Connect with us

# Comment on “Ideal strength and phonon instability in single-layer MoS_{2} ”

Published

on

Li’s paper [Phys. Rev. B 85, 235407 (2012)] presents density functional theory (DFT) results of stress as a function of different strain states. The work of Cooper et al. [Phys. Rev. B 87, 035423 (2013)] performs the same DFT calculations as part of an investigation into the nonlinear elastic properties of

${\mathrm{MoS}}_{2}$

. Some of the DFT results of Li are substantially different from our recently published paper, Cooper et al. [Phys. Rev. B 87, 035423 (2013)]. Although both papers agree on states of equibiaxial stress, there is substantial disagreement on states of uniaxial tensile stress. In this Comment we show that our DFT computations are properly executed and consistent across three different DFT codes, including the one used by Li.

• Revised 20 March 2014

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.90.167401

# Seven reasons why I chose to do science in the government

Published

on

When I was in college, people asked me what I wanted to do with my life. I’d answer, “I want to be of use and to learn always.” The question resurfaced in grad school and at the beginning of my postdoc. I answered that I wanted to do extraordinary science that I’d steer. Academia attracted me most, but I wouldn’t discount alternatives.

Last spring, I accepted an offer to build my research group as a member of NIST, the National Institute for Standards and Technology in the U.S. government. My group will be headquartered on the University of Maryland campus, nestled amongst quantum and interdisciplinary institutes. I’m grateful to be joining NIST, and I’m surprised. I never envisioned myself working for the government. I could have accepted an assistant professorship (and I was extremely grateful for the offers), but NIST swept me off my feet. Here are seven reasons why, for other early-career researchers contemplating possibilities.

1) The science. One event illustrates this reason: The notice of my job offer came from NIST Maryland’s friendly neighborhood Nobel laureate. NIST and the university invested in quantum science years before everyone and her uncle began scrambling to create a quantum institute. That investment has flowered, including in reason (2).

2) The research environment. I wouldn’t say that I have a love affair with the University of Maryland. But I’ve found myself visiting every few years (sometimes blogging about the experience). Why? Much of the quantum community passes through Maryland. Seminars fill the week, visitors fill many offices, and conferences happen once or twice a year. Theorists and experimentalists mingle over lunch and collaborate.

The university shares two quantum institutes with NIST: QuICS (the Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science) and the JQI (the Joint Quantum Institute). My group will be based at the former and affiliated with the latter. We’ll also belong to IPST (the university’s Institute for Physical Science and Technology), a hub for interdisciplinarity and thermodynamics. When visiting a university, I ask how much researchers collaborate across department lines. I usually hear an answer along the lines of “We value interdisciplinarity, and we wish that we had more of it, but we don’t have much.” Few universities ingrain interdisciplinarity into their bones by dedicating institutes to it.

Maryland’s quantum community and thermodynamics communities bustle and produce. They grant NIST researchers an academic environment, independence to shape their research paths, and the freedom to participate in the broader scientific community. If weary of the three institutes mentioned above, one can explore the university’s Quantum Technology Center and Condensed-Matter-Theory Center

3) The people. The first Maryland quantum researcher I met was the friendly neighborhood Nobel laureate, Bill Phillips. Bill was presenting a keynote address at Dartmouth College’s physics department, where I’d earned my Bachelors. Bill said that he’d attended a small liberal-arts college before pursuing his PhD at MIT. During the question-and-answer session, I welcomed him back to a small liberal-arts college. How, I asked, had he benefited from the liberal arts? Juniata College, Bill said, had made him a good person. MIT had helped make him a good scientist. Since then, I’ve kept in occasional contact with Bill, we’ve attended talks of each other’s, and I’ve watched him exhibit the most curiosity I’ve seen in almost anyone. What more could one wish for in a colleague?

An equality used across thermodynamics bears Chris Jarzynski’s last name, but he never calls the equality what everyone else does. I benefited from Chris’s mentorship during my PhD, despite our working on opposite sides of the country. His awards include not only membership in the National Academy of Sciences, but also an Outstanding Referee designation, for reviewing so many journal submissions in service to the scientific community. Chris calls IPST, the university’s interdisciplinary and thermodynamic institute, his intellectual home. That recommendation suffices for me.

I’ve looked up to Alexey Gorshkov since beginning my PhD. I keep an eye out for Mohammad Hafezi’s and Pratyush Tiwari’s papers. A quantum researcher couldn’t ignore Chris Monroe’s papers if she tried. Postdoctoral and graduate fellowships stock the community with energetic young researchers. Three energetic researchers are joining QuICS as senior Fellows around the time I am. I’ll spare you the rest of my sources of inspiration.

4) The teaching. Most faculty members at R1 research universities teach two to three courses per year. NIST members can teach once every other year. I value teaching and appreciate how teaching benefits not only students, but also instructors. I respect teachers and remain grateful for their influence. I’m grateful to have received reports that I teach well. Because I’ve acquired some skill at communicating, people tend to assume that I adore teaching. I adore presenting talks, but I don’t feel a calling to teach. Mentors have exhorted me to pursue what excites me most and what only I can accomplish. I feel called to do research and to mentor younger researchers.

Furthermore, if I had to teach much, I wouldn’t have time for writing anything other than papers or grants, such as blog posts. Some of you readers have astonished me with accounts of what my writing means to you. You’ve approached me at conferences, buttonholed me after seminars, and emailed. I’m grateful (as I keep saying, but I mean what I say) for the opportunity to touch lives across the world. I hope to inspire students to take quantum, information-theory, and thermodynamics courses (including the quantum-thermodynamics course that I’d like to teach occasionally). Instructors teach quantum courses throughout the world. No one else writes about Egyptian sarcophagi and the second law of thermodynamics, to my knowledge, or the Russian writer Alexander Pushkin and reproductive science. Perhaps no one should. But, since no one else does, I have to.1

5) The funding. Faculty members complain that they do little apart from applying for grants. Grants fund students, postdocs, travel, summer salaries, equipment, visitors, and workshops. NIST provides primary investigators with research funding every year. Not all the funding that some groups need, but enough to free up time to undertake the research that primary investigators love.

6) The lack of tenure stress. Many junior faculty members fear that they won’t achieve tenure. The fear pushes them away from taking risks in their research programs. This month, I embarked upon a risk that I know I should take but that, had I been facing an assistant professorship, would have given me pause.

7) The acronyms. Above, I introduced NIST (the National Institute of Standards and Technology), UMD (the University of Maryland), QuICS (the Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science), the JQI (the Joint Quantum Institute), and IPST (the Institute for Physical Science and Technology). I’ll also have an affiliation with UMIACS (the University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Science). Where else can one acquire six acronyms? I adore collecting affiliations, which force me to cross intellectual borders. I also enjoy the opportunity to laugh at my CV.

I’ve deferred joining NIST until summer 2021, to complete my postdoctoral fellowship at the Harvard-Smithsonian Institute for Theoretical Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics (an organization that needs its acronym, ITAMP, as much as “the Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science” does). After then, please stop by. If you’d like to join my group, please email: I’m accepting applications for PhD and postdoctoral positions this fall. See you in Maryland next year.

1Also, blogging benefits my research. I’ll leave the explanation for another post.

I credit my husband with the Nesquick-NIST/QuICS parallel.

# Transforming graph states to Bell-pairs is NP-Complete

Published

on

Axel Dahlberg, Jonas Helsen, and Stephanie Wehner

QuTech – TU Delft, Lorentzweg 1, 2628CJ Delft, The Netherlands

### Abstract

Critical to the construction of large scale quantum networks, i.e. a quantum internet, is the development of fast algorithms for managing entanglement present in the network. One fundamental building block for a quantum internet is the distribution of Bell pairs between distant nodes in the network. Here we focus on the problem of transforming multipartite entangled states into the tensor product of bipartite Bell pairs between specific nodes using only a certain class of local operations and classical communication. In particular we study the problem of deciding whether a given graph state, and in general a stabilizer state, can be transformed into a set of Bell pairs on specific vertices using only single-qubit Clifford operations, single-qubit Pauli measurements and classical communication. We prove that this problem is \${mathbb{NP}}\$-Complete.

### ► References

[1] Stephanie Wehner, David Elkouss, and Ronald Hanson. Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead. Science, 362 (6412): eaam9288, Oct 2018. ISSN 0036-8075. 10.1126/​science.aam9288. URL http:/​/​www.sciencemag.org/​lookup/​doi/​10.1126/​ science.aam9288.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1126/​science.aam9288
http:/​/​www.sciencemag.org/​lookup/​doi/​10.1126/​%20%20science.aam9288

[2] Mihir Pant, Hari Krovi, Don Towsley, Leandros Tassiulas, Liang Jiang, Prithwish Basu, Dirk Englund, and Saikat Guha. Routing entanglement in the quantum internet. npj Quantum Information, 5 (1): 25, 2019a. 10.1038/​s41534-019-0139-x.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1038/​s41534-019-0139-x

[3] Mihir Pant, Don Towsley, Dirk Englund, and Saikat Guha. Percolation thresholds for photonic quantum computing. Nature Communications, 10 (1): 1070, 2019b. ISSN 2041-1723. 10.1038/​s41467-019-08948-x.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1038/​s41467-019-08948-x

[4] Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 10th anniversary edition edition, 2010. ISBN 9780511976667. 10.1017/​CBO9780511976667. URL http:/​/​ebooks.cambridge.org/​ref/​id/​CBO9780511976667.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1017/​CBO9780511976667
http:/​/​ebooks.cambridge.org/​ref/​id/​CBO9780511976667

[5] Takaaki Matsuo, Takahiko Satoh, Shota Nagayama, and Rodney Van Meter. Analysis of measurement-based quantum network coding over repeater networks under noisy conditions. Physical Review A, 97: 13, 10 2017. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.97.062328.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.97.062328

[6] N. Kalb, A. A. Reiserer, P. C. Humphreys, J. J. W. Bakermans, S. J. Kamerling, N. H. Nickerson, S. C. Benjamin, D. J. Twitchen, M. Markham, and R. Hanson. Entanglement distillation between solid-state quantum network nodes. Science, 356 (6341): 928–932, jun 2017. ISSN 0036-8075. 10.1126/​science.aan0070. URL http:/​/​www.sciencemag.org/​lookup/​doi/​10.1126/​ science.aan0070.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1126/​science.aan0070
http:/​/​www.sciencemag.org/​lookup/​doi/​10.1126/​%20%20science.aan0070

[7] H. Bombin and M. A. Martin-Delgado. Exact topological quantum order in \$d=3\$ and beyond: Branyons and brane-net condensates. Phys. Rev. B, 75: 075103, Feb 2007. 10.1103/​PhysRevB.75.075103. URL https:/​/​link.aps.org/​doi/​10.1103/​PhysRevB.75.075103.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevB.75.075103

[8] Héctor Bombín. Gauge color codes: optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes. New Journal of Physics, 17 (8): 083002, aug 2015. 10.1088/​1367-2630/​17/​8/​083002. URL https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​1367-2630/​17/​8/​083002

[9] M. Hein, W. Dür, J. Eisert, R. Raussendorf, M Van den Nest, H. J. Briegel, M. Van den Nest, and H. J. Briegel. Entanglement in Graph States and its Applications. Quantum Computers, Algorithms and Chaos, pages 1–99, 2006. ISSN 1050-2947. 10.3254/​978-1-61499-018-5-115. URL http:/​/​arxiv.org/​abs/​quant-ph/​0602096.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.3254/​978-1-61499-018-5-115
arXiv:quant-ph/0602096

[10] Maarten Van den Nest, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Graphical description of the action of local clifford transformations on graph states. Physical Review A, 69 (2): 022316, 2004. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.69.022316.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.69.022316

[11] Axel Dahlberg and Stephanie Wehner. Transforming graph states using single-qubit operations. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 376, One contribution of 15 to a discussion meeting issue ‘Foundations of quantum mechanics and their impact on contemporary society’, 2018. 10.1098/​rsta.2017.0325.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1098/​rsta.2017.0325

[12] Axel Dahlberg, Jonas Helsen, and Stephanie Wehner. How to transform graph states using single-qubit operations: computational complexity and algorithms. Quantum Science and Technology, 5 (4): 045016, sep 2020. 10.1088/​2058-9565/​aba763.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​2058-9565/​aba763

[13] F. Hahn, A. Pappa, and J. Eisert. Quantum network routing and local complementation. npj Quantum Information, 5 (1): 76, Sep 2019. ISSN 2056-6387. 10.1038/​s41534-019-0191-6.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1038/​s41534-019-0191-6

[14] Axel Dahlberg, Jonas Helsen, and Stephanie Wehner. The complexity of the vertex-minor problem. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.05689, 2019.
arXiv:1906.05689

[15] Hans J. Briegel and Robert Raussendorf. Persistent entanglement in arrays of interacting particles. Phys. Rev. Lett., 86: 910–913, Jan 2001. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.86.910. URL https:/​/​link.aps.org/​doi/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.86.910.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.86.910

[16] Robert Raussendorf and Hans J. Briegel. A one-way quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett., 86: 5188–5191, May 2001. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.86.5188. URL https:/​/​link.aps.org/​doi/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.86.5188.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.86.5188

[17] André Bouchet. An efficient algorithm to recognize locally equivalent graphs. Combinatorica, 11 (4): 315–329, 1991. ISSN 0209-9683. 10.1007/​BF01275668. URL http:/​/​link.springer.com/​10.1007/​BF01275668.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1007/​BF01275668

[18] Maarten Van den Nest, Jeroen Dehaene, and Bart De Moor. Efficient algorithm to recognize the local Clifford equivalence of graph states. Physical Review A, 70 (3): 034302, 2004. ISSN 1050-2947. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.70.034302. URL https:/​/​link.aps.org/​doi/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.70.034302.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.70.034302

[19] Sang Il Oum. Rank-width and vertex-minors. Journal of Combinatorial Theory. Series B, 95 (1): 79–100, 2005. ISSN 00958956. 10.1016/​j.jctb.2005.03.003.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jctb.2005.03.003

[20] Bruno Courcelle and Sang il Oum. Vertex-minors, monadic second-order logic, and a conjecture by Seese. Journal of Combinatorial Theory. Series B, 97 (1): 91–126, 2007. ISSN 00958956. 10.1016/​j.jctb.2006.04.003.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.jctb.2006.04.003

[21] Bruno Courcelle and Joost Engelfriet. Graph Structure and Monadic Second-Order Logic: A Language Theoretic Approach. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 1st edition, 2011. 10.1017/​CBO9780511977619.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1017/​CBO9780511977619

[22] M. Van den Nest, W. Dür, G. Vidal, and H. J. Briegel. Classical simulation versus universality in measurement-based quantum computation. Physical Review A, 75 (1): 012337, 2007. ISSN 1050-2947. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.75.012337. URL https:/​/​link.aps.org/​doi/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.75.012337.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.75.012337

[23] Alexander Langer, Felix Reidl, Peter Rossmanith, and Somnath Sikdar. Practical algorithms for mso model-checking on tree-decomposable graphs. Comput. Sci. Rev., 13 (C): 39–74, November 2014. ISSN 1574-0137. 10.1016/​j.cosrev.2014.08.001. URL http:/​/​dx.doi.org/​10.1016/​j.cosrev.2014.08.001.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​j.cosrev.2014.08.001

[24] Bernardo Martin, Angel Sanchez, Cesar Beltran-Royo, and Abraham Duarte. Solving the edge-disjoint paths problem using a two-stage method. International Transactions in Operational Research, 27 (1): 435–457, 2020. 10.1111/​itor.12544. URL https:/​/​onlinelibrary.wiley.com/​doi/​abs/​10.1111/​itor.12544.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1111/​itor.12544

[25] André Bouchet. Graphic presentations of isotropic systems. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 45 (1): 58–76, 1988. ISSN 10960902. 10.1016/​0095-8956(88)90055-X.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​0095-8956(88)90055-X

[26] Anton Kotzig. Quelques remarques sur les transformations \$kappa\$. In seminaire Paris, 1977.

[27] André Bouchet. Caracterisation des symboles croises de genre nul. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, 274: 724–727, 1972.

[28] André Bouchet. Circle Graph Obstructions. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 60 (1): 107–144, 1994. 10.1006/​jctb.1994.1008.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1006/​jctb.1994.1008

[29] Martin Charles Golumbic. Algorithmic graph theory and perfect graphs. North-Holland Publishing Co., 2nd edition, 2004. ISBN 978-0444515308. 10.1016/​C2013-0-10739-8.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​C2013-0-10739-8

[30] Norman Biggs, E Keith Lloyd, and Robin J Wilson. Graph Theory, 1736-1936. Oxford University Press, 1976. ISBN 9780198539162.

[31] Jens Vygen. Np-completeness of some edge-disjoint paths problems. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 61 (1): 83–90, 1995. 10.1016/​0166-218X(93)E0177-Z.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1016/​0166-218X(93)E0177-Z

[32] M. Fleury. Deux problemes de Geometrie de sitation. Journal de mathematiques elementaires, 2nd (2): 257–261, 1883.

[33] Shimon Even. Graph Algorithms. Cambridge University Press, 2 edition, 2011. 10.1017/​CBO9781139015165.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1017/​CBO9781139015165

### Cited by

[1] Axel Dahlberg, Jonas Helsen, and Stephanie Wehner, “Counting single-qubit Clifford equivalent graph states is #P -complete”, Journal of Mathematical Physics 61 2, 022202 (2020).

The above citations are from SAO/NASA ADS (last updated successfully 2020-10-26 03:05:50). The list may be incomplete as not all publishers provide suitable and complete citation data.

On Crossref’s cited-by service no data on citing works was found (last attempt 2020-10-26 03:05:49).

# Environmentally Induced Entanglement – Anomalous Behavior in the Adiabatic Regime

Published

on

Institut für Theoretische Physik, Technische Universität Dresden, D-01062 Dresden, Germany

### Abstract

Considering two non-interacting qubits in the context of open quantum systems, it is well known that their common environment may act as an entangling agent. In a perturbative regime the influence of the environment on the system dynamics can effectively be described by a unitary and a dissipative contribution. For the two-spin Boson model with (sub-) Ohmic spectral density considered here, the particular unitary contribution (Lamb shift) easily explains the buildup of entanglement between the two qubits. Furthermore it has been argued that in the adiabatic limit, adding the so-called counterterm to the microscopic model compensates the unitary influence of the environment and, thus, inhibits the generation of entanglement. Investigating this assertion is one of the main objectives of the work presented here. Using the hierarchy of pure states (HOPS) method to numerically calculate the exact reduced dynamics, we find and explain that the degree of inhibition crucially depends on the parameter \$s\$ determining the low frequency power law behavior of the spectral density \$J(omega) sim omega^s e^{-omega/omega_c}\$. Remarkably, we find that for resonant qubits, even in the adiabatic regime (arbitrarily large \$omega_c\$), the entanglement dynamics is still influenced by an environmentally induced Hamiltonian interaction. Further, we study the model in detail and present the exact entanglement dynamics for a wide range of coupling strengths, distinguish between resonant and detuned qubits, as well as Ohmic and deep sub-Ohmic environments. Notably, we find that in all cases the asymptotic entanglement does not vanish and conjecture a linear relation between the coupling strength and the asymptotic entanglement measured by means of concurrence. Further we discuss the suitability of various perturbative master equations for obtaining approximate entanglement dynamics.

### ► References

[1] Wojciech Hubert Zurek. Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical. Rev. Mod. Phys., 75 (3): 715–775, May 2003. 10.1103/​RevModPhys.75.715.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​RevModPhys.75.715

[2] W. Dür and H.-J. Briegel. Stability of Macroscopic Entanglement under Decoherence. Phys. Rev. Lett., 92 (18): 180403, May 2004. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.92.180403.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.92.180403

[3] M. P. Almeida, F. de Melo, M. Hor-Meyll, A. Salles, S. P. Walborn, P. H. Souto Ribeiro, and L. Davidovich. Environment-Induced Sudden Death of Entanglement. Science, 316 (5824): 579–582, April 2007. ISSN 0036-8075, 1095-9203. 10.1126/​science.1139892.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1126/​science.1139892

[4] Ting Yu and J. H. Eberly. Sudden Death of Entanglement. Science, 323 (5914): 598–601, January 2009. ISSN 0036-8075, 1095-9203. 10.1126/​science.1167343.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1126/​science.1167343

[5] Daniel Braun. Creation of Entanglement by Interaction with a Common Heat Bath. Phys. Rev. Lett., 89 (27): 277901, December 2002. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.89.277901.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.89.277901

[6] M. S. Kim, Jinhyoung Lee, D. Ahn, and P. L. Knight. Entanglement induced by a single-mode heat environment. Phys. Rev. A, 65 (4): 040101, April 2002. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.65.040101.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.65.040101

[7] Aurelian Isar. Entanglement Generation and Evolution in Open Quantum Systems. Open Systems & Information Dynamics, 16 (02n03): 205–219, September 2009. ISSN 1230-1612, 1793-7191. 10.1142/​S1230161209000153.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1142/​S1230161209000153

[8] L. Mazzola, S. Maniscalco, J. Piilo, K.-A. Suominen, and B. M. Garraway. Sudden death and sudden birth of entanglement in common structured reservoirs. Phys. Rev. A, 79 (4): 042302, April 2009. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.79.042302.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.79.042302

[9] F. Benatti and R. Floreanini. Entangling oscillators through environment noise. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 39 (11): 2689–2699, March 2006. ISSN 0305-4470. 10.1088/​0305-4470/​39/​11/​009.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​0305-4470/​39/​11/​009

[10] Thomas Zell, Friedemann Queisser, and Rochus Klesse. Distance Dependence of Entanglement Generation via a Bosonic Heat Bath. Phys. Rev. Lett., 102 (16): 160501, April 2009. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.102.160501.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.102.160501

[11] Mohammad M. Sahrapour and Nancy Makri. Tunneling, decoherence, and entanglement of two spins interacting with a dissipative bath. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 138 (11): 114109, March 2013. ISSN 0021-9606, 1089-7690. 10.1063/​1.4795159.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1063/​1.4795159

[12] M. Dubé and P. C. E. Stamp. Dynamics of a Pair of Interacting Spins Coupled to an Environmental Sea. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B, 12 (11): 1191–1245, May 1998. ISSN 0217-9792. 10.1142/​S0217979298000661.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1142/​S0217979298000661

[13] Karol Życzkowski, Paweł Horodecki, Michał Horodecki, and Ryszard Horodecki. Dynamics of quantum entanglement. Phys. Rev. A, 65 (1): 012101, December 2001. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.65.012101.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.65.012101

[14] A. M. Basharov. Decoherence and entanglement in radiative decay of a diatomic system. J. Exp. Theor. Phys., 94 (6): 1070–1079, June 2002. ISSN 1063-7761, 1090-6509. 10.1134/​1.1493157.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1134/​1.1493157

[15] L. Jakóbczyk. Entangling two qubits by dissipation. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 35 (30): 6383, 2002. ISSN 0305-4470. 10.1088/​0305-4470/​35/​30/​313.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​0305-4470/​35/​30/​313

[16] S. Schneider and G. J. Milburn. Entanglement in the steady state of a collective-angular-momentum (Dicke) model. Phys. Rev. A, 65 (4): 042107, March 2002. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.65.042107.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.65.042107

[17] K. Lendi and A. J. van Wonderen. Davies theory for reservoir-induced entanglement in a bipartite system. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., 40 (2): 279–288, December 2006. ISSN 1751-8121. 10.1088/​1751-8113/​40/​2/​007.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​1751-8113/​40/​2/​007

[18] Juan Pablo Paz and Augusto J. Roncaglia. Dynamics of the Entanglement between Two Oscillators in the Same Environment. Phys. Rev. Lett., 100 (22): 220401, June 2008. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.100.220401.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.100.220401

[19] Denis Kast and Joachim Ankerhold. Bipartite entanglement dynamics of two-level systems in sub-Ohmic reservoirs. Phys. Rev. B, 90 (10): 100301, September 2014. 10.1103/​PhysRevB.90.100301.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevB.90.100301

[20] Leandro Aolita, Fernando de Melo, and Luiz Davidovich. Open-system dynamics of entanglement:a key issues review. Rep. Prog. Phys., 78 (4): 042001, March 2015. ISSN 0034-4885. 10.1088/​0034-4885/​78/​4/​042001.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​0034-4885/​78/​4/​042001

[21] Tianrui Deng, Yiying Yan, Lipeng Chen, and Yang Zhao. Dynamics of the two-spin spin-boson model with a common bath. J. Chem. Phys., 144 (14): 144102, April 2016. ISSN 0021-9606. 10.1063/​1.4945390.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1063/​1.4945390

[22] P. R. Eastham, P. Kirton, H. M. Cammack, B. W. Lovett, and J. Keeling. Bath-induced coherence and the secular approximation. Phys. Rev. A, 94 (1): 012110, July 2016. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.94.012110.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.94.012110

[23] D. Suess, A. Eisfeld, and W. T. Strunz. Hierarchy of Stochastic Pure States for Open Quantum System Dynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett., 113 (15): 150403, October 2014. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.113.150403.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.113.150403

[24] Pan-Pan Zhang and Alexander Eisfeld. Non-Perturbative Calculation of Two-Dimensional Spectra Using the Stochastic Hierarchy of Pure States. J. Phys. Chem. Lett., 7 (22): 4488–4494, November 2016. ISSN 1948-7185. 10.1021/​acs.jpclett.6b02111.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1021/​acs.jpclett.6b02111

[25] Richard Hartmann and Walter T. Strunz. Exact Open Quantum System Dynamics Using the Hierarchy of Pure States (HOPS). Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 13 (12): 5834–5845, December 2017. ISSN 1549-9618, 1549-9626. 10.1021/​acs.jctc.7b00751.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1021/​acs.jctc.7b00751

[26] P.-P. Zhang, C. D. B. Bentley, and A. Eisfeld. Flexible scheme to truncate the hierarchy of pure states. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 148 (13): 134103, April 2018. ISSN 0021-9606, 1089-7690. 10.1063/​1.5022225.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1063/​1.5022225

[27] Richard Hartmann, Michael Werther, Frank Grossmann, and Walter T. Strunz. Exact open quantum system dynamics: Optimal frequency vs time representation of bath correlations. J. Chem. Phys., 150 (23): 234105, June 2019. ISSN 0021-9606. 10.1063/​1.5097158.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1063/​1.5097158

[28] Richard Hartmann and Walter T. Strunz. Accuracy assessment of perturbative master equations: Embracing nonpositivity. Phys. Rev. A, 101 (1): 012103, January 2020. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.101.012103.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.101.012103

[29] Ulrich Weiss. Quantum Dissipative Systems. World Scientific, Singapore, March 2008. ISBN 978-981-279-162-7.

[30] Fabio Benatti, Roberto Floreanini, and Marco Piani. Environment Induced Entanglement in Markovian Dissipative Dynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett., 91 (7): 070402, August 2003. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.91.070402.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.91.070402

[31] A. J. Leggett, S. Chakravarty, A. T. Dorsey, Matthew P. A. Fisher, Anupam Garg, and W. Zwerger. Dynamics of the dissipative two-state system. Rev. Mod. Phys., 59 (1): 1–85, January 1987. 10.1103/​RevModPhys.59.1.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​RevModPhys.59.1

[32] E. B. Davies. Markovian master equations. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 39 (2): 91–110, June 1974. ISSN 0010-3616, 1432-0916. 10.1007/​BF01608389.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1007/​BF01608389

[33] Heinz-Peter Breuer and Francesco Petruccione. The Theory of Open Quantum Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, January 2007. ISBN 978-0-19-921390-0.

[34] Dariusz Chruściński and Saverio Pascazio. A Brief History of the GKLS Equation. Open Syst. Inf. Dyn., 24 (03): 1740001, September 2017. ISSN 1230-1612, 1793-7191. 10.1142/​S1230161217400017.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1142/​S1230161217400017

[35] Stanislaw Kryszewski and Justyna Czechowska-Kryszk. Master equation – tutorial approach. arXiv:0801.1757 [quant-ph], January 2008.
arXiv:0801.1757

[36] Robert S. Whitney. Staying positive: Going beyond Lindblad with perturbative master equations. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., 41 (17): 175304, 2008. ISSN 1751-8121. 10.1088/​1751-8113/​41/​17/​175304.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​1751-8113/​41/​17/​175304

[37] D. P. S. McCutcheon, A. Nazir, S. Bose, and A. J. Fisher. Long-lived spin entanglement induced by a spatially correlated thermal bath. Physical Review A, 80 (2): 022337, August 2009. ISSN 1050-2947, 1094-1622. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.80.022337.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.80.022337

[38] Dmitry Solenov, Denis Tolkunov, and Vladimir Privman. Exchange interaction, entanglement, and quantum noise due to a thermal bosonic field. Physical Review B, 75 (3): 035134, January 2007. ISSN 1098-0121, 1550-235X. 10.1103/​PhysRevB.75.035134.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevB.75.035134

[39] F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and U. Marzolino. Entangling two unequal atoms through a common bath. Phys. Rev. A, 81 (1): 012105, January 2010. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.81.012105.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.81.012105

[40] Christian Majenz, Tameem Albash, Heinz-Peter Breuer, and Daniel A. Lidar. Coarse graining can beat the rotating-wave approximation in quantum Markovian master equations. Phys. Rev. A, 88 (1): 012103, July 2013. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.88.012103.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.88.012103

[41] Peter P. Orth, David Roosen, Walter Hofstetter, and Karyn Le Hur. Dynamics, synchronization, and quantum phase transitions of two dissipative spins. Phys. Rev. B, 82 (14): 144423, October 2010. 10.1103/​PhysRevB.82.144423.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevB.82.144423

[42] A. Strathearn, P. Kirton, D. Kilda, J. Keeling, and B. W. Lovett. Efficient non-Markovian quantum dynamics using time-evolving matrix product operators. Nature Communications, 9 (1): 3322, August 2018. ISSN 2041-1723. 10.1038/​s41467-018-05617-3.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1038/​s41467-018-05617-3

[43] Ryszard Horodecki, Paweł Horodecki, Michał Horodecki, and Karol Horodecki. Quantum entanglement. Rev. Mod. Phys., 81 (2): 865–942, June 2009. 10.1103/​RevModPhys.81.865.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​RevModPhys.81.865

[44] L. Diósi, N. Gisin, and Walter T. Strunz. Non-Markovian quantum state diffusion. Phys. Rev. A, 58 (3): 1699–1712, September 1998. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.58.1699.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.58.1699

[45] Walter T. Strunz, Lajos Diósi, and Nicolas Gisin. Open System Dynamics with Non-Markovian Quantum Trajectories. Phys. Rev. Lett., 82 (9): 1801–1805, March 1999. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.82.1801.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.82.1801

[46] Scott Hill and William K. Wootters. Entanglement of a Pair of Quantum Bits. Phys. Rev. Lett., 78 (26): 5022–5025, June 1997. 10.1103/​PhysRevLett.78.5022.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevLett.78.5022

[47] A. R.R. Carvalho, F. Mintert, S. Palzer, and A. Buchleitner. Entanglement dynamics under decoherence: From qubits to qudits. The European Physical Journal D, 41 (2): 425–432, February 2007. ISSN 1434-6060, 1434-6079. 10.1140/​epjd/​e2006-00246-4.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1140/​epjd/​e2006-00246-4

[48] Nicolas Vogt, Jan Jeske, and Jared H. Cole. Stochastic Bloch-Redfield theory: Quantum jumps in a solid-state environment. Physical Review B, 88 (17): 174514, November 2013. ISSN 1098-0121, 1550-235X. 10.1103/​PhysRevB.88.174514.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevB.88.174514

[49] Jan Jeske, David J. Ing, Martin B. Plenio, Susana F. Huelga, and Jared H. Cole. Bloch-Redfield equations for modeling light-harvesting complexes. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 142 (6): 064104, February 2015. ISSN 0021-9606. 10.1063/​1.4907370.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1063/​1.4907370

[50] Timur V. Tscherbul and Paul Brumer. Partial secular Bloch-Redfield master equation for incoherent excitation of multilevel quantum systems. J. Chem. Phys., 142 (10): 104107, March 2015. ISSN 0021-9606. 10.1063/​1.4908130.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1063/​1.4908130

[51] A. G. Redfield. On the Theory of Relaxation Processes. IBM J. Res. Dev., 1 (1): 19–31, January 1957. ISSN 0018-8646. 10.1147/​rd.11.0019.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1147/​rd.11.0019

[52] Dragomir Davidović. Completely Positive, Simple, and Possibly Highly Accurate Approximation of the Redfield Equation. Quantum, 4: 326, September 2020. 10.22331/​q-2020-09-21-326.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.22331/​q-2020-09-21-326

[53] Gernot Schaller and Tobias Brandes. Preservation of positivity by dynamical coarse graining. Phys. Rev. A, 78 (2): 022106, August 2008. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.78.022106.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.78.022106

[54] Chris Fleming, N. I. Cummings, Charis Anastopoulos, and B. L. Hu. The rotating-wave approximation: Consistency and applicability from an open quantum system analysis. J. Phys. A: Math. Theor., 43 (40): 405304, 2010. ISSN 1751-8121. 10.1088/​1751-8113/​43/​40/​405304.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1088/​1751-8113/​43/​40/​405304

[55] Jian Ma, Zhe Sun, Xiaoguang Wang, and Franco Nori. Entanglement dynamics of two qubits in a common bath. Phys. Rev. A, 85 (6): 062323, June 2012. 10.1103/​PhysRevA.85.062323.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1103/​PhysRevA.85.062323

[56] E. B. Davies. Markovian master equations. II. Mathematische Annalen, 219 (2): 147–158, June 1976. ISSN 0025-5831, 1432-1807. 10.1007/​BF01351898.
https:/​/​doi.org/​10.1007/​BF01351898