- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Letters

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

Measurement-Induced Crossover of Quantum Jump Statistics in Postselection-Free Many-Body Dynamics

Kazuki Yamamoto1,2,3,4,* and Ryusuke Hamazaki5

  • 1Research Institute for Innovation and Co-Creation, Osaka Metropolitan University, Sakai, Osaka 599-8531, Japan
  • 2Department of Physics, Osaka Metropolitan University, Sumiyoshi, Osaka 558-8585, Japan
  • 3Nambu Yoichiro Institute of Theoretical and Experimental Physics (NITEP), Osaka Metropolitan University, Sumiyoshi, Osaka 558-8585, Japan
  • 4Department of Physics, Institute of Science Tokyo, Meguro, Tokyo 152-8551, Japan
  • 5Nonequilibrium Quantum Statistical Mechanics RIKEN Hakubi Research Team, RIKEN Pioneering Research Institute (PRI), RIKEN iTHEMS, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan

  • *Contact author: kazuki-yamamoto@omu.ac.jp
PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 137, 040402 – Published 23 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/wv5b-r6sb

Abstract

We reveal a nontrivial crossover of subsystem fluctuations of quantum jumps in continuously monitored many-body systems, which have a trivial maximally mixed state as a steady-state density matrix. While the fluctuations exhibit the standard volume law ∝L following Poissonian statistics for sufficiently weak measurement strength, anomalous yet universal scaling law ∝Lα (α∼2.7 up to L=20) indicating super-Poissonian statistics appears for strong measurement strength. This drastically affects the precision of estimating the rate of quantum jumps: for strong (weak) measurement, the estimation uncertainty is enhanced (suppressed) as the system size increases. We demonstrate that the anomalous scaling of the subsystem fluctuation originates from an integrated many-body autocorrelation function and that the transient dynamics contributes to the scaling law rather than the Liouvillian gap. The measurement-induced crossover is accessed only from the postselection-free information obtained from the time and the position of quantum jumps and can be tested in ultracold atom experiments.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (110)

