MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074456944 · doi:10.1103/physreva.84.043832

Dissipation and ultrastrong coupling in circuit QED

2011· article· en· W2074456944 on OpenAlexaff
F. Beaudoin, Jay Gambetta, Alexandre Blais

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDephasingPhysicsMaster equationQubitQuantum mechanicsQuantum electrodynamicsCoupling (piping)PhotonQuantum decoherenceCavity quantum electrodynamicsCasimir effectAsymmetryDegenerate energy levelsRelaxation (psychology)SidebandQuantum master equationQuantumOpen quantum system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cavity and circuit QED study light-matter interaction at its most fundamental level. Yet, this interaction is most often neglected when considering the coupling of this system with an environment. In this paper, we show how this simplification, which leads to the standard quantum optics master equation, is at the root of unphysical effects. Including qubit relaxation and dephasing, and cavity relaxation, we derive a master equation that takes into account the qubit-resonator coupling. Special attention is given to the ultrastrong coupling regime, where the failure of the quantum optical master equation is manifest. In this situation, our model predicts an asymmetry in the vacuum Rabi splitting that could be used to probe dephasing noise at unexplored frequencies. We also show how fluctuations in the qubit frequency can cause sideband transitions, squeezing, and Casimir-like photon generation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations371
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ASame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207