- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review A

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Quantum signatures and semiclassical limitations in the transmission of Fock states

D. J. Nader

PDF

Phys. Rev. A 112, 052221 – Published 24 November, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/2b9f-ygt3

Abstract

Transmission through potential barriers is a fundamental problem in quantum mechanics. While semiclassical methods can approximate certain aspects of transmission, they fail to capture the intrinsically quantum interference associated with Wigner-function negativity. We numerically study the transmission of displaced Fock states through an inverted-oscillator barrier, with and without a Kerr nonlinearity that offers a potential route to experimental realization. These states allow only an approximate classical description since their characteristic Wigner-function negativity is absent in phase space. The semiclassical simulation reproduces the overall transmission, but deviates from exact results and fails to capture short-time plateaus that arise when regions of Wigner-function negativity cross the barrier. With the Kerr nonlinearity, reflections from nonlinear boundaries drive interference into classically forbidden regions, an effect that is inaccessible to semiclassical approaches. We find that these interference effects do not alter the maximum transmission probability, which is bounded by the initial positive-energy fraction and therefore already encoded in the phase-space structure of the Fock states. Because Fock states cannot be faithfully represented within classical phase space, the transmission through a barrier reveals the fundamental limitations of semiclassical approaches.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (87)

  1. E. Merzbacher, The early history of quantum tunneling, Phys. Today 55(8), 44 (2002).
  2. F. Hund, Zur deutung der molekelspektren. I, Z. Phys. 40, 742 (1927).
  3. L. Nordheim, Zur theorie der thermischen emission und der reflexion von elektronen an metallen, Z. Phys. 46, 833 (1928).
  4. G. Gamow, The quantum theory of nuclear disintegration, Nature (London) 122, 805 (1928).
  5. G.-R. Feng, Y. Lu, L. Hao, F.-H. Zhang, and G.-L. Long, Experimental simulation of quantum tunneling in small systems, Sci. Rep. 3, 2232 (2013).
  6. M. H. Devoret, J. M. Martinis, and J. Clarke, Measurements of macroscopic quantum tunneling out of the zero-voltage state of a current-biased josephson junction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1908 (1985).
  7. M. Fiske and I. Giaever, Superconductive tunneling, Proc. IEEE 52, 1155 (1964).
  8. R. Ramos, D. Spierings, I. Racicot, and A. M. Steinberg, Measurement of the time spent by a tunneling atom within the barrier region, Nature (London) 583, 529 (2020).
  9. M. Zendra, F. Borgonovi, G. L. Celardo, and S. Gurvitz, Many-body tunneling in a double-well potential, Phys. Rev. A 110, 062222 (2024).
  10. R. Ferreira and G. Bastard, Tunnelling and relaxation in semiconductor double quantum wells, Rep. Prog. Phys. 60, 345 (1997).
  11. D.-Y. Song, Localization or tunneling in asymmetric double-well potentials, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 362, 609 (2015).
  12. D. Braun and J. Martin, Spontaneous emission from a two-level atom tunneling in a double-well potential, Phys. Rev. A 77, 032102 (2008).
  13. H. Hasegawa, Gaussian wavepacket dynamics and quantum tunneling in asymmetric double-well systems, Physica A 392, 6232 (2013).
  14. M. A. P. Reynoso, D. J. Nader, J. Chávez-Carlos, B. E. Ordaz-Mendoza, R. G. Cortiñas, V. S. Batista, S. Lerma-Hernández, F. Pérez-Bernal, and L. F. Santos, Quantum tunneling and level crossings in the squeeze-driven Kerr oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 108, 033709 (2023).
  15. M. Marthaler and M. I. Dykman, Quantum interference in the classically forbidden region: A parametric oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 76, 010102(R) (2007).
