pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.02151 · v3 · pith:QMGBD3ELnew · submitted 2026-05-04 · 🪐 quant-ph

Optimizing Quantum Entanglement Preservation in a Qubit Qubit System with Dzyaloshinskii Moriya Interaction under Noisy Magnetic Fields via Feedback Control

Seyed Mohsen Moosavi Khansari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 00:54 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum entanglementDzyaloshinskii-Moriya interactionfeedback controlquantum metrologystochastic Lindblad equationnegativityquantum Fisher informationcolored noise
0
0 comments X

The pith

A feedback protocol that tunes Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya strength doubles average entanglement negativity in noisy two-qubit systems and improves metrology sensitivity by 2.5 times.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows how to maintain quantum entanglement between two qubits coupled by Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction when random magnetic fields disturb them. It models the noise with a stochastic Lindblad equation and introduces a proportional-integral controller that changes the interaction strength over time to hold negativity high. Numerical trajectories indicate the controller lifts the time-averaged negativity from 0.21 to 0.42 at moderate noise levels. This preserved entanglement then serves as a better probe for estimating an unknown magnetic field, exceeding the classical precision bound. Readers should care because such control offers a route to make fragile quantum resources last longer in imperfect hardware.

Core claim

The authors derive a stochastic Lindblad master equation for the qubit-qubit system under colored magnetic noise and demonstrate that a proportional-integral feedback law adjusting D_z(t) raises the time-averaged negativity from 0.21 to 0.42 for α=1 and σ=0.5, thereby increasing the quantum Fisher information and delivering a factor of 2.5 improvement in sensitivity beyond the classical shot-noise limit.

What carries the argument

The proportional-integral feedback protocol that continuously adjusts the DM interaction strength D_z(t) to keep negativity close to a chosen target.

If this is right

  • The feedback increases time-averaged negativity from 0.21 to 0.42 under the stated noise conditions.
  • Stabilized states produce higher quantum Fisher information for static field estimation.
  • Overall sensitivity improves by a factor of 2.5 over the classical shot noise limit.
  • The protocol applies to colored noise described by the stochastic master equation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar feedback might extend to systems with more than two qubits if the interaction remains controllable.
  • Experimental tests could compare the predicted negativity curves against data from devices engineered with tunable DM terms.
  • The method suggests that real-time tuning of interaction parameters can counteract decoherence in other quantum sensing setups.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes that the DM interaction strength can be changed externally on the timescale of the noise without adding new sources of decoherence.

What would settle it

An experiment that implements the feedback by modulating the DM coupling in a physical two-qubit device and measures whether the negativity indeed averages to 0.42 instead of 0.21 under comparable noise would confirm or refute the result.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.02151 by Seyed Mohsen Moosavi Khansari.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (Color online) Calibration curve: negativity 𝑁 vs. ⟨𝜎𝑎 𝑧𝜎𝑏 𝑧 ⟩ for the unitary evolution of the 𝑋𝑋𝑋 model with parameters of view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: shows ⟨𝑁(𝑡)⟩ for the 𝑋𝑋𝑋 model with 𝛼 = 1, without feedback, for three noise amplitudes 𝜎 = 0,0.5,1.0. As 𝜎 increases, the oscillations decay faster, and the time-averaged negativity drops from 0.30 (static) to 0.21 (𝜎 = 0.5) and 0.12 (𝜎 = 1.0). Entanglement does not completely die (negativity > 0), but the degradation is significant view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: presents the same system but with the PI feedback controller active (Eq. (9)). For 𝜎 = 0.5, the negativity is now stabilized around 𝑁target = 0.4 after an initial transient, with small residual oscillations. The time-averaged negativity increases to 0.42 – a 100% improvement over the no-feedback case. For 𝜎 = 1.0, the feedback still raises the average from 0.12 to 0.28, though perfect tracking is impossibl… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Color online) Time-averaged negativity 𝑁‾ vs. initial 𝐷𝑧(0) for 𝜎 = 0.5. Solid curves: feedback ON; dashed: OFF. Colors: 𝛼 = 1 (black), 𝛼 = 2 (red), 𝛼 = 3 (blue). Feedback enhances 𝑁‾ for all 𝛼 and reduces sensitivity to the initial 𝐷𝑧 . 6.4 Anisotropic 𝑿𝒀𝒁 model view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Color online) Same as view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (Color online) Quantum Fisher information 𝐹𝑄(𝐵0) for estimating 𝐵0 (units of 𝐽). Black: classical separable state; red: no-feedback entangled state (static fields); blue: feedback-stabilized state (𝜎 = 0.5, 𝐷𝑧 controlled). Parameters: 𝑋𝑋𝑋 model, 𝛼 = 1. The feedback state achieves ≈ 6.2, well above the classical shot-noise limit (1.0) view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (Color online) Sensitivity improvement factor vs. time-averaged negativity 𝑁‾. Markers: simulation results for different 𝛼 and noise levels; solid line: √1 + 2𝑁‾. Feedback increases 𝑁‾, which in turn boosts sensitivity. 8. Discussion and Conclusion We have extended our previous unitary analysis of negativity in a qubit-qubit system with DM interaction to the realistic scenario of time-varying, noisy magnet… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum entanglement is a key resource for quantum information processing and sensing, but it is severely degraded by environmental noise. We extend the previous study by Moosavi Khansari and Kazemi Hasanvand [27] of entanglement dynamics in a qubit qubit system with Dzyaloshinskii Moriya (DM) interaction and static magnetic fields to the realistic case of time varying, stochastic magnetic fields. We derive a stochastic Lindblad master equation and simulate quantum trajectories to quantify the negativity under colored noise. We then design a proportional integral feedback protocol that dynamically adjusts the DM interaction strength D_z (t) to maintain negativity near a target value. The feedback stabilized state is used as a probe for quantum metrology: we compute the quantum Fisher information (QFI) for estimating an unknown static field B_0. Our simulations show that feedback increases the time averaged negativity from 0.21 to 0.42 for {\alpha}=1 at noise amplitude {\sigma}=0.5, leading to a factor 2.5 improvement in sensitivity over the classical shot noise limit. This work provides a practical route to protect entanglement in noisy environments and enhances quantum sensing performance.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript extends prior work on entanglement dynamics in a qubit-qubit system with DM interaction to the case of time-varying stochastic magnetic fields. It derives a stochastic Lindblad master equation, performs quantum trajectory simulations to quantify negativity under colored noise with parameters σ and α, designs a proportional-integral feedback protocol to dynamically tune D_z(t), and uses the resulting state to compute QFI for estimating a static field B_0. The key numerical result is that feedback raises time-averaged negativity from 0.21 to 0.42 for α=1, σ=0.5, yielding a 2.5-fold sensitivity improvement over the classical shot-noise limit.

Significance. If the results are robust, the work provides a concrete numerical demonstration of feedback-based entanglement stabilization in a noisy two-qubit system and its translation into metrological advantage. This could be relevant for quantum sensing applications where environmental noise limits performance. The approach builds on existing literature by incorporating colored noise and closed-loop control, offering a pathway that is in principle implementable if the modulation of D_z can be realized without additional noise.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The reported performance gain (negativity increase from 0.21 to 0.42 and 2.5× sensitivity improvement) is obtained by running the feedback protocol inside the same stochastic Lindblad model that generates the noise. The abstract gives no indication that additional decoherence from the external control of D_z(t) is included, making the central claim dependent on the unverified assumption of ideal, noiseless modulation.
  2. [Abstract (simulation details)] Abstract (simulation details): The abstract states specific quantitative improvements but does not report the number of quantum trajectories used, any convergence checks, or error bars on the negativity and QFI values. This omission prevents assessment of the statistical significance of the 0.21-to-0.42 and factor-2.5 claims.
  3. [Feedback protocol description] Feedback protocol description: The protocol assumes that D_z(t) can be modulated externally on the relevant timescale without introducing additional fluctuating terms in the Hamiltonian. No analysis or simulation is provided to test the sensitivity of the negativity gain to such extra noise channels, which would be present in any physical implementation.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The reference to the previous study [27] is appropriate, but the manuscript could clarify how the stochastic extension differs in its treatment of the magnetic field.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and will make revisions to improve clarity and transparency.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] The reported performance gain (negativity increase from 0.21 to 0.42 and 2.5× sensitivity improvement) is obtained by running the feedback protocol inside the same stochastic Lindblad model that generates the noise. The abstract gives no indication that additional decoherence from the external control of D_z(t) is included, making the central claim dependent on the unverified assumption of ideal, noiseless modulation.

    Authors: We agree that the model assumes ideal, noiseless modulation of D_z(t). The abstract should make this modeling assumption explicit. We will revise the abstract to state that the feedback protocol is implemented under the assumption of ideal control without additional decoherence channels from the modulation itself. This is a standard first-step simplification in such studies, and we will note it as a limitation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract (simulation details)] The abstract states specific quantitative improvements but does not report the number of quantum trajectories used, any convergence checks, or error bars on the negativity and QFI values. This omission prevents assessment of the statistical significance of the 0.21-to-0.42 and factor-2.5 claims.

    Authors: We acknowledge the omission of these details. In the revised version we will add to the abstract (and expand in the methods section) the number of trajectories employed, results of convergence tests, and error bars or standard deviations on the reported negativity and QFI values to allow assessment of statistical significance. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Feedback protocol description] The protocol assumes that D_z(t) can be modulated externally on the relevant timescale without introducing additional fluctuating terms in the Hamiltonian. No analysis or simulation is provided to test the sensitivity of the negativity gain to such extra noise channels, which would be present in any physical implementation.

    Authors: This is a fair observation. Our work focuses on the impact of the colored magnetic-field noise under ideal feedback; we did not model additional noise arising from the control actuator itself. We will add an explicit discussion paragraph acknowledging this assumption and its implications for experimental realization. A full sensitivity analysis with extra control-noise channels lies beyond the present scope but would be a natural extension. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results are numerical simulations within an explicitly derived model

full rationale

The paper derives a stochastic Lindblad master equation from the system Hamiltonian plus colored noise, integrates quantum trajectories numerically, applies a proportional-integral controller to D_z(t) inside that same dynamics, and extracts time-averaged negativity and QFI from the resulting states. These steps are direct numerical evaluation of the stated equations rather than any reduction by construction, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or load-bearing self-citation. The reference [27] supplies only the static-field baseline; the stochastic extension, feedback protocol, and metrology calculation are original to the present work and remain falsifiable by changing the noise model or controller gains. No uniqueness theorems, ansatzes smuggled via citation, or self-definitional loops appear.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so the ledger is necessarily incomplete and limited to elements explicitly named there.

free parameters (2)
  • noise amplitude σ
    Specific value 0.5 used to illustrate the negativity improvement; chosen for the reported simulation case.
  • noise exponent α
    Specific value 1 used to illustrate the negativity improvement; defines the colored-noise spectrum.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The open-system dynamics are captured by a stochastic Lindblad master equation driven by time-varying magnetic fields.
    Invoked to derive the negativity evolution under colored noise.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5751 in / 1430 out tokens · 37633 ms · 2026-07-01T00:54:58.186283+00:00 · methodology

Review history (3 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Quantum entanglement.Rev

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, "Quantum entanglement," Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.81.865

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.865 2009

  2. [2]

    Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein Podolsky Rosen channels,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, "Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein Podolsky Rosen channels," Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.1895

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.70.1895 1993

  3. [3]

    Communication via one and two particle operators on Einstein Podolsky Rosen states,

    C. H. Bennett and S. J. Wiesner, "Communication via one and two particle operators on Einstein Podolsky Rosen states," Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2881 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.69.2881

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.69.2881 1992

  4. [4]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976667

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511976667 2010

  5. [5]

    Entangled coherent states: Teleportation and decoherence,

    S. Van Enk and O. Hirota, "Entangled coherent states: Teleportation and decoherence," Phys. Rev. A 64, 022313 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.64.022313

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.64.022313 2001

  6. [6]

    Entangled coherent states,

    B. C. Sanders, "Entangled coherent states," Phys. Rev. A 45, 6811 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.45.6811

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.45.6811 1992

  7. [7]

    Entanglement in bipartite generalized coherent states,

    S. Sivakumar, "Entanglement in bipartite generalized coherent states," Int. J. Theor. Phys. 48, 894 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10773-008-9862-3

    work page doi:10.1007/s10773-008-9862-3 2009

  8. [8]

    Entangled three qutrit coherent states and localizable entanglement,

    M. Ashrafpour, M. Jafarpour, and A. Sabour, "Entangled three qutrit coherent states and localizable entanglement," Commun. Theor. Phys. 61, 177 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/0253-6102/61/2/05

    work page doi:10.1088/0253-6102/61/2/05 2014

  9. [9]

    Entanglement dynamics of a two qutrit system under DM interaction and the relevance of the initial state,

    M. Jafarpour and M. Ashrafpour, "Entanglement dynamics of a two qutrit system under DM interaction and the relevance of the initial state," Quantum Inf. Process. 12, 761 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-012-0419-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-012-0419-2 2013

  10. [10]

    A thermodynamic theory of weak ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics,

    I. Dzyaloshinsky, "A thermodynamic theory of weak ferromagnetism of antiferromagnetics," J. Phys. Chem. Solids 4, 241 (1958). https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3697(58)90076-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0022-3697(58)90076-3 1958

  11. [11]

    New mechanism of anisotropic superexchange interaction,

    T. Moriya, "New mechanism of anisotropic superexchange interaction," Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 228 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.4.228

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.4.228 1960

  12. [12]

    Correlation dynamics of qubit qutrit systems in a classical dephasing environment,

    G. Karpat and Z. Gedik, "Correlation dynamics of qubit qutrit systems in a classical dephasing environment," Phys. Lett. A 375, 4166 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2011.10.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2011.10.017 2011

  13. [13]

    Separability criterion for density matrices.Phys

    A. Peres, "Separability criterion for density matrices," Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.1413

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.77.1413 1996

  14. [14]

    Separability of mixed states: necessary and sufficient conditions.Physics Letters A, 223(1):1–8, 1996

    M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, "Separability of mixed states: necessary and sufficient conditions," Phys. Lett. A 223, 1 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9601(96)00706-2

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375-9601(96)00706-2 1996

  15. [15]

    Computable measure of entanglement,

    G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, "Computable measure of entanglement," Phys. Rev. A 65, 032314 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.65.032314

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.65.032314 2002

  16. [16]

    Dynamics of entanglement and negativity in a two qubit system under DM interaction,

    M. A. Chamgordani, N. Naderi, H. Koppelaar, and M. Bordbar, "Dynamics of entanglement and negativity in a two qubit system under DM interaction," Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 33, 1950180 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979219501807

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217979219501807 2019

  17. [17]

    Influence of Dzyaloshinskii Moriya interaction on entanglement in a two qubit Heisenberg XYZ system,

    G. F. Zhang, Y . C. Hou, and A. L. Ji, "Influence of Dzyaloshinskii Moriya interaction on entanglement in a two qubit Heisenberg XYZ system," Solid State Commun. 151, 790 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssc.2011.02.032

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ssc.2011.02.032 2011

  18. [18]

    Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estimation,

    J. Liu, H. Yuan, X. M. Lu, and X. Wang, "Quantum Fisher information matrix and multiparameter estimation," J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 53, 023001 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8121/ab5d6d

    work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab5d6d 2020

  19. [19]

    Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles

    L. Pezze, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, "Quantum metrology with non classical states of atomic ensembles," Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.90.035005

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1103/revmodphys.90.035005 2018

  20. [20]

    Characterizing nonclassical correlations via local quantum uncertainty,

    D. Girolami, T. Tufarelli, and G. Adesso, "Characterizing nonclassical correlations via local quantum uncertainty," Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 240402 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.240402

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.110.240402 2013

  21. [21]

    Quantum Fisher information and fidelity susceptibility,

    M. Gessner and A. Smerzi, "Quantum Fisher information and fidelity susceptibility," Phys. Rev. A 97, 022109 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.97.022109

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.97.022109 2018

  22. [22]

    Probing entanglement in a many body system using randomised measurements,

    T. Brydges, A. Elben, P. Jurcevic, B. Vermersch, C. Maier, B. P. Lanyon, P . Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, "Probing entanglement in a many body system using randomised measurements," Science 364, 260 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau4963

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aau4963 2019

  23. [23]

    Entanglement and symmetry in Heisenberg models with Dzyaloshinskii Moriya interaction,

    H. Pichler and A. M. Rey, "Entanglement and symmetry in Heisenberg models with Dzyaloshinskii Moriya interaction," Phys. Rev. X 13, 011023 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.13.011023

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.011023 2023

  24. [24]

    Feedback protected entanglement in noisy quantum sensors,

    Y . Chen and N. Y . Yao, "Feedback protected entanglement in noisy quantum sensors," Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 070502 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.070502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.070502 2022

  25. [25]

    Feedback and entanglement in quantum metrology,

    S. A. Haine and J. J. Hope, "Feedback and entanglement in quantum metrology," Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 060402 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.060402

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.060402 2020

  26. [26]

    Quantum interface between light and atomic ensembles,

    K. Hammerer, A. S. Sorensen, and E. S. Polzik, "Quantum interface between light and atomic ensembles," Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1041 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.82.1041

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.82.1041 2010

  27. [27]

    and Kazemi Hasanvand, F

    Moosavi Khansari, S.M. and Kazemi Hasanvand, F. 'Investigating the evolution of quantum entanglement of a qubit-qubit system with Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction in the presence of magnetic fields', Journal of Interfaces, Thin Films, and Low dimensional systems, 8(1), pp. 837-854 (2024). https://doi.org/10.22051/jitl.2024.47853.1109

    work page doi:10.22051/jitl.2024.47853.1109 2024