Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 121 references

Quantum anomaly and thermodynamics of one-dimensional fermions with antisymmetric two-body interactions

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that a two-species one-dimensional Fermi gas with a derivative-delta attraction has a quantum scale anomaly, in which the running coupling generates a power-law binding energy and renormalized scattering identical to that…

desk verdict A careful, internally consistent two-body calculation, but the power-law anomaly is a cutoff-scheme result until the regulator dependence is resolved. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05210 v3 pith:Z7LSPK32 submitted 2019-08-14 cond-mat.quant-gas

Horacio E. Camblong , Abhijit Chakraborty , Wilder S. Daza , Joaquín E. Drut , Chris L. Lin , Carlos R. Ordóñez This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas MSC 81Q0581T1782B10
keywords quantumanomalydimensionaltransmutationderivative-deltapotentialone-dimensionalFermigasTan'scontactBeth-UhlenbeckformulavirialcoefficientSO(21)symmetry
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper argues that a one-dimensional, two-species Fermi gas with an attractive derivative-delta interaction, $V(x)=g\delta'(x)$, has a quantum scale anomaly: the theory is classically scale invariant, but quantization requires a momentum cutoff and a running coupling, turning the dimensionless $g$ into the two-body binding energy $\epsilon_B$ through the power-law relation $\epsilon_B = \Lambda^2 g^4/(4\pi^2)$. This is a new instance of dimensional transmutation, distinct from the logarithmic case of two-dimensional contact interactions and from the recently studied one-dimensional three-body analogue. The paper shows by both Schr\"odinger and quantum-field-theory routes that after renormalization the reflection and transmission amplitudes are $R=-\kappa/(\kappa+ik)$ and $T=ik/(\kappa+ik)$, exactly the scattering data of the ordinary delta potential, even though the bare interactions differ. On the thermodynamic side, the anomaly appears as Tan's contact, an exact second virial coefficient from the Beth-Uhlenbeck formula, and a semiclassical third virial coefficient, connecting few-body binding to the equation of state. A sympathetic reader would care because this is a minimal, solvable model where the breaking of scale invariance is power-law rather than logarithmic and is visible in measurable thermodynamic quantities.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the derivative-delta potential $\delta'(x)$ treated with a distributional regularization in which the delta function is a limit of even functions, so boundary values at the origin are the symmetrized averages $\psi(0)=[\psi(0^+)+\psi(0^-)]/2$ and similarly for $\psi'(0)$. The argument works by writing the two-body Schr\"odinger equation in momentum space, obtaining a linear system for $\psi(0)$ and $\psi'(0)$; the determinant condition supplies the running coupling $\epsilon_B=\Lambda^2 g^4/(4\pi^2)$, and the same linear system, after the $\Lambda\to\infty$ renormalization, yields $R$ and $T$. In field theory the same results come from the geometric series of bubble diagrams, whose single pole at the bound state determines $\epsilon_B$ and whose resummation gives the exact T-matrix $T_{\rm exact}(Q,p_1,p_3)=-2\sqrt{\epsilon_B}/(1-i\sqrt{\epsilon_B}/\sqrt{Q})$, identical to the delta-potential T-matrix. This combined machinery is what turns a classically scale-invariant antisymmetric contact interaction into a scale-broken but exactly solvable theory.

What would settle it

Use a different admissible regularization—for instance, a one-sided representation of $\delta(x)$ or another member of the four-parameter family of self-adjoint extensions—and recompute the transmission amplitude; if $T=ik/(\kappa+ik)$ does not survive, the universality claim is regularization-dependent. Alternatively, in a lattice realization measure the two-body binding energy versus the bare coupling: the paper predicts $\epsilon_B\propto g^4$, whereas a logarithmic or exponential dependence would contradict it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the derivative-delta potential in one dimension, $V=g\delta'(x)$, whose coupling is classically dimensionless and preserves SO(2,1) scaling symmetry, is anomalous: imposing a momentum cutoff $\Lambda$ and demanding a bound state at energy $\epsilon_B$ forces the running coupling $\epsilon_B=\Lambda^2 g^4/(4\pi^2)$, so the bare coupling vanishes as $\Lambda\to\infty$ while the physical scale $\epsilon_B$ survives. The same renormalization makes the bound-state wave function and the scattering amplitudes finite, and the limiting amplitudes coincide exactly with those of the ordinary $\delta$-potential: $R=-\kappa/(\kappa+ik)$, $T=ik/(\kappa+ik)$, with $\kappa=\sqrt{\epsilon_B}$. The paper verifies this from both the two-body Schr\"odinger equation with symmetrized boundary conditions and the exact resummation of the nonrelativistic field-theory T-matrix, which share the same bound-state pole. It then identifies the anomaly operator with Tan's contact and derives its thermodynamic consequences, including the exact second-order virial coefficient $\sqrt{2}\Delta b_2=-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}e^{\beta\epsilon_B}(1+\operatorname{erf}(\sqrt{\beta\epsilon_B}))$ and the equation-of-state signature $P-2E/L=C$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the chosen regularization of the derivative-delta potential—the delta function as a limit of even functions with symmetrized boundary values, plus the requirement that the bare coupling runs with the cutoff—because other self-adjoint extensions of the same formal operator give different transmission coefficients and would not produce the power-law anomaly or the equality with delta-potential scattering.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The renormalized derivative-delta potential has scattering amplitudes $R=-\kappa/(\kappa+ik)$ and $T=ik/(\kappa+ik)$ with $\kappa=\sqrt{\epsilon_B}$, so in the low-energy limit it is indistinguishable from an ordinary attractive delta potential.
  • The anomaly operator equals Tan's contact density, $C=P-2E/L$, so the breaking of scale invariance is directly measurable through the equation of state.
  • The second virial coefficient is exact: $\sqrt{2}\Delta b_2=-\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}e^{\beta\epsilon_B}(1+\operatorname{erf}(\sqrt{\beta\epsilon_B}))$, which vanishes correctly as $\epsilon_B\to 0$ once the one-dimensional zero-energy correction is included.
  • In a harmonic trap the SO(2,1) symmetry algebra implies a shift of the breathing-mode frequency, providing an experimental signature of the anomaly.
  • In a semiclassical approximation the third virial coefficient obeys $\Delta b_3=-\sqrt{2}\Delta b_2$, linking three-body thermodynamics to the two-body anomaly.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the renormalized scattering is identical to that of the ordinary delta potential while the bare interaction preserves scale invariance, the anomaly is invisible in two-body scattering and shows up only in the binding-energy dependence and many-body thermodynamics; a testable extension would be to measure the contact density $C=P-2E/L$ as a function of $\epsilon_B$ at fixed density and chec
  • The power-law relation $\epsilon_B=\Lambda^2 g^4/(4\pi^2)$ suggests that in any lattice realization the bound-state energy should scale as the fourth power of the dimensionless coupling; a quantum Monte Carlo or exact-diagonalization study of a few-site model could confirm or rule out this scaling without the ambiguity of continuum regularizations.
  • By analogy with the one-dimensional three-body anomaly, where higher virial coefficients were computed, the semiclassical reduction $\Delta b_3=-\sqrt{2}\Delta b_2$ invites a full three-body calculation; if the relation survives beyond the semiclassical approximation, it would give a strong signature that the anomaly, not the details of the potential, controls the thermodynamics.
  • The dependence on the chosen self-adjoint extension means the physically realized version of the derivative-delta potential must come from a microphysical completion such as a narrow well or a lattice; until that completion is specified, the universality claim should be read as a property of the even-regularization scheme.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. This paper studies a one-dimensional two-component Fermi gas with an attractive derivative-delta interaction δ′(x). The authors solve the two-body problem in momentum space with a sharp momentum cutoff, obtaining a bound state with energy ϵ_B = Λ²g⁴/(4π²) (Eq. (15)), which they interpret as power-law dimensional transmutation, and renormalized reflection and transmission amplitudes R = −κ/(κ+ik), T = ik/(κ+ik) (Eqs. (30) and (33)), identical to those of the ordinary delta potential. A nonrelativistic quantum-field-theory T-matrix calculation reproduces the same bound-state pole and scattering amplitudes (Sec. 2.4). Using these two-body data, the paper computes the second-order virial coefficient via the Beth-Uhlenbeck formula (Eq. (53)), identifies the scale anomaly with Tan's contact (Eqs. (64)–(65)), and sketches consequences for the equation of state and universal relations.

Significance. If the central claim is robust, the paper would establish a new example of an SO(2,1) quantum anomaly in a two-body contact interaction, with a power-law rather than logarithmic dimensional transmutation; this would be conceptually interesting and potentially useful for effective-field-theory treatments of low-dimensional gases. The two-body derivation is internally consistent and carefully cross-checked between the Schrödinger and NRQFT approaches, and the paper explicitly discusses Levinson's theorem, the Beth-Uhlenbeck formula, and the structure of the anomaly operator. The main significance is conditional, however: the power-law pole relies on a linearly divergent loop term that is not regulator-independent, and the chosen δ′ regularization is one of many self-adjoint extensions. The thermodynamic results are direct consequences of this two-body input, so their validity is tied to the same open regulator question.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.4, Eqs. (46), (49); §3.4] The central result ϵ_B = Λ²g⁴/(4π²) (Eqs. (15) and (49)) is obtained from the linearly divergent term 2iΛ√Q/π in the one-loop T-matrix (Eq. (46)) and the analogous cutoff-dependent term in Eq. (13). Because power-law divergences are regulator-dependent—dimensional regularization, for example, would set the linearly divergent term to zero—the paper has not established that the power-law dimensional transmutation is a physical property of the derivative-delta interaction rather than an artifact of the sharp-cutoff scheme. The authors acknowledge in Sec. 3.4 that the DR treatment is 'very subtle' and leave it to future work. Since the bound-state energy is the renormalized scale that enters all subsequent thermodynamic and contact results, this is a load-bearing gap. Please either supply a regulator-independent derivation (e.g., a DR calculation, a lattice calculation, or a microphysical UV completion that selects the cutoff scheme) or explicitly restrict the claims to the cutoff scheme, with the scheme dependence documented.
  2. [§2.2 (paragraph beginning 'For a representation of the delta function...')] The quantization of the δ′ potential is fixed by the stipulation that δ(x) is represented as a limit of even functions, so that ψ(0) and ψ′(0) are the symmetrized averages [ψ(0+)+ψ(0−)]/2 and [ψ′(0+)+ψ′(0−)]/2. The paper itself notes that other definitions of δ′ (Refs. [52,53]) lead to different transmission coefficients, so the results of Sec. 2, including the identity R = −κ/(κ+ik), T = ik/(κ+ik), are conditional on this particular self-adjoint extension. The agreement between the Schrödinger and NRQFT calculations is not an independent confirmation, because both implementations use the same boundary-value convention and the same sharp cutoff. A physical argument for this extension is needed.
  3. [§3.1 and §3.4, Eqs. (53), (65)] The thermodynamic results inherit the scheme dependence of the two-body input. In particular, Eq. (53) for the second virial coefficient uses the phase shifts (40)–(41) derived from the chosen δ′ convention, and Eq. (65) identifies the anomaly with Tan's contact using ∂g/∂ ln(βϵ_B) = g/4 from Eq. (15). If the bound-state pole is regulator-dependent, these results are likewise regulator-dependent. Additionally, the modified Beth-Uhlenbeck formula (54), including the −1/2 term, is transferred from the delta-function case with the statement that the same relation is 'expected' to hold; this transfer should be justified by applying the spectral-density argument of Ref. [107] directly to the derivative-delta problem.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (57)] The result Δb3 = −√2 Δb2 is derived within a leading-order semiclassical approximation; the paper should state the limits of validity of this approximation and ideally compare with a direct calculation or with the analogous delta-function result.
  2. [Abstract and §3.4] The phrase 'equivalently as Tan's contact' in the abstract is misleading: ϵ_B is a two-body scale, while Tan's contact is a many-body thermodynamic quantity that depends on it. Rephrasing to say that the anomaly manifests both in the two-body binding energy and, separately, in the contact would be more accurate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the two-body bound-state and scattering derivations are self-contained, and the thermodynamic results follow as corollaries of the derived scattering equivalence.

full rationale

The central two-body derivation is self-contained. The bound-state relation is obtained by solving the two-body Schrödinger equation with the even-sequence definition of δ′ and requiring a nontrivial solution of Eqs. (12)–(13); the determinant yields Eq. (15), ε_B = Λ²g⁴/(4π²), without assuming the target result. The scattering amplitudes are solved from Eqs. (22)–(23) and reduced to R = −κ/(κ+ik), T = ik/(κ+ik) by substituting the independently derived relation κ = Λg²/2π; this is a renormalization step, not a fitted input. The NRQFT calculation reproduces the same T-matrix pole and on-shell amplitudes using the same cutoff, which is consistency between two calculations, not circularity. The thermodynamic results follow from the computed phase shifts via the Beth-Uhlenbeck formula; the −1/2 correction in Eq. (54) is taken from the authors' earlier delta-potential work [107] but is also independently supported by Ref. [114] and by the Levinson's-theorem discussion, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. The admitted regulator-dependence (dimensional regularization described as 'very subtle') and the even-function representation being one of several self-adjoint extensions are physical and correctness caveats, not a reduction of the derivation to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger shows a modest burden: one physical scale (ϵ_B) replaces the bare coupling, and two assumptions particular to this paper: the symmetrized-averaging regularization of the δ' potential, and the transfer of the -1/2 virial correction from the delta-function gas. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Bound-state energy ϵ_B (renormalized scale)
    The classical theory has no scale; after renormalization, the one-parameter family of quantum theories is labeled by the two-body binding energy ϵ_B, which is not determined by the model and must be supplied as input. It plays the role of the physical coupling in all thermodynamic results (βϵ_B).
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The classical derivative-delta Hamiltonian is invariant under the SO(2,1) conformal algebra generated by H, D, and K.
    Invoked in Sec. 2.1 to frame the anomaly; the algebra is standard, but its applicability to the δ' interaction is a model property.
  • ad hoc to paper The derivative-delta potential is regularized by representing δ(x) as a limit of even functions, with ψ(0) and ψ'(0) replaced by their symmetrized averages.
    This is one of several possible self-adjoint extensions; the paper acknowledges alternatives in Sec. 2.2.
  • domain assumption The -1/2 correction to the one-dimensional Beth-Uhlenbeck formula, derived for the delta-function potential, applies to the derivative-delta potential because the phase shifts coincide.
    The paper states 'we expect the same relation (54) to hold' without a direct derivation for the derivative-delta case (Sec. 3.1).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum anomaly and thermodynamics of one-dimensional fermions with antisymmetric two-body interactions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z7LSPK32

@misc{pith2026190805210,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum anomaly and thermodynamics of one-dimensional fermions with antisymmetric two-body interactions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z7LSPK32}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05210}
}
abstract

A system of two-species, one-dimensional fermions, with an attractive two-body interaction of the derivative-delta type, features a scale anomaly. In contrast to the well-known two-dimensional case with contact interactions, and its one-dimensional cousin with three-body interactions (studied recently by some of us and others), the present case displays dimensional transmutation featuring a power-law rather than a logarithmic behavior. We use both the Schr\"{o}dinger equation and quantum field theory to study bound and scattering states, showing consistency between both approaches. We show that the expressions for the reflection $(R)$ and the transmission $(T)$ coefficients of the renormalized, anomalous derivative-delta potential are identical to those of the regular delta potential. The second-order virial coefficient is calculated analytically using the Beth-Uhlenbeck formula, and we make comments about the proper $\epsilon_B\rightarrow 0$ (where $\epsilon_B$ is the bound-state energy) limit. We show the impact of the quantum anomaly (which appears as the binding energy of the two-body problem, or equivalently as Tan's contact) on the equation of state and on other universal relations. Our emphasis throughout is on the conceptual and structural aspects of this problem.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.05210 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Vertex and (b) 1-loop diagram for the derivative-delta contact potential. Here [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [107]

    H. E. Camblong, A. Chakraborty, W. S. Daza, J. E. Drut, C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Spectral density, Levinson’s theorem, and the extra term in the second virial coefficient for the one-dimensionalδ-function potential, Phys. Rev. A 100 (2019) 062110. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.100.062110

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.100.062110 2019

  2. [1]

    Jackiw, Delta-function potentials in two-and three-dimensional quan- tum mechanics, MAB B´ eg memorial volume (1991) 25

    R. Jackiw, Delta-function potentials in two-and three-dimensional quan- tum mechanics, MAB B´ eg memorial volume (1991) 25

    1991

  3. [2]

    L. P. Pitaevskii, A. Rosch, Breathing modes and hidden symmetry of trapped atoms in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. A 55 (1997) R853–R856. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.55.R853

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.55.r853 1997

  4. [3]

    Braaten, L

    E. Braaten, L. Platter, Exact relations for a strongly interacting Fermi gas from the operator product expansion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 205301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.205301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.100.205301 2008

  5. [4]

    Olshanii, H

    M. Olshanii, H. Perrin, V. Lorent, Example of a quantum anomaly in the physics of ultracold gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 095302. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.095302

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.095302 2010

  6. [5]

    Y. Hu, Z. Liang, Visualization of dimensional effects in collective excita- tions of optically trapped quasi-two-dimensional Bose gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 110401. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.110401

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.107.110401 2011

  7. [6]

    Hofmann, Quantum anomaly, universal relations, and breathing mode of a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys

    J. Hofmann, Quantum anomaly, universal relations, and breathing mode of a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 185303. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.185303

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.108.185303 2012

  8. [7]

    Taylor, M

    E. Taylor, M. Randeria, Apparent low-energy scale invariance in two-dimensional Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 135301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.135301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.109.135301 2012

Show all 121 references
  1. [8]

    H. E. Camblong, L. N. Epele, H. Fanchiotti, C. A. Garc´ ıa Canal, Quan- tum anomaly in molecular physics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 220402. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.220402

    2001 doi

  2. [9]

    Martiyanov, V

    K. Martiyanov, V. Makhalov, A. Turlapov, Observation of a two- dimensional Fermi gas of atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 030404. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.030404

    2010 doi

  3. [10]

    M. Feld, B. Fr¨ ohlich, E. Vogt, M. Koschorreck, M. K¨ ohl, Observation of a pairing pseudogap in a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Nature 480 (7375) (2011) 75–78. doi:10.1038/nature10627. 24

    2011 doi

  4. [11]

    Fr¨ ohlich, M

    B. Fr¨ ohlich, M. Feld, E. Vogt, M. Koschorreck, W. Zwerger, M. K¨ ohl, Radio-frequency spectroscopy of a strongly interacting two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 105301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.105301

    2011 doi

  5. [12]

    A. A. Orel, P. Dyke, M. Delehaye, C. J. Vale, H. Hu, Den- sity distribution of a trapped two-dimensional strongly interact- ing Fermi gas, New Journal of Physics 13 (11) (2011) 113032. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/11/113032

    2011 doi

  6. [13]

    P. Dyke, E. D. Kuhnle, S. Whitlock, H. Hu, M. Mark, S. Hoinka, M. Lingham, P. Hannaford, C. J. Vale, Crossover from 2d to 3d in a weakly interacting Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 105304. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.105304

    2011 doi

  7. [14]

    S. K. Baur, B. Fr¨ ohlich, M. Feld, E. Vogt, D. Pertot, M. Koschor- reck, M. K¨ ohl, Radio-frequency spectra of Feshbach molecules in quasi-two-dimensional geometries, Phys. Rev. A 85 (2012) 061604. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.85.061604

    2012 doi

  8. [15]

    A. T. Sommer, L. W. Cheuk, M. J. H. Ku, W. S. Bakr, M. W. Zwierlein, Evolution of fermion pairing from three to two dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 045302. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.045302

    2012 doi

  9. [16]

    Zhang, W

    Y. Zhang, W. Ong, I. Arakelyan, J. E. Thomas, Polaron-to- polaron transitions in the radio-frequency spectrum of a quasi- two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 235302. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.235302

    2012 doi

  10. [17]

    Koschorreck, D

    M. Koschorreck, D. Pertot, E. Vogt, B. Fr¨ ohlich, M. Feld, M. K¨ ohl, Attrac- tive and repulsive Fermi polarons in two dimensions, Nature 485 (7400) (2012) 619–622. doi:10.1038/nature11151

    2012 doi

  11. [18]

    E. Vogt, M. Feld, B. Fr¨ ohlich, D. Pertot, M. Koschorreck, M. K¨ ohl, Scale invariance and viscosity of a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 070404. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.070404

    2012 doi

  12. [19]

    Fr¨ ohlich, M

    B. Fr¨ ohlich, M. Feld, E. Vogt, M. Koschorreck, M. K¨ ohl, C. Berthod, T. Giamarchi, Two-dimensional Fermi liquid with attractive interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (2012) 130403. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.130403

    2012 doi

  13. [20]

    P. Dyke, K. Fenech, T. Peppler, M. G. Lingham, S. Hoinka, W. Zhang, S.-G. Peng, B. Mulkerin, H. Hu, X.-J. Liu, C. J. Vale, Criteria for two- dimensional kinematics in an interacting Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 93 (2016) 011603. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.93.011603

    2016 doi

  14. [21]

    Makhalov, K

    V. Makhalov, K. Martiyanov, A. Turlapov, Ground-state pressure of quasi-2d Fermi and Bose gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 045301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.045301. 25

    2014 doi

  15. [22]

    W. Ong, C. Cheng, I. Arakelyan, J. E. Thomas, Spin-imbalanced quasi-two-dimensional Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 110403. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.110403

    2015 doi

  16. [23]

    M. G. Ries, A. N. Wenz, G. Z¨ urn, L. Bayha, I. Boettcher, D. Kedar, P. A. Murthy, M. Neidig, T. Lompe, S. Jochim, Observation of pair conden- sation in the quasi-2d BEC-BCS crossover, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 230401. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.230401

    2015 doi

  17. [24]

    P. A. Murthy, I. Boettcher, L. Bayha, M. Holzmann, D. Kedar, M. Neidig, M. G. Ries, A. N. Wenz, G. Z¨ urn, S. Jochim, Ob- servation of the berezinskii-kosterlitz-thouless phase transition in an ultracold Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 010401. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.010401

    2015 doi

  18. [25]

    Randeria, Fermion pairing in flatland, Physics 5 (2012) 10

    M. Randeria, Fermion pairing in flatland, Physics 5 (2012) 10

    2012

  19. [26]

    Pieri, Cooper pairs dance in a disk, Physics 8 (2015) 53

    P. Pieri, Cooper pairs dance in a disk, Physics 8 (2015) 53

    2015

  20. [27]

    Bertaina, S

    G. Bertaina, S. Giorgini, BCS-BEC crossover in a two- dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 110403. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.110403

    2011 doi

  21. [28]

    H. Shi, S. Chiesa, S. Zhang, Ground-state properties of strongly inter- acting Fermi gases in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. A 92 (2015) 033603. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.92.033603

    2015 doi

  22. [29]

    Galea, H

    A. Galea, H. Dawkins, S. Gandolfi, A. Gezerlis, Diffusion Monte Carlo study of strongly interacting two-dimensional Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. A 93 (2016) 023602. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.93.023602

    2016 doi

  23. [30]

    X.-J. Liu, H. Hu, P. D. Drummond, Exact few-body results for strongly correlated quantum gases in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 82 (2010) 054524. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.82.054524

    2010 doi

  24. [31]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. M. Parish, T. Enss, Universal equation of state and pseudo- gap in the two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 (2014) 135302. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.135302

    2014 doi

  25. [32]

    Ngampruetikorn, J

    V. Ngampruetikorn, J. Levinsen, M. M. Parish, Pair correlations in the two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 265301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.265301

    2013 doi

  26. [33]

    E. R. Anderson, J. E. Drut, Pressure, compressibility, and contact of the two-dimensional attractive Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 115301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.115301

    2015 doi

  27. [34]

    Barth, J

    M. Barth, J. Hofmann, Pairing effects in the nondegenerate limit of the two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 89 (2014) 013614. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.89.013614. 26

    2014 doi

  28. [35]

    Chafin, T

    C. Chafin, T. Sch¨ afer, Scale breaking and fluid dynamics in a di- lute two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 88 (2013) 043636. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.88.043636

    2013 doi

  29. [36]

    Chiacchiera, D

    S. Chiacchiera, D. Davesne, T. Enss, M. Urban, Damping of the quadrupole mode in a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 88 (2013) 053616. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.88.053616

    2013 doi

  30. [37]

    T. Enss, C. K¨ uppersbusch, L. Fritz, Shear viscosity and spin diffu- sion in a two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 86 (2012) 013617. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.86.013617

    2012 doi

  31. [38]

    J. E. Drut, J. R. McKenney, W. S. Daza, C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Quantum anomaly and thermodynamics of one-dimensional fermions with three-body interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018) 243002. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.243002

    2018 doi

  32. [39]

    W. S. Daza, J. E. Drut, C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, A quantum field- theoretical perspective on scale anomalies in 1d systems with three- body interactions, Modern Physics Letters A 34 (35) (2019) 1950291. doi:10.1142/S0217732319502912

    2019 doi

  33. [40]

    J. Maki, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Virial expansion for a three-component Fermi gas in one dimension: The quantum anomaly correspondence, Phys. Rev. A 100 (2019) 063604. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.100.063604

    2019 doi

  34. [41]

    J. R. McKenney, J. E. Drut, Fermi-Fermi crossover in the ground state of one-dimensional few-body systems with anoma- lous three-body interactions, Phys. Rev. A 99 (2019) 013615. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.99.013615

    2019 doi

  35. [42]

    J. R. McKenney, A. Jose, J. E. Drut, Thermodynamics and static response of anomalous one-dimensional fermions via a quantum Monte Carlo ap- proach in the worldline representation, Phys. Rev. A 102 (2020) 023313. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.102.023313

    2020 doi

  36. [43]

    A. J. Czejdo, J. E. Drut, Y. Hou, J. R. McKenney, K. J. Morrell, Virial co- efficients of trapped and untrapped three-component fermions with three- body forces in arbitrary spatial dimensions, Phys. Rev. A 101 (2020) 063630. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.101.063630

    2020 doi

  37. [44]

    ˇSeba, Some remarks on the δ′-interaction in one dimen- sion, Reports on Mathematical Physics 24 (1) (1986) 111–120

    P. ˇSeba, Some remarks on the δ′-interaction in one dimen- sion, Reports on Mathematical Physics 24 (1) (1986) 111–120. doi:10.1016/0034-4877(86)90045-5

    1986 doi

  38. [45]

    ˇSeba, The generalized point interaction in one dimension, Czechoslovak Journal of Physics B 36 (6) (1986) 667–673

    P. ˇSeba, The generalized point interaction in one dimension, Czechoslovak Journal of Physics B 36 (6) (1986) 667–673. doi:10.1007/BF01597402

    1986 doi

  39. [46]

    Albeverio, F

    S. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, R. Hoegh-Krohn, H. Holden, Solvable models in quantum mechanics, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. 27

    2012

  40. [47]

    Gesztesy, H

    F. Gesztesy, H. Holden, A new class of solvable models in quan- tum mechanics describing point interactions on the line, Jour- nal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 20 (15) (1987) 5157. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/20/15/030

    1987 doi

  41. [48]

    Zhao, Comments on the Schr¨ odinger equation withδ′-interaction in one dimension, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 25 (10) (1992) L617

    B.-H. Zhao, Comments on the Schr¨ odinger equation withδ′-interaction in one dimension, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 25 (10) (1992) L617. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/25/10/003

    1992 doi

  42. [49]

    Albeverio, F

    S. Albeverio, F. Gesztesy, H. Holden, Comments on a recent note on the Schr¨ odinger equation with a δ′-interaction, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 26 (15) (1993) 3903. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/26/15/037

    1993 doi

  43. [50]

    D. J. Griffiths, Boundary conditions at the derivative of a delta func- tion, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 26 (9) (1993) 2265. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/26/9/021

    1993 doi

  44. [51]

    Kurasov, N

    P. Kurasov, N. Elander, On the δ′-interactions in one dimension, Preprint MSI (1993) 93–7

    1993

  45. [52]

    P. L. Christiansen, H. Arnbak, A. V. Zolotaryuk, V. Ermakov, Y. B. Gaididei, On the existence of resonances in the transmission probabil- ity for interactions arising from derivatives of Dirac’s delta function, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36 (27) (2003) 7589...

    2003 doi

  46. [53]

    Toyama, Y

    F. Toyama, Y. Nogami, Transmission–reflection problem with a po- tential of the form of the derivative of the delta function, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 40 (29) (2007) F685. doi:10.1088/1751-8113/40/29/F05

    2007 doi

  47. [54]

    P. Kurasov, Distribution theory for discontinuous test functions and differential operators with generalized coefficients, Journal of mathematical analysis and applications 201 (1) (1996) 297–323. doi:10.1006/jmaa.1996.0256

    1996

  48. [55]

    Coutinho, Y

    F. Coutinho, Y. Nogami, J. F. Perez, Generalized point interactions in one-dimensional quantum mechanics, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 30 (11) (1997) 3937. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/30/11/021

    1997 doi

  49. [56]

    Widmer, Contact interactions in non-relativistic quantum mechanics, Unpublished Bachelor Thesis

    P. Widmer, Contact interactions in non-relativistic quantum mechanics, Unpublished Bachelor Thesis

  50. [57]

    M. H. Al-Hashimi, A. M. Shalaby, Solution of the relativistic Schr¨ odinger equation for the δ′-function potential in one dimen- sion using cutoff regularization, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 025043. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.025043. 28

    2015 doi

  51. [58]

    Gadella, J

    M. Gadella, J. Negro, L. Nieto, Bound states and scattering coefficients of the−aδ(x) +bδ′(x) potential, Physics Letters A 373 (15) (2009) 1310–

    2009

  52. [59]

    Fassari, M

    S. Fassari, M. Gadella, M. Glasser, L. Nieto, Spectroscopy of a one- dimensional v-shaped quantum well with a point impurity, Annals of Physics 389 (2018) 48–62. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2017.12.006

    2018 doi

  53. [60]

    A. V. Zolotaryuk, G. P. Tsironis, Y. Zolotaryuk, Point inter- actions with bias potentials, Frontiers in Physics 7 (2019) 87. doi:10.3389/fphy.2019.00087

    2019

  54. [61]

    Lepage, How to renormalize the Schr¨ odinger equation, Nuclear Physics (ed

    G. Lepage, How to renormalize the Schr¨ odinger equation, Nuclear Physics (ed. by CA Bertulani et al.) (1997) 135

    1997

  55. [62]

    G. P. Lepage, What is renormalization?, arXiv preprint hep-ph/0506330

    arXiv

  56. [63]

    Weinberg, The quantum theory of fields, Cambridge University Press, 1995

    S. Weinberg, The quantum theory of fields, Cambridge University Press, 1995

    1995

  57. [64]

    Polchinski, Effective field theory and the Fermi surface, arXiv preprint hep-th/9210046

    J. Polchinski, Effective field theory and the Fermi surface, arXiv preprint hep-th/9210046

    arXiv

  58. [65]

    Polchinski, Renormalization and effective Lagrangians, Nuclear Physics B 231 (2) (1984) 269–295

    J. Polchinski, Renormalization and effective Lagrangians, Nuclear Physics B 231 (2) (1984) 269–295. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90287-6

    1984 doi

  59. [66]

    Van Kolck, Effective field theory of short-range forces, Nuclear Physics A 645 (2) (1999) 273–302

    U. Van Kolck, Effective field theory of short-range forces, Nuclear Physics A 645 (2) (1999) 273–302. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(98)00612-5

    1999 doi

  60. [67]

    P. F. Bedaque, H.-W. Hammer, U. van Kolck, Renormalization of the three-body system with short-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 463–467. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.463

    1999 doi

  61. [68]

    Ord´ o˜ nez, L

    C. Ord´ o˜ nez, L. Ray, U. van Kolck, Nucleon-nucleon potential from an effective chiral Lagrangian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994) 1982–1985. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.1982

    1994 doi

  62. [69]

    Coleman, E

    S. Coleman, E. Weinberg, Radiative corrections as the origin of spontaneous symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973) 1888–1910. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.1888

    1973 doi

  63. [70]

    Huang, Quarks, leptons & gauge fields, World Scientific, 1992

    K. Huang, Quarks, leptons & gauge fields, World Scientific, 1992

    1992

  64. [71]

    Stevenson, Dimensional analysis in field theory, Annals of Physics 132 (2) (1981) 383–403

    P. Stevenson, Dimensional analysis in field theory, Annals of Physics 132 (2) (1981) 383–403. doi:10.1016/0003-4916(81)90072-5

    1981 doi

  65. [72]

    Weinberg, Perturbative calculations of symmetry breaking, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Perturbative calculations of symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973) 2887–2910. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2887

    1973 doi

  66. [73]

    M. B. Einhorn, D. Jones, Scale fixing by dimensional transmutation: supersymmetric unified models and the renormalization group, Nuclear Physics B 211 (1) (1983) 29–54. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90184-0. 29

    1983 doi

  67. [74]

    H. E. Camblong, L. N. Epele, H. Fanchiotti, C. A. G. Canal, Dimen- sional transmutation and dimensional regularization in quantum me- chanics: I. general theory, Annals of Physics 287 (1) (2001) 14–56. doi:10.1006/aphy.2000.6092

    2001

  68. [75]

    H. E. Camblong, L. N. Epele, H. Fanchiotti, C. A. G. Canal, Dimen- sional transmutation and dimensional regularization in quantum mechan- ics: Ii. rotational invariance, Annals of Physics 287 (1) (2001) 57–100. doi:10.1006/aphy.2000.6093

    2001

  69. [76]

    W. Daza, J. E. Drut, C. Lin, C. Ord´ o˜ nez, Virial expansion for the tan con- tact and Beth-Uhlenbeck formula from two-dimensional SO(2,1) anoma- lies, Phys. Rev. A 97 (2018) 033630. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.97.033630

    2018 doi

  70. [77]

    Tan, Energetics of a strongly correlated Fermi gas, Annals of Physics 323 (12) (2008) 2952–2970

    S. Tan, Energetics of a strongly correlated Fermi gas, Annals of Physics 323 (12) (2008) 2952–2970. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2008.03.004

    2008 doi

  71. [78]

    Tan, Large momentum part of a strongly correlated Fermi gas, Annals of Physics 323 (12) (2008) 2971–2986

    S. Tan, Large momentum part of a strongly correlated Fermi gas, Annals of Physics 323 (12) (2008) 2971–2986. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2008.03.005

    2008 doi

  72. [79]

    Tan, Generalized virial theorem and pressure relation for a strongly correlated Fermi gas, Annals of Physics 323 (12) (2008) 2987–2990

    S. Tan, Generalized virial theorem and pressure relation for a strongly correlated Fermi gas, Annals of Physics 323 (12) (2008) 2987–2990. doi:10.1016/j.aop.2008.03.003

    2008 doi

  73. [80]

    Zhang, A

    S. Zhang, A. J. Leggett, Sum-rule analysis of radio-frequency spec- troscopy of ultracold Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A 77 (2008) 033614. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.77.033614

    2008 doi

  74. [81]

    Werner, Virial theorems for trapped cold atoms, Phys

    F. Werner, Virial theorems for trapped cold atoms, Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008) 025601. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.78.025601

    2008 doi

  75. [82]

    Langmack, M

    C. Langmack, M. Barth, W. Zwerger, E. Braaten, Clock shift in a strongly interacting two-dimensional Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 060402. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.060402

    2012 doi

  76. [83]

    C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Dilational symmetry-breaking in thermodynam- ics, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2017 (4) (2017) 043109. doi:10.1088/1742-5468/aa6b2d

    2017 doi

  77. [84]

    de Alfaro, S

    V. de Alfaro, S. Fubini, G. Furlan, Conformal invariance in quantum mechanics, Il Nuovo Cimento A (1965-1970) 34 (4) (1976) 569–612. doi:10.1007/BF02785666

    1976 doi

  78. [85]

    Jackiw, Introducing scale symmetry, Physics Today 25 (1) (1972) 23

    R. Jackiw, Introducing scale symmetry, Physics Today 25 (1) (1972) 23. doi:10.1063/1.3070673

    1972 doi

  79. [86]

    Jackiw, Dynamical symmetry of the magnetic monopole, Annals of Physics 129 (1) (1980) 183–200

    R. Jackiw, Dynamical symmetry of the magnetic monopole, Annals of Physics 129 (1) (1980) 183–200. doi:10.1016/0003-4916(80)90295-X

    1980 doi

  80. [87]

    Jackiw, Dynamical symmetry of the magnetic vortex, Annals of Physics 201 (1) (1990) 83–116

    R. Jackiw, Dynamical symmetry of the magnetic vortex, Annals of Physics 201 (1) (1990) 83–116. doi:10.1016/0003-4916(90)90354-Q. 30

    1990 doi

  81. [88]

    C. R. Hagen, Scale and conformal transformations in Galilean- covariant field theory, Phys. Rev. D 5 (1972) 377–388. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.5.377

    1972 doi

  82. [89]

    Niederer, The maximal kinematical invariance group of the free Schr¨ odinger equation, Helvetica Physica Acta 45 (1972) 802–810

    U. Niederer, The maximal kinematical invariance group of the free Schr¨ odinger equation, Helvetica Physica Acta 45 (1972) 802–810. doi:10.5169/seals-114417

    1972 doi

  83. [90]

    Niederer, The maximal kinematical invariance group of the free Schr¨ odinger equation, Helvetica Physica Acta 46 (1973) 191–200

    U. Niederer, The maximal kinematical invariance group of the free Schr¨ odinger equation, Helvetica Physica Acta 46 (1973) 191–200

    1973

  84. [91]

    Niederer, The connections between the Schr¨ odinger group and the con- formal group, Helvetica Physica Acta 47 (1974) 119–129

    U. Niederer, The connections between the Schr¨ odinger group and the con- formal group, Helvetica Physica Acta 47 (1974) 119–129

    1974

  85. [92]

    Niederer, The maximal kinematical invariance groups of Schr¨ odinger equations with arbitrary potentials, Helvetica Physica Acta 47 (1974) 167– 172

    U. Niederer, The maximal kinematical invariance groups of Schr¨ odinger equations with arbitrary potentials, Helvetica Physica Acta 47 (1974) 167– 172

    1974

  86. [93]

    Niederer, Schr¨ odinger invariant generalized heat equations, Helvetica Physica Acta 51 (1978) 220

    U. Niederer, Schr¨ odinger invariant generalized heat equations, Helvetica Physica Acta 51 (1978) 220

    1978

  87. [94]

    Nishida, D

    Y. Nishida, D. T. Son, Nonrelativistic conformal field theories, Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 086004. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.086004

    2007 doi

  88. [95]

    Bergman, Nonrelativistic field-theoretic scale anomaly, Phys

    O. Bergman, Nonrelativistic field-theoretic scale anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 5474–5478. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.5474

    1992 doi

  89. [96]

    G. N. J. A˜ na nos, H. E. Camblong, C. Gorrich´ ategui, E. Hern´ andez, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Anomalous commutator algebra for conformal quantum mechan- ics, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 045018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.045018

    2003 doi

  90. [97]

    G. N. J. A˜ na nos, H. E. Camblong, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, SO(2,1) conformal anomaly: Beyond contact interactions, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 025006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.025006

    2003 doi

  91. [98]

    H. E. Camblong, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Anomaly in conformal quantum me- chanics: From molecular physics to black holes, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 125013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.125013

    2003 doi

  92. [99]

    C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Path-integral Fujikawa’s approach to anomalous virial theorems and equations of state for systems with SO(2,1) symmetry, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 446 (2016) 64–74. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2015.11.019

    2016 doi

  93. [100]

    C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Path-integral derivation of the non- relativistic scale anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 085023. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.085023

    2015 doi

  94. [101]

    C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Bose and Fermi statistics and the regularization of the nonrelativistic Jacobian for the scale anomaly, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 085001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.085001. 31

    2016 doi

  95. [102]

    C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Path-integral approach to scale anomaly at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 085050. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.085050

    2015 doi

  96. [103]

    C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Virial theorem for nonrelativistic quantum fields in spatial dimensions, Advances in High Energy Physics 2015. doi:10.1155/2015/796275

    2015 doi

  97. [104]

    C. L. Lin, C. R. Ord´ o˜ nez, Relationship between Fujikawa’s method and the background field method for the scale anomaly, Advances in High Energy Physics 2016. doi:10.1155/2016/2809290

    2016 doi

  98. [105]

    D. S. Petrov, G. V. Shlyapnikov, Interatomic collisions in a tightly confined Bose gas, Phys. Rev. A 64 (2001) 012706. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.64.012706

    2001 doi

  99. [106]

    J. H. Eberly, Quantum scattering theory in one dimension, American Jour- nal of Physics 33 (10) (1965) 771–773. doi:10.1119/1.1970982

    1965 doi

  100. [108]

    Dong, Z.-Q

    S.-H. Dong, Z.-Q. Ma, Levinson’s theorem for the Schr¨ odinger equation in one dimension, International Journal of Theoretical Physics 39 (2) (2000) 469–481. doi:10.1023/A:1003604830131

    2000 doi

  101. [109]

    Sassoli de Bianchi, Levinson’s theorem, zero-energy resonances, and time delay in one-dimensional scattering systems, Journal of Mathematical Physics 35 (6) (1994) 2719–2733

    M. Sassoli de Bianchi, Levinson’s theorem, zero-energy resonances, and time delay in one-dimensional scattering systems, Journal of Mathematical Physics 35 (6) (1994) 2719–2733. doi:10.1063/1.530481

    1994 doi

  102. [110]

    Barton, Levinson’s theorem in one dimension: heuristics, Jour- nal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 18 (3) (1985) 479

    G. Barton, Levinson’s theorem in one dimension: heuristics, Jour- nal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 18 (3) (1985) 479. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/18/3/023

    1985 doi

  103. [111]

    Lin, Friedel theorem for one dimensional relativistic spin-1/2 systems, The European Physical Journal D-Atomic, Molecular, Optical and Plasma Physics 38 (2) (2006) 307–313

    D.-H. Lin, Friedel theorem for one dimensional relativistic spin-1/2 systems, The European Physical Journal D-Atomic, Molecular, Optical and Plasma Physics 38 (2) (2006) 307–313. doi:10.1140/epjd/e2006-00053-y

    2006 doi

  104. [112]

    Zwerger, Strongly interacting Fermi gases, Quantum Matter at Ul- tralow Temperatures 191 (2016) 63–142

    W. Zwerger, Strongly interacting Fermi gases, Quantum Matter at Ul- tralow Temperatures 191 (2016) 63–142

    2016

  105. [113]

    Huang, Introduction to statistical physics, CRC press, 2009

    K. Huang, Introduction to statistical physics, CRC press, 2009

    2009

  106. [114]

    Amaya-Tapia, S

    A. Amaya-Tapia, S. Y. Larsen, M. Lassaut, Second virial coefficient in one dimension as a function of asymptotic quantities, Molecular Physics 103 (9) (2006) 1301–1306. 32

    2006

  107. [115]

    C. R. Shill, J. E. Drut, Virial coefficients of one-dimensional and two-dimensional Fermi gases by stochastic methods and a semi- classical lattice approximation, Phys. Rev. A 98 (2018) 053615. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.98.053615

    2018 doi

  108. [116]

    Valiente, N

    M. Valiente, N. T. Zinner, K. Mølmer, Universal relations for the two- dimensional spin-1/2 Fermi gas with contact interactions, Phys. Rev. A 84 (2011) 063626. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.84.063626

    2011 doi

  109. [117]

    Valiente, N

    M. Valiente, N. T. Zinner, K. Mølmer, Universal properties of Fermi gases in arbitrary dimensions, Phys. Rev. A 86 (2012) 043616. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.86.043616

    2012 doi

  110. [118]

    Werner, Y

    F. Werner, Y. Castin, General relations for quantum gases in two and three dimensions: Two-component fermions, Phys. Rev. A 86 (2012) 013626. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.86.013626

    2012 doi

  111. [119]

    Braaten, Universal relations for fermions with large scattering length, in: W

    E. Braaten, Universal relations for fermions with large scattering length, in: W. Zwerger (Ed.), The BCS-BEC Crossover and the Unitary Fermi Gas, Springer, 2011, Ch. 6, pp. 193–230

    2011

  112. [120]

    X. J. Liu, Virial expansion for a strongly correlated Fermi system and its application to ultracold atomic Fermi gases, Physics Reports 524 (2) (2013) 37–83. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.10.004. 33

    2013 doi

  113. [1313]

    doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2009.02.025

    2009 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.