- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review B

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

Entanglement dynamics in minimal Kitaev chains

Vimalesh Kumar Vimal and Jorge Cayao

  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, Uppsala University, Box 516, S-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden

PDF

Phys. Rev. B 114, 034308 – Published 14 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/mql6-m1rw

Abstract

Minimal Kitaev chains host Majorana quasiparticles, which, although not topologically protected, exhibit spatial nonlocality and hence are expected to be useful for quantum information tasks. In this work, we consider two- and three-site Kitaev chains and investigate the dynamics of bipartite and multipartite entanglement by means of concurrence and geometric measure of entanglement. In two-site Kitaev chains, we find that maximally entangled states can robustly emerge, with their stability and periodicity highly controllable by the interplay between the superconducting pair potential and the on-site energies. At the finely tuned sweet spot, where Majorana quasiparticles appear, the system exhibits oscillations between separable and entangled states, whereas detuning introduces tunable valleys in the entanglement dynamics. Extending to the three-site Kitaev chain, we uncover rich bipartite and multipartite entanglement by generalizing the concepts of concurrence and geometric measure of entanglement. At the sweet spot, the Majorana quasiparticles emerging at the edges suppress concurrence between the edges, while a finite detuning is able to restore it. Depending on the initial state, the three-site Kitaev chain can dynamically generate either a maximally entangled Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state or an imperfect W-type state exhibiting multipartite entanglement, although a (maximally entangled) pure W state cannot be realized due to parity constraints. Our results provide a resource for generating and characterizing highly entangled states in minimal Kitaev chains, with potential relevance for quantum applications.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (133)

  1. Y. Tanaka, M. Sato, and N. Nagaosa, Symmetry and topology in superconductors–odd-frequency pairing and edge states–, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 81, 011013 (2012).
  2. M. Sato and S. Fujimoto, Majorana fermions and topology in superconductors, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 85, 072001 (2016).
  3. M. Sato and Y. Ando, Topological superconductors: A review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 076501 (2017).
  4. R. Aguado, Majorana quasiparticles in condensed matter, Riv. Nuovo Cimento 40, 523 (2017).
  5. R. M. Lutchyn, E. P. Bakkers, L. P. Kouwenhoven, P. Krogstrup, C. M. Marcus, and Y. Oreg, Majorana zero modes in superconductor–semiconductor heterostructures, Nat. Rev. Mater. 3, 52 (2018).
  6. J. Cayao, C. Triola, and A. M. Black-Schaffer, Odd-frequency superconducting pairing in one-dimensional systems, Eur. Phys. J.: Spec. Top. 229, 545 (2020).
  7. S. M. Frolov, M. J. Manfra, and J. D. Sau, Topological superconductivity in hybrid devices, Nat. Phys. 16, 718 (2020).
  8. K. Flensberg, F. von Oppen, and A. Stern, Engineered platforms for topological superconductivity and Majorana zero modes, Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 944 (2021).
  9. Y. Tanaka, S. Tamura, and J. Cayao, Theory of Majorana zero modes in unconventional superconductors, Prog. Theor. Exp. 2024, 08C105 (2024).
  10. Y. Fukaya, B. Lu, K. Yada, Y. Tanaka, and J. Cayao, Superconducting phenomena in systems with unconventional magnets, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37, 313003 (2025).
  11. S. D. Sarma, M. Freedman, and C. Nayak, Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation, npj Quantum Inf. 1, 15001 (2015).
  12. V. Lahtinen and J. K. Pachos, A short introduction to topological quantum computation, SciPost Phys. 3, 021 (2017).
  13. C. W. J. Beenakker, Search for non-Abelian Majorana braiding statistics in superconductors, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 15 (2020).
  14. R. Aguado and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Majorana qubits for topological quantum computing, Phys. Today 73(6), 44 (2020).