  1. M. Müller, S. Diehl, G. Pupillo, and P. Zoller, Engineered open systems and quantum simulations with atoms and ions, Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 61, 1 (2012).
  2. P. M. Harrington, E. J. Mueller, and K. W. Murch, Engineered dissipation for quantum information science, Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 660 (2022).
  3. R. Fazio, J. Keeling, L. Mazza, and M. Schiro, Many-body open quantum systems, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 99 (2025), 10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.99.
  4. A. J. Daley, Quantum trajectories and open many-body quantum systems, Adv. Phys. 63, 77 (2014).
  5. Y. Ashida, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, Non-Hermitian physics, Adv. Phys. 69, 249 (2020).
  6. M. P. Fisher, V. Khemani, A. Nahum, and S. Vijay, Random quantum circuits, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 14, 335 (2023).
  7. Y. Li, X. Chen, and Matthew P. A. Fisher, Quantum Zeno effect and the many-body entanglement transition, Phys. Rev. B 98, 205136 (2018).
  8. A. Chan, R. M. Nandkishore, M. Pretko, and G. Smith, Unitary-projective entanglement dynamics, Phys. Rev. B 99, 224307 (2019).
  9. B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of entanglement, Phys. Rev. X 9, 031009 (2019).
  10. Y. Li, X. Chen, and Matthew P. A. Fisher, Measurement-driven entanglement transition in hybrid quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. B 100, 134306 (2019).
  11. C. Noel, P. Niroula, D. Ahu, A. Risinger, L. Egan, D. Biswas, M. Cetina, A. V. Gorshkov, M. Gullans, D. A. Huse, and C. Monroe, Measurement-induced quantum phases realized in a trapped-ion quantum computer, Nat. Phys. 18, 760 (2022).
  12. J. M. Koh, S.-N. Sun, M. Motta, and A. J. Minnich, Measurement-induced entanglement phase transition on a superconducting quantum processor with mid-circuit readout, Nat. Phys. 19, 1314 (2023).
  13. Google Quantum AI, Measurement-induced entanglement and teleportation on a noisy quantum processor, Nature (London) 622, 481 (2023).
  14. X. Cao, A. Tilloy, and A. De Luca, Entanglement in a fermion chain under continuous monitoring, SciPost Phys. 7, 024 (2019).
  15. O. Alberton, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Entanglement transition in a monitored free-fermion chain: From extended criticality to area law, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 170602 (2021).
  16. X. Turkeshi, A. Biella, R. Fazio, M. Dalmonte, and M. Schiró, Measurement-induced entanglement transitions in the quantum Ising chain: From infinite to zero clicks, Phys. Rev. B 103, 224210 (2021).
  17. X. Turkeshi, M. Dalmonte, R. Fazio, and M. Schirò, Entanglement transitions from stochastic resetting of non-Hermitian quasiparticles, Phys. Rev. B 105, L241114 (2022).
  18. G. Piccitto, A. Russomanno, and D. Rossini, Entanglement transitions in the quantum Ising chain: A comparison between different unravelings of the same Lindbladian, Phys. Rev. B 105, 064305 (2022).
  19. Q. Tang and W. Zhu, Measurement-induced phase transition: A case study in the nonintegrable model by density-matrix renormalization group calculations, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013022 (2020).
  20. Y. Fuji and Y. Ashida, Measurement-induced quantum criticality under continuous monitoring, Phys. Rev. B 102, 054302 (2020).
  21. M. Szyniszewski, A. Romito, and H. Schomerus, Universality of entanglement transitions from stroboscopic to continuous measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 210602 (2020).
  22. O. Lunt and A. Pal, Measurement-induced entanglement transitions in many-body localized systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043072 (2020).
  23. S.-K. Jian, C. Liu, X. Chen, B. Swingle, and P. Zhang, Measurement-induced phase transition in the monitored Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 140601 (2021).
  24. M. Van Regemortel, Z.-P. Cian, A. Seif, H. Dehghani, and M. Hafezi, Entanglement entropy scaling transition under competing monitoring protocols, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 123604 (2021).
  25. Elmer V. H. Doggen, Y. Gefen, I. V. Gornyi, A. D. Mirlin, and D. G. Polyakov, Generalized quantum measurements with matrix product states: Entanglement phase transition and clusterization, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023146 (2022).
  26. T. Minato, K. Sugimoto, T. Kuwahara, and K. Saito, Fate of measurement-induced phase transition in long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 010603 (2022).
  27. T. Müller, S. Diehl, and M. Buchhold, Measurement-induced dark state phase transitions in long-ranged fermion systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 010605 (2022).
  28. M. Buchhold, Y. Minoguchi, A. Altland, and S. Diehl, Effective theory for the measurement-induced phase transition of Dirac fermions, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041004 (2021).
  29. K. Yamamoto and R. Hamazaki, Localization properties in disordered quantum many-body dynamics under continuous measurement, Phys. Rev. B 107, L220201 (2023).
  30. M. Szyniszewski, O. Lunt, and A. Pal, Disordered monitored free fermions, Phys. Rev. B 108, 165126 (2023).
  31. K. Mochizuki and R. Hamazaki, Measurement-induced spectral transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 010410 (2025).
  32. T. Matsubara, K. Yamamoto, and A. Koga, Measurement-induced phase transitions for free fermions in a quasiperiodic potential, Phys. Rev. B 112, 054309 (2025).
  33. N. Chakrabarti, N. Nirbhan, and A. Bhattacharyya, Dynamics of monitored SSH model in Krylov space: From complexity to quantum Fisher information, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2025) 203.
  34. Y. Ashida, S. Furukawa, and M. Ueda, Quantum critical behavior influenced by measurement backaction in ultracold gases, Phys. Rev. A 94, 053615 (2016).
  35. Y. Ashida, S. Furukawa, and M. Ueda, Parity-time-symmetric quantum critical phenomena, Nat. Commun. 8, 15791 (2017).
  36. K. Yamamoto, M. Nakagawa, M. Tezuka, M. Ueda, and N. Kawakami, Universal properties of dissipative Tomonaga-Luttinger liquids: Case study of a non-Hermitian XXZ spin chain, Phys. Rev. B 105, 205125 (2022).
  37. K. Yamamoto and N. Kawakami, Universal description of dissipative Tomonaga-Luttinger liquids with SU(N) spin symmetry: Exact spectrum and critical exponents, Phys. Rev. B 107, 045110 (2023).
  38. S. J. Garratt, Z. Weinstein, and E. Altman, Measurements conspire nonlocally to restructure critical quantum states, Phys. Rev. X 13, 021026 (2023).
  39. X. Sun, H. Yao, and S.-K. Jian, New critical states induced by measurement, arXiv:2301.11337.
  40. Q. Tang and X. Wen, A critical state under weak measurement is not critical, arXiv:2411.13705.
  41. Y. Ashida, S. Furukawa, and M. Oshikawa, System-environment entanglement phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 110, 094404 (2024).
  42. Y. Liu, S. Murciano, D. F. Mross, and J. Alicea, Boundary transitions from a single round of measurements on gapless quantum states, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 023293 (2025).
  43. M. J. Gullans and D. A. Huse, Scalable probes of measurement-induced criticality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 070606 (2020).
  44. Y. Li, Y. Zou, P. Glorioso, E. Altman, and Matthew P. A. Fisher, Cross entropy benchmark for measurement-induced phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 220404 (2023).
  45. S. J. Garratt and E. Altman, Probing postmeasurement entanglement without postselection, PRX Quantum 5, 030311 (2024).
  46. M. Ippoliti and V. Khemani, Postselection-free entanglement dynamics via spacetime duality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 060501 (2021).
  47. T.-C. Lu and T. Grover, Spacetime duality between localization transitions and measurement-induced transitions, PRX Quantum 2, 040319 (2021).
  48. A. G. Moghaddam, K. Pöyhönen, and T. Ojanen, Exponential shortcut to measurement-induced entanglement phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 020401 (2023).
  49. G. Passarelli, X. Turkeshi, A. Russomanno, P. Lucignano, M. Schirò, and R. Fazio, Many-body dynamics in monitored atomic gases without postselection barrier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 163401 (2024).
  50. M. McGinley, Postselection-free learning of measurement-induced quantum dynamics, PRX Quantum 5, 020347 (2024).
  51. X. Feng, J. Côté, S. Kourtis, and B. Skinner, Postselection-free experimental observation of the measurement-induced phase transition in circuits with universal gates, arXiv:2502.01735.
  52. F. Barratt, U. Agrawal, A. C. Potter, S. Gopalakrishnan, and R. Vasseur, Transitions in the learnability of global charges from local measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 200602 (2022).
  53. U. Agrawal, J. Lopez-Piqueres, R. Vasseur, S. Gopalakrishnan, and A. C. Potter, Observing quantum measurement collapse as a learnability phase transition, Phys. Rev. X 14, 041012 (2024).
  54. M. Ippoliti and V. Khemani, Learnability transitions in monitored quantum dynamics via eavesdropper’s classical shadows, PRX Quantum 5, 020304 (2024).
  55. A. A. Akhtar, H.-Y. Hu, and Y.-Z. You, Measurement-induced criticality is tomographically optimal, Phys. Rev. B 109, 094209 (2024).
  56. H. Singh, R. Vasseur, A. C. Potter, and S. Gopalakrishnan, Mixed-state learnability transitions in monitored noisy quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. B 113, 054305 (2026).
  57. J. P. Garrahan, R. L. Jack, V. Lecomte, E. Pitard, K. van Duijvendijk, and F. van Wijland, Dynamical first-order phase transition in kinetically constrained models of glasses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 195702 (2007).
  58. J. P. Garrahan, Simple bounds on fluctuations and uncertainty relations for first-passage times of counting observables, Phys. Rev. E 95, 032134 (2017).
  59. R. Chetrite and H. Touchette, Nonequilibrium Markov processes conditioned on large deviations, Ann. Henri Poincaré 16, 2005 (2015).
  60. J. P. Garrahan, Aspects of non-equilibrium in classical and quantum systems: Slow relaxation and glasses, dynamical large deviations, quantum non-ergodicity, and open quantum dynamics, Physica (Amsterdam) 504A, 130 (2018).
  61. G. Di Fresco, Y. L. Gal, D. Valenti, M. Schirò, and A. Carollo, Entanglement growth in the dark intervals of a locally monitored free-fermion chain, arXiv:2411.13667.
  62. Y. Le Gal, X. Turkeshi, and M. Schirò, Entanglement dynamics in monitored systems and the role of quantum jumps, PRX Quantum 5, 030329 (2024).
  63. J. P. Garrahan and I. Lesanovsky, Thermodynamics of quantum jump trajectories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 160601 (2010).
  64. A. C. Barato and U. Seifert, Thermodynamic uncertainty relation for biomolecular processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 158101 (2015).
  65. 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).
  66. J. M. Horowitz and T. R. Gingrich, Thermodynamic uncertainty relations constrain non-equilibrium fluctuations, Nat. Phys. 16, 15 (2020).
  67. M. Žnidarič, Exact large-deviation statistics for a nonequilibrium quantum spin chain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 040602 (2014).
  68. J. M. Hickey, C. Flindt, and J. P. Garrahan, Trajectory phase transitions and dynamical Lee-Yang zeros of the Glauber-Ising chain, Phys. Rev. E 88, 012119 (2013).
  69. I. Lesanovsky, M. van Horssen, M. Guţá, and J. P. Garrahan, Characterization of dynamical phase transitions in quantum jump trajectories beyond the properties of the stationary state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 150401 (2013).
  70. F. Carollo, J. P. Garrahan, I. Lesanovsky, and C. Pérez-Espigares, Making rare events typical in Markovian open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A 98, 010103(R) (2018).
  71. Z.-K. Liu, K.-H. Sun, A. Cabot, F. Carollo, J. Zhang, Z.-Y. Zhang, L.-H. Zhang, B. Liu, T.-Y. Han, Q. Li, Y. Ma, H.-C. Chen, I. Lesanovsky, D.-S. Ding, and B.-S. Shi, Emergence of subharmonics in a microwave driven dissipative Rydberg gas, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L032069 (2024).
  72. 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).
  73. C. Ates, B. Olmos, J. P. Garrahan, and I. Lesanovsky, Dynamical phases and intermittency of the dissipative quantum Ising model, Phys. Rev. A 85, 043620 (2012).
  74. B. Buča and T. Prosen, Exactly solvable counting statistics in open weakly coupled interacting spin systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 067201 (2014).
  75. M. Žnidarič, Anomalous nonequilibrium current fluctuations in the Heisenberg model, Phys. Rev. B 90, 115156 (2014).
  76. M. Žnidarič, Large-deviation statistics of a diffusive quantum spin chain and the additivity principle, Phys. Rev. E 89, 042140 (2014).
  77. M. J. Kewming, M. T. Mitchison, and G. T. Landi, Diverging current fluctuations in critical Kerr resonators, Phys. Rev. A 106, 033707 (2022).
  78. M. Matsumoto, M. Baggioli, and Z. Cai, Dissipative quantum phase transitions monitored by current fluctuations, Phys. Rev. A 112, 012226 (2025).
  79. M. Cech, M. Cea, M. C. Bañuls, I. Lesanovsky, and F. Carollo, Space-time correlations in monitored kinetically constrained discrete-time quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 230403 (2025).
  80. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/wv5b-r6sb for the numerical results on SFQJ, Vanom, and Vact in other many-body models; the γ dependence of Vanom; and the integrated autocorrelation functions and the Liouvillian gap in the Heisenberg and XX models, which includes Refs. [81–83].
  81. K. Yamamoto, Y. Ashida, and N. Kawakami, Rectification in nonequilibrium steady states of open many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043343 (2020).
  82. T. Haga, M. Nakagawa, R. Hamazaki, and M. Ueda, Quasiparticles of decoherence processes in open quantum many-body systems: Incoherentons, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043225 (2023).
  83. T. Ishiyama, K. Fujimoto, and T. Sasamoto, Exact density profile in a tight-binding chain with dephasing noise, J. Stat. Mech. (2025) 033103.

  84. In our calculation, we take tss=200 as one prototypical timescale that makes ρss reach a maximally mixed state. Practically, this value of tss has been chosen such that the local particle number relaxes to the infinite-temperature values and the trajectory average of the pure-state entanglement entropy saturates to the steady-state values.

  85. I. Poboiko, P. Pöpperl, I. V. Gornyi, and A. D. Mirlin, Theory of free fermions under random projective measurements, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041046 (2023).
  86. W. M. Itano, D. J. Heinzen, J. J. Bollinger, and D. J. Wineland, Quantum Zeno effect, Phys. Rev. A 41, 2295 (1990).
  87. J. Cresser, Ergodicity of quantum trajectory detection records, in Directions in Quantum Optics: A Collection of Papers Dedicated to the Memory of Dan Walls Including Papers Presented at the TAMU-ONR Workshop Held at Jackson, Wyoming, USA, 26–30 July 1999 (Springer, New York, 2001), pp. 358–369.
  88. T. Mori and T. Shirai, Symmetrized Liouvillian gap in Markovian open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 230404 (2023).
  89. T. Shirai and T. Mori, Accelerated decay due to operator spreading in bulk-dissipated quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 040201 (2024).
  90. Z. Cai and T. Barthel, Algebraic versus exponential decoherence in dissipative many-particle systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 150403 (2013).
  91. M. Žnidarič, Relaxation times of dissipative many-body quantum systems, Phys. Rev. E 92, 042143 (2015).

  92. The exponent 2.62±0.03 deviates a little from the exponent α=2.67±0.02 in Eq. (8) for the Heisenberg model. This stems from the system-size difference used in the calculation, where the latter exponent is obtained from the finite-size scaling analysis for L=8,…,18 in Fig. 3 and the former one is for L=8,…,14 in Fig. 4. In the former calculation, we need to compare it with the exponent of the Liouvillian gap, where the exact diagonalization of the Liouvillian numerically limits the system size.

  93. B. Paredes, A. Widera, V. Murg, O. Mandel, S. Fölling, I. Cirac, G. V. Shlyapnikov, T. W. Hänsch, and I. Bloch, Tonks–Girardeau gas of ultracold atoms in an optical lattice, Nature (London) 429, 277 (2004).
  94. T. Kinoshita, T. Wenger, and D. S. Weiss, Observation of a one-dimensional Tonks-Girardeau gas, Science 305, 1125 (2004).
  95. H. P. Lüschen, P. Bordia, S. S. Hodgman, M. Schreiber, S. Sarkar, A. J. Daley, M. H. Fischer, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and U. Schneider, Signatures of many-body localization in a controlled open quantum system, Phys. Rev. X 7, 011034 (2017).
  96. Y. S. Patil, S. Chakram, and M. Vengalattore, Measurement-induced localization of an ultracold lattice gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 140402 (2015).
  97. W. S. Bakr, J. I. Gillen, A. Peng, S. Fölling, and M. Greiner, A quantum gas microscope for detecting single atoms in a Hubbard-regime optical lattice, Nature (London) 462, 74 (2009).
  98. J. F. Sherson, C. Weitenberg, M. Endres, M. Cheneau, I. Bloch, and S. Kuhr, Single-atom-resolved fluorescence imaging of an atomic Mott insulator, Nature (London) 467, 68 (2010).
  99. P. Sierant, M. Lewenstein, A. Scardicchio, L. Vidmar, and J. Zakrzewski, Many-body localization in the age of classical computing, Rep. Prog. Phys. 88, 026502 (2025).
  100. A. Morvan, B. Villalonga, X. Mi, S. Mandra, A. Bengtsson, P. Klimov, Z. Chen, S. Hong, C. Erickson, I. Drozdov et al., Phase transitions in random circuit sampling, Nature (London) 634, 328 (2024).
  101. F. Minganti, A. Biella, N. Bartolo, and C. Ciuti, Spectral theory of Liouvillians for dissipative phase transitions, Phys. Rev. A 98, 042118 (2018).
  102. A. Bohrdt, C. B. Mendl, M. Endres, and M. Knap, Scrambling and thermalization in a diffusive quantum many-body system, New J. Phys. 19, 063001 (2017).
  103. P. Weinberg and M. Bukov, quspin: A python package for dynamics and exact diagonalisation of quantum many body systems part I: Spin chains, SciPost Phys. 2, 003 (2017).
  104. K. Yamamoto and R. Hamazaki, Dataset for “Measurement-induced crossover of quantum jump statistics in postselection-free many-body dynamics” [Data set], Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.15779102 (2025).
  105. N. Yoshioka and R. Hamazaki, Constructing neural stationary states for open quantum many-body systems, Phys. Rev. B 99, 214306 (2019).
  106. N. Shibata and H. Katsura, Dissipative spin chain as a non-Hermitian Kitaev ladder, Phys. Rev. B 99, 174303 (2019).
  107. K. Yamamoto, M. Nakagawa, N. Tsuji, M. Ueda, and N. Kawakami, Collective excitations and nonequilibrium phase transition in dissipative fermionic superfluids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 055301 (2021).
  108. T. Mori and T. Shirai, Resolving a discrepancy between Liouvillian gap and relaxation time in boundary-dissipated quantum many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 230604 (2020).
  109. T. Haga, M. Nakagawa, R. Hamazaki, and M. Ueda, Liouvillian skin effect: Slowing down of relaxation processes without gap closing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 070402 (2021).
  110. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, New York, 2002).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 137, 040402– Published 23 July, 2026
  • Received 6 March 2025
  • Revised 30 June 2025
  • 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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation