- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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

Bosonic entanglement and quantum sensing from energy transfer in two-tone Floquet systems

Yinan Chen1,2,*, Andreas Elben1,3,4,†, Angel Rubio5,6, and Gil Refael1,2,7,‡

  • *Contact author: yinanc@caltech.edu
  • †Contact author: andreas.elben@psi.ch
  • ‡Contact author: refael@caltech.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043014 – Published 3 October, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/cm49-smhr

Abstract

Quantum-enhanced sensors, which surpass the standard quantum limit (SQL) and approach the fundamental precision limits dictated by quantum mechanics, are finding applications across a wide range of scientific fields. This quantum advantage becomes particularly significant when a large number of particles are included in the sensing circuit. Achieving such enhancement requires introducing and preserving entanglement among many particles, posing significant experimental challenges. In this work, we integrate concepts from Floquet theory and quantum information to design an entangler capable of generating the desired entanglement between two paths of a quantum interferometer. We demonstrate that our path-entangled states enable sensing beyond the SQL, reaching the fundamental Heisenberg limit (HL) of quantum mechanics. Moreover, we show that a decoding parity measurement maintains the HL when specific conditions from Floquet theory are satisfied—particularly those related to the periodic driving parameters that preserve entanglement during evolution. We address the effects of a priori phase uncertainty, imperfect transmission, and other types of noises, showing that our method remains robust under realistic conditions. Finally, we propose a superconducting-circuit implementation of our sensor in the microwave regime, highlighting its potential for practical applications in high-precision measurements.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (120)

  1. J. Aasi et al., Enhanced sensitivity of the LIGO gravitational wave detector by using squeezed states of light, Nat. Photon. 7, 613 (2013).
  2. M. Tse et al., Quantum-enhanced advanced LIGO detectors in the era of gravitational-wave astronomy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 231107 (2019).
  3. J. Ye and P. Zoller, Essay: Quantum sensing with atomic, molecular, and optical platforms for fundamental physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 190001 (2024).
  4. N. Aslam, H. Zhou, E. K. Urbach, M. J. Turner, R. L. Walsworth, M. D. Lukin, and H. Park, Quantum sensors for biomedical applications, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 157 (2023).
  5. J. Ahn, Z. Xu, J. Bang, P. Ju, X. Gao, and T. Li, Ultrasensitive torque detection with an optically levitated nanorotor, Nat. Nanotechnol. 15, 89 (2020).
  6. J. Chaste, A. Eichler, J. Moser, G. Ceballos, R. Rurali, and A. Bachtold, A nanomechanical mass sensor with yoctogram resolution, Nat. Nanotechnol. 7, 301 (2012).
  7. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Advances in quantum metrology, Nat. Photon. 5, 222 (2011).
  8. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum-enhanced measurements: Beating the standard quantum limit, Science 306, 1330 (2004).
  9. D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, F. L. Moore, and D. J. Heinzen, Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 46, R6797 (1992).
  10. J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, D. J. Wineland, and D. J. Heinzen, Optimal frequency measurements with maximally correlated states, Phys. Rev. A 54, R4649 (1996).
  11. C. D. Marciniak, T. Feldker, I. Pogorelov, R. Kaubruegger, D. V. Vasilyev, R. van Bijnen, P. Schindler, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and T. Monz, Optimal metrology with programmable quantum sensors, Nature (London) 603, 604 (2022).
  12. R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, M. Jarzyna, and J. Kołodyński, Quantum limits in optical interferometry, Progress in Optics, edited by E. Wolf (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2015), Vol. 60, pp. 345–435.
  13. G. A. Durkin and J. P. Dowling, Local and global distinguishability in quantum interferometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 070801 (2007).
  14. D. Leibfried, M. D. Barrett, T. Schaetz, J. Britton, J. Chiaverini, W. M. Itano, J. D. Jost, C. Langer, and D. J. Wineland, Toward Heisenberg-limited spectroscopy with multiparticle entangled states, Science 304, 1476 (2004).
  15. J. P. Dowling, Quantum optical metrology—the lowdown on high-N00N states, Contemp. Phys. 49, 125 (2008).
  16. J. Joo, W. J. Munro, and T. P. Spiller, Quantum metrology with entangled coherent states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 083601 (2011).