  15. P. Marra, Majorana nanowires for topological quantum computation, J. Appl. Phys. 132, 231101 (2022).
  16. D. Aasen, M. Aghaee, Z. Alam, M. Andrzejczuk, A. Antipov, M. Astafev, L. Avilovas, A. Barzegar, B. Bauer, J. Becker, J. M. Bello-Rivas, U. Bhaskar, A. Bocharov, S. Boddapati, D. Bohn, J. Bommer, P. Bonderson, J. Borovsky, L. Bourdet, S. Boutin, et al., Blueprint for fault-tolerant quantum computation with topological qubit arrays, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 041002 (2025).
  17. A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Phys. Usp. 44, 131 (2001).
  18. M. Sato, Y. Takahashi, and S. Fujimoto, Non-Abelian topological order in s-wave superfluids of ultracold fermionic atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 020401 (2009).
  19. M. Sato, Y. Takahashi, and S. Fujimoto, Non-Abelian topological orders and Majorana fermions in spin-singlet superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 82, 134521 (2010).
  20. R. M. Lutchyn, J. D. Sau, and S. Das Sarma, Majorana fermions and a topological phase transition in semiconductor-superconductor heterostructures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 077001 (2010).
  21. Y. Oreg, G. Refael, and F. von Oppen, Helical liquids and Majorana bound states in quantum wires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 177002 (2010).
  22. R. Aguado, A perspective on semiconductor-based superconducting qubits, Appl. Phys. Lett. 117, 240501 (2020).
  23. E. Prada, R. Aguado, and P. San-Jose, Measuring Majorana nonlocality and spin structure with a quantum dot, Phys. Rev. B 96, 085418 (2017).
  24. D. J. Clarke, Experimentally accessible topological quality factor for wires with zero energy modes, Phys. Rev. B 96, 201109(R) (2017).
  25. J. Cayao, P. San-Jose, A. M. Black-Schaffer, R. Aguado, and E. Prada, Majorana splitting from critical currents in Josephson junctions, Phys. Rev. B 96, 205425 (2017).
  26. J. Cayao and A. M. Black-Schaffer, Distinguishing trivial and topological zero-energy states in long nanowire junctions, Phys. Rev. B 104, L020501 (2021).
  27. J. Cayao, N. Nagaosa, and Y. Tanaka, Enhancing the Josephson diode effect with Majorana bound states, Phys. Rev. B 109, L081405 (2024).
  28. V. K. Vimal and J. Cayao, Entanglement measures of Majorana bound states, Phys. Rev. B 110, 224510 (2024).
  29. S. Mondal, P.-H. Fu, and J. Cayao, Josephson diode effect with Andreev and Majorana bound states, Phys. Rev. B 112, 144506 (2025).
  30. C. Payá, R. Aguado, P. San-Jose, and E. Prada, Josephson effect and critical currents in trivial and topological full-shell hybrid nanowires, Phys. Rev. B 111, 235420 (2025).
  31. J. Cayao, E. Prada, P. San-Jose, and R. Aguado, SNS junctions in nanowires with spin-orbit coupling: Role of confinement and helicity on the subgap spectrum, Phys. Rev. B 91, 024514 (2015).
  32. E. Prada, P. San-Jose, M. W. de Moor, A. Geresdi, E. J. Lee, J. Klinovaja, D. Loss, J. Nygård, R. Aguado, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, From Andreev to Majorana bound states in hybrid superconductor–semiconductor nanowires, Nat. Rev. Phys. 2, 575 (2020).
  33. M. Valentini, F. Peñaranda, A. Hofmann, M. Brauns, R. Hauschild, P. Krogstrup, P. San-Jose, E. Prada, R. Aguado, and G. Katsaros, Nontopological zero-bias peaks in full-shell nanowires induced by flux-tunable Andreev states, Science 373, 82 (2021).
