Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1906.07201 · New Journal of Physics

Energetic cost of quantum control protocols

Obinna Abah, Ricardo Puebla, Anthony Kiely, Gabriele De Chiara, Mauro Paternostro, Steve Campbell

Published Oct 1, 2019• 60 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Abstract We quantitatively assess the energetic cost of several well-known control protocols that achieve a finite time adiabatic dynamics, namely counterdiabatic and local counterdiabatic driving, optimal control, and inverse engineering. By employing a cost measure based on the norm of the total driving Hamiltonian, we show that a hierarchy of costs emerges that is dependent on the protocol duration. As case studies we explore the Landau–Zener model, the quantum harmonic oscillator, and the Jaynes–Cummings model and establish that qualitatively similar results hold in all cases. For the analytically tractable Landau–Zener case, we further relate the effectiveness of a control protocol with the spectral features of the new driving Hamiltonians and show that in the case of counterdiabatic driving, it is possible to further minimize the cost by optimizing the ramp.

DOI
10.1088/1367-2630/ab4c8c

Related papers

Excess work in counterdiabatic driving

Lucas P. Kamizaki, Marcus V. S. Bonança

Many years have passed since the conception of the quintessential method of shortcut to adiabaticity known as counterdiabatic driving (or transitionless quantum driving). Yet, this method appears to be energetically cost-free and thus continually challenges the task of quantifying the amount of energy it demands to be accomplished. This paper proposes that the energy cost of controlling a closed quantum system using the counterdiabatic method can also be assessed using the instantaneous excess work during the process and related quantities, as the time-averaged excess work. Starting from the Mandelstam-Tamm bound for driven dynamics, we have shown that the speed-up of counterdiabatic driving is linked with the spreading of energy between the eigenstates of the total Hamiltonian, which is necessarily accompanied by transitions between these eigenstates. Nonetheless, although excess work can be used to quantify energetically these transitions, it is well known that the excess work is zero throughout the entire process under counterdiabatic driving. To recover the excess work as an energetic cost quantifier for counterdiabatic driving, we will propose a different interpretation of the parameters of the counterdiabatic Hamiltonian, leading to an excess work different from zero. We have illustrated our findings with the Landau-Zener model.

quant-pharXiv:2512.03274•Dec 4, 2025•0 citations

Cost of counterdiabatic driving and work output

Yuanjian Zheng, Steve Campbell, Gabriele De Chiara +1 more

Unitary processes allow for the transfer of work to and from Hamiltonian systems. However, to achieve nonzero power for the practical extraction of work, these processes must be performed within a finite time, which inevitably induces excitations in the system. We show that depending on the time scale of the process and the physical realization of the external driving employed, the use of counterdiabatic quantum driving to extract more work is not always effective. We also show that by virtue of the two-time energy measurement definition of quantum work, the cost of counterdiabatic driving can be significantly reduced by selecting a restricted form of the driving Hamiltonian that depends on the outcome of the first energy measurement. Lastly, we introduce a measure, the exigency, that quantifies the need for an external driving to preserve quantum adiabaticity which does not require knowledge of the explicit form of the counterdiabatic drivings, and can thus always be computed. We apply our analysis to systems ranging from a two-level Landau-Zener problem to many-body problems, namely, the quantum Ising and Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick models.

arXiv:1509.01882•Physical Review A•Oct 28, 2016•101 citations

Cost of transitionless driving and work output

Yuanjian Zheng, Steve Campbell, Gabriele De Chiara +1 more

Unitary processes allow for the transfer of work to and from Hamiltonian systems. However, to achieve non-zero power for the practical extraction of work, these processes must be performed within a finite-time, which inevitably induces excitations in the system. We show that depending on the time-scale of the process and the physical realization of the external driving employed, the use of counterdiabatic quantum driving to extract more work is not always effective. We also show that by virtue of the two-time energy measurement definition of quantum work, the cost of counterdiabatic driving can be significantly reduced by selecting a restricted form of the driving Hamiltonian that depends on the outcome of the first energy measurement. Lastly, we introduce a measure, the exigency, that quantifies the need for an external driving to preserve quantum adiabaticity which does not require knowledge of the explicit form of the counterdiabatic drivings, and can thus always be computed. We apply our analysis to systems ranging from a two-level Landau-Zener problem to many-body problems, namely the quantum Ising and Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick models.

•Sep 7, 2015•2 citations

Performance of shortcut-to-adiabaticity quantum engines

Obinna Abah, Eric Lutz

We consider a paradigmatic quantum harmonic Otto engine operating in finite time. We investigate its performance when shortcut-to-adiabaticity techniques are used to speed up its cycle. We compute efficiency and power by taking the energetic cost of the shortcut driving explicitly into account. We analyze in detail three different shortcut methods: counterdiabatic driving, local counterdiabatic driving, and inverse engineering. We demonstrate that all three lead to a simultaneous increase of efficiency and power for fast cycles, thus outperforming traditional heat engines.

arXiv:1707.09963•Physical review. E•Sep 17, 2018•99 citations

Thermodynamic cost for classical counterdiabatic driving

Alessandro Bravetti, Diego Tapias

Motivated by the recent growing interest about the thermodynamic cost of shortcuts to adiabaticity, we consider the cost of driving a classical system by the so-called counterdiabatic driving (CD). To do so, we proceed in three steps: first we review a general definition recently put forward in the literature for the thermodynamic cost of driving a Hamiltonian system; then we provide a new complementary definition of cost, which is of particular relevance for cases where the average excess work vanishes; finally, we apply our general framework to the case of CD. Interestingly, we find that in such a case our results are the exact classical counterparts of those reported by Funo et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 100602 (2017)PRLTAO0031-900710.1103/PhysRevLett.118.100602]. In particular we show that a universal trade-off between speed and cost for CD also exists in the classical case. To illustrate our points we consider the example of a time-dependent harmonic oscillator subject to different strategies of adiabatic control.

arXiv:1706.07443•Physical review. E•Nov 6, 2017•21 citations

Trade-Off Between Speed and Cost in Shortcuts to Adiabaticity

Steve Campbell, Sebastian Deffner

Achieving effectively adiabatic dynamics is a ubiquitous goal in almost all areas of quantum physics. Here, we study the speed with which a quantum system can be driven when employing transitionless quantum driving. As a main result, we establish a rigorous link between this speed, the quantum speed limit, and the (energetic) cost of implementing such a shortcut to adiabaticity. Interestingly, this link elucidates a trade-off between speed and cost, namely, that instantaneous manipulation is impossible as it requires an infinite cost. These findings are illustrated for two experimentally relevant systems-the parametric oscillator and the Landau-Zener model-which reveal that the spectral gap governs the quantum speed limit as well as the cost for realizing the shortcut.

arXiv:1609.04662•Physical Review Letters•Mar 8, 2017•235 citations
Abstract We quantitatively assess the energetic cost of several well-known control protocols that achieve a finite time adiabatic dynamics, namely counterdiabatic and local counterdiabatic driving, optimal control, and inverse engineering. By employing a cost measure based on the norm of the total driving Hamiltonian, we show that a hierarchy of costs emerges that is dependent on the protocol duration. As case studies we explore the Landau–Zener model, the quantum harmonic oscillator, and the Jaynes–Cummings model and establish that qualitatively similar results hold in all cases. For the analytically tractable Landau–Zener case, we further relate the effectiveness of a control protocol with the spectral features of the new driving Hamiltonians and show that in the case of counterdiabatic driving, it is possible to further minimize the cost by optimizing the ramp.
Many years have passed since the conception of the quintessential method of shortcut to adiabaticity known as counterdiabatic driving (or transitionless quantum driving). Yet, this method appears to be energetically cost-free and thus continually challenges the task of quantifying the amount of energy it demands to be accomplished. This paper proposes that the energy cost of controlling a closed quantum system using the counterdiabatic method can also be assessed using the instantaneous excess work during the process and related quantities, as the time-averaged excess work. Starting from the Mandelstam-Tamm bound for driven dynamics, we have shown that the speed-up of counterdiabatic driving is linked with the spreading of energy between the eigenstates of the total Hamiltonian, which is necessarily accompanied by transitions between these eigenstates. Nonetheless, although excess work can be used to quantify energetically these transitions, it is well known that the excess work is zero throughout the entire process under counterdiabatic driving. To recover the excess work as an energetic cost quantifier for counterdiabatic driving, we will propose a different interpretation of the parameters of the counterdiabatic Hamiltonian, leading to an excess work different from zero. We have illustrated our findings with the Landau-Zener model.
Unitary processes allow for the transfer of work to and from Hamiltonian systems. However, to achieve nonzero power for the practical extraction of work, these processes must be performed within a finite time, which inevitably induces excitations in the system. We show that depending on the time scale of the process and the physical realization of the external driving employed, the use of counterdiabatic quantum driving to extract more work is not always effective. We also show that by virtue of the two-time energy measurement definition of quantum work, the cost of counterdiabatic driving can be significantly reduced by selecting a restricted form of the driving Hamiltonian that depends on the outcome of the first energy measurement. Lastly, we introduce a measure, the exigency, that quantifies the need for an external driving to preserve quantum adiabaticity which does not require knowledge of the explicit form of the counterdiabatic drivings, and can thus always be computed. We apply our analysis to systems ranging from a two-level Landau-Zener problem to many-body problems, namely, the quantum Ising and Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick models.
Unitary processes allow for the transfer of work to and from Hamiltonian systems. However, to achieve non-zero power for the practical extraction of work, these processes must be performed within a finite-time, which inevitably induces excitations in the system. We show that depending on the time-scale of the process and the physical realization of the external driving employed, the use of counterdiabatic quantum driving to extract more work is not always effective. We also show that by virtue of the two-time energy measurement definition of quantum work, the cost of counterdiabatic driving can be significantly reduced by selecting a restricted form of the driving Hamiltonian that depends on the outcome of the first energy measurement. Lastly, we introduce a measure, the exigency, that quantifies the need for an external driving to preserve quantum adiabaticity which does not require knowledge of the explicit form of the counterdiabatic drivings, and can thus always be computed. We apply our analysis to systems ranging from a two-level Landau-Zener problem to many-body problems, namely the quantum Ising and Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick models.
We consider a paradigmatic quantum harmonic Otto engine operating in finite time. We investigate its performance when shortcut-to-adiabaticity techniques are used to speed up its cycle. We compute efficiency and power by taking the energetic cost of the shortcut driving explicitly into account. We analyze in detail three different shortcut methods: counterdiabatic driving, local counterdiabatic driving, and inverse engineering. We demonstrate that all three lead to a simultaneous increase of efficiency and power for fast cycles, thus outperforming traditional heat engines.
Motivated by the recent growing interest about the thermodynamic cost of shortcuts to adiabaticity, we consider the cost of driving a classical system by the so-called counterdiabatic driving (CD). To do so, we proceed in three steps: first we review a general definition recently put forward in the literature for the thermodynamic cost of driving a Hamiltonian system; then we provide a new complementary definition of cost, which is of particular relevance for cases where the average excess work vanishes; finally, we apply our general framework to the case of CD. Interestingly, we find that in such a case our results are the exact classical counterparts of those reported by Funo et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 100602 (2017)PRLTAO0031-900710.1103/PhysRevLett.118.100602]. In particular we show that a universal trade-off between speed and cost for CD also exists in the classical case. To illustrate our points we consider the example of a time-dependent harmonic oscillator subject to different strategies of adiabatic control.
Achieving effectively adiabatic dynamics is a ubiquitous goal in almost all areas of quantum physics. Here, we study the speed with which a quantum system can be driven when employing transitionless quantum driving. As a main result, we establish a rigorous link between this speed, the quantum speed limit, and the (energetic) cost of implementing such a shortcut to adiabaticity. Interestingly, this link elucidates a trade-off between speed and cost, namely, that instantaneous manipulation is impossible as it requires an infinite cost. These findings are illustrated for two experimentally relevant systems-the parametric oscillator and the Landau-Zener model-which reveal that the spectral gap governs the quantum speed limit as well as the cost for realizing the shortcut.