- 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

Quantum versus Classical Thermal Transport at Low Temperatures

Zhixing Zou1,2, Jiangbin Gong1,2,3, Jiao Wang4,5, Giulio Casati6,7, and Giuliano Benenti6,8

PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 066305 – Published 11 February, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/zl25-tjt9

Abstract

This Letter aims to understand how quantum mechanics affects heat transport at low temperatures. In the classical setting, by considering a simple paradigmatic model, our simulations reveal the emergence of negative differential thermal resistance: paradoxically, increasing the temperature bias by lowering the cold bath temperature reduces the steady-state heat current. In sharp contrast, the quantum version of the model, treated via a Lindblad master equation, exhibits no negative differential thermal resistance: the heat current increases monotonically with thermal bias. This marked divergence highlights the fundamental role of quantum effects in low-temperature thermal transport and underscores the need to reconsider classical predictions when designing and optimizing nanoscale thermal devices.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (60)

  1. A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 22, 180 (1907).
  2. P. Debye, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 344, 789 (1912).
  3. C. Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics, 8th ed. (Wiley, New York, 2005).
  4. J. P. Pekola and B. Karimi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 041001 (2021).
  5. G. Wehmeyer, T. Yabuki, C. Monachon, J. Wu, and C. Dames, Appl. Phys. Rev. 4, 041304 (2017).
  6. W.-R. Zhong, D.-Q. Zheng, and B. Hu, Nanoscale 4, 5217 (2012).
  7. L. Wang and B. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 177208 (2007).
  8. L. Wang and B. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 267203 (2008).
  9. N. Li, J. Ren, L. Wang, G. Zhang, P. Hänggi, and B. Li, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 1045 (2012).
  10. B. Li, L. Wang, and G. Casati, Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 143501 (2006).
  11. K. Joulain, J. Drevillon, Y. Ezzahri, and J. Ordonez-Miranda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 200601 (2016).
  12. A. Sood, F. Xiong, S. Chen, H. Wang, D. Selli, J. Zhang, C. J. McClellan, J. Sun, D. Donadio, Y. Cui, E. Pop, and K. E. Goodson, Nat. Commun. 9, 4510 (2018).
  13. J. Wang, G. Casati, and G. Benenti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 110607 (2020).
  14. Y. Li, Y. Dang, S. Zhang, X. Li, Y. Jin, P. Ben-Abdallah, J. Xu, and Y. Ma, Phys. Rev. Appl. 20, 024061 (2023).
  15. L. Castelli, Q. Zhu, T. J. Shimokusu, and G. Wehmeyer, Nat. Commun. 14, 393 (2023).
  16. J. W. Lim, A. Majumder, R. Mittapally, A.-R. Gutierrez, Y. Luan, E. Meyhofer, and P. Reddy, Nat. Commun. 15, 5584 (2024).
  17. B. Li, L. Wang, and G. Casati, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 184301 (2004).
  18. D. Segal, Phys. Rev. B 73, 205415 (2006).
  19. N. Yang, N. Li, L. Wang, and B. Li, Phys. Rev. B 76, 020301(R) (2007).
  20. W. Chung Lo, L. Wang, and B. Li, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 77, 054402 (2008).
  21. W.-R. Zhong, P. Yang, B.-Q. Ai, Z.-G. Shao, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. E 79, 050103(R) (2009).
  22. Z.-G. Shao, L. Yang, H.-K. Chan, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. E 79, 061119 (2009).
  23. D. He, S. Buyukdagli, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. B 80, 104302 (2009).
  24. D. He, B.-Q. Ai, H.-K. Chan, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. E 81, 041131 (2010).
  25. E. Pereira, Phys. Rev. E 82, 040101(R) (2010).
  26. W.-R. Zhong, M.-P. Zhang, B.-Q. Ai, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. E 84, 031130 (2011).
  27. W. Fu, T. Jin, D. He, and S. Qu, Physica (Amsterdam) 433A, 211 (2015).
  28. H.-K. Chan, D. He, and B. Hu, Phys. Rev. E 89, 052126 (2014).
  29. M. S. Mendonça and E. Pereira, Phys. Lett. A 379, 1983 (2015).
  30. R. Luo, Phys. Rev. E 99, 032138 (2019).
  31. R. Luo, J. Guo, J. Zhang, and H. Yang, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043184 (2022).
  32. J. L. Lebowitz and H. Spohn, J. Stat. Phys. 19, 633 (1978).

