The DOI matches its Crossref record; 204 of the 205 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 8 of the 144 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Vibrations, quanta and biology
Open accessAbstract
Quantum biology is an emerging field of research that concerns itself with the experimental and theoretical exploration of non-trivial quantum phenomena in biological systems. In this tutorial overview we aim to bring out fundamental assumptions and questions in the field, identify basic design principles and develop a key underlying theme – the dynamics of quantum dynamical networks in the presence of an environment and the fruitful interplay that the two may enter. At the hand of three biological phenomena whose understanding is held to require quantum mechanical processes, namely excitation and charge transfer in photosynthetic complexes, magneto-reception in birds and the olfactory sense, we demonstrate that this underlying theme encompasses them all, thus suggesting its wider relevance as an archetypical framework for quantum biology.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This tutorial review argues that quantum biology is unified by the interplay between quantum dynamics of multi-site networks and structured environments, with optimal performance often occurring at intermediate noise. It illustrates this through photosynthesis, avian magnetoreception, and olfaction, and surveys non-perturbative numerical methods for structured environments.
Key findings
- In the FMO transport example, conductivity exhibits a maximum at a finite dephasing rate; no noise or very strong noise are counterproductive, and the optimal regime is described as “halfway” between the classical and quantum worlds.
- The phonon antenna principle: in a three-site optimization with site 1 300 cm⁻¹ above site 3 and an environmental spectral density maximum around 200 cm⁻¹, the optimal site 2 is close to site 1 with strong coherent dipolar coupling and close excitation energy; matching the dressed-state splitting to the spectral density maximum optimizes transport.
- Long-lived vibrational modes can regenerate electronic coherences for up to several picoseconds; in a symmetric three-site network, destructive interference limits transfer to 50%, while tuned dephasing restores transport.
- For olfaction, proposed phonon-assisted electron tunneling requires an odorant vibrational mode matching the donor–acceptor energy difference ΔE; Drosophila can discriminate hydrogenated from deuterated molecules and generalize to molecules with similar C–D stretch frequency. For avian magnetoreception, the nuclear spin environment breaks singlet symmetry, and initial coherence in the full electron+nuclear eigenbasis predicts compass sensitivity; white-noise-assisted transport varies sub-percent under up to 20% parameter changes.
Methods
- Tutorial overview/review synthesizing experimental and theoretical literature across three phenomena; no new experiments are reported.
- Illustrative numerical example: the FMO complex is modeled with an exciton-vibrational Hamiltonian, dipolar couplings, Huang–Rhys factors, and Lindblad terms for loss and reaction-center transfer under low-light conditions (γ_in ≪ γ_RC); an initial perturbative master equation/Redfield treatment is used.
- The paper also surveys non-perturbative methods for structured environments, including chain mapping with time-adaptive DMRG, hierarchy equations of motion, and path integral techniques.
Limitations
- The paper states that theory alone cannot succeed and that experiments are essential because biological systems’ complexity and structural variety prevent knowing and controlling all aspects in detail.
- Numerical methods have stated limits: t-DMRG becomes less efficient with increasing temperature; hierarchy methods lack error bounds and require empirical convergence testing; path integral methods favor high temperatures and their scaling to larger systems remains to be demonstrated.
- Evident from the text: this is a review/tutorial rather than a primary experimental study, and the numerical optimization uses a simplified three-site model with an initially approximate perturbative treatment; evolutionary-optimization claims are presented as design-principle interpretations rather than direct proof.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
95 Own interpretation · 68 Not checked yet · 49 No basis given · 5 Own result · 1 Supported so far · 1 Partly supported · accuracy not yet measured
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“This and other non-equilibrium exchanges between system and environment can have considerable influence on the system dynamics [28-35], influence the direction of energy transfer [28] and may even lead to the generation of long-lived quantum coherence in the system [28, 36-38].”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [28] source
On p. 4, the paper reports that coupling to a high-energy environmental mode produces coherent oscillations lasting at least 1.5 ps, whereas they vanish after 0.3 ps when that mode is decoupled. This supports the hedged claim that system–environment interaction may lead to long-lived coherence, in the simulated dimer studied here. (LLM, conf=0.89)
- Not checked yetcites [36] source
- Not checked yetcites [37] source
- Could not verifycites [38] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The discussion on p. 2 describes spectroscopy used to study coherent energy transfer, while the discussion on p. 4 raises the effect of an environment on spectral peak shapes as an open question. Neither passage says that non-equilibrium system–environment exchanges can generate long-lived quantum coherence; searches for those terms found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This and other non-equilibrium exchanges between system and environment can have considerable influence on the system dynamics [28-35], influence the direction of energy transfer [28] and may even lead to the generation of long-lived quantum coherence in the system [28, 36-38].”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [28] source
The model starts with an excitation on the system and none in the bath (p. 3). The results report that coupling to an environmental oscillator has a pronounced effect on population dynamics (p. 4), supporting the attributed point that system–environment interactions can substantially influence system dynamics. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Supportedcites [29] source
The paper describes how excitation leaves environmental phonons in a nonequilibrium state that subsequently relaxes. Its Concluding Remarks report that changing the phonon relaxation time changes the predicted duration of coherent energy-transfer dynamics in the FMO complex, supporting the attributed influence on system dynamics. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked yetcites [30] source
- Supportedcites [31] source
The Introduction (p. 1) says nonequilibrium driving can produce a steady state quite different from ground-state properties and that the state depends on how the system is driven. The iterative path-integral discussion (p. 4) further describes lead-induced correlations whose temporal behavior changes with bias voltage, supporting the claim that exchanges with the environment can substantially affect system behavior. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked yetcites [32] source
- Partly supportedcites [33] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper reports that strong coupling to the solvent causes fast relaxation of vibronic levels and that solvent reorganization shifts a spectral peak (indexed section: Abstract; page not provided). These observations support an influence of the environment on the studied system’s dynamics, but the paper does not characterize the interactions as non-equilibrium exchanges or establish the claim at that broader level. (LLM, conf=0.82)
- Supportedcites [34] source
The discussion on p. 2 says environmental dephasing and relaxation impose irreversible dynamics on an exciton state. The Introduction (p. 1) also describes environmental noise as crucial to explaining energy-transfer efficiency, supporting the broader point that system–environment interactions can considerably influence dynamics. (LLM, conf=0.87)
- Supportedcites [35] source
In THE MODEL (p. 2), the paper says dephasing noise opens an incoherent relaxation channel and suppresses coherent oscillations. STATE PREPARATION DEPENDENT TRANSPORT (p. 7) reports that changing the dephasing rate substantially changes the relative efficiency of fast and slow transport pathways, supporting the claim that environmental effects can considerably influence system dynamics. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, the optimal solution is such that the energy separation of the dressed states matches the maximum of the environmental spectral density, i.e. where the environmental fluctuations are strongest, so that the environment may bring about transitions between the dressed states most effectively.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“an examination of the parameters that are typically entering the dynamical equations when describing photosynthetic complexes reveals that the strength of the intrasystem coupling, e.g. the dipolar interaction, is comparable in strength to the system-environment coupling.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The key observation is that optimal performance is found for an intermediate level of dephasing noise.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the conductivity of the electronic transport network in the FMO complex (quantified as the rate at which the reaction center is populated in steady state divided by the rate at which excitations enter the transport network) exhibits a maximum at a finite dephasing rate”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“dephasing noise can actually assist the electronic transport [15, 16].”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, it was found that the physically important relaxation pathway between sites 1 and 3 is mediated by pigments which are spectrally and spatially positioned by the protein to efficiently sample the spectral function of the proteins fluctuations [34, 61].”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Let us first provide evidence, by means of a numerical example, that such tuning and optimization may be taking place and that the vibrational environment may indeed have a significant and indeed beneficial impact on the transport dynamics of the FMO complex.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“(see [92] for recent experiments with similar outcomes on humans).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [92] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 63
- Probably not a substantial claim. 52
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No noise or very strong noise are counterproductive for the performance of the transport network.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A numerical optimization employing Redfield equations to take account of the spectral structure of the environment (see [34, 61] for theoretical and numerical details) now finds that the optimal position of site 2 is close to site 1 such that it exhibits a strong coherent dipolar interaction and close in excitation energy.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [34]
- Not checked yetcites [61]
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Even more remarkable is the observation in recent experiments that Drosophila flies are capable of discriminating between molecules in their hydrogenated and their deuterated form and, importantly, are able to generalize from deuterated molecules to other molecules that exhibit a vibrational modes similar in frequency to the Carbon-Deuterium stretch mode [21]”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [21]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, in 50% of the cases the system will remain in the anti-symmetric state while in the other 50% of the cases the excitation reaches the reaction center. Therefore the transfer efficiency is limited to 50% in this setting.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the exchange of energy between two quantum systems these features will then enforce highest efficiency if the respective energy levels, such as vibrational eigenfrequencies, are well matched.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“there is some evidence for proton tunneling in enzymes (see e.g. [8])”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This includes coherence and interference, that is, wave-like features of particles which may lead to faster propagation for example in quantum random walks [9].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This requires a wide variety of transport processes including excitation energy transfer but extending to charge transport including electrons, protons and ions as well as the transport of larger molecules, peptides and proteins.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Biological systems need to be supplied with energy and drained of entropy to maintain the out-of-equilibrium state that life represents.
In the paper
“This in turn permits the unambiguous identification of frequencies and thus can facilitate the construction of sensing devices [20].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is noteworthy though that, distinct from evolutionary optimization, via the control of conformation within an existing structure nature also possesses the means to switch between different states of operation.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The uncontrolled fluctuations of these environments will lead to changes in the local structures in which the electronic degrees of freedom are embedded and may therefore lead to decoherence.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and at the same time the properties of the environmental fluctuations that this transport networks are subjected to are determined and tuned mainly via the secondary protein structure.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In order to optimize this interplay between system and environment, biological systems cannot simply be random conglomerates but must possess structure that they can control.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While thermal fluctuations imparted by the environment may be beneficial for example to overcome potential barriers between distinct classical configurations and therefore facilitating processes such as protein folding or chemical reactions”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So much is unknown about biological systems that assumptions that are entering theoretical models as well as the predictions of these models must be tested against experiment.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The discussions so far suggest that quantum dynamics, structured environments and their mutual interplay may provide increased efficiencies and potentially even novel functionalities.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rich structure of biological environments leads to non-Markovian dynamics which is also non-perturbative being neither weak nor strong compared to the intrasystem dynamics.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“If, on the other hand, a narrow spectral feature, relating to a long-lived vibrational mode, is excited then this will lead to long lasting quasi-coherent motion of the environment with the possibility of triggering quasi-coherent exchange with the system.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This optimization that is required here will have taken place on evolutionary time scales.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ensuing out-of-equilibrium dynamics then leads to perturbation of the environment by the system and a back-action of the very same environment on the system initiating as a result a dynamical exchange between system and environment.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It will become crucial that far from being passive scaffolds whose mere purpose is to hold other molecules in their place, the primary, secondary and especially the tertiary structure of proteins play a much broader and active role for the emergence of quantum effects in biology.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It must be stressed however that the study of quantum effects in biology is an endeavour in which theory alone cannot succeed and has to proceed hand-in-hand with experiment.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Biological environments are not featureless sources of white noise nor do they represent merely weak perturbations.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Excitation by incoherent sunlight as well as ensemble averages may suppress the observed coherence and have tempted some researchers to reach the conclusion that coherence may be of no relevance in these systems under natural conditions.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the coherence and entanglement [63, 64] properties of states [62, 65] and, more importantly, the dynamics of the system [66] which demonstrate quite clearly that on shorter lengthand timescales quantum coherence is present in the systems while for longer distances and times classical properties dominate.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [65]
- Not checked yetcites [66]
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“We will later see that there are a number of additional mechanisms in which noise and coherent dynamics coexist to lead to similar conclusions [62, 79].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [79]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Note, that H I describes a purely dephasing interaction because the vibrational degrees of freedom have energies that are at least 10 -100 times smaller than the excitation energies of the excitons thus suppressing direct exciton-phonon interconversion.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The vibrational degrees of freedom have energies at least 10-100 times smaller than the excitation energies of the excitons.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“More importantly, this principle is sufficiently general to provide a mechanism that can support the surprisingly long-lasting oscillatory features observed in recent ultra-fast laser spectroscopy experiments [11-14] and explain key aspects of the dynamics that may underlie the process olfaction.”
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, if the environmental noise is too weak, then the formation of dressed states will present little benefit for transport. On the other hand if dephasing noise is very strong then it will suppress the formation of the dressed states and thus of the phonon antenna effect in the first place.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Needless to say, these dynamical equations describing the full state of system and vibrational environment are generally too complex to be solved exactly.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Observing these two points alone, that is inducing strong coherent coupling to move to a dressed basis and tuning the coupling such that it matches the maximum of the spectral density of the environmental fluctuations, one already comes close to the numerically obtained solution of the above optimization problem and can thus optimize excitation energy transport.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the presence of a long-lived vibrational mode the phonon antenna principle remains the same but, crucially, the nature of the interaction changes as the interaction between a single vibrational mode and the electronic degrees of freedom is coherent, at least for as long as the mode itself remains coherent.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is the equations of motion that determine the performance of each individual system and are unaffected by the nature of the initial preparation or ensemble averages that may obscure the observed coherence”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Crucially however we will see shortly that the structure of the environment does play an important role and thus the development of methods that can capture these features will be of considerable importance for quantitative studies of such systems.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We will contend that nature can construct and optimize pigment-protein complexes, for example the FMO complex, to create transport networks that exploit both the quantum dynamics of its electronic degrees of freedom and their interaction with a structured vibrational environment.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Needless to say, not all biological systems will possess long-lived vibrational modes that are strongly coupled to electronic degrees of freedom and can therefore play a role in the dynamics of the system.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Pigment-protein complexes consist of a number of sites, schematically depicted in Fig. 3, whose excitation energies generally exhibit a certain degree of static disorder, that is, their on-site energies will differ from site to site and also from one pigment-protein complexes to another.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As is well-known in quantum optics a mode in a coherent state acts on a two-level system essentially like a time-dependent classical driving field resulting in coherent Rabi-like oscillations following approximately the Hamiltonian”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Remarkably, it was well before the advent of the lock-and-key principle that Dyson in 1938 proposed [93] that the smell of a molecule may be determined by its vibrational spectrum and that hence the olfactory system effectively operates as a vibrational spectrometer”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [93]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As a result we will observe coherent transitions between dissipative excitonic states and thus coherences that will last for the coherence time of the vibrational mode an expectation that can be corroborated by more sophisticated numerical treatments employing methods described in [28, 87-89].”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This electron-vibrational coupling regenerates electronic coherences in the system to replace those that are continuously damped out by the fluctuations of the smooth background environment and may even lead to stationary entanglement [90].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [90]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Secondly, we note that the sudden displacement of this mode implies that it is now found to be in a displaced thermal state which will be close to a coherent state if the frequency of the mode is such that its thermal occupation number is low.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The initial (fast) injection of an exciton, either coherently or incoherently, populates one of the exciton states of the system (raised black dot in Fig. 7b) and creates a sudden force on the electrons and nuclei and thus change their equilibrium positions (compressed spring in Fig. 7b).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What is present in all biological systems however are thermal fluctuations of the molecular and protein structures as well as the surrounding solvents, water etc.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This resonance condition ensures increased transport efficiency and thus leads to a detectable effect at the physiological level (delivery of an electronic excitation to the reaction center or electron transfer which stimulates a subsequent response of a receptor).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In that case tunneling is suppressed in the absence of the odorant because of the impossibility to satisfy energy conservation.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Electrons in the donor have an energy that is ∆E higher than for electrons in the acceptor, and the energy distribution in donor and acceptor is much narrower than ∆E.
In the paper
“Despite considerable progress concerning the understanding of the structure of olfactory receptors that involved in the early stages of the olfactory process, the detailed mechanisms by which we are able to discriminate between the vast number of odorants are not yet fully understood [91].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [91]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“They realised that these anomalies arose for certain voltages such that the energy difference of the electrons on both sides of the tunneling barrier would match a vibrational quantum of energy of the adsorbed molecules and went on to demonstrate that this mechanism, inelastic electron tunneling spectroscopy, allows them to identify vibrational spectra of molecules”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [97]
- Not checked yetcites [98]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What we would like to stress here though is the very close resemblance of the above mechanism to the phonon antenna principle and thus the importance of electronvibrational coupling.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a consequence we expect again that an intermediate noise level will be optimal, too low it will not suppress destructive interference efficiently and too high it will suppress all transport.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The effects of weak magnetic field on the growth of plants as well as the remarkable orientation and navigation abilities of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish, crustaceans and insects are well documented [123].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [123]
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In this case, neither variations of the fine details of the spectral density nor variations of the electronic structure of the transport network have a significant effect.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [122]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thanks to constructive interference a symmetric superposition experiences a coherently enhanced coupling to the site 3 to which it will then propagate rapidly, and from there into the reaction center, while the antisymmetric part will not evolve at all.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At this stage no magnetic field sensitivity can be expected as the spin singlet state is rotationally symmetric and hence insensitive to the orientation and magnitude of the external magnetic field.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In such a case dephasing may be useful to reduce the effective transition rate to such sites and thus block unfavorable transfer paths from being followed [74, 106].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [74]
- Not checked yetcites [106]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a consequence this excitation will remain localized and does not propagate through the system.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The mechanism by which this magnetic field sense is achieved, however, is less well understood and at least two alternative ideas are being considered, one that exploits the forces exerted on ferrimagnetic iron oxide particles embedded in the body, essentially a classical effect, and another that is based on magnetically sensitive free radical reactions [17, 18, 124].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [17]
- Not checked yetcites [18]
- Not checked yetcites [124]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, a low level of fluctuations will not bring the site energies sufficiently close and transport remains suppressed, while excessive fluctuations of the site energies will reduce the time intervals in which the sites are energetically sufficiently close to allow for efficient energy transfer.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It should also be noted that an energy mismatch and the resulting time-evolution of the relative phase between the two sites 1 and 2 also leads to transitions between symmetric and anti-symmetric state and can thus assists transport [16, 62, 121].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [16] source
- Not checked yetcites [62]
- Not checked yetcites [121]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“which achieves a maximum for ∆ G 0 = λ .”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [105]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Eventually the finite lifetime of the excitation implies that it will be lost to the general environment due to a spontaneous annihilation process, an event that is not in the interest of a transport network.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, the presence of dephasing noise inhibits both constructive and destructive interference and therefore slows the propagation of an excitation in a system initiated in the symmetric state and accelerates the propagation of an excitation in a system initiated in the antisymmetric state.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Behavioral experiments with birds such as the European robin to study avian magneto-reception [125] have led to the observation that the process of avian magnetoreception depends on the wavelength of the ambient light [126] and can be disrupted by very weak external oscillating magnetic fields [19, 127].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [125]
- Not checked yetcites [126]
- Not checked yetcites [19]
- Not checked yetcites [127]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Such a stability can be an attractive feature to ensure robustness in an organism that is subject to changes in its environment.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While in many respects it appears easier to achieve considerable changes in the electronic structure as compared to the vibrational environment it is likely that both will have been subject to evolutionary adaptation.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Hence it is only when studying the properties of system and environment that we can gain and understanding of the chemical compass and an opportunity to predict optimal designs [138].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [138]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that local interactions between electron spins and their nuclear environment lead to a breaking of the symmetry of the electronic spin state gives a first indication of the importance of the presence of local environments.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, it has become clear that the optimal operating regime for quantum bio dynamics tends to favour parameter ranges in which the interaction between system components is comparable to the interaction of these system components and their environment.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The spectral function thus describes the overall strength of the interaction of the system with the reservoir modes of frequency ω .”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand it may on occasion be beneficial to increase the level of noise by arranging easily movable charges close to a site which will respond strongly to vibrations and thus create significant changes in the excitation energy of the site.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This approach is non-perturbative and is capable of interpolating, for example, between the Bloch-Redfield and the F¨ orster regimes [152, 154].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [152]
- Not checked yetcites [154]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For spin environments, e.g. the nuclear spin environment in magneto-reception, the structure of the relevant molecule and the form of the electronic wavefunction determines the strength and anisotropy of the hyperfine interaction.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We begin by presenting an approach to the systemenvironment interaction that preserves the full information about the environment state, is able to treat arbitrary spectral densities and coupling strengths within a single unified framework with known and controllable error and is computationally efficient in the size of the environment.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this way, it is conceivable that similar to a PC card the insertion of a specific molecule may allow for certain functionality to be achieved.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A translationally invariant harmonic chain with this ratio ω n /t n has a gapless dispersion and excitations can escape down the chain without being scattered back towards the system (see Fig. 13 for illustration).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have also explained that it is likely that nature has optimized both the properties of its quantum networks and the structure of the environment to achieve optimal performance.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The principles expounded here are more general though and apply to any quantum network whose task may include for example transport or sensing and that is in contact with an environment of charges, spins or vibrations.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus the buildup of excitations in any region of the chain is limited over time, and correlations can be expected to be bounded.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As it can be proven for a wide variety of spectral densities, in the large n limit the chain parameters ω n to t n converge and their ratio approaches ω n /t n → 2.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this model the quantum system interacts with a macroscopic number of environmental degrees of freedom and the total system and environment state evolves under a purely unitary dynamics.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests that indeed nature has at its hand a wide variety of possibilities for tuning quantum networks and their environments to achieve robust and efficient devices.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are two principal aspects that can be controlled, the electronic network and its environment.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A donor acceptor pair in the singlet state may either recombine to reach the groundstate or lead to a reaction product at rate k S . Spins in the triplet state cannot recombine to reach the ground state but may lead to different reaction products at rate k T .”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is this process for example that couples the vibrational motion of proteins and molecules to their electronic energies and is thus the cause of both dephasing and the interaction of long-lived vibrational modes with electronic degrees of freedom.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise the phonon assisted tunneling process in olfaction suggests that this process may be used to recognise molecules and to initiate charge transfer processes.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Certainly, strong featureless noise can affect the ability to act and react specifically to external input.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It should be noted however that, in contrast to some other methods, it becomes computationally less efficient with increasing temperature.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Dissipation and decoherence appear when the system is observed without any knowledge of the state of its environment, leading to a non-unitary effective dynamics for the sub-system's reduced density matrix.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hence, in various circumstances it may be essential to reduce the level of noise for example by protecting a molecule inside a protein structure or a hydrophobic binding pocket.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“From this viewpoint the chemical compass can be seen as an environment assisted quantum interferometer thus affirming avian magneto-reception as an example of quantum biology that benefits from an interplay of system-environment interaction [138].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [138]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These changes can be significant and can reach the range of 100 ′ s of wavenumbers or more even for very small distance changes in the environment. For larger structural changes of the protein scaffold, e.g. due to variations in pH-value or other more drastic changes the shift in wavelength can even reach dozens of nanometers.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite the relative simplicity of this model its dynamics is not exactly solvable and one has to resort to numerical methods. This is particularly so, when the environmental spectral density does exhibit considerable structure or when the coupling strength between system and environment lies in the non-perturbative regime.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Indeed, a large amount of initial coherence in this picture correlates strongly with high sensitivity of the chemical compass and the impact of different types of decoherence can be predicted from it.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [138]
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For highly structured environments in which for example both narrow and broad features are combined these methods find challenges.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Temperatures not too far below the typical system frequencies appear to be accessible [169].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [169] M. Thorwart, P. Reimann and P. H¨ anggi, Iterative algorithm versus analytic solutions of the parametrically driven dissipative quantum harmonic oscillator , Phys. Rev. E 62 (2000) pp. 5808 - 5817.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Path integral methods have been applied mostly to dimers (see e.g.[166]) and their scaling to larger systems, just as for the transformation approach to be discussed below, remains to be demonstrated.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [166] M. Thorwart, J. Eckel, J.H. Reina, P. Nalbach, and S. Weiss, Enhanced quantum entanglement in the nonMarkovian dynamics of biomolecular excitons , Chem. Phys. Lett. 478 (2009), pp. 234 - 237.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The importance of these design principles goes beyond merely understanding what has been created already but also paves the way by which these principles, when spelled out and made quantitative, can allow for the rational design of optimal structures as well as the execution of optimized experiments by which to amplify and verify quantum effects in biology.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With decreasing temperatures and thus increasing correlation time the computational effort grows rapidly.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can be understood from simple and generalizable principles that we have identified in our discussions to explain that too much or too little coherence can be detrimental and that it is in fact natural to expect that there is an intermediate regime that is optimal.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The depth of this hierarchy and the structure of its coefficients depend on the correlation time of the bath and its spectral density.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, it should be noted, that the hierarchy method has been applied successfully to a dimer [152, 154] as well as the seven-site FMO complex [154, 159, 160] with a Brownian harmonic oscillator spectral density of the environment.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [152]
- Not checked yetcites [154]
- Not checked yetcites [159] A.G. Dykstra and Y. Tanimura, The role of the environment time scale in light-harvesting efficiency and coherent oscillations , New J. Phys. 14 (2012), 073027.
- Not checked yetcites [160] Ch. Kreisbeck, T. Kramer, M. Rodriguez, and B. Hein, High-performance solution of hierarchical equations of motions for studying energy-transfer in light-harvesting complexes , J. Chem. Theo. Comp. 7 (2011), pp. 2166 2174.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For specific choices of the bath spectral density, namely the Brownian harmonic oscillator and/or high temperatures the temporal bath correlations decay exponentially so that the hierarchy can be terminated early with small but uncontrolled error and one obtains a manageable structure of the hierarchy.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A nonexponential decay of the temporal bath correlations also leads one to estimate an exponential growth of the number of operators in the hierarchy.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“More complex spectral densities will lead to considerably more demanding evaluations of the coefficients of the hierarchy.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, by the use of protein structure to arrange molecules and their local environment they are capable of tuning the properties of transport or sensory networks and, at the same time, adjust the environment of these networks by providing isolation or for example by inserting specific molecules with desirable vibrational or spin properties to fashion an environment.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These procedures are expected to give good results in the high temperature limit and hence short correlation time of the environments.”
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Biological systems need to be supplied with energy and drained of entropy to maintain the out-of-equilibrium state that life represents.
“biological systems need to be supplied with energy and drained of entropy to maintain the out-of-equilibrium state that life represents.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Biological structures are open systems in permanent contact with their environments.
“Biological structures in general are not isolated as they are open systems that are in permanent contact with their environments.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The dynamics is dominated by contributions to the spectral density where each site interacts with its own independent environment.
“We assume that the dynamics is dominated by contributions to the spectral density where each site interacts with its own independent environment an assumption that is corroborated by first-principles numerical studies of photosynthetic complexes [52, 54-57] and normal-mode analysis combined with quantum chemical methods [58, 59].”
The paper relies on this without support.
In the reaction center charge separation is achieved to irreversibly stabilize the excitonic energy.
“motivated by the fact that in the reaction center charge separation is achieved to irreversibly stabilize the excitonic energy.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The vibrational degrees of freedom have energies at least 10-100 times smaller than the excitation energies of the excitons.
“the vibrational degrees of freedom have energies that are at least 10 -100 times smaller than the excitation energies of the excitons”
The paper relies on this without support.
Natural conditions do not resemble laser light.
“While natural conditions do not resemble laser light”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The binding pocket of an olfactory receptor is situated close to an electron donor and an electron acceptor.
“The binding pocket of an olfactory receptor, which begins empty (upper part of Fig. 8), is assumed to be situated close to an electron donor and an electron acceptor”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Electrons in the donor have an energy that is ∆E higher than for electrons in the acceptor, and the energy distribution in donor and acceptor is much narrower than ∆E.
“Crucially, it is assumed that electrons in the donor have an energy that is ∆ E higher than for electrons in the acceptor and that the energy distribution in donor and acceptor is much narrower than ∆ E .”
The paper relies on this without support.
The odorant will reside in the binding pocket for a time long enough for electron transfer to take place.
“Once the odorant has entered the binding pocket it will reside there for a certain time long enough for electron transfer to take place.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The electronic spin state remains unaffected during electron transfer, so the electrons remain in a singlet state.
“For simplicity we assume that the electronic spin state remains unaffected in this step so that the electrons remain in a singlet state.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The environment is well described by a continuum of harmonic oscillator degrees of freedom.
“The environment is assumed to be well described by a continuum of harmonic oscillator degrees of freedom labeled by some real number.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The interaction between system and environment is a linear coupling between arbitrary system operators and the position operator of the environment.
“For the interaction between the system and its environment we assume a linear coupling between arbitrary system operators and the position operator of the environment”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The total system and environment state evolves under purely unitary dynamics.
“In this model the quantum system interacts with a macroscopic number of environmental degrees of freedom and the total system and environment state evolves under a purely unitary dynamics.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The initial state of the environment is Gaussian.
“For Gaussian initial states of the environment [145], the dynamics induced in the quantum system S by its interaction with the environment is determined by the spectral density J ( ω ) [146, 147].”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The donor-acceptor pair is initially in its electronic ground state with a paired electron in a singlet state.
“A donor-acceptor pair is initially in its electronic ground state characterized by a paired electron in a singlet state.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The nuclear spins are initially unpolarized.
“It turns out that it is the coherence of the initial state (electronic singlet state and unpolarized nuclear spins) in the basis made up of the eigenstates of the full system in the absence of a magnetic field that has predictive power of the sensitivity of the chemical compass.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Recent work has demonstrated that the retention of quantum dynamics in biological systems is intricately connected with environmental fluctuations taking place at biologically relevant length and time scales [51–55].”
From The origins of quantum biology (2018) · cites this paper as [54]
Citations
Cites
An Introduction To Compressive Sampling
Candes, E. J., & Wakin, M. B. (2008) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2007.914731 · Cited by 10,017
On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups
Lindblad, G. (1976) · Communications in Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1007/bf01608499 · Cited by 7,548 · cited 4×
“Both features are not well modeled by the traditional perturbative treatments that lead to master equations of Lindblad [139, 140], Redfield [141] or modified Redfield type [46, 142, 143] (see [60] for a review of master equations).”
BackgroundInfluentialTheory of open quantum systems
Xu, R., & Yan, Y. (2002) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.1474579 · Cited by 6,622
The Theory of Open Quantum Systems
Breuer, H.-P., & Petruccione, F. (2007) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199213900.001.0001 · Cited by 5,938
Dynamics of the dissipative two-state system
Leggett, A. J., Chakravarty, S., Dorsey, A. T., Fisher, M. P. A., Garg, A., & Zwerger, W. (1987) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.59.1 · Cited by 5,109
Completely positive dynamical semigroups of N -level systems
Gorini, V., Kossakowski, A., & Sudarshan, E. C. G. (1976) · Journal of Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.522979 · Cited by 3,998 · cited 4×
“Both features are not well modeled by the traditional perturbative treatments that lead to master equations of Lindblad [139, 140], Redfield [141] or modified Redfield type [46, 142, 143] (see [60] for a review of master equations).”
BackgroundInfluentialElectron transfer reactions in chemistry. Theory and experiment
Marcus, R. A. (1993) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.65.599 · Cited by 3,667
Evidence for wavelike energy transfer through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems
Engel, G. S., Calhoun, T. R., Read, E. L., Ahn, T.-K., Mančal, T., Cheng, Y.-C., Blankenship, R. E., & Fleming, G. R. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05678 · Cited by 3,315
Colloquium : Area laws for the entanglement entropy
Eisert, J., Cramer, M., & Plenio, M. B. (2010) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.82.277 · Cited by 2,873
Self-citation(2012) · WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooks · doi:10.1142/9789814374927 · Cited by 2,499
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Plenio M.B., 2007, Quantum Inf. Comput., 7, 1
- Stock G., 1999, Phys. Rev. A, 59, 564
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Baumgratz, T., Cramer, M., & Plenio, M. B. (2014) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.140401 · Cited by 2,721
Self-citationColloquium : Quantum coherence as a resource
Streltsov, A., Adesso, G., & Plenio, M. B. (2017) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.89.041003 · Cited by 1,878
Self-citationNatural strategies for photosynthetic light harvesting
Croce, R., & van Amerongen, H. (2014) · Nature Chemical Biology · doi:10.1038/nchembio.1555 · Cited by 1,013
Measuring Quantum Coherence with Entanglement
Streltsov, A., Singh, U., Dhar, H. S., Bera, M. N., & Adesso, G. (2015) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.115.020403 · Cited by 927
The Radical-Pair Mechanism of Magnetoreception
Hore, P. J., & Mouritsen, H. (2016) · Annual Review of Biophysics · doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-032116-094545 · Cited by 813
Metadata
- Authors
- Huelga, S. F., & Plenio, M. B.
- Affiliations
- Universität Ulm (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Plenio, M.B.
- Venue
- Contemporary Physics
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 181-207
- ISSN
- 0010-7514 (ISSN-L)
- 1366-5812
- OpenAlex
- W2049846301
- Semantic Scholar
- 4fb506751ebd8d7b063b48b2552a8ccea3a87ceb
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 205
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 64 · 2016: 51 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 3
- FWCI
- 22.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Contemporary Physics (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Spectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Biofield Effects and Biophysics
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Physical and Theoretical Chemistry › Photochemistry and Electron Transfer Studies
- Keywords
- quantum biology, photosynthetic complexes, exciton transfer, charge transfer, olfaction, quantum coherence
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review