  34. M. Aghaee, A. Alcaraz Ramirez, Z. Alam, R. Ali, M. Andrzejczuk, A. Antipov, M. Astafev, A. Barzegar, B. Bauer, J. Becker, U. K. Bhaskar, A. Bocharov, S. Boddapati, D. Bohn, J. Bommer, L. Bourdet, A. Bousquet, S. Boutin, L. Casparis, B. J. Chapman, et al., Interferometric single-shot parity measurement in InAs–Al hybrid devices, Nature (London) 638, 651 (2025).
  35. M. Leijnse and K. Flensberg, Parity qubits and poor man's Majorana bound states in double quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 86, 134528 (2012).
  36. J. D. Sau and S. D. Sarma, Realizing a robust practical Majorana chain in a quantum-dot-superconductor linear array, Nat. Commun. 3, 964 (2012).
  37. A. Tsintzis, R. S. Souto, and M. Leijnse, Creating and detecting poor man's Majorana bound states in interacting quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 106, L201404 (2022).
  38. A. Tsintzis, R. S. Souto, K. Flensberg, J. Danon, and M. Leijnse, Majorana qubits and non-Abelian physics in quantum dot–based minimal Kitaev chains, PRX Quantum 5, 010323 (2024).
  39. R. S. Souto, A. Tsintzis, M. Leijnse, and J. Danon, Probing Majorana localization in minimal Kitaev chains through a quantum dot, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043182 (2023).
  40. C.-X. Liu, A. M. Bozkurt, F. Zatelli, S. L. D. ten Haaf, T. Dvir, and M. Wimmer, Enhancing the excitation gap of a quantum-dot-based Kitaev chain, Commun. Phys. 7, 235 (2024).
  41. M. Alvarado, A. Levy Yeyati, R. Aguado, and R. Seoane Souto, Interplay between Majorana and Shiba states in a minimal Kitaev chain coupled to a superconductor, Phys. Rev. B 110, 245144 (2024).
  42. M. Nitsch, L. Maffi, V. V. Baran, R. S. Souto, J. Paaske, M. Leijnse, and M. Burrello, The poor man's Majorana tetron, PRX Quantum 6, 030365 (2025).
  43. W. Samuelson, V. Svensson, and M. Leijnse, Minimal quantum dot based Kitaev chain with only local superconducting proximity effect, Phys. Rev. B 109, 035415 (2024).
  44. J. Cayao, Emergent pair symmetries in systems with poor man's Majorana modes, Phys. Rev. B 110, 125408 (2024).
  45. J. Cayao and R. Aguado, Non-Hermitian minimal Kitaev chains, Phys. Rev. B 111, 205432 (2025).
  46. M. Luethi, H. F. Legg, D. Loss, and J. Klinovaja, Fate of poor man's Majoranas in the long Kitaev chain limit, Phys. Rev. B 111, 115419 (2025).
  47. M. Luethi, H. F. Legg, D. Loss, and J. Klinovaja, From perfect to imperfect poor man's Majoranas in minimal Kitaev chains, Phys. Rev. B 110, 245412 (2024).
  48. J. Cayao and M. Sato, Nonlocal Josephson diode effect in minimal Kitaev chains, Phys. Rev. Res. 8, 013326 (2026).
  49. R. Seoane Souto and R. Aguado, Subgap states in semiconductor-superconductor devices for quantum technologies: Andreev qubits and minimal Majorana chains, in New Trends and Platforms for Quantum Technologies, edited by R. Aguado, R. Citro, M. Lewenstein, and M. Stern (Springer Nature, Cham, Switzerland, 2024), pp. 133–223.
  50. T. Dvir, G. Wang, N. van Loo, C.-X. Liu, G. P. Mazur, A. Bordin, S. L. Ten Haaf, J.-Y. Wang, D. van Driel, F. Zatelli, et al., Realization of a minimal Kitaev chain in coupled quantum dots, Nature (London) 614, 445 (2023).
  51. A. Bordin, G. Wang, C.-X. Liu, S. L. D. ten Haaf, N. van Loo, G. P. Mazur, D. Xu, D. van Driel, F. Zatelli, S. Gazibegovic, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, M. Wimmer, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and T. Dvir, Tunable crossed Andreev reflection and elastic cotunneling in hybrid nanowires, Phys. Rev. X 13, 031031 (2023).