  33. This model represents the simplest instance of billiard-type gas models, which serve as paradigms in the study of classical nonequilibrium dynamics due to their conceptual simplicity and dynamical richness [13, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39]. In contrast, studies of quantum thermal transport have predominantly focused on spin chain and tight-binding systems [40, 41, 42]. This preference likely stems from the intrinsic difficulty of modeling collisional interactions between gas particles and thermal baths in the quantum regime.

  34. G. Benenti, G. Casati, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 070604 (2013).
  35. R. Luo, G. Benenti, G. Casati, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 080602 (2018).
  36. C. P. Dettmann, The Lorentz gas: A paradigm for nonequilibrium stationary states, in Hard Ball Systems and the Lorentz Gas, edited by D. Szász (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2000), pp. 315–365.
  37. B. Li, G. Casati, J. Wang, and T. Prosen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 254301 (2004).
  38. J. Wang and G. Casati, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 040601 (2017).
  39. Z. Zou, G. Casati, G. Benenti, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. E 109, L062104 (2024).
  40. G. T. Landi, D. Poletti, and G. Schaller, Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 045006 (2022).
  41. V. Balachandran, G. Benenti, E. Pereira, G. Casati, and D. Poletti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 200603 (2018).
  42. V. Balachandran, G. Benenti, E. Pereira, G. Casati, and D. Poletti, Phys. Rev. E 99, 032136 (2019).
  43. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/zl25-tjt9 for the derivation of classical thermal flux [Eq. (3)], details of the MCMC Maxwell bath relaxation and robustness checks, explicit expressions of the dissipator terms and Lindblad operators, quantum relaxation analysis, the length-scaling comparison, and numerical details for the two-interacting-particles model.
  44. D. W. Heermann, Stochastic methods, in Computer Simulation Methods in Theoretical Physics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1986), pp. 56–108.

  45. In the MCMC Maxwell bath, incomplete relaxation leads to an effective temperature Teff of the particle reflected from the cold bath that is higher than the prescribed bath temperature TR. When Teff only slightly exceeds TR, this enhancement results in a larger heat flux compared to the standard Maxwell bath, owing to the NDTR effect. At the special point where Teff=(TL−TR)2, both models yield identical results, as can be seen from Eq. (4). As TR decreases further, Teff>(TL−TR)2 and the heat flux from the MCMC Maxwell bath becomes smaller than that of the standard Maxwell bath.

  46. H. P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, 2002).
  47. S. Lepri, R. Livi, and A. Politi, Phys. Rep. 377, 1 (2003).
  48. A. Dhar, Adv. Phys. 57, 457 (2008).
  49. G. Benenti, D. Donadio, S. Lepri, and R. Livi, Riv. Nuovo Cimento Soc. Ital. Fis. 46, 105 (2023).
  50. M. Perarnau-Llobet, H. Wilming, A. Riera, R. Gallego, and J. Eisert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 120602 (2018).
  51. A. Rivas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 160601 (2020).
  52. P. Talkner and P. Hänggi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 041002 (2020).
  53. Á. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 094001 (2014).
  54. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and B. Vacchini, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 021002 (2016).
  55. I. de Vega and D. Alonso, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015001 (2017).
  56. L. Li, M. J. W. Hall, and H. M. Wiseman, Phys. Rep. 759, 1 (2018).
  57. D. Tamascelli, A. Smirne, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 030402 (2018).
  58. M. Carrega, L. M. Cangemi, G. De Filippis, V. Cataudella, G. Benenti, and M. Sassetti, PRX Quantum 3, 010323 (2022).
  59. A. Chin, J. Keeling, D. Segal, and H. Wang, J. Chem. Phys. 163, 050401 (2025).
  60. G. Benenti, G. Casati, K. Saito, and R. Whitney, Phys. Rep. 694, 1 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 066305– Published 11 February, 2026
  • Received 29 September 2025
  • Revised 15 December 2025
  • Accepted 26 January 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