- 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

Violation of the thermodynamic uncertainty relation in quantum collisional models

Arghya Maity1,2,* and Ahana Ghoshal3,†

  • *Contact author: arghyamaityphysics@gmail.com
  • †Contact author: ahanaghoshal1995@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. A 112, 022203 – Published 5 August, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/kjkg-ksjd

Abstract

The thermodynamic uncertainty relation (TUR) is a fundamental principle in nonequilibrium thermodynamics that relates entropy production to fluctuations in a system, establishing a trade-off between the precision of an observable and the thermodynamic cost. Investigating TUR violations challenges classical thermodynamic limits, offering the potential for improved precision-entropy trade-offs, which is crucial for enhancing performance and optimization in quantum technologies. In this work, we investigate the thermodynamic uncertainty relation within a quantum collisional model, which offers the advantage of discretizing interactions into successive collisions with auxiliaries, allowing for precise tracking of dynamics and the incorporation of memory effects and non-Markovian behavior. We consider three types of dynamics in the collisional model: one is Markovian evolution, achieved by taking the continuous-time limit and imposing the stability condition, while the other two are non-Markovian dynamics—one arising from increasing the collision time between the system and the auxiliaries, and the other from incorporating interactions between the auxiliaries. For the Markovian dynamics, we examine the classical and quantum TUR bounds in the nonequilibrium steady-state regime, and also the finite-time TUR bound. We identify two distinct regimes of classical TUR violation: in some cases, the maximum violation occurs in the steady state, while in others, it is necessarily transient—appearing only at early times and vanishing with further evolution. For the two non-Markovian approaches, we find that both the degree and type of non-Markovianity crucially affect TUR violations. The second approach shows more pronounced violations during transient times, while the first approach has much stronger violations in the steady-state regime for a certain parameter window.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (135)

  1. A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for biomolecular processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 158101 (2015).
  2. T. R. Gingrich, J. M. Horowitz, N. Perunov, and J. L. England, Dissipation bounds all steady-state current fluctuations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 120601 (2016).
  3. A. C. Barato, R. Chetrite, A. Faggionato, and D. Gabrielli, A unifying picture of generalized thermodynamic uncertainty relations, J. Stat. Mech. (2019) 084017.
  4. G. Falasco, M. Esposito, and J.-C. Delvenne, Unifying thermodynamic uncertainty relations, New J. Phys. 22, 053046 (2020).
  5. Y. Hasegawa, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for general open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 010602 (2021).
  6. P. Menczel, E. Loisa, K. Brandner, and C. Flindt, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations for coherently driven open quantum systems, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 54, 314002 (2021).
  7. G. Falasco, M. Esposito, and J.-C. Delvenne, Beyond thermodynamic uncertainty relations: nonlinear response, error-dissipation trade-offs, and speed limits, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 55, 124002 (2022).
  8. H. B. Callen and T. A. Welton, Irreversibility and generalized noise, Phys. Rev. 83, 34 (1951).
  9. R. Kubo, The fluctuation-dissipation theorem, Rep. Prog. Phys. 29, 255 (1966).
  10. F. Carollo, R. L. Jack, and J. P. Garrahan, Unraveling the large deviation statistics of Markovian open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 130605 (2019).
  11. G. Guarnieri, G. T. Landi, S. R. Clark, and J. Goold, Thermodynamics of precision in quantum nonequilibrium steady states, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033021 (2019).
  12. Y. Hasegawa, Quantum thermodynamic uncertainty relation for continuous measurement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 050601 (2020).
  13. J. M. Horowitz and T. R. Gingrich, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations constrain non-equilibrium fluctuations, Nat. Phys. 16, 15 (2020).
  14. Y. Hasegawa, Irreversibility, Loschmidt echo, and thermodynamic uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 240602 (2021).
  15. P. Pietzonka, F. Ritort, and U. Seifert, Finite-time generalization of the thermodynamic uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. E 96, 012101 (2017).
  16. J. M. Horowitz and T. R. Gingrich, Proof of the finite-time thermodynamic uncertainty relation for steady-state currents, Phys. Rev. E 96, 020103(R) (2017).
  17. S. Otsubo, S. Ito, A. Dechant, and T. Sagawa, Estimating entropy production by machine learning of short-time fluctuating currents, Phys. Rev. E 101, 062106 (2020).
  18. K. Proesmans and C. V. den Broeck, Discrete-time thermodynamic uncertainty relation, Europhys. Lett. 119, 20001 (2017).
  19. A. C. Barato, R. Chetrite, A. Faggionato, and D. Gabrielli, Bounds on current fluctuations in periodically driven systems, New J. Phys. 20, 103023 (2018).
  20. V. Holubec and A. Ryabov, Cycling tames power fluctuations near optimum efficiency, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 120601 (2018).
  21. K. Macieszczak, K. Brandner, and J. P. Garrahan, Unified thermodynamic uncertainty relations in linear response, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 130601 (2018).
  22. S. K. Manikandan, D. Gupta, and S. Krishnamurthy, Inferring entropy production from short experiments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120603 (2020).
  23. T. Van Vu, V. T. Vo, and Y. Hasegawa, Entropy production estimation with optimal current, Phys. Rev. E 101, 042138 (2020).
  24. D.-K. Kim, Y. Bae, S. Lee, and H. Jeong, Learning entropy production via neural networks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 140604 (2020).
  25. S. K. Manikandan, S. Ghosh, A. Kundu, B. Das, V. Agrawal, D. Mitra, A. Banerjee, and S. Krishnamurthy, Quantitative analysis of non-equilibrium systems from short-time experimental data, Commun. Phys. 4, 258 (2021).
  26. S. Otsubo, S. K. Manikandan, T. Sagawa, and S. Krishnamurthy, Estimating time-dependent entropy production from non-equilibrium trajectories, Commun. Phys. 5, 11 (2022).
  27. S. V. Moreira, M. Radaelli, A. Candeloro, F. C. Binder, and M. T. Mitchison, Precision bounds for multiple currents in open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. E 111, 064107 (2025).
  28. A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Cost and precision of Brownian clocks, Phys. Rev. X 6, 041053 (2016).
  29. T. Koyuk and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for time-dependent driving, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 260604 (2020).
  30. L. M. Cangemi, M. Carrega, A. De Candia, V. Cataudella, G. De Filippis, M. Sassetti, and G. Benenti, Optimal energy conversion through antiadiabatic driving breaking time-reversal symmetry, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013237 (2021).
  31. L. P. Fischer, P. Pietzonka, and U. Seifert, Large deviation function for a driven underdamped particle in a periodic potential, Phys. Rev. E 97, 022143 (2018).
  32. J. S. Lee, J.-M. Park, and H. Park, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for underdamped Langevin systems driven by a velocity-dependent force, Phys. Rev. E 100, 062132 (2019).
  33. T. Van Vu and Y. Hasegawa, Uncertainty relations for underdamped Langevin dynamics, Phys. Rev. E 100, 032130 (2019).
  34. P. P. Potts and P. Samuelsson, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations including measurement and feedback, Phys. Rev. E 100, 052137 (2019).
  35. A. M. Timpanaro, G. Guarnieri, J. Goold, and G. T. Landi, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations from exchange fluctuation theorems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 090604 (2019).
  36. P. Pietzonka, A. C. Barato, and U. Seifert, Universal bound on the efficiency of molecular motors, J. Stat. Mech. (2016) 124004.
  37. M. W. Jack, N. J. López-Alamilla, and K. J. Challis, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations and molecular-scale energy conversion, Phys. Rev. E 101, 062123 (2020).
  38. Y. Song and C. Hyeon, Thermodynamic cost, speed, fluctuations, and error reduction of biological copy machines, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 11, 3136 (2020).
  39. M. Campisi and R. Fazio, The power of a critical heat engine, Nat. Commun. 7, 11895 (2016).
  40. V. Holubec and A. Ryabov, Work and power fluctuations in a critical heat engine, Phys. Rev. E 96, 030102(R) (2017).
  41. P. Pietzonka and U. Seifert, Universal trade-off between power, efficiency, and constancy in steady-state heat engines, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 190602 (2018).