  52. A. Bordin, X. Li, D. van Driel, J. C. Wolff, Q. Wang, S. L. D. ten Haaf, G. Wang, N. van Loo, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and T. Dvir, Crossed Andreev reflection and elastic cotunneling in three quantum dots coupled by superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 056602 (2024).
  53. F. Zatelli, D. van Driel, D. Xu, G. Wang, C.-X. Liu, A. Bordin, B. Roovers, G. P. Mazur, N. van Loo, J. C. Wolff, et al., Robust poor man's Majorana zero modes using Yu-Shiba-Rusinov states, Nat. Commun. 15, 7933 (2024).
  54. S. L. Ten Haaf, Q. Wang, A. M. Bozkurt, C.-X. Liu, I. Kulesh, P. Kim, D. Xiao, C. Thomas, M. J. Manfra, T. Dvir, et al., A two-site Kitaev chain in a two-dimensional electron gas, Nature (London) 630, 329 (2024).
  55. N. van Loo, F. Zatelli, G. O. Steffensen, B. Roovers, G. Wang, T. V. Caekenberghe, A. Bordin, D. van Driel, Y. Zhang, W. D. Huisman, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, G. P. Mazur, R. Aguado, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Single-shot parity readout of a minimal Kitaev chain, Nature 650, 334 (2026).
  56. R. A. Dourado, M. Leijnse, and R. S. Souto, Majorana sweet spots in 3-site Kitaev chains, Phys. Rev. B 111, 235409 (2025).
  57. X. Yang, Z. Lyu, X. Wang, E. Zhuo, Y. Zhang, D. Wang, Y. Shi, Y. Huang, B. Li, X. Song, P. Li, B. Tong, Z. Dou, J. Shen, G. Liu, F. Qu, and L. Lu, Procedure to tune a three-site artificial Kitaev chain to host Majorana bound states based on transmon measurements, Phys. Rev. B 112, 165418 (2025).
  58. S. L. D. ten Haaf, Y. Zhang, Q. Wang, A. Bordin, C.-X. Liu, I. Kulesh, V. P. M. Sietses, C. G. Prosko, D. Xiao, C. Thomas, M. J. Manfra, M. Wimmer, and S. Goswami, Observation of edge and bulk states in a three-site Kitaev chain, Nature (London) 641, 890 (2025).
  59. A. Bordin, C.-X. Liu, T. Dvir, F. Zatelli, S. L. D. ten Haaf, D. van Driel, G. Wang, N. van Loo, Y. Zhang, J. C. Wolff, T. Van Caekenberghe, G. Badawy, S. Gazibegovic, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, M. Wimmer, L. P. Kouwenhoven, and G. P. Mazur, Enhanced Majorana stability in a three-site Kitaev chain, Nat. Nanotechnol. 20, 726 (2025).
  60. A. Bordin, F. J. B. Evertsz', B. Roovers, J. D. T. Luna, W. D. Huisman, F. Zatelli, G. P. Mazur, S. L. D. ten Haaf, G. Badawy, E. P. A. M. Bakkers, C.-X. Liu, R. S. Souto, N. van Loo, and L. P. Kouwenhoven, Probing Majorana localization of a phase-controlled three-site Kitaev chain with an additional quantum dot, Nat. Commun. 17, 2313 (2026).
  61. D. Maroulakos, C. Jasiukiewicz, A. Wal, A. Sinner, I. Weymann, T. Domański, and L. Chotorlishvili, Majorana signatures in the tripartite uncertainty relations with quantum memory, Phys. Rev. B 111, 224426 (2025).
  62. C. Jasiukiewicz, A. Sinner, I. Weymann, T. Domański, and L. Chotorlishvili, Entanglement between quantum dots transmitted via a Majorana wire: Insights from the fermionic negativity, concurrence, and quantum mutual information, Phys. Rev. B 111, 075415 (2025).