  17. R. J. Birrittella, P. M. Alsing, and C. C. Gerry, The parity operator: Applications in quantum metrology, AVS Quantum Sci. 3, 014701 (2021).
  18. C. C. Gerry and J. Mimih, The parity operator in quantum optical metrology, Contemp. Phys. 51, 497 (2010).
  19. L. Pezzé and A. Smerzi, Mach-Zehnder interferometry at the Heisenberg limit with coherent and squeezed-vacuum light, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 073601 (2008).
  20. J. Zhang, M. Um, D. Lv, J.-N. Zhang, L.-M. Duan, and K. Kim, NOON states of nine quantized vibrations in two radial modes of a trapped ion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 160502 (2018).
  21. H.-S. Zhong, Y. Li, W. Li, L.-C. Peng, Z.-E. Su, Y. Hu, Y.-M. He, X. Ding, W. Zhang, H. Li, L. Zhang, Z. Wang, L. You, X.-L. Wang, X. Jiang, L. Li, Y.-A. Chen, N.-L. Liu, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, 12-photon entanglement and scalable scattershot boson sampling with optimal entangled-photon pairs from parametric down-conversion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 250505 (2018).
  22. M. W. Mitchell, J. S. Lundeen, and A. M. Steinberg, Super-resolving phase measurements with a multiphoton entangled state, Nature (London) 429, 161 (2004).
  23. G. Y. Xiang, B. L. Higgins, D. W. Berry, H. M. Wiseman, and G. J. Pryde, Entanglement-enhanced measurement of a completely unknown optical phase, Nat. Photon. 5, 43 (2011).
  24. J.-P. Li, J. Qin, A. Chen, Z.-C. Duan, Y. Yu, Y. Huo, S. Höfling, C.-Y. Lu, K. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, Multiphoton graph states from a solid-state single-photon source, ACS Photonics 7, 1603 (2020).
  25. I. Afek, O. Ambar, and Y. Silberberg, High-NOON states by mixing quantum and classical light, Science 328, 879 (2010).
  26. A. Muñoz de las Heras, C. Tabares, J. T. Schneider, L. Tagliacozzo, D. Porras, and A. González-Tudela, Photonic quantum metrology with variational quantum optical nonlinearities, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013299 (2024).
  27. A. M. de las Heras, D. Porras, and A. González-Tudela, Improving quantum metrology protocols with programmable photonic circuits, Nanophotonics 14, 2075 (2025).
  28. T. Oka and H. Aoki, Photovoltaic Hall effect in graphene, Phys. Rev. B 79, 081406 (2009).
  29. N. H. Lindner, G. Refael, and V. Galitski, Floquet topological insulator in semiconductor quantum wells, Nat. Phys. 7, 490 (2011).
  30. N. H. Lindner, D. L. Bergman, G. Refael, and V. Galitski, Topological Floquet spectrum in three dimensions via a two-photon resonance, Phys. Rev. B 87, 235131 (2013).
  31. F. Nathan, I. Martin, and G. Refael, Topological frequency conversion in Weyl semimetals, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043060 (2022).
  32. Y. H. Wang, H. Steinberg, P. Jarillo-Herrero, and N. Gedik, Observation of Floquet-Bloch states on the surface of a topological insulator, Science 342, 453 (2013).
  33. M. C. Rechtsman, J. M. Zeuner, Y. Plotnik, Y. Lumer, D. Podolsky, F. Dreisow, S. Nolte, M. Segev, and A. Szameit, Photonic Floquet topological insulators, Nature (London) 496, 196 (2013).
  34. Y.-G. Peng, C.-Z. Qin, D.-G. Zhao, Y.-X. Shen, X.-Y. Xu, M. Bao, H. Jia, and X.-F. Zhu, Experimental demonstration of anomalous Floquet topological insulator for sound, Nat. Commun. 7, 13368 (2016).
  35. I. Martin, G. Refael, and B. Halperin, Topological frequency conversion in strongly driven quantum systems, Phys. Rev. X 7, 041008 (2017).
  36. S. Körber, L. Privitera, J. C. Budich, and B. Trauzettel, Interacting topological frequency converter, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 022023 (2020).
  37. J. Luneau, C. Dutreix, Q. Ficheux, P. Delplace, B. Douçot, B. Huard, and D. Carpentier, Topological power pumping in quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013169 (2022).