  42. U. Seifert, From stochastic thermodynamics to thermodynamic inference, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 10, 171 (2019).
  43. W. Hwang and C. Hyeon, Energetic costs, precision, and transport efficiency of molecular motors, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 9, 513 (2018).
  44. G. Paneru, S. Dutta, T. Tlusty, and H. K. Pak, Reaching and violating thermodynamic uncertainty bounds in information engines, Phys. Rev. E 102, 032126 (2020).
  45. S. Pal, S. Saryal, D. Segal, T. S. Mahesh, and B. K. Agarwalla, Experimental study of the thermodynamic uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 022044(R) (2020).
  46. H. M. Friedman, B. K. Agarwalla, O. Shein-Lumbroso, O. Tal, and D. Segal, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation in atomic-scale quantum conductors, Phys. Rev. B 101, 195423 (2020).
  47. F. Taddei and R. Fazio, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations for systems with broken time reversal symmetry: The case of superconducting hybrid systems, Phys. Rev. B 108, 115422 (2023).
  48. K. Brandner, T. Hanazato, and K. Saito, Thermodynamic bounds on precision in ballistic multiterminal transport, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 090601 (2018).
  49. K. Ptaszyński, Coherence-enhanced constancy of a quantum thermoelectric generator, Phys. Rev. B 98, 085425 (2018).
  50. B. K. Agarwalla and D. Segal, Assessing the validity of the thermodynamic uncertainty relation in quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B 98, 155438 (2018).
  51. L. M. Cangemi, V. Cataudella, G. Benenti, M. Sassetti, and G. De Filippis, Violation of thermodynamics uncertainty relations in a periodically driven work-to-work converter from weak to strong dissipation, Phys. Rev. B 102, 165418 (2020).
  52. A. Rignon-Bret, G. Guarnieri, J. Goold, and M. T. Mitchison, Thermodynamics of precision in quantum nanomachines, Phys. Rev. E 103, 012133 (2021).
  53. A. Arash Sand Kalaee, A. Wacker, and P. P. Potts, Violating the thermodynamic uncertainty relation in the three-level maser, Phys. Rev. E 104, L012103 (2021).
  54. T. Van Vu and K. Saito, Thermodynamics of precision in Markovian open quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 140602 (2022).
  55. B. Mohan, R. Gangwar, T. Pandit, M. Lal Bera, M. Lewenstein, and M. Nath Bera, Coherent heat transfer leads to genuine quantum enhancement in performances of continuous engines, Phys. Rev. Appl. 23, 044050 (2025).
  56. S. Saryal, H. M. Friedman, D. Segal, and B. K. Agarwalla, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation in thermal transport, Phys. Rev. E 100, 042101 (2019).
  57. J. Liu and D. Segal, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation in quantum thermoelectric junctions, Phys. Rev. E 99, 062141 (2019).
  58. G. T. Landi, E. Novais, M. J. de Oliveira, and D. Karevski, Flux rectification in the quantum XXZ chain, Phys. Rev. E 90, 042142 (2014).
  59. F. Ciccarello, S. Lorenzo, V. Giovannetti, and G. M. Palma, Quantum collision models: Open system dynamics from repeated interactions, Phys. Rep. 954, 1 (2022).
  60. S. Cusumano, Quantum collision models: A beginner guide, Entropy 24, 1258 (2022).
  61. F. Ciccarello, G. M. Palma, and V. Giovannetti, Collision-model-based approach to non-Markovian quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 87, 040103(R) (2013).
  62. N. K. Bernardes, A. R. R. Carvalho, C. H. Monken, and M. F. Santos, Environmental correlations and Markovian to non-Markovian transitions in collisional models, Phys. Rev. A 90, 032111 (2014).
  63. S. Kretschmer, K. Luoma, and W. T. Strunz, Collision model for non-Markovian quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 94, 012106 (2016).
  64. S. Lorenzo, F. Ciccarello, G. M. Palma, and B. Vacchini, Quantum non-Markovian piecewise dynamics from collision models, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn. 24, 1740011 (2017).
  65. Z.-X. Man, Y.-J. Xia, and R. Lo Franco, Validity of the Landauer principle and quantum memory effects via collisional models, Phys. Rev. A 99, 042106 (2019).
  66. H. T. Şenyaşa, Ş. Kesgin, G. Karpat, and B. Çakmak, Entropy production in non-Markovian collision models: Information backflow vs. system-environment correlations, Entropy 24, 824 (2022).
  67. T. Saha, A. Das, and S. Ghosh, Quantum homogenization in non-Markovian collisional model, New J. Phys. 26, 023011 (2024).
  68. A. Levy and R. Kosloff, The local approach to quantum transport may violate the second law of thermodynamics, Europhys. Lett. 107, 20004 (2014).
  69. D. A. Chisholm, G. García-Pérez, M. A. C. Rossi, G. M. Palma, and S. Maniscalco, Stochastic collision model approach to transport phenomena in quantum networks, New J. Phys. 23, 033031 (2021).
  70. F. Tian, J. Zou, L. Li, H. Li, and B. Shao, Effect of inter-system coupling on heat transport in a microscopic collision model, Entropy 23, 471 (2021).
  71. G. Karpat, I. Yalçinkaya, and B. Çakmak, Quantum synchronization in a collision model, Phys. Rev. A 100, 012133 (2019).
  72. B. Çakmak, S. Campbell, B. Vacchini, Ö. E. Müstecaplioğlu, and M. Paternostro, Robust multipartite entanglement generation via a collision model, Phys. Rev. A 99, 012319 (2019).
  73. O. A. D. Molitor and G. T. Landi, Stroboscopic two-stroke quantum heat engines, Phys. Rev. A 102, 042217 (2020).
  74. P. Taranto, F. Bakhshinezhad, P. Schüttelkopf, F. Clivaz, and M. Huber, Exponential improvement for quantum cooling through finite-memory effects, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 054005 (2020).
  75. O. Abah and M. Paternostro, Implications of non-Markovian dynamics on information-driven engine, J. Phys. Commun. 4, 085016 (2020).
  76. S. Seah, M. Perarnau-Llobet, G. Haack, N. Brunner, and S. Nimmrichter, Quantum speed-up in collisional battery charging, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 100601 (2021).
  77. V. Scarani, M. Ziman, P. Štelmachovič, N. Gisin, and V. Bužek, Thermalizing quantum machines: Dissipation and entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 097905 (2002).
  78. L. Bruneau, A. Joye, and M. Merkli, Repeated interactions in open quantum systems, J. Math. Phys. 55, 075204 (2014).
  79. D. Grimmer, D. Layden, R. B. Mann, and E. Martín-Martínez, Open dynamics under rapid repeated interaction, Phys. Rev. A 94, 032126 (2016).
  80. S. Seah, S. Nimmrichter, and V. Scarani, Nonequilibrium dynamics with finite-time repeated interactions, Phys. Rev. E 99, 042103 (2019).
  81. M. Cattaneo, G. De Chiara, S. Maniscalco, R. Zambrini, and G. L. Giorgi, Collision models can efficiently simulate any multipartite Markovian quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 130403 (2021).
  82. P. Strasberg, Repeated interactions and quantum stochastic thermodynamics at strong coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 180604 (2019).
  83. N. K. Bernardes, J. P. S. Peterson, R. S. Sarthour, A. M. Souza, C. H. Monken, I. Roditi, I. S. Oliveira, and M. F. Santos, High resolution non-Markovianity in NMR, Sci. Rep. 6, 33945 (2016).
  84. J. T. Barreiro, M. Müller, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, T. Monz, M. Chwalla, M. Hennrich, C. F. Roos, P. Zoller, and R. Blatt, An open-system quantum simulator with trapped ions, Nature (London) 470, 486 (2011).
  85. Á. Cuevas, A. Geraldi, C. Liorni, L. D. Bonavena, A. De Pasquale, F. Sciarrino, V. Giovannetti, and P. Mataloni, All-optical implementation of collision-based evolutions of open quantum systems, Sci. Rep. 9, 3205 (2019).
  86. G. García-Pérez, M. A. C. Rossi, and S. Maniscalco, IBM Q experience as a versatile experimental testbed for simulating open quantum systems, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 1 (2020).
  87. A. Burger, L. C. Kwek, and D. Poletti, Digital quantum simulation of the spin-boson model under Markovian open-system dynamics, Entropy 24, 1766 (2022).
  88. M. Cattaneo, M. A. C. Rossi, G. García-Pérez, R. Zambrini, and S. Maniscalco, Quantum simulation of dissipative collective effects on noisy quantum computers, PRX Quantum 4, 010324 (2023).
  89. R. Erbanni, X. Xu, T. F. Demarie, and D. Poletti, Simulating quantum transport via collisional models on a digital quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 108, 032619 (2023).
  90. X. Mi, A. A. Michailidis, S. Shabani, K. C. Miao, P. V. Klimov, J. Lloyd, E. Rosenberg, R. Acharya, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen et al., Stable quantum-correlated many-body states through engineered dissipation, Science 383, 1332 (2024).
  91. D. Karevski and T. Platini, Quantum nonequilibrium steady states induced by repeated interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 207207 (2009).
  92. G. Guarnieri, D. Morrone, B. Çakmak, F. Plastina, and S. Campbell, Non-equilibrium steady-states of memoryless quantum collision models, Phys. Lett. A 384, 126576 (2020).
  93. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Measure for the degree of non-Markovian behavior of quantum processes in open systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 210401 (2009).
  94. E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and H.-P. Breuer, Measure for the non-Markovianity of quantum processes, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062115 (2010).
  95. F. L. S. Rodrigues, G. De Chiara, M. Paternostro, and G. T. Landi, Thermodynamics of weakly coherent collisional models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 140601 (2019).
  96. V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups of N-level systems, J. Math. Phys. 17, 821 (1976).
  97. G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976).
  98. H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, New York, 2002).
  99. R. Alicki and K. Lendi, Quantum Dynamical Semigroups and Applications (Springer, Berlin, 2007).
  100. A. Rivas and S. F. Huelga, Open Quantum Systems (Springer, Berlin, 2011).
  101. D. A. Lidar, Lecture notes on the theory of open quantum systems, arXiv:1902.00967.
  102. H. Spohn, Entropy production for quantum dynamical semigroups, J. Math. Phys. 19, 1227 (1978).
  103. H. Spohn and J. L. Lebowitz, Irreversible thermodynamics for quantum systems weakly coupled to thermal reservoirs, Adv. Chem. Phys. 38, 109 (1978).
  104. S. R. de Groot and P. Mazur, Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics (Dover, New York, 2013).
  105. P. Pietzonka, A. C. Barato, and U. Seifert, Universal bounds on current fluctuations, Phys. Rev. E 93, 052145 (2016).
  106. J. Liu and D. Segal, Coherences and the thermodynamic uncertainty relation: Insights from quantum absorption refrigerators, Phys. Rev. E 103, 032138 (2021).
  107. M. Esposito, U. Harbola, and S. Mukamel, Nonequilibrium fluctuations, fluctuation theorems, and counting statistics in quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 1665 (2009).
  108. M. Bruderer, L. D. Contreras-Pulido, M. Thaller, L. Sironi, D. Obreschkow, and M. B. Plenio, Inverse counting statistics for stochastic and open quantum systems: The characteristic polynomial approach, New J. Phys. 16, 033030 (2014).
  109. K. Prech, P. Johansson, E. Nyholm, G. T. Landi, C. Verdozzi, P. Samuelsson, and P. P. Potts, Entanglement and thermokinetic uncertainty relations in coherent mesoscopic transport, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023155 (2023).
  110. G. T. Landi, M. J. Kewming, M. T. Mitchison, and P. P. Potts, Current fluctuations in open quantum systems: Bridging the gap between quantum continuous measurements and full counting statistics, PRX Quantum 5, 020201 (2024).
  111. G. Kießlich, P. Samuelsson, A. Wacker, and E. Schöll, Counting statistics and decoherence in coupled quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 73, 033312 (2006).
  112. C. L. Latune, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, Negative contributions to entropy production induced by quantum coherences, Phys. Rev. A 102, 042220 (2020).
  113. M. Scandi, H. J. D. Miller, J. Anders, and M. Perarnau-Llobet, Quantum work statistics close to equilibrium, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023377 (2020).
  114. J. B. Brask and N. Brunner, Small quantum absorption refrigerator in the transient regime: Time scales, enhanced cooling, and entanglement, Phys. Rev. E 92, 062101 (2015).
  115. M. T. Mitchison, M. P. Woods, J. Prior, and M. Huber, Coherence-assisted single-shot cooling by quantum absorption refrigerators, New J. Phys. 17, 115013 (2015).
  116. S. Das, A. Misra, A. K. Pal, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Necessarily transient quantum refrigerator, Europhys. Lett. 125, 20007 (2019).
  117. R. Ghosh, A. Ghoshal, and U. Sen, Quantum thermal transistors: Operation characteristics in steady state versus transient regimes, Phys. Rev. A 103, 052613 (2021).
  118. A. Maity and A. Ghoshal, Using non-Markovian dynamics in effective-negative-temperature-based transient quantum otto engines, Phys. Rev. A 109, 022207 (2024).
  119. L. Razzoli, M. Carrega, F. Cavaliere, G. Benenti, and M. Sassetti, Synchronization-induced violation of thermodynamic uncertainty relations, Quantum Sci. Technol. 9, 045032 (2024).
  120. K. Luoma and J. Piilo, Discrete dynamics and non-Markovianity, J. Phys. B: At., Mol. Opt. Phys. 49, 125501 (2016).
  121. S. Wißmann, A. Karlsson, E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and H.-P. Breuer, Optimal state pairs for non-Markovian quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 86, 062108 (2012).
  122. M. Popovic, B. Vacchini, and S. Campbell, Entropy production and correlations in a controlled non-Markovian setting, Phys. Rev. A 98, 012130 (2018).
  123. S. Bhattacharya, A. Misra, C. Mukhopadhyay, and A. K. Pati, Exact master equation for a spin interacting with a spin bath: Non-Markovianity and negative entropy production rate, Phys. Rev. A 95, 012122 (2017).
  124. S. Marcantoni, S. Alipour, F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and A. T. Rezakhani, Entropy production and non-Markovian dynamical maps, Sci. Rep. 7, 12447 (2017).
  125. G. Argentieri, F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and M. Pezzutto, Violations of the second law of thermodynamics by a non-completely positive dynamics, Europhys. Lett. 107, 50007 (2014).
  126. Y. Y. Xu, J. Liu, and M. Feng, Positive entropy production rate induced by non-Markovianity, Phys. Rev. E 98, 032102 (2018).
  127. P. Strasberg and M. Esposito, Non-Markovianity and negative entropy production rates, Phys. Rev. E 99, 012120 (2019).
  128. Á. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Quantum non-Markovianity: Characterization, quantification and detection, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 094001 (2014).
  129. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and B. Vacchini, Colloquium: Non-Markovian dynamics in open quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 021002 (2016).
  130. M. Esposito, K. Lindenberg, and C. V. den Broeck, Entropy production as correlation between system and reservoir, New J. Phys. 12, 013013 (2010).
  131. G. T. Landi and M. Paternostro, Irreversible entropy production: From classical to quantum, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 035008 (2021).
  132. C. Sanderson and R. Curtin, Armadillo: A template-based C++ library for linear algebra, J. Open Source Softw. 1, 26 (2016).
  133. C. Sanderson and R. Curtin, A User-Friendly Hybrid Sparse Matrix Class in C++, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, edited by J. Davenport, M. Kauers, G. Labahn, J. Urban (Springer, New York, 2018), Vol. 10931, p. 430.
  134. S. G. Johnson, The nlopt nonlinear-optimization package, http://github.com/stevengj/nlopt.
  135. T. Chanda, Qiclib, https://titaschanda.github.io/QIClib.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 112, 022203– Published 5 August, 2025
  • Received 17 January 2025
  • Accepted 23 July 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