Quick Navigation

Topics

Open Quantum Systems Decoherence Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations

Tight Quantum Speed Limit for Ergotropy Charging in the N-Qubit Dicke Battery

arXiv
Authors: Anass Jad, Abderrahim El Allati

Year

2026

Paper ID

28493

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

114

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We derive and analytically prove a tight quantum speed limit (QSL) for ergotropy charging in the N-qubit Dicke quantum battery: the first-passage time to normalised ergotropy ε satisfies τ*(ε) geq sqrt{Nε}/\(2λsqrt{bar{n}}\), where λ is the coupling and bar{n} is the mean charger photon number. The bound follows from an exact perturbative identity ε(t) = Aλ2bar{n}t2 + mathcal{O}((λt)4), where A=4/N is the short-time ergotropy coefficient, combined with a global upper bound proved analytically for all N. The composite parameter ΓN = 2λsqrt{bar{n}/N} is the unique figure of merit for charging speed; all protocols collapse onto ΓN τ* geq sqrtε, with the bound saturated to within 1% at small ε.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We derive and analytically prove a tight quantum speed limit (QSL) for ergotropy charging in the N-qubit Dicke quantum battery: the first-passage time to normalised ergotropy ε...

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #28493

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.