  16. D. J. Nader, C. A. González-Rodríguez, and S. Lerma-Hernández, Avoided crossings and dynamical tunneling close to excited-state quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. E 104, 064116 (2021).
  17. G. Chen and J. Liang, Unconventional quantum phase transition in the finite-size Lipkin–Meshkov–Glick model, New J. Phys. 8, 297 (2006).
  18. G. J. Milburn, J. Corney, E. M. Wright, and D. F. Walls, Quantum dynamics of an atomic bose-einstein condensate in a double-well potential, Phys. Rev. A 55, 4318 (1997).
  19. S. Zöllner, H.-D. Meyer, and P. Schmelcher, Tunneling dynamics of a few bosons in a double well, Phys. Rev. A 78, 013621 (2008).
  20. N. Kluksdahl, A. Kriman, and D. Ferry, Wigner function simulation of quantum tunneling, Superlattices Microstruct. 4, 127 (1988).
  21. K. G. Kay, Time-dependent semiclassical tunneling through barriers, Phys. Rev. A 88, 012122 (2013).
  22. K. L. Jensen, J. L. Lebowitz, J. M. Riga, D. A. Shiffler, and R. Seviour, Wigner wave packets: Transmission, reflection, and tunneling, Phys. Rev. B 103, 155427 (2021).
  23. C. S. Tautermann, A. F. Voegele, T. Loerting, and K. R. Liedl, An accurate semiclassical method to predict ground-state tunneling splittings, J. Chem. Phys. 117, 1967 (2002).
  24. G. Rastelli, Semiclassical formula for quantum tunneling in asymmetric double-well potentials, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012106 (2012).
  25. L. Aragón-Muñoz, G. Chacón-Acosta, and H. Hernandez-Hernandez, Effective quantum tunneling from a semiclassical momentous approach, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 34, 2050271 (2020).
  26. J. Le Deunff, A. Mouchet, and P. Schlagheck, Semiclassical description of resonance-assisted tunneling in one-dimensional integrable models, Phys. Rev. E 88, 042927 (2013).
  27. M. Hillery, R. F. O'Connell, M. O. Scully, and E. P. Wigner, Distribution functions in physics: Fundamentals, Phys. Rep. 106, 121 (1984).
  28. Y. Lu, I. Strandberg, F. Quijandría, G. Johansson, S. Gasparinetti, and P. Delsing, Propagating Wigner-negative states generated from the steady-state emission of a superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 253602 (2021).
  29. S. Rahimi-Keshari, T. C. Ralph, and C. M. Caves, Sufficient conditions for efficient classical simulation of quantum optics, Phys. Rev. X 6, 021039 (2016).
  30. Y. Xiang, S. Liu, J. Guo, Q. Gong, N. Treps, Q. He, and M. Walschaers, Distribution and quantification of remotely generated Wigner negativity, npj Quantum Inf. 8, 21 (2022).
  31. F. Toscano, D. A. R. Dalvit, L. Davidovich, and W. H. Zurek, Sub-Planck phase-space structures and heisenberg-limited measurements, Phys. Rev. A 73, 023803 (2006).
  32. Y. L. Lin and O. C. O. Dahlsten, Necessity of negative Wigner function for tunneling, Phys. Rev. A 102, 062210 (2020).
  33. C. Chen and S. Zhou, Insights into quantum tunneling via a phase-space approach, Phys. Rev. A 109, 032227 (2024).
  34. I. F. Valtierra and A. B. Klimov, Tunneling currents in the hyperbolic phase space, Entropy 26, 639 (2024).
  35. A. Ono, Phase-space consideration on barrier transmission in a time-dependent variational approach with superposed wave packets, Phys. Lett. B 826, 136931 (2022).
  36. G. Breitenbach, S. Schiller, and J. Mlynek, Measurement of the quantum states of squeezed light, Nature (London) 387, 471 (1997).
  37. U. Leonhardt and H. Paul, Measuring the quantum state of light, Prog. Quantum Electron. 19, 89 (1995).
  38. A. I. Lvovsky, H. Hansen, T. Aichele, O. Benson, J. Mlynek, and S. Schiller, Quantum state reconstruction of the single-photon Fock state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 050402 (2001).
  39. J. Park, Y. Lu, J. Lee, Y. Shen, K. Zhang, S. Zhang, M. S. Zubairy, K. Kim, and H. Nha, Revealing nonclassicality beyond Gaussian states via a single marginal distribution, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114, 891 (2017).
  40. A. Polkovnikov, Phase space representation of quantum dynamics, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 325, 1790 (2010).
  41. J. Schachenmayer, A. Pikovski, and A. M. Rey, Many-body quantum spin dynamics with Monte Carlo trajectories on a discrete phase space, Phys. Rev. X 5, 011022 (2015).
  42. P. D. Drummond and C. W. Gardiner, Generalised p-representations in quantum optics, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 13, 2353 (1980).
  43. J. F. Corney and M. K. Olsen, Non-Gaussian pure states and positive Wigner functions, Phys. Rev. A 91, 023824 (2015).
  44. A. Kenfack and K. Życzkowski, Negativity of the Wigner function as an indicator of non-classicality, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 6, 396 (2004).
  45. X.-B. Wang, T. Hiroshima, A. Tomita, and M. Hayashi, Quantum information with Gaussian states, Phys. Rep. 448, 1 (2007).
  46. B. Wielinga and G. J. Milburn, Quantum tunneling in a Kerr medium with parametric pumping, Phys. Rev. A 48, 2494 (1993).
  47. S. Marti, U. von Lüpke, O. Joshi, Y. Yang, M. Bild, A. Omahen, Y. Chu, and M. Fadel, Quantum squeezing in a nonlinear mechanical oscillator, Nat. Phys. 20,1 (2024).
  48. X. He, Y. Lu, D. Bao, H. Xue, W. Jiang, Z. Wang, A. Roudsari, P. Delsing, J. Tsai, and Z. Lin, Fast generation of Schrödinger cat states using a Kerr-tunable superconducting resonator, Nat. Commun. 14, 6358 (2023).
  49. G. Barton, Quantum mechanics of the inverted oscillator potential, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 166, 322 (1986).
  50. C. Yuce, Quantum inverted harmonic potential, Phys. Scr. 96, 105006 (2021).
  51. F. Ullinger, M. Zimmermann, and W. P. Schleich, The logarithmic phase singularity in the inverted harmonic oscillator, AVS Quantum Science 4, 024402 (2022).
  52. A. Albrecht, P. Ferreira, M. Joyce, and T. Prokopec, Inflation and squeezed quantum states, Phys. Rev. D 50, 4807 (1994).
  53. S. Wang, S. Chen, and J. Jing, Quantum instability and Ehrenfest time for an inverted harmonic oscillator, Commun. Theor. Phys. 77, 015101 (2024).
  54. P. Romatschke, Out-of-time-ordered-correlators for the pure inverted quartic oscillator: Classical chaos meets quantum stability, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2024) 126.
  55. M. Maamache and J. R. Choi, Quantum-classical correspondence for the inverted oscillator, Chin. Phys. C 41, 113106 (2017).
  56. D. F. Walls and J. D. Harvey, Quantum Optics VI: Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Quantum Optics, Rotorua, New Zealand, January 24–28, 1994, Vol. 77 (Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2012).
  57. S. Puri, S. Boutin, and A. Blais, Engineering the quantum states of light in a Kerr-nonlinear resonator by two-photon driving, npj Quantum Inf. 3, 18 (2017).
  58. J. Chávez-Carlos, T. L. Lezama, R. G. Cortiñas, J. Venkatraman, M. H. Devoret, V. S. Batista, F. Pérez-Bernal, and L. F. Santos, Spectral kissing and its dynamical consequences in the squeeze-driven Kerr oscillator, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 76 (2023).
  59. Y. Cai, X. Deng, L. Zhang, Z. Ni, J. Mai, P. Huang, P. Zheng, L. Hu, S. Liu, Y. Xu et al., Quantum squeezing amplification with a weak Kerr nonlinear oscillator, arXiv:2503.08197.
  60. J. Venkatraman, R. G. Cortiñas, N. E. Frattini, X. Xiao, and M. H. Devoret, A driven Kerr oscillator with two-fold degeneracies for qubit protection, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 121, e2311241121 (2024).
  61. S. Rebic, S. Tan, A. Parkins, and D. Walls, Large Kerr nonlinearity with a single atom, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 1, 490 (1999).
  62. M. A. P. Reynoso, E. M. Signor, J. Khalouf-Rivera, A. D. Ribeiro, F. Pérez-Bernal, and L. F. Santos, Phase transitions, symmetries, and tunneling in Kerr parametric oscillators, Phys. Rev. A 112, 032415 (2025).
  63. A. Grimm, N. E. Frattini, S. Puri, S. O. Mundhada, S. Touzard, M. Mirrahimi, S. M. Girvin, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Stabilization and operation of a Kerr-cat qubit, Nature (London) 584, 205 (2020).
  64. S. Boutin, D. M. Toyli, A. V. Venkatramani, A. W. Eddins, I. Siddiqi, and A. Blais, Effect of higher-order nonlinearities on amplification and squeezing in josephson parametric amplifiers, Phys. Rev. Appl. 8, 054030 (2017).
  65. F. Iachello, R. G. Cortiñas, F. Pérez-Bernal, and L. F. Santos, Symmetries of the squeeze-driven Kerr oscillator, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56, 495305 (2023).
  66. K. Holmes, W. Rehman, S. Malzard, and E.-M. Graefe, Husimi dynamics generated by non-Hermitian Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 157202 (2023).
  67. M. Marthaler and M. I. Dykman, Switching via quantum activation: A parametrically modulated oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 73, 042108 (2006).
  68. A. C. Oliveira, J. G. Peixoto de Faria, and M. C. Nemes, Quantum-classical transition of the open quartic oscillator: The role of the environment, Phys. Rev. E 73, 046207 (2006).
  69. D. Nader and E. Serrano-Ensástiga, Critical energies and wigner functions of the stationary states of the Bose-Einstein condensates in a double-well trap, Adv. Quantum Technol. 8, 2400451 (2025).
  70. D. Nader, J. Hernández-González, H. Vázquez-Sánchez, and S. Lerma-Hernández, Manifestation of classical instability in the quantum density of states of a double well potential, Phys. Lett. A 481, 129014 (2023).
  71. S. Deléglise, I. Dotsenko, C. Sayrin, J. Bernu, M. Brune, J.-M. Raimond, and S. Haroche, Reconstruction of non-classical cavity field states with snapshots of their decoherence, Nature (London) 455, 510 (2008).
  72. M. Hofheinz, E. Weig, M. Ansmann, R. C. Bialczak, E. Lucero, M. Neeley, A. O'Connell, H. Wang, J. M. Martinis, and A. Cleland, Generation of fock states in a superconducting quantum circuit, Nature (London) 454, 310 (2008).
  73. W. B. Case, Wigner functions and Weyl transforms for pedestrians, Am. J. Phys. 76, 937 (2008).
  74. E. Colomés, Z. Zhan, and X. Oriols, Comparing wigner, husimi and bohmian distributions: Which one is a true probability distribution in phase space? J. Comput. Electron. 14, 894 (2015).
  75. J. Teske, M. Besbes, B. Okhrimenko, and R. Walser, Mean-field Wigner function of Bose-Einstein condensates in the Thomas-Fermi limit, Phys. Scr. 93, 124004 (2018).
  76. G. Adesso, S. Ragy, and A. R. Lee, Continuous variable quantum information: Gaussian states and beyond, Open Systems & Information Dynamics 21, 1440001 (2014).
  77. C. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise: A Handbook of Markovian and Non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics (Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2004).
  78. M. Olsen and A. Bradley, Numerical representation of quantum states in the positive-p and Wigner representations, Opt. Commun. 282, 3924 (2009).
  79. S. Koh, Wigner function of a time-dependent inverted harmonic oscillator, New Phys. Sae Mulli 73, 74 (2023).
  80. V. Bagrov, D. Gitman, E. Macedo, and A. Pereira, Coherent states of inverse oscillators and related problems, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 46, 325305 (2013).
  81. J. Glaisher, Xxxii. On a class of definite integrals, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 42, 294 (1871).
  82. Z. Chen, I. M. Grace, S. L. Woltering, L. Chen, A. Gee, J. Baugh, G. A. D. Briggs, L. Bogani, J. A. Mol, C. J. Lambert et al., Quantum interference enhances the performance of single-molecule transistors, Nat. Nanotechnol. 19, 986 (2024).
  83. S. Krämer, D. Plankensteiner, L. Ostermann, and H. Ritsch, Quantumoptics.Jl: A julia framework for simulating open quantum systems, Comput. Phys. Commun. 227, 109 (2018).
  84. S. G. Johnson, The hcubature.Jl package for multi-dimensional adaptive integration in julia (2017), https://github.com/JuliaMath/HCubature.jl.
  85. Wolfram Research, NDSolve, Wolfram Research, Inc., Champaign, Illinois (2025), version 14.0, https://reference.wolfram.com/language/ref/NDSolve.html.
  86. G. Casella and R. Berger, Statistical Inference (Chapman and Hall/CRC, London, 2024).
  87. D. Nader, Inverted oscillator (2025), https://github.com/djuliannader/InvertedOscillator.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 112, 052221– Published 24 November, 2025
  • Received 5 July 2025
  • Revised 9 September 2025
  • Accepted 30 October 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation