T S Mahesh,∗ Deepak Khurana,† Krithika V R,‡ Sreejith G J,§ and C S Sudheer Kumar¶ Department of Physics and NMR Research Center,
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Pune 411008, India
Quantum control of large spin registers is crucial for many applications ranging from spectroscopy to quantum information. A key factor that determines the efficiency of a register for implementing a given information processing task is its network topology. One particular type, called star-topology, involves a central qubit uniformly interacting with a set of ancillary qubits. A particular advantage of the star-topology quantum registers is in the efficient preparation of large entangled states, called NOON states, and their generalized variants. Thanks to the robust generation of such correlated states, spectral simplicity, ease of polarization transfer from ancillary qubits to the central qubit, as well as the availability of large spin-clusters, the star-topology registers have been utilized for several interesting applications over the last few years. Here we review some recent progress with the star-topology registers, particularly via nuclear magnetic resonance methods.
I. INTRODUCTION
The long-lasting quantum memory of nuclear spins is at the heart of versatile applications of nuclear mag-netic resonance from spectroscopy and biomedical imag-ing to quantum information processimag-ing. While remark-able progress has been achieved with few-spin systems forming small quantum registers, scaling the register size has been a daunting task. The challenges include the highly mixed state of NMR ensembles, spectral complex-ity of large registers that limit their quantum control, and decoherence causing the loss of quantum memory. In this review, we explain how certain symmetries, particularly the star-symmetry, can provide a way forward to realize large quantum registers, albeit for specific applications.
Quantum registers may be categorized based on the network-topology of qubits. Some common topologies are shown in Fig. 1. In principle, linear and cyclic chains are sufficient to realize universal quantum gates, while all to all topology is most efficient, since it allows a direct transport of information from one qubit to any other. As we scale up the size of the register though, it is hard to maintain all to all interactions, and it will become necessary to consider a practical topology that is best suited for a particular application. In this review, we focus on the star-topology registers (STRs), which con-sist of a central qubit uniformly interacting with a set of ancillary qubits. We shall discuss various aspects of star-topology registers, mainly from the perspectives of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and quantum infor-mation. Although here we treat a qubit synonymous with a spin-1/2 particle, the underlying principles hold in
non-∗[email protected]
†Current Affiliation: Section of Quantum Physics and
Infor-mation Technology (QPIT), Department of Physics, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kgs. Lyngby, Denmark. Email: [email protected].
‡krithika [email protected]
FIG. 1. Some common topologies of quantum registers: (a) linear chain, (b) cyclic chain, (c) all-to-all, (d) central-spin or star-topology register (STR), and (e) double-STR.
NMR architectures.
For completeness, we shall first introduce the theoret-ical and spectroscopic aspects of the STRs in the follow-ing section. In section III, we shall review recent progress with utilizing the STRs for various applications. Finally, we shall summarize in section IV.
II. STAR-TOPOLOGY REGISTER (STR)
As illustrated in Fig. 1(d), an STR consists of a cen-tral qubit (C) directly connected to a set of ancillary (A) or satellite qubits. Many of the STRs realized by nu-clear spin-systems via liquid-state NMR techniques have the following properties: (i) no net effective interactions among the ancillary qubits; (ii) the central qubit uni-formly interacts with each of the ancillary qubits; (iii) the central qubit is realized by a different nuclear isotope and hence can be selectively addressed; (iv) the ancillary qubits are indistinguishable from one another. The last
point implies that the ancillary qubits can only be col-lectively addressed, but no selective addressing of a par-ticular ancillary qubit is possible. While this fact limits the type of quantum gates that can be realized, crucially, it also brings about spectral simplicity that allows us to conveniently handle much larger registers.
We shall consider an STR with N − 1 ancillary qubits surrounding a central qubit. For such a system, the NMR Hamiltonian (in units of ~) can be written as [1]
H0= HC+ HA+ HCA
= ωCIzC+ ωAIzA+ 2πJCAIzCI A
z, (1)
where ωC and ωA are the Larmor frequencies of C and
A qubits, JCA is the fixed strength of the indirect
spin-spin interaction that is characteristic of the spin-spin-system, IC
z is the spin operator for the central qubit and IzA =
PN −1
k=1 I A,k
z is the collective spin operator for the ancillary
qubits. The Larmor frequencies are proportional to the strength of the magnetic field B0,
ωC= −γCB0 and ωA= −γAB0, (2)
where γC and γA are the gyromagnetic ratios of the
nu-clei.
The eigenstates of STR are Zeeman product states of individual qubit-states |↑zi ≡ |0i and |↓zi = |1i. Thus,
we label the STR eigenstates with N -bit binary strings and form a computational basis. Each binary string is associated with a Hamming weight h that counts the number of 1’s in the string. The labeling is chosen such that ascending energy levels correspond to ascend-ing Hammascend-ing weights and degenerate levels get the same Hamming weight. Levels of same Hamming weight are collectively represented by |N −h, hi. Similar labeling schemes had been conveniently employed for informa-tion encoding purposes even when the eigenstates are not product states [2–4]. The total spin magnetic mo-ment quantum number for the state vector |N −h, hi is thus
mh= N
2 −h. (3)
Similarly, if h is the Hamming weight for the ancillary part of the state vector, i.e., |N − 1 − h, hiA, then
mAh =N − 1
2 − h, (4)
is the total ancillary spin magnetic moment quantum number. As illustrated in Fig. 2, the energy eigenstates form two subspaces corresponding to |0iC and |1iC
states of the central qubit: Eigenstates h ∈ {0, 1, · · · , N −1} Total magnetic quantum number Eigenvalue |0iC|N − 1 − h, hiA m0,h= 12+ m A h +ωC/2 + mAh(ωA+ πJCA) |1iC|N − 1 − h, hiA m1,h= −12+ m A h −ωC/2 + mA h(ωA− πJCA)
FIG. 2. Energy levels of an STR forming two subspaces corre-sponding to the |0iCand |1iC states of the central spin. The
transitions of A and C are indicated by blue and gray arrows respectively.
FIG. 3. 31P spectra of trimethylphosphite corresponding to single quantum excitation from thermal equilibrium (upper trace) and corresponding to the NOON state (lower trace). The molecular structure of trimethylphosphite shows the cen-tral31P spin (in pink) that is coupled to nine1H spins (in
white) via an indirect scalar coupling of JCA= 11 Hz.
The selection rule for the radio frequency (RF) exci-tation allows only transitions with a unit change in the total spin magnetic moment quantum number. Thus, all inter-subspace transitions of C-spin are allowed, while A-spin transitions within each subspace satisfy ∆mA
h =
−∆h = ±1. As a result, C-qubit possesses N distinct transition frequencies ωC + 2πJCAmAh (gray arrows in
Fig. 2). On the other hand, A-qubits collectively have only two distinct transition frequencies, ωA+πJCAin the
|0iC subspace and ωA− πJCA in the |1iCsubspace. Fig.
3 shows the experimental spectrum of31P spin coupled
with nine ancillary1H spins in trimethyl phosphite.
Owing to mathematical ease, most of the NMR exper-iments are described in a rotating frame, that precesses with the applied RF drive, thereby rendering it
time-independent. Since C and A are of different nuclear iso-topes, their Larmor frequencies differ over several tens or even hundreds of megahertz. This allows them to be con-trolled by independent radio-wave channels. In a doubly rotating frame, precessing at the respective carrier fre-quencies, the Hamiltonian is of the form,
H = −2πνCIzC− 2πνAIzA
+2πJCAIzCI A
z + ΩC(IxCcos φC+ IyCsin φC)
+ΩA(IxAcos φA+ IyAsin φA). (5)
Here νC, νA are resonance offsets, ΩC, ΩA are RF
am-plitudes on the respective channels, and φC, φA are the
RF phases, all of which being tunable experimental pa-rameters.
A. Thermal state with low purity
Under normal NMR conditions, thermal energy is much higher than the Zeeman energy gaps, so that for a given spin-1/2 nucleus,
ρ = 1 2e
−H/kT ≈1
21 + Iz (6)
where = ~γB0/(kT ) 1 is known as the purity
factor, and 1 is the 2 × 2 identity matrix. Defining C= ~γCB0/(kT ) and A= ~γAB0/(kT ), we obtain ρC= 1 + C 2 |0ih0| + 1 − C 2 |1ih1| ρA= 1 + A 2 |0ih0| + 1 − A 2 |1ih1| ⊗(N −1) , so that ρCA= ρC⊗ ρA ≈ N −1 X h=0 p0,hρ0,h+ p1,hρ1,h. (7)
Here ρ0,h corresponds to an uniform mixture of degener-ate levels |0iC|N − 1 − h, hi of |0iC subspace, while ρ1,h
corresponds to that of |1iC|N − 1 − h, hi of |1iC
sub-space. At low purity, i.e., {A, C} 1, the relative
populations are p0,h≈ N − 1 h 1 + C+ 2mAhA 2N and, p1,h≈ N − 1 h 1 − C+ 2mAhA 2N , (8)
where N −1h = (N −1−h)!h!(N −1)! denotes the binomial coeffi-cient.
Thus the thermal magnetizations are
MC= N −1 X h=0 (p0,h− p1,h)/2 = C
2 , for C spin, and
MA= N −1 X h=0 (p0,h+ p1,h)mAh = (N − 1) A 2 for A spins. (9) Later, we shall see how we can exploit the large reserve magnetization present in the ancillary qubits.
III. PREPARING MANY-BODY
ENTANGLEMENT: NOON AND MSSM STATES One of the key advantages of STRs is the efficiency with which the central qubit can get correlated with the ancillary qubits. Since the central qubit is uniformly cou-pled to all the indistinguishable ancillary qubits, a single CNOT gate can simultaneously act on all the ancillary qubits, thus offering the most efficient way to prepare many-body entanglement. We shall consider the follow-ing cases.
A. Pure ground state
In this case, each of qubits is initially pre-pared in the ground state, i.e., |ψCi = |0i and
|ψAi = |0 · · · 0i = |N − 1, 0i. Now consider the following
circuit.
|ψCi H •
≡ {q
h}
|ψAi /
Here the Hadamard gate H takes |0i to the uniform superposition (|0i + |1i)/√2, while the CNOT gate, im-plemented simultaneously on all the ancillary qubits of the STR, flips the ancillary qubits if the central qubit is in |1i state, else it does nothing. The circuit works as follows [5]. |0iC|N − 1, 0iA HC −→ 1 √ 2|0iC|N − 1, 0iA+ 1 √ 2|1iC|N − 1, 0iA CN OT −→ 1 √ 2|0iC|N − 1, 0iA+ 1 √ 2|1iC|0, N − 1iA =|N, 0i + |0, N i√ 2 = |NOONi. (10)
The output state is named this way because of N, 0, 0, N appearing in the state vector representation. It is a max-imally entangled state popularly known as the cat state. Coherence order (qh): For a superposition of two ba-sis states, we define the order of coherence qh as the
difference in the Hamming weights of the two state vectors. For an STR prepared in the superposition
|0iC|N − 1 − h, hiA+ |1iC|h, N − 1 − hiA
qh= 1 + (N − 1 − h − h) = N − 2h. (11)
In particular, for the NOON state, h = 0, and therefore
q0= N, (12)
is the highest possible coherence order for the N -qubit STR. As we shall see later, large coherence orders are exploited in several applications, wherein NOON state offers the maximum advantage.
B. Thermal initial state
Under normal NMR conditions, the initial state of an STR is not the pure ground state considered before, but rather a thermal state as described by Eqn. 7. We therefore analyze following circuit for the thermal state.
{qh}
ρCA
We shall first consider its effect on a particular state vector in the |0iC subspace, i.e.,
|0iC|N − 1 − h, hiA HC, CN OT −−−−−−−−→ 1 √ 2|0iC|N − 1 − h, hiA+ 1 √ 2|1iC|h, N − 1 − hiA, (13) which is an entangled coherence of coherence order qh=
N − 2h. Note that qh ∈ {N, N − 2, · · · , −N + 2} for
h ∈ {0, 1, · · · , N − 1}. The variants of NOON states with coherence order qh< N are known as many-some,
some-many (MSSM) states, since they are superpositions of state vectors having both 0’s and 1’s. Fig. 4 repre-sents the relative distribution P (qh) of NOON and MSSM
states of various coherence orders in terms of a pascal tri-angle.
One can also see that the two subspaces lead to iden-tical coherence orders. Thus we may write the output of the above quantum circuit in terms of coherence order as, ρCA−→ −N +2 X qh=N,N −2,··· pqhρqh, (14)
where ρqh corresponds to mixtures of MSSM states of coherence order qhand
pqh= (p0,h+ p1,h)
P (qh)
P
qhP (qh)
. (15)
Of course, in principle, it is possible to generate NOON or MSSM states in registers with other topologies too, but not as efficiently as in an STR. For instance, in a linear chain with nearest-neighbor interaction, the gen-eration of NOON and MSSM states proceeds sequentially as depicted by the arrows in Fig. 4.
FIG. 4. Pascal triangle showing the relative distribution P (qh)
of NOON states (upper most 1’s) and MSSM states of various coherence orders qhversus size N of the STR.
In the following, we shall discuss various applications of such quantum correlated states.
IV. APPLICATIONS
A. Quantum Sensing of Magnetic Fields Quantum sensing has a wide range of applications such as rotation sensing (via sagnac interferometric technique) in navigation systems [6], very weak magnetic field sens-ing, dark matter axion detection [7], laser interferometer gravitational wave detection, cold-atom scanning probe microscope [8], quantum metrology, nanoscale magne-tometry, surface characterization, and molecular spec-troscopy [9]. Here one usually employs the interfero-metric technique that produces fringes depending on the path difference between two arms of an interferometer. Equivalently, a single spin prepared in a superposition state |0i + |1i is evolved as
|0i + |1i−→ |0i + eφ iφ|1i, (16) where φ is the net phase factor due to the magnetic per-turbation acting over a certain duration. Typically, one obtains a signal as a function of φ, such as hIxi = cos φ
for the above output state. Having N independent spins, instead of one, improves the signal strength by a factor of N . However, if noise (say, shot-noise) also scales as √
N , an effective improvement in the signal to noise ra-tio is only√N . Thus the precision of sensing is limited by the standard deviation of random errors that scales as 1/√N , which is known as the standard quantum limit. Instead, we now let the magnetic perturbation act on the N -particle system prepared in the NOON state. In this case,
leading to an error scaling of 1/N , thus achieving the so called Heisenberg limit. In practice, however, the shorter coherence time of the NOON state, compared to the single-spin superposition, poses a challenge in achiev-ing Heisenberg limit. Jonathan Jones and co-workers have utilized a 10-spin STR in an NMR setup to sen-sitively measure magnetic fields of the order of a few µT and thereby demonstrated beating the standard quantum limit [10].
B. Measurement of Translational Diffusion
Driven by thermal energy, the molecules in a liquid un-dergo random translational motion that is characterized by the diffusion constant D. NMR has been a powerful tool to measure translational diffusion constant [11,12]. The standard technique involves letting spins prepared in a superposition state |0i + |1i evolve under a cancel-ing pair of pulsed-field-gradients (PFGs) Gz and −Gz
separated by a time delay ∆. The PFGs, each of du-ration δ, introduce z-coordinate dependent phase shifts ±γzGzδ, which for a static molecule cancel each other
and restore the original superposition state. However, a diffusing molecule changes its position after the first gradient and therefore instead of exactly cancelling the gradient-induced phases, it acquires a phase shift, i.e.,
|0i + |1i dz
−→ |0i + eiφ|1i with,
φ = γdzGzδ, (18)
where dz is the net displacement along the z coordinate
during the delay ∆. In practice, one starts with the ther-mal equilibrium of the ensemble system ρeq =1/2 + Iz
and measures a signal that is proportional to the net transverse magnetization hIxi. The diffusion experiment
can be described by the following quantum circuit.
ρeq H Gz ∆ −Gz
hIxi
The statistical average of the phase-shifted superposi-tions lead to a decay of the overall signal S according to
S = exp(−γ2G2zδ2D∆), (19) where D is the diffusion constant [11]. Thus the NMR diffusion experiments involves collecting a series of sig-nals S as a function of the gradient strengths Gz for a
fixed diffusion delay ∆.
If the diffusing molecule, or a part of it, has an STR, then we can measure diffusion far more efficiently, by exploiting the robust preparation of NOON or MSSM states. If an STR diffuses along the z-coordinate by dz,
the NOON/MSSM state would evolve as |0iC|N − h − 1, hiA+ |1iC|h, N − h − 1iA
dz −→ |0iC|N − h − 1, hiA+ eiφh|1iC|h, N − h − 1iA, (20)
where, h ∈ {0, 1, · · · , N − 1} φh= lhγCdzGzδ = lhφC and, lh= 1 + (N − 2h − 1)γA γC = 1 + (qh− 1)γA γC . (21)
Here qh is the coherence order. Thus, compared to the diffusion of a single C-spin, phase encoding of diffusion in the STR is improved by the factor lhcalled lopsidedness
of the NOON/MSSM state.
The following circuit represents the experimental scheme.
ρC
{qh} Gz ∆ −Gz qh 1
hIxi
ρA
Starting from the thermal equilibrium state ρC + ρA
of the STR, one prepares NOON/MSSM states before applying opposite PFGs separated by a diffusion de-lay. Here, a diffusing STR acquires a phase factor by time-separated and mutually canceling pair of gradients. However, since coherences with order qh 6= 1 are not
directly observable as transverse magnetization, they have to be converted into observable single-quantum coherence with the help of an untangling CNOT gate. Another pair of PFGs gz and −lhgz help to filter out
se-lectively the signal originating from a specific coherence order qh.
qh 1 ≡ gz
•
−lhgz
The resulting signal of the central spin decays with PFG strength as
Sh= exp(−l2hγC2G2zδ2D∆). (22) The quadratic dependence on the lopsidedness lh
dras-tically improves the diffusion sensitivity of STRs over single-spin systems, particularly for large values of lh.
This fact can be exploited to decrease the standard error, or to reduce diffusion time ∆, or to minimize hardware constraints by reducing PFG strength Gz, or a
combi-nation of these. While this technique is also known as multiple-quantum diffusion spectroscopy in NMR liter-ature [13, 14], the STRs provide a unique advantage of parallel and efficient preparation of NOON and MSSM states, and thereby are most suited for this purpose. Ab-hishek et al. [15] demonstrated efficient measurement of translation diffusion constant by preparing a 10-qubit NOON state using nine1H spins interacting with a
cen-FIG. 5. The normalized echo intensities as a function of Gz
with (a) standard method and (b) the NOON state method. The dots represent the experimental data and the lines rep-resent the linear fit. (Reused from [15] Copyright (2014) with permission from Elsevier.)
tral 31P spin in trimethyl phosphite (see Fig. 5).
Com-pared to the single-qubit experiment, the NOON state experiment required considerably shorter diffusion times to observe the diffusion induced signal decay. This tech-nique can potentially be adopted for fast measurement of diffusion, for instance in dynamic sample conditions. One can also utilize NOON states for the characterizing very slow diffusion or to measure diffusion with limited PFG strengths.
C. RF inhomogeneity mapping
Sensitive phase encoding by NOON states can open a wide variety of applications, one being in characterizing the spatial amplitude distribution of radio-frequency (RF) pulses used in NMR experiments. RF inhomogene-ity (RFI) depends on several factors such as proximinhomogene-ity and the finite size of the RF coils compared to the sample volume, the dielectric constant of the solvent and associated skin-depth, presence of other coils or protective layers, etc. In quantitative spectroscopy as well as quantum information experiments, it is important to take into account the distribution of RF amplitudes to design high-fidelity quantum controls that generate precise spin dynamics. The standard method involves recording Rabi oscillations decaying under RFI, also known as Torrey oscillations, whose Fourier transform quantifies the RFI distribution [16,17]. Since it requires a sufficiently long RF pulse to capture the decay profile, one needs to apply suitably low RF power to avoid overheating of the coil, thereby limiting
the RFI measurements to only low powers. Abhishek et al [15] exploited the sensitive phase encoding of NOON states to a faster mapping of RFI decay profiles, thus allowing its characterization even at higher powers. Their method can be understood via the following circuit.
ρC {qh} Y XRabi −Y qh 1 hIxi ρA Y XRabi −Y
Here the Y gates sandwiching the long X gates that drive Rabi oscillations of the C and A spins al-low capturing Torrey oscillations by phase-encoding of NOON/MSSM states. With this circuit, we can map the two-dimensional profile of the probability distribu-tion P (ΩC, ΩA). This information can then be
incorpo-rated into quantum control sequences to generate robust quantum operations, such as gradient ascent pulse engi-neering (GRAPE) [18], bang-bang (BB) quantum control [19], push-pull engineering [20], etc.
D. Noise spectroscopy
The inevitable presence of the surrounding environ-ment leads to the loss of information stored in a quan-tum register. This phenomenon of decoherence causes de-struction of quantum coherence and correlations among qubits, which are essential for robust implementation of quantum technologies in a scalable manner [21]. Though noisy devices operating with few qubits, popularly known as Noisy Intermediate Scale Quantum (NISQ) devices [22], can already perform valuable computational tasks, mitigating decoherence is the key to exploit the full po-tential of quantum information devices. In this regard, various quantum control strategies have been developed over the years to combat decoherence [23]. To ensure maximum efficiency, these control strategies must be ju-diciously optimized according to the noise characteristics of the surrounding environment. Fortunately, most of the relevant information about the environment is encoded in the noise spectrum. While sophisticated dynamical de-coupling (DD) methods have been developed to suppress noise and combat decoherence [24], they also leave be-hind signatures of frequency-dependent noise profiles on the system dynamics. In other words, a DD sequence can be designed to filter-in only a particular frequency window of the environmental noise to affect system. Us-ing this filterUs-ing capability, the noise spectroscopy was independently proposed by Yuge et al. [25], and ´Alvarez and Suter [26]. Noise spectroscopy procedures with the help of DD sequences are extensively reviewed in [27].
In the case of a multi-qubit system, along with the self-noise spectrum of each qubit, knowledge of spatial and temporal correlations among noise fields at various qubits is also important. For example, Sza´nkowski et
al. [28] proposed a method to probe spectra of both self and correlated noise between noise sources in two qubits. This method is further generalized to the case of multiple qubits in [29]. Multi-qubit noise spectroscopy methods are essentially based on the application of appropriate DD sequences after the initialization of the system into various correlated states. Preparing quantum states with a high degree of correlation in a multi-qubit system is a daunting task in general. However, as described in section III, the symmetry of STRs allows efficient and robust creation of specific correlated states (NOON and MSSM states) which makes them particularly suitable to study correlations among noise sources affecting various qubits.
In Ref. [30], Khurana et al. implemented DD based noise spectroscopy protocol with MSSM/NOON states prepared in Trimethyl phosphite (Fig. 2). The following circuit represents the experimental scheme:
ρC
{qh} DD qh 1
hIxi
ρA
After preparation of NOON or MSSM states, Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill (CPMG) [31, 32] DD sequence is applied on all the qubits, which captures the combined effect of self and correlation noise spectra. The results of the noise spectroscopy of various MSSM states are shown in Fig. 6. As expected, the noise spectrum (S(ω)), profiles appear to go higher with the magnitude of the lopsidedness due to an increase in quantum correlations among qubits. Since it is not possible to address ancillary qubits individually in STRs, self-spectra and correlation spectra can not be isolated. However, the variation of combined noise spectrum with lopsidedness provides im-portant information about the spatial correlation among noise sources affecting qubits. For example, in this par-ticular case of Trimethyl phosphite, the quadratic de-pendence of low-frequency noise (S0(ω)) on lopsidedness
(inset of Fig. 6) points to predominantly correlated noise among the qubits [33].
E. Algorithmic cooling
Apart from tackling decoherence, initialization of quantum registers in a high purity quantum state is one of the major requirements for the scalable imple-mentation of fault-tolerant quantum technologies [34]. For quantum processors based on ensembles of identical spin qubits such as NMR and Electron Spin Resonance (ESR), it is extremely challenging to produce pure quan-tum states in a scalable manner [35]. A potential solution to this problem is Algorithmic Cooling (AC) [36, 37], a protocol that achieves a small set of highly pure quan-tum bits (computational qubits) at the expense of the purity of a large number of ancillary quantum bits (reset
FIG. 6. Trimethylphosphite noise-spectra for various MSSM states with lopsidedness lh. The dashed lines parallel to lh
-axis represent the maximum frequency (250 Hz) sampled in experiments. The inset shows the scaling of low-frequency spectral density values with lh. (Reprinted with permission
from [30], copyright (2016) by the American Physical Society.)
qubits). Since entropy compression is limited by Shan-non bound in a closed system, a Shan-non-unitary extension of AC was proposed by Boykin et. al. [38], which in-volves iterative entropy removal from the reset qubits to heat bath (i.e. surrounding environment). This protocol is called Heat Bath Algorithmic Cooling (HBAC) and it is extensively reviewed in [39]. Each iteration of HBAC consists of two steps: (i) AC, wherein entropy is trans-ferred from the computation qubit to the reset qubit, and (ii) heat-bath cooling (HBC), wherein the reset qubits ex-change the extra entropy gained to the heat bath. The efficiency of HBAC critically depends on the ratio of T1
relaxation of the computational qubit to reset qubits and it should be as large as possible so that multiple iterations of HBAC can be carried out.
STRs are well-suited quantum registers for AC and HBAC as (i) central spin is connected to a large number of ancillary qubits for strong polarization transfer and (ii) these registers can be efficiently controlled by quantum control methods such as GRAPE and BB optimal control due to their symmetry. AC and HBAC protocols for an STR and corresponding changes in the level-populations are illustrated in Fig. 7.
Pande et. al. [40] conducted a systematic exper-imental study of HBAC of the central qubit in two STRs: tetramethylsilane (TMS) with N = 13 and tetrakis(trimethylsilyl)silane (TTSS) with N = 37. In these two systems, the T1 relaxation of the central qubit
is longer than that of ancillary qubits by 5 and 34 times respectively. This allowed multiple iterations of HBAC, enhancing the purity of central qubit by 10.4 and 24.1 times, respectively, as shown in Fig. 8. In TTSS, the strongly boosted polarization of the central qubit allowed the preparation and observation of higher order MSSM states, with coherence orders, as high as qh= 15.
FIG. 7. Schematics of HBAC procedure to purify central qubit using polarization of bunch of surrounding ancillary qubits. Labeling of energy level is as described in Fig. 2.
F. Amplification of Quantum Fisher Information
Given a quantum state with an unknown parameter being measured with a suitable observable, the quantum Fisher information (QFI) is a measure of the amount of information that one can extract about the unknown parameter. QFI also quantifies the maximum achiev-able precision in estimating the unknown parameter with a given amount of resource via quantum Cramer-Rao bound. As we discussed in section IV A, if we do not make use of quantum correlations to estimate/measure an unknown parameter, then we can achieve only the shot-noise scaling in precision. However, by exploiting the quantum correlations we can achieve the Heisenberg scaling and beyond [41]. Here we review the work done in Ref. [42] which describes exploiting the ancillary qubits in an STR to amplify QFI as well as to efficiently tomo-graph the central target qubit.
Estimation of QFI in an N-qubit STR: Consider a quantum system prepared in a state in the neighborhood of ρθ0,φ0(see Eq. (25)) and M be a given observable with spectral decomposition M =P
imi|miihmi|. Let us
as-sume that the polar angle θ has a distribution around θ0,
while φ0 is precisely known. Now we may calculate the
probability fθ,φ0(mi) = Tr(ρθ,φ0|miihmi|) corresponding to the eigenvalue mi. Then QFI is defined in terms of
non-zero probability distributions as [43]
Fθ(ρθ0,φ0, M ) = X i 1 fθ0,φ0(mi) ∂fθ,φ0(mi) ∂θ θ 0 !2 . (23)
where fθ0,φ0(mi) 6= 0. Here ∂fθ,φ0(mi)/∂θ|θ0 quantifies the sensitivity of the observable M to small fluctuations in θ around θ0. An observable which maximises QFI is
known as an unbiased observable or symmetric logarith-mic derivative (SLD). For example, if the unknown state of a qubit is somewhere near the pole (in Bloch sphere representation), then an observable corresponding to x-component of spin angular momentum (Pauli-x operator) will be the most sensitive one for small fluctuations in θ (see [42] for details).
Starting from thermal equilibrium ρCA, one can utilize
the standard NMR technique, namely INEPT [1,44] to prepare a correlated state of the form
ρ1= 1 2N 1 2N+ A2IzCI A z . (24)
For a large STR, the above state corresponds to a large anti-phase spin-order and accordingly leads to a strong NMR signal after applying a suitable read-out pulse. Then an unknown state is prepared as follows,
ρ1
↓ e−iθ0{cos(φ0+π/2)IxC+sin(φ0+π/2)ICy} ρθ0,φ0= 1 2N 1 2N + εA2IθC 0,φ0I A z . (25)
The unknown state correlated with the ancillary qubits holds much higher QFI than an uncorrelated qubit. In general, QFI depends on the size of STR as well as its initial purity. For high purities, there seems to be little enhancement in QFI. On the other hand for low purities,
FIG. 8. HBAC of (a) TMS and (b) TTSS. Shown in each case are molecular structure,1H-decoupled29Si spectra before and
after HBAC, and magnetization versus HBAC iteration num-ber (n). Mn = T /TnC represent relative magnetization of
central qubit after n HBAC iterations, where T and TC n,
re-spectively, are spin temperature at thermal equilibrium and after n HBAC iterations separtated by time delay τHB. Here
the theoretical data points are calculated with ideal HBAC controls. In the right spectrum, the sidebands (indicated by stars) are due to 29Si–13C J coupling. (Reprinted with per-mission from [40], copyright (2017) by the American Physical Society.)
like in the case of NMR registers (i.e., A∼ 10−5), we find
empirically that the maximum QFI (which corresponds to SLD) goes as
Fθ(ρθ0,φ0, M←θ→0,φ0) ≈
2
A(N − 1), (26)
where N ≥ 2. Sudheer et al demonstrated a QFI ampli-fication of upto 50 times compared to without precorre-lation between ancilla and target [42]. They also showed that quantum discord is the resource responsible for this enhancement in QFI [42]. Since QFI is increasing lin-early with the size of STR as in Eq. (26), the quantum Cramer-Rao bound for the variance (∆θ)2in this case is
given by
(∆θ)2≥ 1
k2
A(N − 1)
(27)
where k is the number of identical copies of the unknown state. Hence one can achieve the Heisenberg scaling, if all the copies are correlated, i.e., N − 1 = k. Finally we note that in NMR, by exploiting the ancillary qubits in an STR, it is possible to know both θ0 and φ0
us-ing a sus-ingle quadrature measurement. However without using the ancillary qubits, the same requires two indepen-dent quadrature measurements. This is akin to ancilla-assisted quantum state tomography [45].
G. Temporal ordered phase in star systems
Motivated in part by high precision quantum dynam-ics achieved in NMR and other experimental platforms, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the physics of quantum systems far out of equilibrium. Decades worth of studies on equilibrium statistical me-chanical models have demonstrated a range of ordered phases. A natural question is whether robust ordered phases can exist in quantum systems driven far out of equilibrium. Simplest move away from equilibrium in-volve a quench [46] wherein the Hamiltonian is altered at an instant bringing simple initial states become finite energy density states. Generic many body systems fol-lowing a quench are expected to eventually reach a state wherein all local quantities approach a thermal ensem-ble value [47, 48]. Exceptions are found in integrable systems, where the system approaches generalized Gibbs ensemble [49–51], and in many body localized systems [52]. Periodically driven systems further deviate from the equilibrium scenario, and sometimes provide a route to engineer new effective Hamiltonian dynamics and realize phases that cannot exist in equilibrium systems [53,54]. Analogy between the constant Hamiltonian of equilib-rium systems and the constant Floquet unitary of period-ically driven systems, however, allow translation of many notions of equilibrium physics such as stationary states, energies etc [55,56]. It has been found that in generic in-teracting periodically driven quantum systems, irrespec-tive of the initial state, local observables measured at stroboscopic intervals approach a long time steady state described by T = ∞ ensemble [57, 58]. All eigenstates of the Floquet unitary have infinite temperature correla-tions for local operators. Excepcorrela-tions can again be found in integrable systems [59], and disordered systems [59– 61], with memory of initial conserved quantities or local order persist till long time scales.
An interesting scenario in periodic driven systems is exemplified by the Z2symmetric Ising chain kicked with
unitary is given by U = exp −ıJ T ~ X hiji σizσjz exp " ıX i hiσix # (28)
where J is the spin interaction strength, T is the time period between successive pulses and σi are the
stan-dard spin operators of the spin 1/2 representation. In the vicinity of h = π, the Floquet eigenstates are symmetric and antisymmetric combinations of short range correlated states i.e. of the form |s1, s2, s3. . . i ±
|−s1, −s2, −s3. . . i, with eigenvalues ±ω. Here si labels
the local magnetisation characterising the eigenstate or-der. It is easy to see that a physical state initialized with |Si ≡ |s1, s2, s3. . . i undergoes oscillations between
|Si and |−Si with period twice that of the drive [62]. In the presence of disorder (say for instance in hi), the
eigenstate order and the π phase shift of the eigenvalue pairs are stable against additional weak perturbations or finite deviation of mean hi from π [63–66]. This robust
spatio-temporally ordered system is called a discrete time crystal (DTC) and has seen several experimental realiza-tions that match the condirealiza-tions for DTC up to varying levels of accuracy.[67–71]
NMR systems [69,70] form a natural setting for real-ization of the Floquet unitary described in Eq 28. The STR is a unique system wherein such a Floquet unitary can be realized with a geometry that resembles a mean field version of the the time crystal. Pal et al [69] stud-ied DTC in STRs of sizes up to 37 spins demonstrating robust period two magnetisation response. Fig. 9 shows the summary of the experimental results on the system. A driving protocol identical to Eq. 28was implemented wherein every satellite spin (Ising) interact with the cen-tral spin but do not interact with each other. As expected the stable period two oscillations vanish when the central nucleus is replaced with a NMR inactive nucleus. Nu-merical results showed that for systems initialized with a fixed magnetisation per spin, the time scale over which fi-nite period two oscillations survived increased with num-ber of satellite spins.
Unlike the prototypical example of DTC, the star shaped clusters of spins do not have a extended spatial structure, neither exhibit a true disorder. Nevertheless, the system under the action of the Floquet unitary (28) shows physics that closely resemble the DTC phase with robust subharmonic oscillations even beyond experimen-tally realistic time scales.
H. Quantum chaos
Another field where STRs are of potential interest is in quantum chaos. Quantum chaos is the study of quan-tum systems which, in the classical limit, exhibit chaos. Quantum chaos manifests in interacting spin systems and it is important to understand the fundamental aspects of the phenomenon for developing robust quantum
technol-FIG. 9. Results of magnetisation measurements on the 10 spin cluster in Trimethylphosphite (top) and 4 spin cluster in C-13 Acetonitrile (bottom) subjected to the periodic driving with hi ≈ π − e. (a) Strength of the subharmonic peak at
frequency 0.5/T (where T is the time period) in the Fourier power spectrum of the magnetisation as a function of the error e in the π pulses. Different markers indicate results for differ-ent time windows for Fourier transformations. (b) Waterfall plot of Fourier spectrum of magnetisation time series for dif-ferent values of e indicating that a stable peak survives upto e ∼ 0.25π as expected in a DTC phase. The blue lines in-dicate the expected oscillation frequency for an isolated spin. (c) Decay time scale of the amplitude of the magnetisation oscillations as a function of the error e. (d) Similar to panel (a), this shows the strength of the subharmonic peak as a function of the error e in the pulse. (b) Similar to panel (b), Fourier transform of the magnetisation of the C-13 Acetoni-trile. (c) Fourier transform of the magnetisation in C-12 ace-tonitrile which has an NMR inactive central spin indicating a frequency that continuously varies with the error in the ap-plied pulse. (Reprinted with permission from [69], copyright (2018) by the American Physical Society.)
ogy, where such interactions might be detrimental. This phenomenon has been extensively studied theoretically [72–80], and investigated experimentally using multiple platforms [81–87]. A natural extension would be the study of large spin systems, which are closer to the clas-sical limit, thus bridging the quantum and clasclas-sical do-mains. Star topology systems are ideal candidates for such studies.
One of the most extensively studied models of chaos is the kicked top model [88–93]. Krithika et al had [87] used a two-qubit system to investigate quantum chaos in the kicked top. Extending this to an STR, one obtains a set of two-qubit kicked-tops, each of which is constituted by an ancillary qubit and the common central qubit. The
FIG. 10. Quantum chaos in an STR. von Neumann entropy of the central qubit for (a) k = 0, (b) k = 2, (c) k = 5, and (d) k = 10. Entropy as a function of STR size for (e) odd and (f) even number of ancillary qubits for the fixed initial state (θ, φ) = (π/2, π/2). In all the cases JCA = 50 Hz and
the entropy is averaged over the last 100 out of a total of 200 kicks.
Hamiltonian for such a model is given by
H = π 2(I C x + I A x) X n δ(t − nτ ) + k 2j N −1 X i=1 (IzC+ IzA,i)2 ≡π 2(I C x + I A x) X n δ(t − nτ ) + 2πJCAIzCI A z, (29)
where the linear term is a 90okick about the x-axis on all
spins, k = 2πJ τ is the chaoticity parameter, and j = 1 is the combined spin-size of each top. The value of k determines the degree of chaos in the system, with small values indicating little chaos, and large values indicating high degree of chaos in the system. A numerical study of such a model is described below.
Entanglement entropy has been used as a measure for diagnosing quantum chaos [87]. Fig. 10(a-d) shows the von Neuman entropy of an STR of size N = 10 with varying chaoticity parameter k. In each case, the STR qubits were initialized to the phase-space point (θ, φ) in the Bloch sphere, followed by the evolution under the Hamiltonian in Eq. 29. We can see that for k = 0 (Fig. 10(a)), the entropy is identically ≈ 0 over the entire phase space, and as the chaoticity parameter increases, the
av-erage von Neumann entropy of the system increases as well. Moreover, for smaller k values, the phase space shows distinct islands of low entropy surrounded by high entropy regions. Such distributions can be interpreted as a quantum equivalent of regular and chaotic regions of the classical phase space.
Furthermore, to study the role of STR size in the dy-namics of the system, we initialized the system to a fixed point in the phase space (θ, φ) = (π/2, π/2) and evolved the system for 200 kicks while varying the number of an-cillas from 1 to 9. The von Neumann entropy of the cen-tral spin averaged over the last hundred kicks is shown in Fig. 10 (e)-(f). Interestingly, we can see that the dynamics shows oscillatory behaviour for both odd and even number of ancillas. For small systems, we can ex-pect such oscillations due to the small dimension of the Hilbert space. However, the system with any even num-ber of ancillas shows more prominent oscillations, com-pared to odd number of ancillas, in the von Neumann entropy of the central spin for large values of k. Such a characteristic can be attributed to symmetries in the system in the different cases considered. Moreover, these results also indicate that the role of multiple-quantum coherences, which is fundamentally linked to the size of the system. The interplay between multiple quantum co-herences and chaos is yet to be probed and is crucial for understanding chaos in such systems.
I. Multi-star systems
One can find several multi-star topology registers which are interesting for specific applications. For ex-ample, Pande et al [40] have demonstrated purification of two computational central qubits using a double-STR (see Fig. 1 (e)) wherein each of computational qubits is coupled to a separate set of ancillary qubits. Using a pair of central qubits, involving low natural abundance 13C nuclei, of another double-STR, Khurana et al [94] demon-strated purification of long-lived singlet states which offer a plethora of applications in spectroscopy as well as imag-ing [95]. In this case, the direct ancilla assisted cooling using the double-star system accelerated the NMR ob-servation of the long-lived singlet state by a factor of 23. One can envisage multi-star systems wherein individually addressable central qubits form a network amenable for implementing intricate quantum dynamics.
V. SUMMARY
Coherent control over the quantum dynamics of large registers is essential to realize quantum supremacy. A pivotal consideration in designing a large register is the network topology that is optimum for a specific task. Star-topology network is ideal for parallel implementa-tion of nonlocal quantum gates controlled by a central qubit and acting on all of the indistinguishable ancillary
qubits. The ability to easily and rapidly entangle all qubits is attractive for several applications. The other advantages of star-registers include the presence of a large ancillary polarization which can be efficiently transferred to the central qubit, spectral simplicity, availability of natural star- or star-like spin systems, etc. In this review, after introducing the NMR aspects of star-topology sys-tems, we discussed a range of applications demonstrated in some recent works. Star topology systems have also been used to extract measures like quantum discord [96], out-of-time-order correlations [97] and Renyi entropy [98] to investigate the dynamics of quantum correlations and
processes of information spreading. Hence, star topol-ogy systems present a rich test bed for studying multiple facets of quantum dynamics, and should be of interest in most architectures even beyond NMR.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Funding from DST/SJF/PSA-03/2012-13, CSIR 03(1345)/16/EMR-II, and DST/ICPS/QuST/2019/Q67 is gratefully acknowledged.
[1] M. H. Levitt, Spin dynamics: basics of nuclear magnetic resonance. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
[2] N. Sinha, T. S. Mahesh, K. V. Ramanathan, and A. Ku-mar, “Toward quantum information processing by nu-clear magnetic resonance: Pseudopure states and logi-cal operations using selective pulses on an oriented spin 3/2 nucleus,” The Journal of Chemical Physics, vol. 114, no. 10, pp. 4415–4420, 2001.
[3] T. S. Mahesh, N. Sinha, K. V. Ramanathan, and A. Kumar, “Ensemble quantum-information processing by nmr: Implementation of gates and the creation of pseudopure states using dipolar coupled spins as qubits,” Physical Review A, vol. 65, no. 2, p. 022312, 2002. [4] K. Murali, N. Sinha, T. S. Mahesh, M. H. Levitt, K. V.
Ramanathan, and A. Kumar, “Quantum-information processing by nuclear magnetic resonance: Experimental implementation of half-adder and subtractor operations using an oriented spin-7/2 system,” Physical Review A, vol. 66, no. 2, p. 022313, 2002.
[5] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
[6] T. L. Gustavson, P. Bouyer, and M. A. Kasevich, “Preci-sion rotation measurements with an atom interferometer gyroscope,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 78, pp. 2046–2049, Mar 1997.
[7] D. Carney, G. Krnjaic, D. C. Moore, C. A. Regal, G. Afek, S. Bhave, B. Brubaker, T. Corbitt, J. Cripe, N. Crisosto, A. Geraci, S. Ghosh, J. G. E. Harris, A. Hook, E. W. Kolb, J. Kunjummen, R. F. Lang, T. Li, T. Lin, Z. Liu, J. Lykken, L. Magrini, J. Manley, N. Mat-sumoto, A. Monte, F. Monteiro, T. Purdy, C. J. Riedel, R. Singh, S. Singh, K. Sinha, J. M. Taylor, J. Qin, D. J. Wilson, and Y. Zhao, “Mechanical quantum sensing in the search for dark matter,” Quantum Science and Tech-nology, vol. 6, p. 024002, jan 2021.
[8] L. Amico, M. Boshier, G. Birkl, A. Minguzzi, C. Miniatura, L. C. Kwek, D. Aghamalyan, V. Ahufinger, N. Andrei, A. S. Arnold, M. Baker, T. A. Bell, T. Bland, J. P. Brantut, D. Cassettari, F. Chevy, R. Citro, S. D. Palo, R. Dumke, M. Edwards, R. Folman, J. Fort-agh, S. A. Gardiner, B. M. Garraway, G. Gauthier, A. G¨unther, T. Haug, C. Hufnagel, M. Keil, W. von Kl-itzing, P. Ireland, M. Lebrat, W. Li, L. Longchambon, J. Mompart, O. Morsch, P. Naldesi, T. W. Neely, M. Ol-shanii, E. Orignac, S. Pandey, A. P´erez-Obiol, H. Perrin,
L. Piroli, J. Polo, A. L. Pritchard, N. P. Proukakis, C. Ry-lands, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, F. Scazza, S. Stringari, F. Tosto, A. Trombettoni, N. Victorin, D. Wilkowski, K. Xhani, and A. Yakimenko, “Roadmap on atomtron-ics,” arXiv:2008.04439 [cond-mat.quant-gas], 2020. [9] C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro,
“Quan-tum sensing,” Reviews of modern physics, vol. 89, no. 3, p. 035002, 2017.
[10] J. A. Jones, S. D. Karlen, J. Fitzsimons, A. Ardavan, S. C. Benjamin, G. A. D. Briggs, and J. J. Morton, “Mag-netic field sensing beyond the standard quantum limit using 10-spin noon states,” Science, vol. 324, no. 5931, pp. 1166–1168, 2009.
[11] W. S. Price, “Pulsed-field gradient nuclear magnetic reso-nance as a tool for studying translational diffusion: Part 1. basic theory,” Concepts in Magnetic Resonance: An Educational Journal, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 299–336, 1997. [12] W. S. Price, “Pulsed-field gradient nuclear magnetic
reso-nance as a tool for studying translational diffusion: Part ii. experimental aspects,” Concepts in Magnetic Reso-nance: An Educational Journal, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 197– 237, 1998.
[13] L. E. Kay and J. Prestegard, “An application of pulse-gradient double-quantum spin echoes to diffusion mea-surements on molecules with scalar-coupled spins,” Jour-nal of Magnetic Resonance (1969), vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 103– 113, 1986.
[14] B. E. Chapman and P. W. Kuchel, “Sensitivity in heteronuclear multiple-quantum diffusion experiments,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance, Series A, vol. 102, no. 1, pp. 105–109, 1993.
[15] A. Shukla, M. Sharma, and T. Mahesh, “Noon states in star-topology spin-systems: Applications in diffu-sion studies and rf inhomogeneity mapping,” Chemical Physics Letters, vol. 592, pp. 227–231, 2014.
[16] H. Torrey, “Transient nutations in nuclear magnetic res-onance,” Physical Review, vol. 76, no. 8, p. 1059, 1949. [17] M. A. Pravia, N. Boulant, J. Emerson, A. Farid, E. M.
Fortunato, T. F. Havel, R. Martinez, and D. G. Cory, “Robust control of quantum information,” The Journal of chemical physics, vol. 119, no. 19, pp. 9993–10001, 2003.
[18] N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, T. Schulte-Herbr¨uggen, and S. J. Glaser, “Optimal control of coupled spin dy-namics: design of nmr pulse sequences by gradient ascent algorithms,” Journal of magnetic resonance, vol. 172,
no. 2, pp. 296–305, 2005.
[19] G. Bhole, V. Anjusha, and T. Mahesh, “Steering quan-tum dynamics via bang-bang control: Implementing op-timal fixed-point quantum search algorithm,” Physical Review A, vol. 93, no. 4, p. 042339, 2016.
[20] L. Innocenti, G. De Chiara, M. Paternostro, and R. Puebla, “Ultrafast critical ground state prepara-tion via bang–bang protocols,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 22, no. 9, p. 093050, 2020.
[21] W. H. Zurek, “Decoherence, einselection, and the quan-tum origins of the classical,” Reviews of modern physics, vol. 75, no. 3, p. 715, 2003.
[22] J. Preskill, “Quantum computing in the nisq era and be-yond,” Quantum, vol. 2, p. 79, 2018.
[23] D. Suter and G. A. ´Alvarez, “Colloquium: Protecting quantum information against environmental noise,” Re-views of Modern Physics, vol. 88, no. 4, p. 041001, 2016. [24] L. Viola, E. Knill, and S. Lloyd, “Dynamical decou-pling of open quantum systems,” Physical Review Let-ters, vol. 82, no. 12, p. 2417, 1999.
[25] T. Yuge, S. Sasaki, and Y. Hirayama, “Measurement of the noise spectrum using a multiple-pulse sequence,” Physical review letters, vol. 107, no. 17, p. 170504, 2011. [26] G. A. ´Alvarez and D. Suter, “Measuring the spectrum of colored noise by dynamical decoupling,” Physical review letters, vol. 107, no. 23, p. 230501, 2011.
[27] P. Sza´nkowski, G. Ramon, J. Krzywda, D. Kwiatkowski, et al., “Environmental noise spectroscopy with qubits subjected to dynamical decoupling,” Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, vol. 29, no. 33, p. 333001, 2017. [28] P. Sza´nkowski, M. Trippenbach, and L. Cywi´nski,
“Spec-troscopy of cross correlations of environmental noises with two qubits,” Physical Review A, vol. 94, no. 1, p. 012109, 2016.
[29] G. A. Paz-Silva, L. M. Norris, and L. Viola, “Multiqubit spectroscopy of gaussian quantum noise,” Physical Re-view A, vol. 95, no. 2, p. 022121, 2017.
[30] D. Khurana, G. Unnikrishnan, and T. S. Mahesh, “Spec-tral investigation of the noise influencing multiqubit states,” Physical Review A, vol. 94, no. 6, p. 062334, 2016.
[31] H. Y. Carr and E. M. Purcell, “Effects of diffusion on free precession in nuclear magnetic resonance experiments,” Physical review, vol. 94, no. 3, p. 630, 1954.
[32] S. Meiboom and D. Gill, “Modified spin-echo method for measuring nuclear relaxation times,” Review of scientific instruments, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 688–691, 1958.
[33] J. Tang and A. Pines, “Multiple quantum nmr and relax-ation of an oriented ch3 group,” The Journal of Chemical Physics, vol. 72, no. 5, pp. 3290–3297, 1980.
[34] D. P. DiVincenzo, “The physical implementation of quan-tum computation,” Fortschritte der Physik: Progress of Physics, vol. 48, no. 9-11, pp. 771–783, 2000.
[35] T. D. Ladd, F. Jelezko, R. Laflamme, Y. Nakamura, C. Monroe, and J. L. O’Brien, “Quantum computers,” Nature, vol. 464, no. 7285, pp. 45–53, 2010.
[36] O. W. Sørensen, “Polarization transfer experiments in high-resolution nmr spectroscopy,” Progress in nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 503– 569, 1989.
[37] L. J. Schulman and U. V. Vazirani, “Molecular scale heat engines and scalable quantum computation,” in Proceed-ings of the thirty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pp. 322–329, 1999.
[38] P. O. Boykin, T. Mor, V. Roychowdhury, F. Vatan, and R. Vrijen, “Algorithmic cooling and scalable nmr quan-tum computers,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 99, no. 6, pp. 3388–3393, 2002.
[39] D. K. Park, N. A. Rodriguez-Briones, G. Feng, R. Rahimi, J. Baugh, and R. Laflamme, “Heat bath algo-rithmic cooling with spins: review and prospects,” Elec-tron Spin Resonance (ESR) Based Quantum Computing, pp. 227–255, 2016.
[40] V. R. Pande, G. Bhole, D. Khurana, and T. S. Ma-hesh, “Strong algorithmic cooling in large star-topology quantum registers,” Physical Review A, vol. 96, no. 1, p. 012330, 2017.
[41] S. Boixo, A. Datta, M. J. Davis, S. T. Flammia, A. Shaji, and C. M. Caves, “Quantum metrology: Dynamics ver-sus entanglement,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 101, p. 040403, Jul 2008.
[42] C. S. Sudheer Kumar and T. S. Mahesh, “Ancilla-induced amplification of quantum fisher information,” The Euro-pean Physical Journal Plus, vol. 133, p. 460, Nov 2018. [43] G. Toth and I. Apellaniz, “Quantum metrology from
a quantum information science perspective,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, vol. 47, no. 42, p. 424006, 2014.
[44] J. Cavanagh, Protein NMR spectroscopy: principles and practice. Academic Pr, 1996.
[45] A. Shukla, K. R. K. Rao, and T. S. Mahesh, “Ancilla-assisted quantum state tomography in multiqubit regis-ters,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 87, p. 062317, Jun 2013. [46] A. Mitra, “Quantum quench dynamics,” Annual Review
of Condensed Matter Physics, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 245–259, 2018.
[47] L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, “From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics,” Advances in Physics, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 239–362, 2016.
[48] C. Gogolin and J. Eisert, “Equilibration, thermalisa-tion, and the emergence of statistical mechanics in closed quantum systems,” Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 79, no. 5, p. 056001, 2016.
[49] M. Fagotti and F. H. L. Essler, “Reduced density ma-trix after a quantum quench,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 87, p. 245107, Jun 2013.
[50] V. Alba and P. Calabrese, “Entanglement and thermody-namics after a quantum quench in integrable systems,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 114, no. 30, pp. 7947–7951, 2017.
[51] L. Vidmar and M. Rigol, “Generalized gibbs ensemble in integrable lattice models,” Journal of Statistical Mechan-ics: Theory and Experiment, vol. 2016, no. 6, p. 064007, 2016.
[52] M. Serbyn, Z. Papi´c, and D. A. Abanin, “Quantum quenches in the many-body localized phase,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 90, p. 174302, Nov 2014.
[53] P. Bruno, “Impossibility of spontaneously rotating time crystals: a no-go theorem,” Physical review letters, vol. 111, no. 7, p. 070402, 2013.
[54] H. Watanabe and M. Oshikawa, “Absence of quantum time crystals,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 114, p. 251603, Jun 2015.
[55] J. H. Shirley, “Solution of the schr¨odinger equation with a hamiltonian periodic in time,” Phys. Rev., vol. 138, pp. B979–B987, May 1965.
[56] H. Sambe, “Steady states and quasienergies of a quantum-mechanical system in an oscillating field,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 7, pp. 2203–2213, Jun 1973.
[57] P. Ponte, A. Chandran, Z. Papi´c, and D. A. Abanin, “Pe-riodically driven ergodic and many-body localized quan-tum systems,” Annals of Physics, vol. 353, pp. 196–204, 2015.
[58] A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, “Equilibrium states of generic quantum systems subject to periodic driving,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 90, p. 012110, Jul 2014. [59] A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, “Periodic
ther-modynamics of isolated quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 112, p. 150401, Apr 2014.
[60] A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, “Fate of many-body localization under periodic driving,” Physical re-view letters, vol. 115, no. 3, p. 030402, 2015.
[61] D. A. Abanin, W. De Roeck, and F. Huveneers, “The-ory of many-body localization in periodically driven sys-tems,” Annals of Physics, vol. 372, pp. 1–11, 2016. [62] V. Khemani, A. Lazarides, R. Moessner, and S. L.
Sondhi, “Phase structure of driven quantum systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 116, p. 250401, Jun 2016.
[63] C. W. von Keyserlingk, V. Khemani, and S. L. Sondhi, “Absolute stability and spatiotemporal long-range order in floquet systems,” Physical Review B, vol. 94, no. 8, p. 085112, 2016.
[64] N. Y. Yao, A. C. Potter, I.-D. Potirniche, and A. Vish-wanath, “Discrete time crystals: Rigidity, criticality, and realizations,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 118, p. 030401, Jan 2017.
[65] D. V. Else, B. Bauer, and C. Nayak, “Floquet time crys-tals,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 117, p. 090402, Aug 2016. [66] K. Sacha, “Modeling spontaneous breaking of
time-translation symmetry,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 91, p. 033617, Mar 2015.
[67] S. Choi, J. Choi, R. Landig, G. Kucsko, H. Zhou, J. Isoya, F. Jelezko, S. Onoda, H. Sumiya, V. Khemani, et al., “Observation of discrete time-crystalline order in a dis-ordered dipolar many-body system,” Nature, vol. 543, no. 7644, pp. 221–225, 2017.
[68] J. Zhang, P. Hess, A. Kyprianidis, P. Becker, A. Lee, J. Smith, G. Pagano, I.-D. Potirniche, A. C. Potter, A. Vishwanath, et al., “Observation of a discrete time crystal,” Nature, vol. 543, no. 7644, pp. 217–220, 2017. [69] S. Pal, N. Nishad, T. S. Mahesh, and G. J. Sreejith,
“Temporal order in periodically driven spins in star-shaped clusters,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 120, p. 180602, May 2018.
[70] J. Rovny, R. L. Blum, and S. E. Barrett, “Observation of discrete-time-crystal signatures in an ordered dipolar many-body system,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 120, p. 180603, May 2018.
[71] D. V. Else, C. Monroe, C. Nayak, and N. Y. Yao, “Dis-crete time crystals,” Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics, vol. 11, pp. 467–499, 2020.
[72] D. Wintgen and H. Friedrich, “Regularity and irregular-ity in spectra of the magnetized hydrogen atom,” Physi-cal review letters, vol. 57, no. 5, p. 571, 1986.
[73] F. Haake, Quantum Signatures of Chaos. Springer US, 1991.
[74] R. V. Jensen, “Quantum chaos,” Nature, vol. 355, no. 6358, pp. 311–318, 1992.
[75] S. Tomsovic and D. Ullmo, “Chaos-assisted tunneling,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 50, pp. 145–162, Jul 1994.
[76] H.-J. St¨ockmann, “Quantum chaos: an introduction,” 2000.
[77] G. Casati and B. Chirikov, Quantum chaos: between or-der and disoror-der. Cambridge University Press, 2006. [78] J. N. Bandyopadhyay and A. Lakshminarayan,
“Entan-glement production in coupled chaotic systems: Case of the kicked tops,” Physical Review E, vol. 69, no. 1, p. 016201, 2004.
[79] J. Larson, B. M. Anderson, and A. Altland, “Chaos-driven dynamics in spin-orbit-coupled atomic gases,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 87, p. 013624, Jan 2013.
[80] T. Graß, B. Juli´a-D´ıaz, M. Ku´s, and M. Lewenstein, “Quantum chaos in su(3) models with trapped ions,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 111, p. 090404, Aug 2013.
[81] W. K. Hensinger, H. H¨affner, A. Browaeys, N. R. Heck-enberg, K. Helmerson, C. McKenzie, G. J. Milburn, W. D. Phillips, S. L. Rolston, H. Rubinsztein-Dunlop, et al., “Dynamical tunnelling of ultracold atoms,” Na-ture, vol. 412, no. 6842, pp. 52–55, 2001.
[82] S. Chaudhury, A. Smith, B. Anderson, S. Ghose, and P. S. Jessen, “Quantum signatures of chaos in a kicked top,” Nature, vol. 461, no. 7265, pp. 768–771, 2009. [83] G. B. Lemos, R. M. Gomes, S. P. Walborn, P. H. S.
Ribeiro, and F. Toscano, “Experimental observation of quantum chaos in a beam of light,” Nature communica-tions, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–7, 2012.
[84] A. G. Araujo-Ferreira, R. Auccaise, R. S. Sarthour, I. S. Oliveira, T. J. Bonagamba, and I. Roditi, “Classical bi-furcation in a quadrupolar nmr system,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 87, p. 053605, May 2013.
[85] C. Neill, P. Roushan, M. Fang, Y. Chen, M. Kolodru-betz, Z. Chen, A. Megrant, R. Barends, B. Campbell, B. Chiaro, et al., “Ergodic dynamics and thermalization in an isolated quantum system,” Nature Physics, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1037–1041, 2016.
[86] E. V. H. Doggen, B. Georgeot, and G. Lemari´e, “Chaos-assisted tunneling in the presence of anderson localiza-tion,” Phys. Rev. E, vol. 96, p. 040201, Oct 2017. [87] V. Krithika, V. Anjusha, U. T. Bhosale, and T. Mahesh,
“Nmr studies of quantum chaos in a two-qubit kicked top,” Physical Review E, vol. 99, no. 3, p. 032219, 2019. [88] F. Haake, M. Ku´s, and R. Scharf, “Classical and quan-tum chaos for a kicked top,” Zeitschrift f¨ur Physik B Condensed Matter, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 381–395, 1987. [89] S. Ghose, R. Stock, P. Jessen, R. Lal, and A. Silberfarb,
“Chaos, entanglement, and decoherence in the quantum kicked top,” Physical Review A, vol. 78, no. 4, p. 042318, 2008.
[90] M. Lombardi and A. Matzkin, “Entanglement and chaos in the kicked top,” Physical Review E, vol. 83, no. 1, p. 016207, 2011.
[91] J. B. Ruebeck, J. Lin, and A. K. Pattanayak, “Entangle-ment and its relationship to classical dynamics,” Physical Review E, vol. 95, no. 6, p. 062222, 2017.
[92] U. T. Bhosale and M. Santhanam, “Signatures of bifur-cation on quantum correlations: Case of the quantum kicked top,” Physical Review E, vol. 95, no. 1, p. 012216, 2017.
[93] S. Dogra, V. Madhok, and A. Lakshminarayan, “Quan-tum signatures of chaos, thermalization, and tunneling in the exactly solvable few-body kicked top,” Physical Review E, vol. 99, no. 6, p. 062217, 2019.
[94] D. Khurana and T. S. Mahesh, “Bang-bang optimal control of large spin systems: Enhancement of 13c–13c
singlet-order at natural abundance,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance, vol. 284, pp. 8–14, 2017.
[95] G. Pileio, Long-lived Nuclear Spin Order: Theory and Applications, vol. 22. Royal Society of Chemistry, 2020. [96] S. I. Doronin, E. B. Fel’dman, and E. I. Kuznetsova,
“Contributions of different parts of spin–spin interactions to quantum correlations in a spin ring model in an ex-ternal magnetic field,” Quantum Information Processing,
vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 2929–2943, 2015.
[97] M. Niknam, L. F. Santos, and D. G. Cory, “Sensitivity of quantum information to environment perturbations mea-sured with a nonlocal out-of-time-order correlation func-tion,” Physical Review Research, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 013200, 2020.
[98] M. Niknam, L. F. Santos, and D. G. Cory, “Experimental detection of the correlation renyi entropy in the central spin model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.13948, 2020.
