The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 12 are not checked yet; none of the 6 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Optimal Control at the Quantum Speed Limit
Open accessAbstract
Optimal control theory is a promising candidate for a drastic improvement of the performance of quantum information tasks. We explore its ultimate limit in paradigmatic cases, and demonstrate that it coincides with the maximum speed limit allowed by quantum evolution.
Checked 2026-10-06 · 12 references not checked yet
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper shows that Krotov quantum optimal control can reach the quantum speed limit: infidelity converges to zero only when the fixed total time \(T\) exceeds a critical \(T_{\mathrm{QSL}}\), and this threshold agrees with dynamical bounds in Landau-Zener and spin-chain state-transfer models. It suggests optimal control can operationally characterize quantum speed limits in complex systems.
Key findings
- In the Landau-Zener model, Krotov infidelity does not converge to zero for \(T < T_{\mathrm{QSL}} \approx 1.5688\) (units of \(\hbar/\omega\)), while for \(T\) above this value it decreases exponentially; the second-derivative criterion crosses zero near \(T \approx 1.58\), matching the time-independent Bhattacharyya estimate with no fitting parameters.
- For Heisenberg spin-chain state transfer, infidelity converges to zero only above a critical time; the numerical \(T^*_{\mathrm{QSL}}\) scales linearly with chain length \(N\) (intercept \(b \sim 1.53\)), and for \(N=101\), target infidelity \(I^* = 5 \times 10^{-5}\) at \(n=10^5\) iterations gives \(T=56.66 \approx T^*_{\mathrm{QSL}}\) versus \(T=68.97\).
- Spin-chain optimal control improves the transfer time over the adiabatic approach of Ref. [18] by up to two orders of magnitude and is faster than Ref. [19] for Ising coupling, using only single-site local pulses whereas Ref. [19] used global pulses.
- The numerical spin-chain \(T^*_{\mathrm{QSL}}\) exceeds the analytical QSL estimate by a factor \(\eta \approx 3\), attributed to difficulty in formulating the QSL for the many-body problem; both estimators scale linearly with \(N\).
Methods
- Uses the Krotov recursive optimal-control algorithm to minimize infidelity \(I = 1 - |\langle \psi(T)|\psi_G\rangle|^2\) for fixed duration \(T\), starting from initial guess control pulses and analyzing convergence as a function of iteration number \(n\) and \(T\).
- Applies the approach to two models: a Landau-Zener Hamiltonian with control \(\Gamma(t)\), preparing the instantaneous ground state and targeting the ground state with \(\Gamma(T)=-\Gamma(0)\); and a one-dimensional Heisenberg spin chain with parabolic magnetic potential controls \(C(t)\) and \(d(t)\), transferring \(|0\rangle\) to \(|N-1\rangle\) in the single-spin-up sector.
- Compares numerical \(T_{\mathrm{QSL}}\) estimates with dynamical bounds: the Bhattacharyya bound for the Landau-Zener case, and time-averaged energy-spread bounds \(\Delta E_1\), \(\Delta E_2\) for the spin chain, with \(T_{\mathrm{QSL}}/(N-1) \ge \max\{\pi/(2\Delta E_1); \pi/(2\Delta E_2)\}\).
Limitations
- The paper states that for the spin-chain model the sign of the second derivative of infidelity cannot be used as a reliable signature of \(T_{\mathrm{QSL}}\), so the numerical estimate uses the smallest \(T\) achieving a target infidelity threshold \(I^*\) in a fixed number of iterations; the result does not depend significantly on \(I^*\) and \(n\).
- The paper attributes the factor \(\eta \approx 3\) discrepancy between numerical and analytical spin-chain QSL estimates to the difficulty in formulating the quantum speed limit for the many-body problem.
- Evident from the text: the findings are demonstrated in two paradigmatic models with Krotov optimal control and fixed \(T\), not as a general proof for arbitrary systems or control constraints; the Landau-Zener analytical estimate also assumes the dynamics can be effectively described by a time-independent Hamiltonian for most of the evolution.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
9 Own result · 7 Own interpretation · 5 Not checked yet · 1 Own method · 1 No basis given
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 energy spread is almost constant save near the final time, where large oscillations are present, corresponding to the deceleration of the spinwave.”
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.
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 average energy spreading ∆ E 2 ( t ) is larger for smaller time transfer T allowing for a higher average excitation velocity.”
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
“On the contrary, by progressively increasing T towards and above T QSL , the curvature changes sign and the infidelity in the large iteration limit decreases exponentially , as confirmed by the fit in Fig. 1.”
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.
In the paper
“Remarkably, the peculiar feature of the initial guess Γ gs ( t ) of being almost constantly zero for most of the central part of the evolution is preserved by the recursive optimization of OC [2]”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] V. F. Krotov, Global Methods in Optimal Control Theory (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1996).
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
“In particular, as shown in Fig. 3 (left) the infidelity appears to converge to zero only for values of T that are above a certain critical time T QSL .”
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.
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 connection between OC and the QSL emerges at the time duration T < T QSL for which OC fails to converge.”
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: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“Indeed, we achieved an improvement of the transfer time with respect to Ref. [18] of up to two orders of magnitude.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] V. Balachandran and J. Gong, Phys. Rev. A 77 , 012303 (2008). source
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
“Finally, in Fig. 2 we show a comparison between the estimate T QSL through the second derivative of the infidelity and the theoretical time-independent estimate (2) for various Γ(0) /ω ratios. We stress that here we have no fitting parameters.”
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.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the Landau-Zener model, the dynamics for most of the evolution can be approximated by the time-independent Hamiltonian H0 = H[Γ=0].
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
“Consequently, for the present model the sign of the second derivative cannot be used as a reliable signature of T QSL .”
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.
In the paper
“It is also worth mentioning that we achieved a transfer time faster than that obtained (for Ising coupling) in Ref. [19].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] N. Khaneja and S. J. Glaser, Phys. Rev. A 66 , 060301(R) (2002). source
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. 4
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 results are reported in Fig.4 (right) where the two quantities are compared: both estimators are linearly dependent on N , but the numerical results show an improvement over the theoretical prediction by a factor of η ≈ 3”
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
“Interestingly enough, however, our method only uses single-site local pulses while in Ref. [19] this was achieved using global pulses that operate jointly on the whole chain.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [19] N. Khaneja and S. J. Glaser, Phys. Rev. A 66 , 060301(R) (2002). source
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.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, a numerical estimate T ∗ QSL for such quantity can been obtained by considering the smallest time T which allows us to achieve the target infidelity threshold I ∗ in a fixed number of algorithm iterations n (the result does not depend significantly on the value of I ∗ and n ).”
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
“The picture that arises is that OC finds a solution x opt ( t ) that initially accelerates the spin excitation, and then transfers it with constant velocity up to the end of the chain, where deceleration occurs.”
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 authors state this as an assumption.
For the Landau-Zener model, the dynamics for most of the evolution can be approximated by the time-independent Hamiltonian H0 = H[Γ=0].
“assuming H 0 = H [Γ = 0] as the Hamiltonian.”
“for most of the evolution time the dynamics can be effectively described by a time-independent Hamiltonian”
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?
In the citing paper
“the shortest time-scale for quantum optimal control algorithms to converge [28]”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Therefore, Caneva et al showed that using the Krotov algorithm the minimal elapsed time one can consider corresponds exactly to τ QSL .”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Remarkably they found that there was a minimum value of τ given by Battacharyya's bound [51] (i.e. the Mandelstam-Tamm bound for arbitrary angles), below which the algorithm failed to converge, while for values above this they consistently found F → 1.”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“In a remarkable work, Caneva et al [28] showed explicitly the connection between the quantum speed limit and optimal control.”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“The relation and importance of this first became evident in the seminal work of Caneva et al [28] in the context of optimal control.”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“if we restrict |ψ 0 and |ψ T to be the respective ground states of the Landau-Zener Hamiltonian, equation ( 57), at the start and end of the protocol, Γ(0) = -γ and Γ(τ ) = γ , then τ min = τ QSL , precisely in line with [28,109].”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“the quantum speed limit time that emerged as the fundamental bound from Caneva et al [28], from equation (58), actually assumes that the system's Hamiltonian is time-independent.”
From Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control (2017) · cites this paper as [28]
In the citing paper
“Interestingly, Čencov's theorem states that the Fisher information metric is the only Riemannian metric on the set of probability distributions that is contractive under stochastic maps [47]”
From Generalized Geometric Quantum Speed Limits (2016) · cites this paper as [47]
In the citing paper
“They showed that the Krotov algorithm of quantum optimal control theory fails to converge when the duration of the process is chosen below the quantum speed limit time.”
From Energy–time uncertainty relation for driven quantum systems (2013) · cites this paper as [28]
Citations
Cites
Quantum Computation and Quantum Information
Nielsen, M. A., Chuang, I., & Grover, L. K. (2002) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1463744 · Cited by 21,895
Quantum computation and quantum information
Law, J. (2001) · ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · doi:10.1145/505482.505499 · Cited by 20,450
Messiah, A. (1961) · Cited by 16,012
Non-adiabatic crossing of energy levels
Zener, C. (1932) · Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series A Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character · doi:10.1098/rspa.1932.0165 · Cited by 4,572
A Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithm Applied to Random Instances of an NP-Complete Problem
Farhi, E., Goldstone, J., Gutmann, S., Lapan, J., Lundgren, A., & Preda, D. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1057726 · Cited by 2,056
Khaneja, N., Reiss, T., Kehlet, C., Schulte-Herbrüggen, T., & Glaser, S. J. (2005) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance · doi:10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.004 · Cited by 1,854
Optimal control of quantum-mechanical systems: Existence, numerical approximation, and applications
Peirce, A. P., Dahleh, M., & RABITZ, H. A. (1988) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.37.4950 · Cited by 897
The maximum speed of dynamical evolution
Margolus, N., & Levitin, L. B. (1998) · Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena · doi:10.1016/s0167-2789(98)00054-2 · Cited by 887
Theory of Quantum Annealing of an Ising Spin Glass
Santoro, G. E., Martoňák, R., Tosatti, E., & Car, R. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1068774 · Cited by 734
Self-citationQuantum search by local adiabatic evolution
Roland, J., & Cerf, N. J. (2002) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.65.042308 · Cited by 629
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Training Schrödinger’s cat: quantum optimal control
Glaser, S. J., Boscain, U., Calarco, T., Koch, C. P., Köckenberger, W., Kosloff, R., Kuprov, I., Luy, B., Schirmer, S. G., Schulte‐Herbrüggen, T., et al. (2015) · The European Physical Journal D · doi:10.1140/epjd/e2015-60464-1 · Cited by 758
Self-citationOptimal Hamiltonian Simulation by Quantum Signal Processing
Low, G. H., & Chuang, I. L. (2017) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.010501 · Cited by 955
Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a review
Heyl, M. (2018) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aaaf9a · Cited by 739
Generation and manipulation of Schrödinger cat states in Rydberg atom arrays
Omran, A., Levine, H., Keesling, A., Semeghini, G., Wang, T. T., Ebadi, S., Bernien, H., Zibrov, A. S., Pichler, H., Choi, S., et al. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aax9743 · Cited by 633
Self-citationQuantum speed limits: from Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control
Deffner, S., & Campbell, S. (2017) · Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical · doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa86c6 · Cited by 585
Quantum Speed Limit for Non-Markovian Dynamics
Deffner, S., & Lutz, E. (2013) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.111.010402 · Cited by 511
Quantum Speed Limits in Open System Dynamics
del Campo, A., Egusquiza, I. L., Plenio, M. B., & Huelga, S. F. (2013) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.110.050403 · Cited by 493
Bason, M. G., Viteau, M., Malossi, N., Huillery, P., Arimondo, E., Ciampini, D., Fazio, R., Giovannetti, V., Mannella, R., & Morsch, O. (2012) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/nphys2170 · Cited by 462
Self-citationQuantum speed limits: from Heisenberg's uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control
Deffner, S., & Campbell, S. (2017) · Maryland Shared Open Access Repository (USMAI Consortium) · doi:10.13016/m2heya-i4ys · Cited by 485
Koch, C. P., Boscain, U., Calarco, T., Dirr, G., Filipp, S., Glaser, S. J., Kosloff, R., Montangero, S., Schulte-Herbrüggen, T., Sugny, D., et al. (2022) · EPJ Quantum Technology · doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-022-00138-x · Cited by 404
Self-citationChopped random-basis quantum optimization
Caneva, T., Calarco, T., & Montangero, S. (2011) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.84.022326 · Cited by 394
Self-citationSecond order gradient ascent pulse engineering
de Fouquieres, P., Schirmer, S. G., Glaser, S. J., & Kuprov, I. (2011) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance · doi:10.1016/j.jmr.2011.07.023 · Cited by 299
Controlling open quantum systems: tools, achievements, and limitations
Koch, C. P. (2016) · Journal of Physics Condensed Matter · doi:10.1088/0953-8984/28/21/213001 · Cited by 282
Generalized Geometric Quantum Speed Limits
Pires, D. P., Cianciaruso, M., Céleri, L. C., Adesso, G., & Soares-Pinto, D. O. (2016) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.021031 · Cited by 265
Scalable architecture for a room temperature solid-state quantum information processor
Yao, N. Y., Jiang, L., Gorshkov, A. V., Maurer, P. C., Giedke, G., Cirac, J. I., & Lukin, M. D. (2012) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms1788 · Cited by 245
Optimal Quantum Control Using Randomized Benchmarking
Kelly, J., Barends, R., Campbell, B., Chen, Y., Chen, Z., Chiaro, B., Dunsworth, A., Fowler, A. G., Hoi, I.-C., Jeffrey, E. R., et al. (2014) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.240504 · Cited by 257
Driving at the quantum speed limit: optimal control of a two-level system
Hegerfeldt, G. C. (2013) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.111.260501 · Cited by 232
Monotonically convergent optimization in quantum control using Krotov’s method
Reich, D. M., Ndong, M., & Koch, C. P. (2012) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.3691827 · Cited by 220
Lienhard, V., de Léséleuc, S., Barredo, D., Lahaye, T., Browaeys, A., Schuler, M., Henry, L.-P., & Läuchli, A. M. (2018) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.8.021070 · Cited by 209
Introduction to the Pontryagin Maximum Principle for Quantum Optimal Control
Boscain, U., Sigalotti, M., & Sugny, D. (2021) · PRX Quantum · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.030203 · Cited by 205
Energy–time uncertainty relation for driven quantum systems
Deffner, S., & Lutz, E. (2013) · Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical · doi:10.1088/1751-8113/46/33/335302 · Cited by 199
Quantum speed limit for arbitrary initial states
Zhang, Y.-J., Han, W., Xia, Y.-J., Cao, J.-P., & Fan, H. (2014) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep04890 · Cited by 176
Quantum Speed Limits across the Quantum-to-Classical Transition
Shanahan, B., Chenu, A., Margolus, N., & del Campo, A. (2018) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.070401 · Cited by 164
Introduction to quantum optimal control for quantum sensing with nitrogen-vacancy centers in diamond
Rembold, P., Oshnik, N., Müller, M. M., Montangero, S., Calarco, T., & Neu, E. (2020) · AVS Quantum Science · doi:10.1116/5.0006785 · Cited by 157
Self-citationQuantum Speed Limit is Not Quantum
Okuyama, M., & Ohzeki, M. (2018) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.070402 · Cited by 157
Quantum speedup in a memory environment
Xu, Z.-Y., Luo, S., Yang, W. L., Liu, C., & Zhu, S. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.89.012307 · Cited by 156
Zhang, X., Wei, Z., Asad, R., Yang, X.-C., & Wang, X. (2019) · npj Quantum Information · doi:10.1038/s41534-019-0201-8 · Cited by 160
Tightening Quantum Speed Limits for Almost All States
Campaioli, F., Pollock, F. A., Binder, F. C., & Modi, K. (2018) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.060409 · Cited by 148
Optimal control of complex atomic quantum systems
van Frank, S., Bonneau, M., Schmiedmayer, J., Hild, S., Gross, C., Cheneau, M., Bloch, I., Pichler, T., Negretti, A., Calarco, T., et al. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep34187 · Cited by 152
Self-citationKrotov: A Python implementation of Krotov's method for quantum optimal control
Goerz, M. H., Basilewitsch, D., Gago-Encinas, F., Krauss, M. G., Horn, K. P., Reich, D. M., & Koch, C. P. (2019) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.7.6.080 · Cited by 124
Bapst, V., Foini, L., Krząkała, F., Semerjian, G., & Zamponi, F. (2012) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.10.002 · Cited by 135
Environment-Assisted Speed-up of the Field Evolution in Cavity Quantum Electrodynamics
Cimmarusti, A. D., Yan, Z., Patterson, B. D., Corcos, L. P., Orozco, L. A., & Deffner, S. (2015) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.114.233602 · Cited by 124
Communication at the quantum speed limit along a spin chain
Murphy, M., Montangero, S., Giovannetti, V., & Calarco, T. (2010) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.82.022318 · Cited by 121
Self-citationInformation Theoretical Analysis of Quantum Optimal Control
Lloyd, S., & Montangero, S. (2014) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.010502 · Cited by 107
Self-citationQuantum coherence sets the quantum speed limit for mixed states
Mondal, D., Datta, C., & Sazim, S. (2016) · Physics Letters A · doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2015.12.015 · Cited by 113
Exploring the quantum speed limit with computer games
Sørensen, J. J., Pedersen, M. K., Munch, M. K., Haikka, P., Jensen, J. H., Planke, T., Andreasen, M. G., Gajdacz, M., Mølmer, K., Lieberoth, A., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature17620 · Cited by 113
RetractedOne decade of quantum optimal control in the chopped random basis
Müller, M. M., Said, R. S., Jelezko, F., Calarco, T., & Montangero, S. (2022) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/ac723c · Cited by 123
Self-citationQuantum speed limits in open systems: Non-Markovian dynamics without rotating-wave approximation
Sun, Z., Liu, J., Ma, J., & Wang, X. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep08444 · Cited by 107
“(4) equals zero and the coefficient 2 in Xt should be omitted.”
BackgroundRobustness of high-fidelity Rydberg gates with single-site addressability
Goerz, M. H., Halperin, E., Aytac, J. M., Koch, C. P., & Whaley, K. B. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.90.032329 · Cited by 105
Optimal control of complex atomic quantum systems
van Frank, S., Bonneau, M., Schmiedmayer, J., Hild, S. J., Groß, C., Cheneau, M., Bloch, I., Pichler, T., Negretti, A., Calarco, T., et al. (2016) · MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) · Cited by 106
Self-citationBapst, V., Foini, L., Krząkała, F., Semerjian, G., & Zamponi, F. (2012) · HAL · Cited by 124
Scalable quantum computation via local control of only two qubits
Burgarth, D. K., Maruyama, K., Murphy, M., Montangero, S., Calarco, T., Nori, F., & Plenio, M. B. (2010) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.81.040303 · Cited by 103
Self-citationSpeeding up and slowing down the relaxation of a qubit by optimal control
Mukherjee, V., Carlini, A., Mari, A., Caneva, T., Montangero, S., Calarco, T., Fazio, R., & Giovannetti, V. (2013) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.88.062326 · Cited by 87
Self-citationClassical-driving-assisted quantum speed-up
Zhang, Y.-J., Han, W., Xia, Y.-J., Cao, J.-P., & Fan, H. (2015) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.91.032112 · Cited by 95
Quantum dynamical speedup in a nonequilibrium environment
Cai, X.-J., & Zheng, Y. (2017) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.95.052104 · Cited by 92
Mechanism for quantum speedup in open quantum systems
Liu, H.-B., Yang, W. L., An, J.-H., & Xu, Z.-Y. (2016) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.93.020105 · Cited by 94
Quantum speed limits—primer, perspectives, and potential future directions
Frey, M. R. (2016) · Quantum Information Processing · doi:10.1007/s11128-016-1405-x · Cited by 93
Ultimate speed limits to the growth of operator complexity
Hörnedal, N., Carabba, N., Matsoukas-Roubeas, A. S., & del Campo, A. (2022) · Communications Physics · doi:10.1038/s42005-022-00985-1 · Cited by 112
Tight, robust, and feasible quantum speed limits for open dynamics
Campaioli, F., Pollock, F. A., & Modi, K. (2019) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2019-08-05-168 · Cited by 92
“Such bounds are typically applied to estimate the speed of computational gates [5, 6], the precision in quantum metrology [7–11], the performance in quantum optimal control [4, 12–19], and the charging power in quantum thermodynamics [20, 21].”
BackgroundSpeed limits for quantum gates in multiqubit systems
Ashhab, S., de Groot, P. C., & Nori, F. (2012) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.85.052327 · Cited by 89
Error budgeting for a controlled-phase gate with strontium-88 Rydberg atoms
Pagano, A., Weber, S., Jaschke, D., Pfau, T., Meinert, F., Montangero, S., & Büchler, H. P. (2022) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.4.033019 · Cited by 85
Self-citationOptimal control methods for quantum batteries
Mazzoncini, F., Cavina, V., Andolina, G. M., Erdman, P. A., & Giovannetti, V. (2023) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.107.032218 · Cited by 86
Self-citationQuantum-speed-limit time for multiqubit open systems
Liu, C., Xu, Z.-Y., & Zhu, S. (2015) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.91.022102 · Cited by 83
Unifying Quantum and Classical Speed Limits on Observables
García-Pintos, L. P., Nicholson, S. B., Green, J. R., del Campo, A., & Gorshkov, A. V. (2022) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.12.011038 · Cited by 95
Quantum Speed Limits for Leakage and Decoherence
Marvian, I., & Lidar, D. A. (2015) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.115.210402 · Cited by 78
Optimizing entangling quantum gates for physical systems
Müller, M. M., Reich, D. M., Murphy, M., Yuan, H., Vala, J., Whaley, K. B., Calarco, T., & Koch, C. P. (2011) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.84.042315 · Cited by 78
Self-citationGeneral features of the relaxation dynamics of interacting quantum systems
Torres-Herrera, E. J., Vyas, M., & dos Santos, L. F. (2014) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/6/063010 · Cited by 79
Jäger, G., Reich, D. M., Goerz, M. H., Koch, C. P., & Hohenester, U. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.90.033628 · Cited by 79
Speeding up critical system dynamics through optimized evolution
Caneva, T., Calarco, T., Fazio, R., Santoro, G. E., & Montangero, S. (2011) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.84.012312 · Cited by 78
Self-citationQuench dynamics of isolated many-body quantum systems
Torres-Herrera, E. J., & dos Santos, L. F. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.89.043620 · Cited by 77
Charting the circuit QED design landscape using optimal control theory
Goerz, M. H., Motzoi, F., Whaley, K. B., & Koch, C. P. (2017) · npj Quantum Information · doi:10.1038/s41534-017-0036-0 · Cited by 99
Analytically solvable two-level quantum systems and Landau-Zener interferometry
Barnes, E. (2013) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.88.013818 · Cited by 72
Optimal control of a qubit in an optical cavity
Deffner, S. (2014) · Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics · doi:10.1088/0953-4075/47/14/145502 · Cited by 75
Charting the circuit QED design landscape using optimal control theory
Goerz, M. H., Motzoi, F., Whaley, K. B., & Koch, C. P. (2017) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 74
Automatic spin-chain learning to explore the quantum speed limit
Zhang, X., Cui, Z.-W., Wang, X., & Yung, M. (2018) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.97.052333 · Cited by 75
Zermelo navigation and a speed limit to quantum information processing
Russell, B., & Stepney, S. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.90.012303 · Cited by 72
Campaioli, F., Pollock, F. A., & Vinjanampathy, S. (2018) · Fundamental Theories of Physics · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-99046-0_8 · Cited by 71
The quantum speed limit of optimal controlled phasegates for trapped neutral atoms
Goerz, M. H., Calarco, T., & Koch, C. P. (2011) · Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · doi:10.1088/0953-4075/44/15/154011 · Cited by 70
Self-citationQuantum speed limit and optimal evolution time in a two-level system
Poggi, P. M., Lombardo, F. C., & Wisniacki, D. A. (2013) · EPL (Europhysics Letters) · doi:10.1209/0295-5075/104/40005 · Cited by 70
Zeno Dynamics, Indistinguishability of State, and Entanglement
Smerzi, A. (2012) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.109.150410 · Cited by 65
Demonstration of Quantum Brachistochrones between Distant States of an Atom
Lam, M. R., Peter, N., Groh, T., Alt, W., Robens, C., Meschede, D., Negretti, A., Montangero, S., Calarco, T., & Alberti, A. (2021) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.11.011035 · Cited by 69
Self-citationFast and robust quantum state transfer via a topological chain
Palaiodimopoulos, N. E., Brouzos, I., Diakonos, F. Κ., & Theocharis, G. (2021) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.103.052409 · Cited by 69
Heyl, M. (2017) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.95.060504 · Cited by 69
Distinct Bound of the Quantum Speed Limit via the Gauge Invariant Distance
Sun, S., & Zheng, Y. (2019) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.180403 · Cited by 65
Universal Bound on Energy Cost of Bit Reset in Finite Time
Zhen, Y.-Z., Egloff, D., Modi, K. K., & Dahlsten, O. (2021) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.190602 · Cited by 66
High-speed driving of a two-level system
Hegerfeldt, G. C. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.90.032110 · Cited by 62
Coherent-state transfer via highly mixed quantum spin chains
Cappellaro, P., Viola, L., & Ramanathan, C. (2011) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.83.032304 · Cited by 62
Energetic cost of quantum control protocols
Abah, O., Puebla, R., Kiely, A., Chiara, G. D., Paternostro, M., & Campbell, S. (2019) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ab4c8c · Cited by 56
Optimizing for an arbitrary perfect entangler. I. Functionals
Watts, P., Vala, J., Müller, M. M., Calarco, T., Whaley, K. B., Reich, D. M., Goerz, M. H., & Koch, C. P. (2015) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.91.062306 · Cited by 60
Self-citationIntroduction to theoretical and experimental aspects of quantum optimal control
Ansel, Q., Dionis, E., Arrouas, F., Peaudecerf, B., Guérin, S., Guéry-Odelin, D., & Sugny, D. (2024) · Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6455/ad46a5 · Cited by 59
Local quantum control of Heisenberg spin chains
Heule, R., Bruder, C., Burgarth, D. K., & Stojanović, V. M. (2010) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.82.052333 · Cited by 58
Solution to the Quantum Zermelo Navigation Problem
Brody, D. C., & Meier, D. M. (2015) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.114.100502 · Cited by 58
Vibrational state inversion of a Bose–Einstein condensate: optimal control and state tomography
Bücker, R., Berrada, T., van Frank, S., Schaff, J.-F., Schumm, T., Schmiedmayer, J., Jäger, G., Grond, J., & Hohenester, U. (2013) · Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · doi:10.1088/0953-4075/46/10/104012 · Cited by 59
Controlling the transport of an ion: classical and quantum mechanical solutions
Fürst, H. A., Goerz, M. H., Poschinger, U., Murphy, M., Montangero, S., Calarco, T., Schmidt‐Kaler, F., Singer, K., & Koch, C. P. (2014) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/7/075007 · Cited by 58
Self-citationProbing Quantum Speed Limits with Ultracold Gases
del Campo, A. (2021) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.126.180603 · Cited by 56
Robust entanglement in antiferromagnetic Heisenberg chains by single-spin optimal control
Wang, X., Bayat, A., Schirmer, S. G., & Bose, S. (2010) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.81.032312 · Cited by 56
Optimized cross-resonance gate for coupled transmon systems
Kirchhoff, S., Keßler, T., Liebermann, P., Assémat, E., Machnes, S., Motzoi, F., & Wilhelm, F. K. (2018) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.97.042348 · Cited by 53
Time-optimal navigation through quantum wind
Brody, D. C., Gibbons, G. W., & Meier, D. M. (2015) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/3/033048 · Cited by 52
Quantum speed limit and optimal control of many-boson dynamics
Brouzos, I., Streltsov, A. I., Negretti, A., Said, R. S., Caneva, T., Montangero, S., & Calarco, T. (2015) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.92.062110 · Cited by 52
Self-citationSpeed Limits for Macroscopic Transitions
Hamazaki, R. (2022) · PRX Quantum · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.3.020319 · Cited by 60
Topological state transfer in Kresling origami
Miyazawa, Y., Chen, C., Chaunsali, R., Gormley, T. S., Yin, G., Theocharis, G., & Yang, J. (2022) · Communications Materials · doi:10.1038/s43246-022-00280-0 · Cited by 55
Nonexponential fidelity decay in isolated interacting quantum systems
Torres-Herrera, E. J., & dos Santos, L. F. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.90.033623 · Cited by 49
Quantum speed limits and optimal Hamiltonians for driven systems in mixed states
Andersson, O., & Heydari, H. (2014) · Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · doi:10.1088/1751-8113/47/21/215301 · Cited by 50
Detecting metrologically useful asymmetry and entanglement by a few local measurements
Zhang, C., Yadin, B., Hou, Z., Cao, H., Liu, B., Huang, Y., Maity, R., Vedral, V., Li, C., Guo, G., et al. (2017) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.96.042327 · Cited by 54
Krotov method for optimal control of closed quantum systems
Morzhin, O. V., & Pechen, A. N. (2019) · Russian Mathematical Surveys · doi:10.1070/rm9835 · Cited by 59
Vibrational state inversion of a Bose-Einstein condensate: optimal control and state tomographyPreprint
Bücker, R., Berrada, T., Frank, R. V., Schaff, J.-F., Schumm, T., Jäger, G., Grond, J., & Hohenester, U. (2016) · Cited by 60
Zermelo navigation in the quantum brachistochrone
Russell, B., & Stepney, S. (2015) · Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical · doi:10.1088/1751-8113/48/11/115303 · Cited by 47
Quantum Field Thermal Machines
Gluza, M., Sabino, J., Ng, N. H. Y., Vitagliano, G., Pezzutto, M., Omar, Y., Mazets, I. E., Huber, M., Schmiedmayer, J., & Eisert, J. (2021) · PRX Quantum · doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.030310 · Cited by 51
Breaking adiabatic quantum control with deep learning
Ding, Y., Ban, Y., Martín‐Guerrero, J. D., Solano, E., Casanova, J., & Chen, X. (2021) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.103.l040401 · Cited by 50
Observing crossover between quantum speed limits
Ness, G., Lam, M. R., Alt, W., Meschede, D., Sagi, Y., & Alberti, A. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abj9119 · Cited by 53
Metadata
- Authors
- Caneva, T., Murphy, M., Calarco, T., Fazio, R., Montangero, S., Giovannetti, V., & Santoro, G. E.
- Affiliations
- Scuola Internazionale Superiore di Studi Avanzati (IT)
- Universität Ulm (DE)
- Scuola Normale Superiore (IT)
- The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) (IT)
- Venue
- Physical Review Letters
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2009-12-07
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 240501-240501
- ISSN
- 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
- 1079-7114
- OpenAlex
- W2160409148
- Semantic Scholar
- f1a2f8bcbbcd647e99b6a5a50dc08c24ff04e172
- Cited by
- 509
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 15
- FWCI
- 14.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- SDL (submittedVersion)
- Archivio istituzionale della ricerca (Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna) (submittedVersion)
- Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Keywords
- optimal control, quantum speed limit, quantum control, quantum information processing, quantum dynamics
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 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