  63. L. Chen, Y.-Q. Zhang, and R.-S. Han, Robustness of coherence between two quantum dots mediated by Majorana fermions*, Chin. Phys. B 27, 077102 (2018).
  64. Z. Wang, X.-Y. Hu, Q.-F. Liang, and X. Hu, Detecting Majorana fermions by nonlocal entanglement between quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 87, 214513 (2013).
  65. S. Plugge, A. Zazunov, P. Sodano, and R. Egger, Majorana entanglement bridge, Phys. Rev. B 91, 214507 (2015).
  66. Z. C. Shi, W. Wang, and X. X. Yi, Entangled states of two quantum dots mediated by Majorana fermions, New J. Phys. 18, 023005 (2016).
  67. It is worth noting that entanglement has also been widely used as probe of topological phase transitions in several large Kitaev systems via the entanglement entropy and spectrum; see, e.g., Refs.  [128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133].
  68. J.-Z. Xu, J.-B. Guo, W. Wen, Y.-K. Bai, and F. Yan, Entanglement evolution of three-qubit mixed states in multipartite cavity–reservoir systems, Chin. Phys. B 21, 080305 (2012).
  69. B.-Q. Liu, B. Shao, and J. Zou, Entanglement of two qubits coupled to an xy spin chain: Role of energy current, Phys. Rev. A 80, 062322 (2009).
  70. E. del Valle, Steady-state entanglement of two coupled qubits, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 28, 228 (2011).
  71. Z. Wang, W. Wu, and J. Wang, Steady-state entanglement and coherence of two coupled qubits in equilibrium and nonequilibrium environments, Phys. Rev. A 99, 042320 (2019).
  72. L. T. Kenfack, M. Tchoffo, L. C. Fai, and G. C. Fouokeng, Decoherence and tripartite entanglement dynamics in the presence of Gaussian and non-Gaussian classical noise, Physica B 511, 123 (2017).
  73. W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of formation and concurrence, Quantum Inf. Comput. 1, 27 (2001).
  74. V. K. Vimal and V. Subrahmanyam, Quantum correlations and entanglement in a Kitaev-type spin chain, Phys. Rev. A 98, 052303 (2018).
  75. A. Osterloh, L. Amico, G. Falci, and R. Fazio, Scaling of entanglement close to a quantum phase transition, Nature (London) 416, 608 (2002).
  76. T.-C. Wei and P. M. Goldbart, Geometric measure of entanglement and applications to bipartite and multipartite quantum states, Phys. Rev. A 68, 042307 (2003).
  77. W. Dür, G. Vidal, and J. I. Cirac, Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways, Phys. Rev. A 62, 062314 (2000).
  78. S. S. Sharma and N. K. Sharma, Two-way and three-way negativities of three-qubit entangled states, Phys. Rev. A 76, 012326 (2007).
  79. X. S. Ma, G. S. Liu, and A. M. Wang, Entanglement dynamics of three-qubit states under a spin environment, Int. J. Quantum Inf. 09, 791 (2011).
  80. M. Xiao-San, L. Gao-Sheng, and W. An-Min, Entanglement evolution of three-qubit states under local decoherence, Commun. Theor. Phys. 54, 79 (2010).
  81. R. Orús, S. Dusuel, and J. Vidal, Equivalence of critical scaling laws for many-body entanglement in the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 025701 (2008).
  82. D. Zhu, G.-G. He, and F.-L. Zhang, Locality of three-qubit Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger-symmetric states, Phys. Rev. A 105, 062202 (2022).
  83. L. Xiong, J. Liu, and Q. Qin, The geometric measure of entanglement of multipartite states and the z-eigenvalue of tensors, Quantum Inf. Proc. 21, 102 (2022).
  84. V. Gulati, S. Siyanwal, Arvind, and K. Dorai, ANN-enhanced detection of multipartite entanglement in a three-qubit NMR quantum processor, Quantum Inf. Proc. 24, 74 (2025).
  85. R. Hübener, M. Kleinmann, T.-C. Wei, C. González-Guillén, and O. Gühne, Geometric measure of entanglement for symmetric states, Phys. Rev. A 80, 032324 (2009).
  86. S. Hu, L. Qi, and G. Zhang, Computing the geometric measure of entanglement of multipartite pure states by means of non-negative tensors, Phys. Rev. A 93, 012304 (2016).
  87. A. Streltsov, H. Kampermann, and D. Bruß, Linking a distance measure of entanglement to its convex roof, New J. Phys. 12, 123004 (2010).
  88. A. Shimony, Degree of entanglement, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 755, 675 (1995).
  89. L. Qi, Eigenvalues and invariants of tensors, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 325, 1363 (2007).
  90. D. Ramachandran and R. Vathsan, A sharp geometric measure of entanglement, Quantum Inf. Proc. 24, 257 (2024).
  91. A. Mishra, S. Mahanti, A. K. Roy, and P. K. Panigrahi, Geometric genuine multipartite entanglement for four-qubit systems, Phys. Open 20, 100230 (2024).
  92. L. T. Weinbrenner and O. Gühne, Quantifying entanglement from the geometric perspective, Europhys. Lett. 151, 68001 (2025).
  93. D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilenger, Going beyond Bell's theorem, in Bell's Theorem, Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe, edited by M. C. Kafatos (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 1989), pp. 69–72.
  94. D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and A. Zeilinger, Bell's theorem without inequalities, Am. J. Phys. 58, 1131 (1990).
  95. E. D'Hondt and P. Panangaden, The computational power of the W and GHZ states, Quantum Inf. Comput. 6, 173 (2006).
  96. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nat. Photon. 5, 222 (2011).
  97. C. Yin, Fast and accurate Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger encoding using all-to-all interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 130604 (2025).
  98. S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, and L. Banchi, Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communications, Nat. Commun. 8, 15043 (2017).
  99. V. Lipinska, G. Murta, and S. Wehner, Anonymous transmission in a noisy quantum network using the W state, Phys. Rev. A 98, 052320 (2018).
  100. J. Miguel-Ramiro, F. Riera-Sàbat, and W. Dür, Quantum repeater for W states, PRX Quantum 4, 040323 (2023).
  101. J. Gao, L. Santos, G. Krishna, Z.-S. Xu, A. Iovan, S. Steinhauer, O. Gühne, P. J. Poole, D. Dalacu, V. Zwiller, and A. W. Elshaari, Scalable generation and detection of on-demand W states in nanophotonic circuits, Nano Lett. 23, 5350 (2023).
  102. L. P. Yang, J. P. Wang, Y. Q. Ji, J. Wang, Z. M. Zhang, Y. L. Liu, L. Dong, and X. M. Xiu, Fast generation of GHZ state with Rydberg superatom by transitionless quantum driving, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 626 (2024).
  103. S. Dogra, K. Dorai, and Arvind, Experimental construction of generic three-qubit states and their reconstruction from two-party reduced states on an NMR quantum information processor, Phys. Rev. A 91, 022312 (2015).
  104. K. J. Resch, P. Walther, and A. Zeilinger, Full characterization of a three-photon Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state using quantum state tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 070402 (2005).
  105. H. Mikami, Y. Li, K. Fukuoka, and T. Kobayashi, New high-visibility two-photon interference with a beam splitter in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 150404 (2005).
  106. R. J. Nelson, D. G. Cory, and S. Lloyd, Experimental demonstration of Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger correlations using nuclear magnetic resonance, Phys. Rev. A 61, 022106 (2000).
  107. A. Ekert, E. Knill, W. H. Zurek, P. Catasti, and S. V. S. Mariappan, NMR Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 356, 1941 (1998).