  38. I.-D. Potirniche, A. C. Potter, M. Schleier-Smith, A. Vishwanath, and N. Y. Yao, Floquet symmetry-protected topological phases in cold-atom systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 123601 (2017).
  39. M. S. Rudner, N. H. Lindner, E. Berg, and M. Levin, Anomalous edge states and the bulk-edge correspondence for periodically driven two-dimensional systems, Phys. Rev. X 3, 031005 (2013).
  40. P. Titum, E. Berg, M. S. Rudner, G. Refael, and N. H. Lindner, Anomalous Floquet-Anderson insulator as a nonadiabatic quantized charge pump, Phys. Rev. X 6, 021013 (2016).
  41. R. Roy and F. Harper, Periodic table for Floquet topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 96, 155118 (2017).
  42. C. W. von Keyserlingk and S. L. Sondhi, Phase structure of one-dimensional interacting Floquet systems. II. Symmetry-broken phases, Phys. Rev. B 93, 245146 (2016).
  43. F. Nathan, G. Refael, M. S. Rudner, and I. Martin, Quantum frequency locking and downconversion in a driven qubit-cavity system, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043411 (2020).
  44. F. Nathan, I. Martin, and G. Refael, Topological frequency conversion in a driven dissipative quantum cavity, Phys. Rev. B 99, 094311 (2019).
  45. D. M. Long, P. J. D. Crowley, A. J. Kollár, and A. Chandran, Boosting the quantum state of a cavity with Floquet driving, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 183602 (2022).
  46. C. W. Helstrom, Quantum detection and estimation theory, J. Stat. Phys. 1, 231 (1969).
  47. A. Carollo, B. Spagnolo, and D. Valenti, Symmetric logarithmic derivative of fermionic gaussian states, Entropy 20, 485 (2018).
  48. G. Di Fresco, B. Spagnolo, D. Valenti, and A. Carollo, Metrology and multipartite entanglement in measurement-induced phase transition, Quantum 8, 1326 (2024).
  49. 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).
  50. S. L. Braunstein and C. M. Caves, Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439 (1994).
  51. T. Oka and S. Kitamura, Floquet engineering of quantum materials, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 10, 387 (2019).
  52. R. Kaubruegger, A. Shankar, D. V. Vasilyev, and P. Zoller, Optimal and variational multiparameter quantum metrology and vector-field sensing, PRX Quantum 4, 020333 (2023).
  53. R. Kaubruegger, D. V. Vasilyev, M. Schulte, K. Hammerer, and P. Zoller, Quantum variational optimization of Ramsey interferometry and atomic clocks, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041045 (2021).
  54. U. Dorner, R. Demkowicz-Dobrzanski, B. J. Smith, J. S. Lundeen, W. Wasilewski, K. Banaszek, and I. A. Walmsley, Optimal quantum phase estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 040403 (2009).
  55. B. M. Escher, R. L. de Matos Filho, and L. Davidovich, General framework for estimating the ultimate precision limit in noisy quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Phys. 7, 406 (2011).
  56. R. Demkowicz-Dobrzanski, U. Dorner, B. J. Smith, J. S. Lundeen, W. Wasilewski, K. Banaszek, and I. A. Walmsley, Quantum phase estimation with lossy interferometers, Phys. Rev. A 80, 013825 (2009).
  57. G. Tóth and I. Apellaniz, Quantum metrology from a quantum information science perspective, J. Phys. A 47, 424006 (2014).
  58. A. Carollo, D. Valenti, and B. Spagnolo, Geometry of quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rep. 838, 1 (2020).
  59. C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 035002 (2017).
  60. M. G. A. Paris, Entanglement and visibility at the output of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1615 (1999).
  61. G. Haack, H. Förster, and M. Büttiker, Parity detection and entanglement with a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, Phys. Rev. B 82, 155303 (2010).
  62. S. Colombo, E. Pedrozo-Peñafiel, and V. Vuletić, Entanglement-enhanced optical atomic clocks, Appl. Phys. Lett. 121, 210502 (2022).
  63. B. Yurke, S. L. McCall, and J. R. Klauder, Su(2) and su(1,1) interferometers, Phys. Rev. A 33, 4033 (1986).
  64. E. Polino, M. Valeri, N. Spagnolo, and F. Sciarrino, Photonic quantum metrology, AVS Quantum Sci. 2, 024703 (2020).
  65. D.-W. Wang, H. Cai, R.-B. Liu, and M. O. Scully, Mesoscopic superposition states generated by synthetic spin-orbit interaction in Fock-state lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 220502 (2016).
  66. Y. Maleki and A. M. Zheltikov, A high-N00N output of harmonically driven cavity QED, Sci. Rep. 9, 16780 (2019).
  67. Y.-H. Kang, Z.-P. Lin, J.-Q. Yang, Y. Wang, J. Song, Z.-B. Yang, and Y. Xia, Effective protocol for generating NOON states of resonator modes, Opt. Express 31, 42976 (2023).
  68. C. Psaroudaki and G. Refael, Energy transfer in random-matrix ensembles of Floquet Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. B 108, 064301 (2023).
  69. Note that ω1P̂1+ω2P̂2=0 directly leads to (ω1∂ϕ1+ω2∂ϕ2)εn=0.
  70. K. Macieszczak, M. Fraas, and R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, Bayesian quantum frequency estimation in presence of collective dephasing, New J. Phys. 16, 113002 (2014).
  71. A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, Circuit quantum electrodynamics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025005 (2021).
  72. M. Aspelmeyer, T. J. Kippenberg, and F. Marquardt, Cavity optomechanics, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 1391 (2014).
  73. A. V. Chumak, V. I. Vasyuchka, A. A. Serga, and B. Hillebrands, Magnon spintronics, Nat. Phys. 11, 453 (2015).
  74. X.-M. Jin, C.-Z. Peng, Y. Deng, M. Barbieri, J. Nunn, and I. A. Walmsley, Sequential path entanglement for quantum metrology, Sci. Rep. 3, 1779 (2013).
  75. A. Rath, C. Branciard, A. Minguzzi, and B. Vermersch, Quantum fisher information from randomized measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 260501 (2021).
  76. Z. Ren, W. Li, A. Smerzi, and M. Gessner, Metrological detection of multipartite entanglement from young diagrams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 080502 (2021).
  77. V. Dodonov, I. Malkin, and V. Man’ko, Even and odd coherent states and excitations of a singular oscillator, Physica 72, 597 (1974).
  78. J. Kempe, Quantum random walks: An introductory overview, Contemp. Phys. 44, 307 (2003).
  79. S. E. Venegas-Andraca, Quantum walks: A comprehensive review, Quantum Inf. Process. 11, 1015 (2012).
  80. S. Zhou, M. Zhang, J. Preskill, and L. Jiang, Achieving the heisenberg limit in quantum metrology using quantum error correction, Nat. Commun. 9, 78 (2018).
  81. Y. Dong, L. Lin, and Y. Tong, Ground-state preparation and energy estimation on early fault-tolerant quantum computers via quantum eigenvalue transformation of unitary matrices, PRX Quantum 3, 040305 (2022).
  82. G. Wang, D. S. França, R. Zhang, S. Zhu, and P. D. Johnson, Quantum algorithm for ground state energy estimation using circuit depth with exponentially improved dependence on precision, Quantum 7, 1167 (2023).
  83. C. C. Gerry and J. Mimih, Heisenberg-limited interferometry with pair coherent states and parity measurements, Phys. Rev. A 82, 013831 (2010).
  84. P. M. Anisimov, G. M. Raterman, A. Chiruvelli, W. N. Plick, S. D. Huver, H. Lee, and J. P. Dowling, Quantum metrology with two-mode squeezed vacuum: Parity detection beats the Heisenberg limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 103602 (2010).
  85. L. Sun, A. Petrenko, Z. Leghtas, B. Vlastakis, G. Kirchmair, K. M. Sliwa, A. Narla, M. Hatridge, S. Shankar, J. Blumoff, L. Frunzio, M. Mirrahimi, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Tracking photon jumps with repeated quantum non-demolition parity measurements, Nature (London) 511, 444 (2014).
  86. L. Cohen, D. Istrati, L. Dovrat, and H. S. Eisenberg, Super-resolved phase measurements at the shot noise limit by parity measurement, Opt. Express 22, 11945 (2014).
  87. J. Rubio and J. Dunningham, Quantum metrology in the presence of limited data, New J. Phys. 21, 043037 (2019).
  88. R. Demkowicz-Dobrzański, J. Kołodyński, and M. GuŢă, The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum-enhanced metrology, Nat. Commun. 3, 1063 (2012).
  89. J. Zou, S. Bosco, and D. Loss, Spatially correlated classical and quantum noise in driven qubits, npj Quantum Inf. 10, 46 (2024).
  90. D. Valenti, A. Carollo, and B. Spagnolo, Stabilizing effect of driving and dissipation on quantum metastable states, Phys. Rev. A 97, 042109 (2018).
  91. Z.-L. Xiang, S. Ashhab, J. Q. You, and F. Nori, Hybrid quantum circuits: Superconducting circuits interacting with other quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 623 (2013).
  92. C. J. Hood, T. W. Lynn, A. C. Doherty, A. S. Parkins, and H. J. Kimble, The atom-cavity microscope: Single atoms bound in orbit by single photons, Science 287, 1447 (2000).
  93. D. W. Vernooy, A. Furusawa, N. P. Georgiades, V. S. Ilchenko, and H. J. Kimble, Cavity QED with high-Q whispering gallery modes, Phys. Rev. A 57, R2293 (1998).
  94. T. Niemczyk, F. Deppe, H. Huebl, E. P. Menzel, F. Hocke, M. J. Schwarz, J. J. Garcia-Ripoll, D. Zueco, T. Hümmer, E. Solano, A. Marx, and R. Gross, Circuit quantum electrodynamics in the ultrastrong-coupling regime, Nat. Phys. 6, 772 (2010).
  95. P. Forn-Díaz, J. Lisenfeld, D. Marcos, J. J. García-Ripoll, E. Solano, C. J. P. M. Harmans, and J. E. Mooij, Observation of the Bloch-Siegert shift in a qubit-oscillator system in the ultrastrong coupling regime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 237001 (2010).
  96. D. Malz and A. Smith, Topological two-dimensional Floquet lattice on a single superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 163602 (2021).
  97. S. Rasmussen, K. Christensen, S. Pedersen, L. Kristensen, T. Bækkegaard, N. Loft, and N. Zinner, Superconducting circuit companion—An introduction with worked examples, PRX Quantum 2, 040204 (2021).
  98. T. P. Orlando, J. E. Mooij, L. Tian, C. H. van der Wal, L. S. Levitov, S. Lloyd, and J. J. Mazo, Superconducting persistent-current qubit, Phys. Rev. B 60, 15398 (1999).
  99. I. M. Pop, K. Geerlings, G. Catelani, R. J. Schoelkopf, L. I. Glazman, and M. H. Devoret, Coherent suppression of electromagnetic dissipation due to superconducting quasiparticles, Nature (London) 508, 369 (2014).
  100. L. B. Nguyen, Y.-H. Lin, A. Somoroff, R. Mencia, N. Grabon, and V. E. Manucharyan, High-coherence fluxonium qubit, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041041 (2019).
  101. I. N. Moskalenko, I. A. Simakov, N. N. Abramov, A. A. Grigorev, D. O. Moskalev, A. A. Pishchimova, N. S. Smirnov, E. V. Zikiy, I. A. Rodionov, and I. S. Besedin, High fidelity two-qubit gates on fluxoniums using a tunable coupler, npj Quantum Inf. 8, 130 (2022).
  102. R. Harris, A. J. Berkley, M. W. Johnson, P. Bunyk, S. Govorkov, M. C. Thom, S. Uchaikin, A. B. Wilson, J. Chung, E. Holtham, J. D. Biamonte, A. Y. Smirnov, M. H. S. Amin, and A. Maassen van den Brink, Sign- and magnitude-tunable coupler for superconducting flux qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 177001 (2007).
  103. M. S. Allman, J. D. Whittaker, M. Castellanos-Beltran, K. Cicak, F. da Silva, M. P. DeFeo, F. Lecocq, A. Sirois, J. D. Teufel, J. Aumentado, and R. W. Simmonds, Tunable resonant and nonresonant interactions between a phase qubit and LC resonator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 123601 (2014).
  104. X. Li, T. Cai, H. Yan, Z. Wang, X. Pan, Y. Ma, W. Cai, J. Han, Z. Hua, X. Han, Y. Wu, H. Zhang, H. Wang, Y. Song, L. Duan, and L. Sun, Tunable coupler for realizing a controlled-phase gate with dynamically decoupled regime in a superconducting circuit, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 024070 (2020).
  105. F. Yan, P. Krantz, Y. Sung, M. Kjaergaard, D. L. Campbell, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Tunable coupling scheme for implementing high-fidelity two-qubit gates, Phys. Rev. Appl. 10, 054062 (2018).
  106. A. M. van den Brink, A. J. Berkley, and M. Yalowsky, Mediated tunable coupling of flux qubits, New J. Phys. 7, 230 (2005).
  107. D. L. Campbell, A. Kamal, L. Ranzani, M. Senatore, and M. D. LaHaye, Modular tunable coupler for superconducting circuits, Phys. Rev. Appl. 19, 064043 (2023).
  108. L. Chen, H.-X. Li, Y. Lu, C. W. Warren, C. J. Križan, S. Kosen, M. Rommel, S. Ahmed, A. Osman, J. Biznárová, A. Fadavi Roudsari, B. Lienhard, M. Caputo, K. Grigoras, L. Grönberg, J. Govenius, A. F. Kockum, P. Delsing, J. Bylander, and G. Tancredi, Transmon qubit readout fidelity at the threshold for quantum error correction without a quantum-limited amplifier, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 26 (2023).
  109. W. Wang, Y. Wu, Y. Ma, W. Cai, L. Hu, X. Mu, Y. Xu, Z.-J. Chen, H. Wang, Y. P. Song, H. Yuan, C.-L. Zou, L.-M. Duan, and L. Sun, Heisenberg-limited single-mode quantum metrology in a superconducting circuit, Nat. Commun. 10, 4382 (2019).
  110. Y. Lu, A. Maiti, J. W. O. Garmon, S. Ganjam, Y. Zhang, J. Claes, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, High-fidelity parametric beamsplitting with a parity-protected converter, Nat. Commun. 14, 5767 (2023).
  111. B. J. Chapman, S. J. de Graaf, S. H. Xue, Y. Zhang, J. Teoh, J. C. Curtis, T. Tsunoda, A. Eickbusch, A. P. Read, A. Koottandavida, S. O. Mundhada, L. Frunzio, M. Devoret, S. Girvin, and R. Schoelkopf, High-on-off-ratio beam-splitter interaction for gates on bosonically encoded qubits, PRX Quantum 4, 020355 (2023).
  112. S. D. Huver, C. F. Wildfeuer, and J. P. Dowling, Entangled Fock states for robust quantum optical metrology, imaging, and sensing, Phys. Rev. A 78, 063828 (2008).
  113. S. Zhou, A. G. Manes, and L. Jiang, Achieving metrological limits using ancilla-free quantum error-correcting codes, Phys. Rev. A 109, 042406 (2024).
  114. L. A. Clark, A. Stokes, and A. Beige, Quantum-enhanced metrology with the single-mode coherent states of an optical cavity inside a quantum feedback loop, Phys. Rev. A 94, 023840 (2016).
  115. W. Berdanier, M. Kolodrubetz, S. A. Parameswaran, and R. Vasseur, Floquet quantum criticality, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 115, 9491 (2018).
  116. W. Berdanier, M. Kolodrubetz, R. Vasseur, and J. E. Moore, Floquet dynamics of boundary-driven systems at criticality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 260602 (2017).
  117. A. Carollo, B. Spagnolo, and D. Valenti, Uhlmann curvature in dissipative phase transitions, Sci. Rep. 8, 9852 (2018).
  118. A. Carollo, B. Spagnolo, A. A. Dubkov, and D. Valenti, On quantumness in multi-parameter quantum estimation, J. Stat. Mech. (2019) 094010.
  119. G. D. Fresco, B. Spagnolo, D. Valenti, and A. Carollo, Multiparameter quantum critical metrology, SciPost Phys. 13, 077 (2022).
  120. M. Gessner, L. Pezzè, and A. Smerzi, Entanglement and squeezing in continuous-variable systems, Quantum 1, 17 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 043014– Published 3 October, 2025
  • Received 30 October 2024
  • Accepted 3 September 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