformation: p′ = M p, where M is a matrix parametrized by the leakage rates ζ = 0 .20, γ= 0 .15...

    work page

  4. [3]

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

    2017

  5. [4]

    Aslam, H

    N. Aslam, H. Zhou, E. K. Urbach, M. J. Turner, R. L. Walsworth, M. D. Lukin, and H. Park, Quantum sensors 7 1248 N 100 101 102 100 101 102 100 101 102 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 468 10 12 14 16 18 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 45 90 135 180 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -3 -2 -1 0123 t(MHz) 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 Ωt (MHz) 0 0.2 0.4...

    work page 2023

  6. [5]

    Casola, T

    F. Casola, T. van der Sar, and A. Yacoby, Probing condensed matter physics with magnetometry based on nitrogen-vacancy centres in diamond, Nature Reviews Materials 3, 17088 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [6]

    Kahn, Fast rate estimation of a unitary operation in SU(d), Phys

    J. Kahn, Fast rate estimation of a unitary operation in SU(d), Phys. Rev. A 75, 022326 (2007)

    work page 2007

  8. [7]

    M. A. Ballester, Estimation of unitary quantum opera- tions, Phys. Rev. A 69, 022303 (2004)

    work page 2004

Show all 65 references
  1. [8]

    Imai and A

    H. Imai and A. Fujiwara, Geometry of optimal estima- tion scheme for su(d) channels, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 40, 4391 (2007)

    2007

  2. [9]

    P. C. Humphreys, M. Barbieri, A. Datta, and I. A. Walmsley, Quantum enhanced multiple phase estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 070403 (2013)

    2013

  3. [10]

    Baumgratz and A

    T. Baumgratz and A. Datta, Quantum enhanced estima- tion of a multidimensional field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 030801 (2016)

    2016

  4. [11]

    Szczykulska, T

    M. Szczykulska, T. Baumgratz, and A. D. and, Multi-parameter quantum metrology, Advances in Physics: X 1, 621 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1080/23746149.2016.1230476

    2016

  5. [12]

    Z. Hou, Z. Zhang, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, H. Chen, L. Liu, and H. Yuan, Minimal tradeoff and ul- timate precision limit of multiparameter quantum mag- netometry under the parallel scheme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 020501 (2020)

    2020

  6. [13]

    S. Ragy, M. Jarzyna, and R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, Compatibility in multiparameter quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. A 94, 052108 (2016)

    2016

  7. [14]

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X.-M. Lu, and X. Wang, Quantum fisher information matrix and multiparameter estima- tion, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53, 023001 (2019)

    2019

  8. [15]

    Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, W

    R. Demkowicz-Dobrza´ nski, W. G´ orecki, and M. Gut ¸˘ a, Multi-parameter estimation beyond quantum fisher in- formation, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and The- oretical 53, 363001 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Yuan, Sequential feedback scheme outperforms the parallel scheme for hamiltonian parameter estimation, Phys

    H. Yuan, Sequential feedback scheme outperforms the parallel scheme for hamiltonian parameter estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 160801 (2016)

    2016

  10. [18]

    Z. Hou, H. Zhu, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Achieving quantum precision limit in adaptive qubit state tomography, npj Quantum Information 2, 16001 (2016)

    2016

  11. [19]

    Israel, S

    Y. Israel, S. Rosen, and Y. Silberberg, Supersensitive po- larization microscopy using noon states of light, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 103604 (2014)

    2014

  12. [20]

    M. A. Taylor, J. Janousek, V. Daria, J. Knittel, B. Hage, H.-A. Bachor, and W. P. Bowen, Biological measure- ment beyond the quantum limit, Nature Photonics 7, 229 (2013)

    2013

  13. [21]

    J.-F. Tang, Z. Hou, J. Shang, H. Zhu, G.-Y. Xiang, C.- F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Experimental optimal orienteering via parallel and antiparallel spins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 060502 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Polino, M

    E. Polino, M. Riva, M. Valeri, R. Silvestri, G. Corrielli, A. Crespi, N. Spagnolo, R. Osellame, and F. Sciarrino, Experimental multiphase estimation on a chip, Optica 6, 8 288 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    Hou, J.-F

    Z. Hou, J.-F. Tang, J. Shang, H. Zhu, J. Li, Y. Yuan, K.- D. Wu, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Determin- istic realization of collective measurements via photonic quantum walks, Nature Communications 9, 1414 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Roccia, I

    E. Roccia, I. Gianani, L. Mancino, M. Sbroscia, F. Somma, M. G. Genoni, and M. Barbieri, Entan- gling measurements for multiparameter estimation with two qubits, Quantum Science and Technology 3, 01LT01 (2017)

    2017

  17. [25]

    M. A. Ciampini, N. Spagnolo, C. Vitelli, L. Pezz` e, A. Smerzi, and F. Sciarrino, Quantum-enhanced multi- parameter estimation in multiarm interferometers, Scien- tific Reports 6, 28881 (2016)

    2016

  18. [26]

    L. B. Ho, H. Hakoshima, Y. Matsuzaki, M. Matsuzaki, and Y. Kondo, Multiparameter quantum estimation un- der dephasing noise, Phys. Rev. A 102, 022602 (2020)

    2020

  19. [27]

    X.-Q. Zhou, H. Cable, R. Whittaker, P. Shadbolt, J. L. O’Brien, and J. C. F. Matthews, Quantum-enhanced to- mography of unitary processes, Optica 2, 510 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    Hou, J.-F

    Z. Hou, J.-F. Tang, H. Chen, H. Yuan, G.-Y. Xi- ang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Zero&#x2013;trade-off multiparameter quantum estimation via simulta- neously saturating multiple heisenberg uncertainty relations, Science Advances 7, eabd2986 (2021), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf...

    2021 doi

  21. [29]

    super- heisenberg

    Z. Hou, Y. Jin, H. Chen, J.-F. Tang, C.-J. Huang, H. Yuan, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, “super- heisenberg” and heisenberg scalings achieved simultane- ously in the estimation of a rotating field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 070503 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Z. Hu, S. Wang, L. Qiao, T. Isogawa, C. Li, Y. Yang, G. Wang, H. Yuan, and P. Cappellaro, Control incom- patibility in multiparameter quantum metrology (2024), arXiv:2411.18896 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Zhang, L

    J. Zhang, L. Wang, Y.-J. Hai, J. Zhang, J. Chu, J. Jiang, W. Huang, Y. Liang, J. Qiu, X. Sun, Z. Tao, L. Zhang, Y. Zhou, Y. Chen, W. Guo, X. Linpeng, S. Liu, W. Ren, J. Niu, Y. Zhong, H. Yuan, and D. Yu, Distributed multi- parameter quantum metrology with a superconducting qua...

    2024

  24. [32]

    J. R. Maze, P. L. Stanwix, J. S. Hodges, S. Hong, J. M. Taylor, P. Cappellaro, L. Jiang, M. V. G. Dutt, E. Togan, A. S. Zibrov, A. Yacoby, R. L. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, Nanoscale magnetic sensing with an individual electronic spin in diamond, Nature 455, 644 (2008)

    2008

  25. [33]

    J. M. Taylor, P. Cappellaro, L. Childress, L. Jiang, D. Budker, P. R. Hemmer, A. Yacoby, R. Walsworth, and M. D. Lukin, High-sensitivity diamond magnetometer with nanoscale resolution, Nature Physics 4, 810 (2008)

    2008

  26. [34]

    B. J. Maertz, A. P. Wijnheijmer, G. D. Fuchs, M. E. Nowakowski, and D. D. Awschalom, Vector magnetic field microscopy using nitrogen vacancy centers in diamond, Applied Physics Letters 96, 092504 (2010), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/1.3337096/14426413/...

    2010 doi

  27. [35]

    Steinert, F

    S. Steinert, F. Dolde, P. Neumann, A. Aird, B. Nayde- nov, G. Balasubramanian, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, High sensitivity magnetic imaging using an array of spins in diamond, Review of Scientific Instruments 81, 043705 (2010), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/rsi/article- pdf/doi/...

    2010 doi

  28. [36]

    L. M. Pham, D. Le Sage, P. L. Stanwix, T. K. Yeung, D. Glenn, A. Trifonov, P. Cappellaro, P. R. Hemmer, M. D. Lukin, H. Park, A. Yacoby, and R. L. Walsworth, Magnetic field imaging with nitrogen-vacancy ensembles, New Journal of Physics 13, 045021 (2011)

    2011

  29. [37]

    Tetienne, L

    J.-P. Tetienne, L. Rondin, P. Spinicelli, M. Chipaux, T. Debuisschert, J.-F. Roch, and V. Jacques, Magnetic- field-dependent photodynamics of single nv defects in di- amond: an application to qualitative all-optical magnetic imaging, New Journal of Physics 14, 103033 (2012)

    2012

  30. [38]

    P. Wang, Z. Yuan, P. Huang, X. Rong, M. Wang, X. Xu, C. Duan, C. Ju, F. Shi, and J. Du, High-resolution vector microwave magnetometry based on solid-state spins in diamond, Nature Communications 6, 6631 (2015)

    2015

  31. [39]

    L. Shao, R. Liu, M. Zhang, A. V. Shneidman, X. Au- dier, M. Markham, H. Dhillon, D. J. Twitchen, Y.-F. Xiao, and M. Lonˇ car, Wide-field optical microscopy of microwave fields using nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamonds, Advanced Optical Materials 4, 1075 (2016), https://advanc...

    2016 doi

  32. [40]

    Y.-X. Liu, A. Ajoy, and P. Cappellaro, Nanoscale vec- tor dc magnetometry via ancilla-assisted frequency up- conversion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 100501 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Horsley, P

    A. Horsley, P. Appel, J. Wolters, J. Achard, A. Tallaire, P. Maletinsky, and P. Treutlein, Microwave device char- acterization using a widefield diamond microscope, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 044039 (2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    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)

    2020

  35. [43]

    Wang, Y.-X

    G. Wang, Y.-X. Liu, J. M. Schloss, S. T. Alsid, D. A. Braje, and P. Cappellaro, Sensing of arbitrary-frequency fields using a quantum mixer, Phys. Rev. X 12, 021061 (2022)

    2022

  36. [44]

    Wang, Y.-X

    G. Wang, Y.-X. Liu, Y. Zhu, and P. Cappellaro, Nanoscale vector ac magnetometry with a single nitrogen-vacancy center in diamond, Nano Letters 21, 5143 (2021)

    2021

  37. [45]

    Isogawa, Y

    T. Isogawa, Y. Matsuzaki, and J. Ishi-Hayase, Vector dc magnetic-field sensing with a reference microwave field using perfectly aligned nitrogen-vacancy centers in dia- mond, Phys. Rev. A 107, 062423 (2023)

    2023

  38. [46]

    Dolde, H

    F. Dolde, H. Fedder, M. W. Doherty, T. N¨ obauer, F. Rempp, G. Balasubramanian, T. Wolf, F. Reinhard, L. C. L. Hollenberg, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, Electric-field sensing using single diamond spins, Nature Physics 7, 459 (2011)

    2011

  39. [47]

    Kucsko, P

    G. Kucsko, P. C. Maurer, N. Y. Yao, M. Kubo, H. J. Noh, P. K. Lo, H. Park, and M. D. Lukin, Nanometre- scale thermometry in a living cell, Nature 500, 54 (2013)

    2013

  40. [48]

    Kehayias, M

    P. Kehayias, M. J. Turner, R. Trubko, J. M. Schloss, C. A. Hart, M. Wesson, D. R. Glenn, and R. L. Walsworth, Imaging crystal stress in diamond using en- sembles of nitrogen-vacancy centers, Phys. Rev. B 100, 174103 (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    W. S. Huxter, M. F. Sarott, M. Trassin, and C. L. Degen, Imaging ferroelectric domains with a single-spin scanning quantum sensor, Nature Physics 19, 644 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    Hsieh, P

    S. Hsieh, P. Bhattacharyya, C. Zu, T. Mittiga, T. J. Smart, F. Machado, B. Kobrin, T. O. H¨ ohn, N. Z. Rui, M. Kamrani, S. Chatterjee, S. Choi, M. Zaletel, V. V. Struzhkin, J. E. Moore, V. I. Levitas, R. Jeanloz, and N. Y. Yao, Imaging stress and magnetism at high pressures us...

    2019 doi

  43. [51]

    Hirose and P

    M. Hirose and P. Cappellaro, Coherent feedback control of a single qubit in diamond, Nature 532, 77 (2016)

    2016

  44. [52]

    Hern´ andez-G´ omez, T

    S. Hern´ andez-G´ omez, T. Isogawa, A. Belenchia, A. Levy, N. Fabbri, S. Gherardini, and P. Cappellaro, Interferome- try of quantum correlation functions to access quasiprob- ability distribution of work, npj Quantum Information 10, 115 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Yuan and C.-H

    H. Yuan and C.-H. F. Fung, Optimal feedback scheme and universal time scaling for hamiltonian parameter es- timation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 110401 (2015)

    2015

  46. [54]

    Robledo, L

    L. Robledo, L. Childress, H. Bernien, B. Hensen, P. F. A. Alkemade, and R. Hanson, High-fidelity projective read- out of a solid-state spin quantum register, Nature 477, 574 (2011)

    2011

  47. [55]

    Pfaff, B

    W. Pfaff, B. J. Hensen, H. Bernien, S. B. van Dam, M. S. Blok, T. H. Taminiau, M. J. Tiggelman, R. N. Schouten, M. Markham, D. J. Twitchen, and R. Hanson, Unconditional quantum teleportation between dis- tant solid-state quantum bits, Science 345, 532 (2014), https://www.scien...

    2014 doi

  48. [56]

    Kamimaki, K

    A. Kamimaki, K. Wakamatsu, K. Mikata, Y. Sekiguchi, and H. Kosaka, Deterministic bell state measurement with a single quantum memory, npj Quantum Informa- tion 9, 101 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Pang and A

    S. Pang and A. N. Jordan, Optimal adaptive control for quantum metrology with time-dependent hamiltonians, Nature Communications 8, 14695 (2017)

    2017

  50. [58]

    Schmitt, T

    S. Schmitt, T. Gefen, D. Louzon, C. Osterkamp, N. Stau- denmaier, J. Lang, M. Markham, A. Retzker, L. P. McGuinness, and F. Jelezko, Optimal frequency measure- ments with quantum probes, npj Quantum Information 7, 55 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    Ogawa, S

    K. Ogawa, S. Nishimura, K. Sasaki, and K. Kobayashi, Demonstration of highly sensitive wideband mi- crowave sensing using ensemble nitrogen-vacancy centers, Applied Physics Letters 123, 214002 (2023), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/apl/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/5.0175456/20056695/214...

    2023 doi

  52. [60]

    Ogawa, M

    K. Ogawa, M. Tsukamoto, Y. Mori, D. Takafuji, J. Shiogai, K. Ueda, J. Matsuno, K. Sasaki, and K. Kobayashi, Wideband wide-field imaging of spin-wave propagation using diamond quantum sensors (2024), arXiv:2411.17344 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Ogawa, M

    K. Ogawa, M. Tsukamoto, Y. Mori, D. Takafuji, J. Sh- iogai, K. Ueda, J. Matsuno, J. ichiro Ohe, K. Sasaki, and K. Kobayashi, Quantitative imaging of nonlinear spin-wave propagation using diamond quantum sensors (2025), arXiv:2503.23321 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2025

  54. [62]

    Jacques, P

    V. Jacques, P. Neumann, J. Beck, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, J. Meijer, F. Kaiser, G. Balasubrama- nian, F. Jelezko, and J. Wrachtrup, Dynamic polarization of single nuclear spins by optical pumping of nitrogen- vacancy color centers in diamond at room temperature, Phys. Rev. Let...

    2009

  55. [63]

    mS = 0, mI = 0 → mS = 0, mI = +1 (leakage rate: ζ)

  56. [64]

    mS = 0, mI = −1 → mS = 0, mI = +1 (leakage rate: γ)

  57. [65]

    mS = 0, mI = −1 → mS = 0, mI = 0 (leakage rate: η) 19 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Pumping Time ( s) 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Pumping Time ( s) 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Pumping Time ( s) 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.9 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 N...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.