pith. sign in

arxiv: 2310.14244 · v3 · submitted 2023-10-22 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas · nlin.SI

Exact solutions and Dynamical phase transitions in the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model with Dual nonlinear interactions

Dongyang Yu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 06:28 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas nlin.SI
keywords Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick modeldual nonlinear interactionsclassical dynamical phase transitionsJacobi elliptic functionsexact solutionsnon-logarithmic criticality
0
0 comments X

The pith

An auxiliary function maps dual-interaction LMG classical dynamics onto Jacobi elliptic functions, yielding exact solutions and non-logarithmic dynamical criticality.

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

The paper derives exact classical solutions for the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model when two distinct nonlinear interaction terms are present. It does so by introducing an auxiliary function that converts the equations of motion into a form solvable by Jacobi elliptic functions. From these closed-form solutions the authors construct the full classical dynamical phase diagram. They identify a non-logarithmic scaling of dynamical criticality that does not appear when only one nonlinear term is retained. The results are positioned as a reference point for later analysis of the corresponding quantum model and its entanglement dynamics.

Core claim

By constructing an auxiliary function that maps the dual-interaction classical dynamics onto the complex plane of Jacobi elliptic functions, exact solutions are obtained without further approximations. These solutions produce the classical dynamical phase diagram and reveal a non-logarithmic behavior of dynamical criticality that is absent in the single-nonlinear-interaction case.

What carries the argument

An auxiliary function that maps the dual-interaction classical equations onto the complex plane of Jacobi elliptic functions.

If this is right

  • The complete classical dynamical phase diagram of the dual-interaction LMG model becomes available in closed form.
  • Dynamical criticality exhibits a non-logarithmic dependence on control parameters.
  • The exact solutions supply a benchmark for finite-size quantum dynamical phase transitions in the same model.
  • Entanglement dynamics in the quantum dual-interaction LMG model can be compared directly against the classical limit.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The method may generalize to other spin models whose equations reduce to elliptic integrals only after an auxiliary transformation.
  • Non-logarithmic criticality could appear in the quantum case as a signature distinguishable from the single-interaction LMG model.
  • The auxiliary-function technique might allow extraction of higher-order correlation functions without solving the full quantum many-body problem.

Load-bearing premise

The auxiliary function maps the dual-interaction dynamics onto Jacobi elliptic functions while preserving every solution branch without extra approximations or limits on parameter values.

What would settle it

Direct numerical integration of the classical equations of motion for representative parameter values in the dual-interaction regime, compared against the predicted Jacobi-elliptic trajectories and the claimed non-logarithmic scaling of critical times.

read the original abstract

Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick (LMG) model is paradigmatic to study quantum phase transition in equilibrium or non-equilibrium systems and entanglement dynamics in a variety of disciplines. The generic LMG model usually incorporates two nonlinear interactions. While the classical dynamics of the single-nonlinear-inteaction LMG model is well understood through Jacobi elliptic functions, the dualinteraction case remains unexplored due to analytical challenges. Here, by constructing an auxiliary function that maps the dynamics to the complex plane of Jacobi elliptic functions, we derive exact solutions of classical dynamics for the dual-interaction LMG model. Based on the exact solutions, we give the classical dynamical phase diagram of the LMG model with dual nonlinear interactions, and find out a non-logarithmic behavior of dynamical criticality which is absent in case of single nonlinear interaction. Our results establish a benchmark to analyze the quantum dynamical phase transitions and many-body entanglement dynamics of finite-size LMG model.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that an auxiliary function can be constructed to map the classical dynamics of the LMG model with two nonlinear interactions exactly onto the complex plane of Jacobi elliptic functions, yielding closed-form solutions. From these solutions the authors construct the classical dynamical phase diagram and report a non-logarithmic scaling of dynamical criticality that is absent when only a single nonlinear interaction is present. The results are positioned as a benchmark for subsequent quantum dynamical phase-transition and entanglement studies.

Significance. If the auxiliary mapping is shown to be exact and unrestricted, the work would supply the first analytic handle on the dual-interaction classical LMG dynamics and would identify a qualitatively new criticality signature. This would be a useful reference point for finite-size quantum calculations in the same model class.

major comments (1)
  1. [derivation of the auxiliary function (methods/results)] The central claim rests on the auxiliary function mapping the full classical dynamics (arbitrary coupling strengths, all conserved-quantity sectors) onto Jacobi elliptic functions without additional restrictions or branch omissions. The manuscript must demonstrate explicitly that the mapping preserves the complete set of solution branches and does not implicitly relate the two nonlinear couplings; otherwise the reported phase diagram and the contrast with the single-interaction case are limited to a subset of parameter space.
minor comments (1)
  1. [abstract] The abstract states that 'exact solutions' are derived but supplies no indication of the verification steps (e.g., substitution back into the equations of motion or comparison with numerical integration). Adding a brief statement of the verification procedure would strengthen the presentation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the single major comment point by point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [derivation of the auxiliary function (methods/results)] The central claim rests on the auxiliary function mapping the full classical dynamics (arbitrary coupling strengths, all conserved-quantity sectors) onto Jacobi elliptic functions without additional restrictions or branch omissions. The manuscript must demonstrate explicitly that the mapping preserves the complete set of solution branches and does not implicitly relate the two nonlinear couplings; otherwise the reported phase diagram and the contrast with the single-interaction case are limited to a subset of parameter space.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on establishing the unrestricted validity of the mapping. The auxiliary function is constructed directly from the classical equations of motion for the general dual-interaction Hamiltonian H = - (J_x S_x^2 + J_y S_y^2 + J_z S_z^2)/N with independent couplings J_x and J_y (no relation imposed between them). The reduction to a single second-order ODE uses only the two conserved quantities (energy and total spin length), which enter as free parameters set by initial conditions; the auxiliary function is then defined to bring this ODE into the standard Jacobi form without further restrictions on parameter values or solution branches. The resulting closed-form expressions therefore cover arbitrary coupling strengths and all sectors. That said, we agree that an explicit verification of this generality (e.g., numerical checks for unrelated J_x, J_y values and different conserved quantities) would strengthen the presentation. In the revised manuscript we will add a short subsection (or appendix) containing such explicit demonstrations, confirming that no implicit coupling relation is introduced and that all branches of the elliptic functions are retained. This will make the generality of the dynamical phase diagram and the non-logarithmic criticality fully transparent. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper's central claim rests on constructing a new auxiliary function that maps the dual-nonlinear LMG classical dynamics onto the Jacobi elliptic function plane, yielding exact solutions and a non-logarithmic dynamical criticality. The provided abstract and reader's summary contain no equations or steps that reduce by definition to fitted inputs, no self-citations invoked as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and no renaming of known results. The derivation is presented as an independent analytical advance for the previously unexplored dual-interaction case, remaining self-contained without circular reduction to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all ledger entries left empty due to insufficient detail.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5691 in / 1006 out tokens · 18279 ms · 2026-05-24T06:28:18.894698+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    exact solutions and perturbation theory

    Lipkin, H.J., Meshkov, N., Glick, A.J.: Valid- ity of many-body approximation methods for a solvable model: (i). exact solutions and perturbation theory. Nuclear Physics 62(2), 188–198 (1965) https://doi.org/10. 1016/0029-5582(65)90862-X

    work page 1965

  2. [3]

    diagram summations

    Glick, A.J., Lipkin, H.J., Meshkov, N.: Validity of many-body approximation meth- ods for a solvable model: (iii). diagram summations. Nuclear Physics 62(2), 211– 224 (1965) https://doi.org/10.1016/0029- 5582(65)90864-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0029- 1965

  3. [4]

    D6 : (color online) Landscape of energy, Seven typical examples are chosen to demon- strate the frequency landscape as varying θ and φ

    Carrasco, J.A., Finkel, F., Gonzalez-Lopez, A., Rodriguez, M.A., Tempesta, P.: General- ized isotropic lipkin–meshkov–glick models: 15 Fig. D6 : (color online) Landscape of energy, Seven typical examples are chosen to demon- strate the frequency landscape as varying θ and φ. The global/local minimums, saddle points and global/local maximums are labeled by...

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ 2016

  4. [5]

    Raghavan, S., Smerzi, A., Fantoni, S., Shenoy, S.R.: Coherent oscillations between two weakly coupled bose-einstein condensates: Josephson effects, π oscillations, and macro- scopic quantum self-trapping. Phys. Rev. A 59, 620–633 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.59.620

    work page 1999

  5. [6]

    Zibold, T., Nicklas, E., Gross, C., Oberthaler, M.K.: Classical bifurcation at the transition from rabi to josephson dynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 204101 (2010) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.105.204101

    work page 2010

  6. [7]

    nature 464(7293), 1301–1306 (2010) https:// doi.org/10.1038/nature09009

    Baumann, K., Guerlin, C., Brennecke, F., Esslinger, T.: Dicke quantum phase transi- tion with a superfluid gas in an optical cavity. nature 464(7293), 1301–1306 (2010) https:// doi.org/10.1038/nature09009

    work page doi:10.1038/nature09009 2010

  7. [8]

    NATURE 580(7805), 602 (2020) https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2224-x

    Muniz, J.A., Barberena, D., Lewis-Swan, R.J., Young, D.J., Cline, J.R.K., Rey, A.M., Thompson, J.K.: Exploring dynamical phase transitions with cold atoms in an optical cav- ity. NATURE 580(7805), 602 (2020) https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2224-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2224-x 2020

  8. [9]

    Chu, A., Will, J., Arlt, J., Klempt, C., Rey, A.M.: Simulation of xxz spin models using sideband transitions in trapped bosonic gases. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 240504 (2020) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.125. 240504

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125 2020

  9. [10]

    Science Advances 6(25), 4935 (2020) https://doi.org/ 10.1126/sciadv.aba4935

    Xu, K., Sun, Z.-H., Liu, W., Zhang, Y.- R., Li, H., Dong, H., Ren, W., Zhang, P., Nori, F., Zheng, D., Fan, H., Wang, H.: Probing dynamical phase transitions with a superconducting quantum simulator. Science Advances 6(25), 4935 (2020) https://doi.org/ 10.1126/sciadv.aba4935

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.aba4935 2020

  10. [12]

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

    work page 2018

  11. [13]

    Non-minimalRTcoupling and its impact on inflationary evolution inf(R, T)gravity

    Morita, H., Ohnishi, H., Providencia, J., Nishiyama, S.: Exact solutions for the lmg model hamiltonian based on the bethe ansatz. Nuclear Physics B 737(3), 337–350 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb. 2006.01.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb 2006

  12. [14]

    Ribeiro, P., Vidal, J., Mosseri, R.: Exact spectrum of the lipkin-meshkov-glick model 16 in the thermodynamic limit and finite- size corrections. Phys. Rev. E 78, 021106 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE. 78.021106

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve 2008

  13. [15]

    Unanyan, R.G., Fleischhauer, M.: Decoherence-free generation of many-particle entanglement by adiabatic ground-state tran- sitions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 133601 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90. 133601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.90 2003

  14. [16]

    Or´ us, R., Dusuel, S., Vidal, J.: Equivalence of critical scaling laws for many-body entan- glement in the lipkin-meshkov-glick model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 025701 (2008) https:// doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.025701

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.101.025701 2008

  15. [17]

    Ma, J., Wang, X., Gu, S.-J.: Many-body reduced fidelity susceptibility in lipkin- meshkov-glick model. Phys. Rev. E 80, 021124 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevE.80.021124

    work page 2009

  16. [18]

    Engelhardt, G., Bastidas, V.M., Emary, C., Brandes, T.: ac-driven quantum phase transi- tion in the lipkin-meshkov-glick model. Phys. Rev. E 87, 052110 (2013) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevE.87.052110

    work page 2013

  17. [19]

    Engelhardt, G., Bastidas, V.M., Kopylov, W., Brandes, T.: Excited-state quantum phase transitions and periodic dynamics. Phys. Rev. A 91, 013631 (2015) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.91.013631

    work page 2015

  18. [20]

    Schliemann, J.: Coherent quantum dynam- ics: What fluctuations can tell. Phys. Rev. A 92, 022108 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.92.022108

    work page 2015

  19. [21]

    Lerose, A., Marino, J., Zunkovic, B., Gam- bassi, A., Silva, A.: Chaotic dynamical fer- romagnetic phase induced by nonequilib- rium quantum fluctuations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 130603 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.120.130603

    work page 2018

  20. [22]

    Physica B: Con- densed Matter 593, 412297 (2020) https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.physb.2020.412297

    Bao, J., Guo, B., Liu, Y.-H., Shen, L.-H., Sun, Z.-Y.: Multipartite nonlocality and global quantum discord in the antiferromagnetic lipkin–meshkov–glick model. Physica B: Con- densed Matter 593, 412297 (2020) https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.physb.2020.412297

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physb.2020.412297 2020

  21. [23]

    Nader, D.J., Gonz´ alez-Rodr ´ ıguez, C.A., Lerma-Hern´ andez, S.: Avoided crossings and dynamical tunneling close to excited-state quantum phase transitions. Phys. Rev. E 104, 064116 (2021) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevE.104.064116

    work page 2021

  22. [24]

    Romero, A.M., Engel, J., Tang, H.L., Economou, S.E.: Solving nuclear struc- ture problems with the adaptive varia- tional quantum algorithm. Phys. Rev. C 105, 064317 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.105.064317

    work page 2022

  23. [25]

    Annals of Physics 324(9), 1837–1846 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2009.05.008

    Viscondi, T.F., Furuya, K., De Oliveira, M.: Coherent state approach to the cross- collisional effects in the population dynam- ics of a two-mode bose–einstein condensate. Annals of Physics 324(9), 1837–1846 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2009.05.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2009.05.008 2009

  24. [26]

    Opatrny, T., Kolar, M., Das, K.K.: Spin squeezing by tensor twisting and lipkin- meshkov-glick dynamics in a toroidal bose-einstein condensate with spatially mod- ulated nonlinearity. Phys. Rev. A 91, 053612 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA. 91.053612

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2015

  25. [27]

    Physics Reports 509(2), 89–165 (2011) https://doi.org/10

    Ma, J., Wang, X., Sun, C.P., Nori, F.: Quantum spin squeezing. Physics Reports 509(2), 89–165 (2011) https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.physrep.2011.08.003

    work page 2011

  26. [28]

    Micheli, A., Jaksch, D., Cirac, J.I., Zoller, P.: Many-particle entanglement in two- component bose-einstein condensates. Phys. Rev. A 67, 013607 (2003) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.67.013607

    work page 2003

  27. [29]

    Vidal, J., Palacios, G., Aslangul, C.: Entan- glement dynamics in the lipkin-meshkov-glick model. Phys. Rev. A 70, 062304 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.70. 062304

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.70 2004

  28. [30]

    Lerose, A., Zunkovic, B., Marino, J., Gam- bassi, A., Silva, A.: Impact of nonequilibrium 17 fluctuations on prethermal dynamical phase transitions in long-range interacting spin chains. Phys. Rev. B 99, 045128 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.99. 045128

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.99 2019

  29. [31]

    Figueroa

    Marino, J., Eckstein, M., Foster, M.S., Rey, A.M.: Dynamical phase transitions in the collisionless pre-thermal states of isolated quantum systems: theory and experiments. Reports on Progress in Physics 85(11), 116001 (2022) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361- 6633/ac906c

    work page doi:10.1088/1361- 2022

  30. [32]

    Unanyan, R.G., Ionescu, C., Fleischhauer, M.: Many-particle entanglement in the gaped antiferromagnetic lipkin model. Phys. Rev. A 72, 022326 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.72.022326

    work page 2005

  31. [33]

    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Math- ematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 374(2069), 20150160 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.1098/rsta.2015.0160

    Zunkovic, B., Silva, A., Fabrizio, M.: Dynam- ical phase transitions and loschmidt echo in the infinite-range xy model. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Math- ematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 374(2069), 20150160 (2016) https://doi.org/ 10.1098/rsta.2015.0160

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2015.0160 2069

  32. [35]

    The Scientific World Journal 2022, 2711466 (2022) https:// doi.org/10.1155/2022/2711466

    Salas S, A.H., Altamirano, G.C., Martinez H, L.J.: Analytical solution to the general- ized complex duffing equation. The Scientific World Journal 2022, 2711466 (2022) https:// doi.org/10.1155/2022/2711466

    work page doi:10.1155/2022/2711466 2022

  33. [36]

    Krech, M.: Casimir forces in binary liquid mixtures. Phys. Rev. E 56, 1642–1659 (1997) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.56.1642

    work page doi:10.1103/physreve.56.1642 1997

  34. [37]

    Solinas, P., Ribeiro, P., Mosseri, R.: Dynami- cal properties across a quantum phase transi- tion in the lipkin-meshkov-glick model. Phys. Rev. A 78, 052329 (2008) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.78.052329

    work page 2008

  35. [38]

    Baksic, A., Ciuti, C.: Controlling discrete and continuous symmetries in superradiant phase transitions with circuit qed systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 173601 (2014) https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.173601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.173601 2014

  36. [39]

    Soriente, M., Donner, T., Chitra, R., Zil- berberg, O.: Dissipation-induced anomalous multicritical phenomena. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 183603 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.120.183603

    work page 2018

  37. [40]

    Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter 31(7), 075801 (2018) https://doi.org/10

    Li, B., Gao, C., Xianlong, G., Wang, P.: Crit- ical behavior of the order parameter at the nonequilibrium phase transition of the ising model. Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter 31(7), 075801 (2018) https://doi.org/10. 1088/1361-648X/aaf6cd

    work page 2018

  38. [41]

    Huang, Y., Li, T., Yin, Z.-q.: Symmetry- breaking dynamics of the finite-size lipkin- meshkov-glick model near ground state. Phys. Rev. A 97, 012115 (2018) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevA.97.012115

    work page 2018

  39. [42]

    Stitely, K.C., Giraldo, A., Krauskopf, B., Parkins, S.: Lasing and counter-lasing phase transitions in a cavity-qed system. Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023101 (2022) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevResearch.4.023101

    work page 2022

  40. [43]

    Armitage, J.V., Eberlein, W.F.: Elliptic Functions, pp. 1–24. Cambridge University Press, London (2006). https://doi.org/10. 1017/CBO9780511617867 . https://doi.org/ 10.1017/CBO9780511617867

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511617867 2006

  41. [44]

    Wang, Z.X., Guo, D.R.: Special Func- tions, pp. 387–416. world scientific, Singa- pore (1989). https://doi.org/10.1142/0653 . https://doi.org/10.1142/0653

    work page doi:10.1142/0653 1989

  42. [45]

    Castanos, O., Lopez-Pena, R., Hirsch, J.G., Lopez-Moreno, E.: Classical and quantum phase transitions in the lipkin-meshkov- glick model. Phys. Rev. B 74, 104118 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB. 74.104118

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb 2006

  43. [46]

    Ribeiro, P., Vidal, J., Mosseri, R.: Thermo- dynamical limit of the lipkin-meshkov-glick model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 050402 (2007) 18 https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99. 050402 19

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99 2007