  108. Z. Bao, S. Xu, Z. Song, K. Wang, L. Xiang, Z. Zhu, J. Chen, F. Jin, X. Zhu, Y. Gao, Y. Wu, C. Zhang, N. Wang, Y. Zou, Z. Tan, A. Zhang, Z. Cui, F. Shen, J. Zhong, T. Li, et al., Creating and controlling global Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger entanglement on quantum processors, Nat. Commun. 15, 8823 (2024).
  109. K. Su, Z.-H. Sun, and H. Fan, Quench dynamics of entanglement spectra and topological superconducting phases in a long-range Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. A 101, 063613 (2020).
  110. J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Quantum many-body systems out of equilibrium, Nat. Phys. 11, 124 (2015).
  111. M. Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions: A review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 054001 (2018).
  112. T.-S. Deng and F. Yang, Dissipation-driven topological phase transitions in open quantum systems independent of system Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. B 113, 024312 (2026).
  113. W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary state of two qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998).
  114. M. Bourennane, M. Eibl, C. Kurtsiefer, S. Gaertner, H. Weinfurter, O. Gühne, P. Hyllus, D. Bruß, M. Lewenstein, and A. Sanpera, Experimental detection of multipartite entanglement using witness operators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 087902 (2004).
  115. O. Gühne and G. Tóth, Entanglement detection, Phys. Rep. 474, 1 (2009).
  116. M. Choi, E. Bae, and S. Lee, Genuine multipartite entanglement measures based on multi-party teleportation capability, Sci. Rep. 13, 15013 (2023).
  117. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010).
  118. N. P. Bauer, J. C. Budich, B. Trauzettel, and A. Calzona, Quench-probe setup as analyzer of fractionalized entanglement spreading, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 190401 (2023).
  119. N. P. Bauer, B. Trauzettel, T. K. Kvorning, J. H. Bardarson, and C. Artiaco, Local information flow in quantum quench dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 112, 022221 (2025).
  120. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009).
  121. V. Kumar Vimal and V. Subrahmanyam, Magnetization revivals and dynamics of quantum correlations in a Kitaev spin chain, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012406 (2020).
  122. S. R. Hedemann, X states of the same spectrum and entanglement as all two-qubit states, Quantum Inf. Proc. 17, 293 (2018).
  123. A pure W state can be created in three-qubit systems under certain circumstances [76, 77], where neither |000〉 nor |111〉 appears in the eigenstates, and where the initial state also lacks these configurations. The system must then evolve under dynamics that preserve these conditions.
  124. Y. Yeo and W. K. Chua, Teleportion via preparatory entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 060502 (2006).
  125. M. Hillery, V. Bužek, and A. Berthiaume, Quantum secret sharing, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1829 (1999).
  126. L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018).
  127. D. M. Pino, R. S. Souto, and R. Aguado, Minimal Kitaev-transmon qubit based on double quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B 109, 075101 (2024).
  128. W.-H. Zhong, H.-Q. Lin, and X.-J. Yu, Quantum entanglement of fermionic symmetry-enriched quantum critical points in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B 112, 075129 (2025).
  129. G. Lee, T. Jin, Y.-X. Wang, A. McDonald, and A. Clerk, Entanglement phase transition due to reciprocity breaking without measurement or postselection, PRX Quantum 5, 010313 (2024).
  130. R. Nehra, D. S. Bhakuni, A. Ramachandran, and A. Sharma, Flat bands and entanglement in the Kitaev ladder, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013175 (2020).
  131. D. J. Yates and A. Mitra, Entanglement properties of the time-periodic Kitaev chain, Phys. Rev. B 96, 115108 (2017).
  132. L. Levy and M. Goldstein, Entanglement and disordered-enhanced topological phase in the Kitaev chain, Universe 5, 33 (2019).
  133. L. Pezzè, M. Gabbrielli, L. Lepori, and A. Smerzi, Multipartite entanglement in topological quantum phases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 250401 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. B 114, 034308– Published 14 July, 2026
  • Received 25 July 2025
  • Revised 12 February 2026
  • Accepted 24 June 2026
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. Funded by Bibsam.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation