A Lee-Huang-Yang type expansion for the thermodynamic energy density of a dilute mixture of Bose gases

Marco Olivieri

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 52 references

A Lee-Huang-Yang type expansion for the thermodynamic energy density of a dilute mixture of Bose gases

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A dilute two-species Bose gas is proved to have a universal second-order energy density that depends only on the three scattering lengths and matches the two-component Lee-Huang-Yang formula.

desk verdict The upper-bound machinery is real, but the advertised LHY constant for soft potentials rests on an impossible combination of assumptions; the main theorem's η>0 branch is vacuous. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.15976 v2 pith:GSUSEG6Y submitted 2025-05-21 math-ph math.APmath.MPmath.SP

Marco Olivieri This is my paper · ORCID

classification math-phmath.APmath.MPmath.SP MSC 81V7082B1082D50

keywords BosegasmixtureLee-Huang-YangformulathermodynamiclimitscatteringlengthBogoliubovtransformationBose-Einsteincondensationsoftpotentialsdilute

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 proves a second-order expansion for the energy per volume of a dilute three-dimensional gas made of two species of repelling bosons. For compactly supported integrable potentials it fixes the order of the correction, $O((\rho\bar a)^{5/2})$; under the extra softness conditions it fixes the universal coefficient and matches the physics formula (1.5), with error $C(\rho\bar a)^{5/2}(\rho\bar a^3)^\eta$. If the theorem is right, a dilute mixture's energy is universal to this order and the one-species Lee-Huang-Yang law is recovered when the second species is removed. The paper also proves Bose-Einstein condensation for both components in boxes larger than the Gross-Pitaevskii healing length.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the two-species Bogoliubov transformation: a real symmetric $2\times2$ matrix $S_p$ generates operators $d_k=c_k+\beta_k c^*_{-k}$ that diagonalize the quadratic Hamiltonian into a positive part $K_{\mathrm{diag}}$ plus an explicit sum $S$ whose large-box limit is the Lee-Huang-Yang integral. For the lower bound, the mechanism is the combination of Neumann localization, the renormalization identity $v=g+v\omega$ with $g=v(1-\omega)$, and the extraction of soft pairs in Proposition 9.2, which uses the excess of the diagonal Hamiltonian and the spectral gap to absorb the negative error $E_\omega$ coming from the interspecies renormalization. The decisive smallness condition is $K_\ell^2 K_z \delta_{AB}\bar a^{-1}\le(1000C)^{-1}$, ensuring that the interspecies potential is soft enough for the correct Lee-Huang-Yang coefficient to survive.

What would settle it

Compute the ground-state energy density for a family of soft potentials $v_R(x)=R^{-3}v_1(|x|/R)$ with $R=\bar a(\rho\bar a^3)^{-\eta}$ and two comparable species densities, and check whether the difference from (1.5) is bounded by $C(\rho\bar a)^{5/2}(\rho\bar a^3)^\eta$ as $\rho\bar a^3\to0$. A more targeted check is to saturate condition (3.4) by taking $v_{AB}=\lambda v_R$ with $\lambda=(\rho\bar a^3)^{\eta+\nu}$; the proof predicts the error term (9.44) is still absorbed, so any exact calculation showing a different second-order coefficient in that regime would refute the theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that for repulsive, compactly supported, non-increasing potentials satisfying the miscibility bound $a_{AB}^2\le a_A a_B$ and the softness estimates (1.26), the thermodynamic limit of $E_{N_A,N_B}/L^3$ is $E_{\mathrm{main}}+E_{\mathrm{LHY}}$ plus a controlled error, where $E_{\mathrm{main}}+E_{\mathrm{LHY}}$ is exactly the physics formula (1.5). The upper bound is obtained by a quasi-free trial state adapted to two species and by minimizing a two-species Bogoliubov functional with explicit minimizers. The lower bound is obtained by localizing to boxes of size $\ell=K_\ell(\rho\bar a)^{-1/2}$, renormalizing the potentials through the scattering equation, and controlling the cubic terms with a soft-pair extraction. The result establishes universality of the second-order energy for dilute bosonic mixtures and recovers the one-species Lee-Huang-Yang constant as a limiting case.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the interspecies potential is soft enough that its low-momentum renormalization error can be made small relative to the density, with precise smallness fixed by condition (3.4); the lower-bound proof also assumes the potentials are non-increasing, which the author expects to be a removable technical crutch.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the theorem is correct, the thermodynamic energy density of a dilute, miscible two-species Bose gas is universal through order $\rho^{5/2}$, depending only on $a_A$, $a_B$, and $a_{AB}$.
Taking $\rho_B,a_B,a_{AB}\to0$ recovers the one-species Lee-Huang-Yang formula with the standard $128/(15\sqrt\pi)$ coefficient.
For soft interspecies potentials, both components exhibit Bose-Einstein condensation, with the excited fraction bounded by $(\rho\bar a^3)^{1/17-1/500}$.
The explicit minimizers of the two-species Bogoliubov functional provide ready-made trial states for upper-bound computations in related dilute-gas problems.
The localization scheme used for the lower bound gives a route toward the same expansion for general integrable potentials and eventually hard-core interactions.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the upper bound needs only the uniform softness $\delta\le C\bar a(\rho\bar a^3)^\eta$ while the lower bound uses the stricter interspecies condition $\delta_{AB}\le C\bar a(\rho\bar a^3)^{4\eta+\nu}$, a natural next step is to try to relax condition (3.4) to the uniform bound, widening the class of admissible interspecies potentials.
The author's Remark A.2 identifies the diagonalization of the scattering-length matrix as the only structural obstacle, so the same expansion is plausibly within reach for mixtures of $M>2$ species without a closed-form eigenvalue formula.
A concrete test of the universality claim would be to compare (1.5) with numerical ground-state energies for ultracold two-species bosonic mixtures in a box at small $\rho\bar a^3$; the theorem predicts agreement at order $\rho^{5/2}$ whenever the miscibility and softness conditions hold.
The proof's upper-bound strategy relies on quasi-free states, so removing the softness condition is likely to be easier for the upper bound than for the lower bound, where the cubic-term estimates are the bottleneck.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the paper is not quite what it claims to be. The two-species Bogoliubov machinery and the upper bound are genuine, but the lower bound for the LHY coefficient in the soft-potential case is vacuous. The stress-test note is correct: condition (1.26) with η>0 cannot be satisfied together with Assumption 1.2.

Why: for any admissible v_AB, the scattering solution gives ω_AB=1−φ_AB superharmonic with boundary value a_AB/R_AB on the support, so ω_AB ≥ a_AB/R_AB inside. Hence δ_AB = ∫v_AB ω_AB ≥ (a_AB/R_AB)∫v_AB ≥ 8π a_AB^2/R_AB. With a_AB ≥ \bar a/C_a and R_AB ≤ R ≤ C_R \bar a(ρ\bar a^3)^{−η}, this gives δ_AB/\bar a ≥ c(ρ\bar a^3)^η. But (1.26) demands δ_AB/\bar a ≤ C(ρ\bar a^3)^{4η+ν} for η>0. Since 4η+ν > η, the two bounds contradict for small ρ\bar a^3. The example in Remark 1.6 has the same problem: scaling v_AB = λv_R with λ = x^{η+ν}, R ~ x^{−η}\bar a gives δ_AB/\bar a ~ x^{2η+ν}, which is larger, not smaller, than x^{4η+ν}. So no admissible potential exists for which the LHY-constant lower bound is proven.

What is genuinely new and good: the two-species Bogoliubov transformation, the explicit minimizers (2.14), the upper bound Theorem 2.1 with the correct LHY coefficient under a satisfiable softness condition, the BEC estimate in the GP-like regime, and the Neumann localization and symmetrization toolkit. These are real and will be useful. The integrable-potential result (η=0) is honest: it gives the main order and an error of the same magnitude as the LHY term, so it does not extract the constant. The paper is long and I have not line-by-line checked Appendices C–F, but the proof structure is coherent. The flaw is not sloppiness in estimates; it is a genuinely inconsistent set of assumptions.

Recommendation: send it to a serious referee, because the upper-bound part and the technical machinery deserve scrutiny and could be salvaged. But the current version overclaims: the central theorem's soft-potential case is empty. The author should either remove the claim, weaken the conclusion, or find a different condition on δ_AB compatible with the support bound. As written, I would not accept it.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the ground state energy density of a dilute three-dimensional mixture of two species of repulsive bosons. It claims an upper and lower bound yielding an expansion of the form e3D(ρA, ρB) = 4π(ρA²aA + 2ρAρBaAB + ρB²aB) + ELHY + error, where ELHY is the two-species Lee-Huang-Yang correction. The main theorem, Theorem 1.4, states this expansion with error C(ρᾱ)^{5/2}(ρᾱ³)^η under Assumption 1.2 and the smallness conditions (1.26). For η = 0 only a main-order bound is obtained, while for η > 0 the paper claims to extract the correct LHY constant, with a separate corollary for soft potentials. The proof follows the recent strategy of Fournais et al.: a quasi-free upper bound with an explicit two-species Bogoliubov transformation, and a lower bound based on Neumann localization, renormalization of the potentials, c-number substitution, and control of cubic terms via spectral gaps and soft pairs. The paper also proves a Bose-Einstein condensation estimate and a Neumann localization lemma for mixtures.

Significance. If the main theorem were correct, this would be a major step: a rigorous derivation of the universal two-species Lee-Huang-Yang formula depending only on the three scattering lengths, extending the one-species results in [2,18,19,53]. The paper contains substantial and useful technical contributions: an explicit diagonalization of the two-species Bogoliubov Hamiltonian, a self-contained derivation of the Bogoliubov integral, a condensation estimate in the local boxes, and a Neumann localization argument for mixtures. The derivation is not circular: the LHY constant is obtained by evaluating an integral, not by fitting, and the one-species limit is recovered as a consistency check. However, the central claim for the soft-potential regime is undermined by an inconsistency in the assumptions: the stated condition on δAB for η > 0 cannot be satisfied by any potential satisfying the other assumptions. As a result, the regime in which the correct LHY constant is claimed is empty, and the only non-vacuous statement is the main-order bound of Corollary 1.5(1.35).

major comments (3)

[§1.2, Eq. (1.26), with (1.18) and (1.20)] The soft-potential regime η > 0 of Theorem 1.4 is vacuous. Let ωAB = 1 − φAB be the scattering solution for vAB. Since −ΔωAB = gAB/2 ≥ 0, ωAB is superharmonic; by Newton's theorem ωAB = aAB/|x| for |x| ≥ RAB, so ωAB = aAB/RAB on ∂BRAB. The minimum principle for superharmonic functions gives ωAB ≥ aAB/RAB on supp vAB. Therefore δAB = ∫ vAB ωAB ≥ (aAB/RAB)∫ vAB ≥ 8π aAB²/RAB, using ∫gAB = 8πaAB ≤ ∫vAB. With RAB ≤ R ≤ CR ᾱ (ρᾱ³)^{-η} from (1.20) and aAB ≥ ᾱ/Ca from (1.18), we get δAB/ᾱ ≥ c (ρᾱ³)^η. But (1.26) for η > 0 requires δAB/ᾱ ≤ C (ρᾱ³)^{4η+ν}. Since 4η + ν > η, these inequalities contradict each other for sufficiently small ρᾱ³. Hence no potential satisfying Assumption 1.2 can satisfy (1.26) with η > 0. The proposed example in Remark 1.6, vAB = λvR with λ = (ρᾱ³)^{η+ν}, does not rescue the regime: for small λ one has aAB ≈ λaR, which violates (1.18) unless the intra-species potentials are scaled by the same λ, and in that case the universal lower bound above still gives δAB/ᾱ ≥ c(ρᾱ³)^η, incompatible with the stronger power (ρᾱ³)^{4η+ν}.
[§3, Eq. (3.4), and §9, Eq. (9.10)] The impossibility of (1.26) for η > 0 is exactly the condition used in the lower bound. Theorem 3.1 assumes Kℓ² Kz δAB ᾱ^{-1} ≤ (1000C)^{-1} for η ≠ 0, and Proposition 9.2 uses the same condition as (9.10). Substituting Kℓ = (ρᾱ³)^{-2η} and Kz = (ρᾱ³)^{-ν}, this is equivalent to δAB ≤ Cᾱ(ρᾱ³)^{4η+ν}, i.e. precisely the unsatisfiable part of (1.26). This condition is needed in the proof of Proposition 9.2 to control the negative quadratic term Eω appearing in (9.42)–(9.44); without it, the error cannot be absorbed into the spectral gap and the LHY constant cannot be extracted. Thus the lower-bound derivation of IAB has no admissible input in the η > 0 case.
[§1.2, Corollary 1.5, and Theorem 1.4 for η = 0] In the only non-vacuous case η = 0, the claimed theorem does not actually extract the LHY constant. The error in (1.27) is C(ρᾱ)^{5/2}, while ELHY = (ρA²aA² + 2ρAρBaAB² + ρB²aB²)^{5/4} IAB is also of order (ρᾱ)^{5/2}. Consequently the error term is of the same order as the LHY correction, and Corollary 1.5(1.35) reduces to the main-order bound |e3D − 4π(...)| ≤ C(ρᾱ)^{5/2}, with no information on the coefficient of the (ρᾱ)^{5/2} term. The text acknowledges that “in this case ELHY is of the same order of the error term,” but this means the paper's central claim—the rigorous derivation of the two-species LHY constant—is only asserted in the empty η > 0 regime.

minor comments (4)

[§1.2, Remark 1.6, Eq. (1.42)] The inequality (1.42) appears dimensionally inconsistent: the right-hand side Cρᾱ(ρᾱ³)^{2η+ν} has dimension length^{-2}, whereas δAB has dimension length. If the intended bound was Cᾱ(ρᾱ³)^{2η+ν}, the notation should be corrected; as written the displayed estimate cannot be right.
[§2, just before Eq. (2.1)] There is a typo: “thermodyanic box” should be “thermodynamic box”.
[References, [29]] Reference [29] is listed as “Ground state energy of the dilute spin-polarized Fermi gas: Lower bound, 2024. ArXiv:2402.17558,” but the same arXiv number appears for reference [6] (Brooks et al.). Please verify the correct identifier.
[Lemma 2.3, Eq. (2.20)–(2.21)] In the display for L2^(0) there is an extra parenthesis: “ρB,0bvB(0))γBB_p” should presumably read “ρB,0bvB(0)γBB_p”.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the LHY-type coefficient is obtained by explicit evaluation of a Bogoliubov momentum integral, not fitted, assumed, or imported from the target formula.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained with respect to the claimed energy expansion. The upper bound (Theorem 2.1) constructs an explicit quasi-free trial state, diagonalizes the two-species Bogoliubov Hamiltonian, and the LHY-type constant emerges from Lemma B.1, where the integral of G(k^2, λ±) is evaluated in closed form in terms of the scattering lengths; this computation does not presuppose formula (1.5). The lower bound (Theorem 3.1) proceeds through localization, renormalization (Lemma 4.1), symmetrization, c-number substitution, and spectral-gap estimates, and again the LHY term is produced by the same Bogoliubov integral, with the softness conditions (1.26) and (3.4) used only to control error terms, not to fix the coefficient. The self-citations, mainly [15], [16], [17], and [24], supply technical tools such as symmetrization estimates, gap extraction, and localization arguments; the central one-species limit in Remark 1.7 is a consistency check against the known LHY formula, not an input. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness or ansatz is imported from the author's prior work to force the result. The skeptic's concern that the δ_AB condition (1.26)/(3.4) may be incompatible with the support bound (1.20) for η > 0 is a potential vacuity/correctness objection, not a circularity, and does not change the circularity assessment.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proofs introduce no physical free parameters. The technical parameters (Kℓ, KH, Kz, M, μA, μB) are auxiliary; their choice does not affect the final constants. All physical assumptions are explicitly listed in Assumption 1.2 and Theorem 1.4.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption Potentials are repulsive, spherically symmetric, L1, compactly supported, and non-increasing (Assumption 1.2, eqs. 1.14-1.15).
Used throughout the proof; the non-increasing condition is essential for Lemma 6.2, the symmetrization lower bound.
domain assumption Miscibility condition a_AB^2 ≤ a_A a_B (1.16).
Guarantees ξ_AB ∈ [0,1] and the convexity of the quadratic form; needed for the LHY formula and for the convexity argument in Appendix F.
domain assumption Comparability of scattering lengths: \bar a ≤ C_a a (1.18).
Used in many estimates, including Appendix E around (E.15) and Lemma 2.7.
domain assumption Softness conditions (1.26) or (1.34).
Needed to obtain the correct LHY constant; for the lower bound only softness of the AB potential is used (condition (3.4)).
standard math Scattering theory: properties of the scattering length and the equation -Δφ + (1/2)vφ = 0 with φ = 1 - a/|x| outside the support.
Standard; used to define g = vφ and to renormalize the potentials.
standard math Bogoliubov diagonalization of the 2x2 matrix in Lemma A.1.
Used to compute the Bogoliubov sum; the eigenvalues λ± are derived exactly.
standard math Dyson's lemma and Temple's inequality, used in Appendix D for the condensation estimate.
Standard tools for dilute Bose gas lower bounds.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Lee-Huang-Yang type expansion for the thermodynamic energy density of a dilute mixture of Bose gases." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GSUSEG6Y

@misc{pith2026250515976,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Lee-Huang-Yang type expansion for the thermodynamic energy density of a dilute mixture of Bose gases},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GSUSEG6Y}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.15976}
}

read the original abstract

We consider a dilute gas in 3D composed of two species of bosons interacting through positive inter-species and intra-species pairwise potentials. We prove a second order expansion for the energy density in the thermodynamic limit. For the case of compactly supported, integrable potentials, we derive the correct second order of the expansion. If we make the further assumption of having soft potentials, we also derive the correct coefficient of the second order and the resulting formula is coherent with the physics literature. If we let the density and scattering length of one of the species go to zero, we obtain the Lee-Huang-Yang formula for one species of bosons. The paper also contains a proof of BEC for a mixture of bosons in a box with length scale larger than the Gross-Pitaevskii one.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

[1]

Anapolitanos, M

I. Anapolitanos, M. Hott, and D. Hundertmark. Derivation of the Hartree equation for compound Bose gases in the mean field limit. Reviews in Mathematical Physics , 29(07):1750022, 2017. 61

work page 2017
[2]

Basti, S

G. Basti, S. Cenatiempo, and B. Schlein. A new second-order upper bound for the ground state energy of dilute Bose gases. Forum of Mathematics, Sigma , 9:e74, 2021

work page 2021
[3]

N. N. Bogolyubov. On the theory of superfluidity. Journal of Physics (USSR) , 11:77– 90, 1947

work page 1947
[4]

Brietzke

B. Brietzke. On the second order correction to the ground state energy of the dilute Bose gas : PhD thesis., 2017

work page 2017
[5]

Brietzke and J

B. Brietzke and J. P. Solovej. The Second-Order Correction to the Ground State Energy of the Dilute Bose Gas. Annales Henri Poincar´ e, 21(2):571–626, 2020

work page 2020
[7]

Caraci, A

C. Caraci, A. Olgiati, D. Saint Aubin, and B. Schlein. Third order corrections to the ground state energy of a Bose gas in the Gross-Pitaevskii regime, 2023. ArXiv:2311.07433

arXiv 2023
[8]

Chong, J

J. Chong, J. Lee, and Z. Sun. Quantitative Derivation of the Two- Component Gross-Pitaevskii Equation with Uniform-in-Time Convergence Rate,

work page
[9]

De Oliveira and A

G. De Oliveira and A. Michelangeli. Mean-field dynamics for mixture condensates via Fock space methods. Reviews in Mathematical Physics , 31(08):1950027, 2019

work page 2019

Show all 52 references

[10]

Dimonte, M

D. Dimonte, M. Falconi, and A. Olgiati. On some rigorous aspects of fragmented condensation. Nonlinearity, 34(1):1, 2020

2020
[11]

F. J. Dyson. Ground-state energy of a hard-sphere gas. Physical Review, 106(1):20–26, 1957

1957
[12]

Erd˝ os, B

L. Erd˝ os, B. Schlein, and H. Yau. Ground-state energy of a low-density Bose gas: A second-order upper bound. Physical Review A , 78(5), 2008

2008
[13]

B. D. Esry, C. H. Greene, J. P. Burke, and J. L. Bohn. Hartree-Fock Theory for Double Condensates. Physical Review Letters, 78:3594–3597, 1997

1997
[14]

Falconi, E

M. Falconi, E. L. Giacomelli, C. Hainzl, and M. Porta. The Dilute Fermi Gas via Bogoliubov Theory. Annales Henri Poincar´ e, 22(12):2283–2353, 2021

2021
[15]

Fournais, T

S. Fournais, T. Girardot, L. Junge, L. Morin, and M. Olivieri. The Ground State Energy of a Two-Dimensional Bose Gas. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 405(3):59, 2024

2024
[16]

Fournais, T

S. Fournais, T. Girardot, L. Junge, L. Morin, and M. Olivieri. Lower bounds on the energy of the Bose gas. Reviews in Mathematical Physics , 36(09):2360004, 2024

2024
[17]

Fournais, T

S. Fournais, T. Girardot, L. Junge, L. Morin, M. Olivieri, and A. Triay. The free energy of dilute Bose gases at low temperatures interacting via strong potentials,
[18]

Fournais and J

S. Fournais and J. P. Solovej. The energy of dilute Bose gases.Annals of Mathematics, 192(3):893 – 976, 2020. 62

2020
[19]

Fournais and J

S. Fournais and J. P. Solovej. The energy of dilute Bose gases. II: The general case. Inventiones Mathematicae, 232(2):863–994, 2023

2023
[20]

E. L. Giacomelli. An optimal upper bound for the dilute Fermi gas in three dimensions. Journal of Functional Analysis , 285(8):110073, 2023

2023
[21]

E. L. Giacomelli. An optimal lower bound for the low density Fermi gas in three dimensions, 2024. ArXiv:2410.08904

2024
[22]

R. A. Guyer and M. D. Miller. Magnetic ordering in a normal Fermi liquid. II. Strongly polarized systems and the melting curve of 3He. Physical Review B , 21:3917–3928, 1980

1980
[23]

Haberberger, C

F. Haberberger, C. Hainzl, P. T. Nam, R. Seiringer, and A. Triay. The free energy of dilute Bose gases at low temperatures, 2023. ArXiv:2304.02405

2023 arXiv
[24]

Haberberger, C

F. Haberberger, C. Hainzl, B. Schlein, and A. Triay. Upper bound for the free energy of dilute bose gases at low temperature, 2024. ArXiv:2405.03378

2024 arXiv
[25]

D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, J. R. Ensher, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell. Dynamics of component separation in a binary mixture of bose-einstein condensates. Physical Review Letters, 81:1539–1542, Aug 1998

1998
[26]

D. S. Hall, M. R. Matthews, C. E. Wieman, and E. A. Cornell. Measurements of Relative Phase in Two-Component Bose-Einstein Condensates. Physical Review Letters, 81:1543–1546, 1998

1998
[27]

D. M. Larsen. Binary Mixtures of Dilute Bose Gases with Repulsive Interactions at Low Temperature. Annals of Physics , 24:89–101, 1963

1963
[28]

A. B. Lauritsen. Almost Optimal Upper Bound for the Ground State Energy of a Dilute Fermi Gas via Cluster Expansion. Annales Henri Poincar´ e, 26:203–243, 2025

2025
[29]

A. B. Lauritsen and R. Seiringer. Ground state energy of the dilute spin-polarized Fermi gas: Lower bound, 2024. ArXiv:2402.17558

2024 arXiv
[30]

A. B. Lauritsen and R. Seiringer. Ground state energy of the dilute spin-polarized Fermi gas: Upper bound via cluster expansion. Journal of Functional Analysis , 286(7):110320, 2024

2024
[31]

Lee and A

J. Lee and A. Michelangeli. On the characterisation of fragmented bose–einstein condensation and its emergent effective evolution. Nonlinearity, 36(12):6364, 2023

2023
[32]

T. D. Lee, K. Huang, and C. N. Yang. Eigenvalues and Eigenfunctions of a Bose System of Hard Spheres and Its Low-Temperature Properties. Physical Reviews , 106(6):1135–1145, 1957

1957
[33]

E. H. Lieb, R. Seiringer, and J. P. Solovej. Ground-state energy of the low-density Fermi gas. Physical Review A , 71:053605, 2005

2005
[34]

E. H. Lieb, J. P. Solovej, R. Seiringer, and J. Yngvason. The Mathematics of the Bose Gas and its Condensation . Oberwolfach Seminars. Birkh¨ auser Basel, 2005

2005
[35]

E. H. Lieb and J. Yngvason. Ground State Energy of the Low Density Bose Gas. Physical Review Letters, 80(12):2504–2507, 1998. 63

1998
[36]

M. W. Mancini, G. D. Telles, A. R. L. Caires, V. S. Bagnato, and L. G. Marcassa. Ob- servation of ultracold ground-state heteronuclear molecules. Physical Review Letters, 92:133203, 2004

2004
[37]

Matthews, D

M. Matthews, D. Hall, D. Jin, J. Ensher, C. Wieman, E. Cornell, F. Dalfovo, C. Min- niti, and S. Stringari. Dynamical Response of a Bose-Einstein Condensate to a Dis- continuous Change in Internal State. Physical Review Letters, (81), 1998

1998
[38]

Michelangeli, P

A. Michelangeli, P. T. Nam, and A. Olgiati. Ground state energy of mixture of Bose gases. Reviews in Mathematical Physics , 31(02):1950005, 2019

2019
[39]

Michelangeli and A

A. Michelangeli and A. Olgiati. Mean-field quantum dynamics for a mixture of Bose–Einstein condensates. Analysis and Mathematical Physics , 7(4):377–416, 2017

2017
[40]

M. D. Miller. The ground state of binary boson mixtures. Annals of Physics , 127(2):367–412, 1980

1980
[41]

Modugno, G

G. Modugno, G. Ferrari, G. Roati, R. J. Brecha, A. Simoni, and M. Inguscio. Bose-Einstein Condensation of Potassium Atoms by Sympathetic Cooling. Science, 294(5545):1320–1322, 2001

2001
[42]

Modugno, M

G. Modugno, M. Modugno, F. Riboli, G. Roati, and M. Inguscio. Two Atomic Species Superfluid. Physical Review Letters, 89:190404, 2002

2002
[43]

Modugno, F

M. Modugno, F. Ferlaino, F. Riboli, G. Roati, G. Modugno, and M. Inguscio. Mean- field analysis of the stability of a K-Rb Fermi-Bose mixture. Physical Review A , 68:043626, 2003

2003
[44]

C. J. Myatt, E. A. Burt, R. W. Ghrist, E. A. Cornell, and C. E. Wieman. Production of two overlapping bose-einstein condensates by sympathetic cooling. Physical Review Letters, 78:586–589, 1997

1997
[45]

Ole´ s and K

B. Ole´ s and K. Sacha. N-conserving Bogoliubov vacuum of a two-component Bose–Einstein condensate: density fluctuations close to a phase-separation condition. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , 41:145005, 2008

2008
[46]

A. Olgiati. Effective Non-linear Dynamics of Binary Condensates and Open Problems, pages 239–256. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017

2017
[47]

S. B. Papp and C. E. Wieman. Observation of heteronuclear feshbach molecules from a 85Rb − −87Rb gas. Physical Review Letters, 97:180404, 2006

2006
[48]

D. S. Petrov. Quantum Mechanical Stabilization of a Collapsing Bose-Bose Mixture. Physical Review Letters, 115:155302, 2015

2015
[49]

L. P. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari. Bose-Einstein condensation and superfluidity . In- ternational Series of Monographs on Physics, 164. Oxford University Press, 2016

2016
[50]

J. P. Solovej. Many body quantum mechanics, 2007. https://web.math.ku.dk/ solovej/MANYBODY/mbnotes-ptn-5-3-14.pdf

2007
[51]

G. Temple. The theory of Rayleigh’s principle as applied to continuous systems. Proceeding of the Royal Society A11 , page 9276–293, 1928. 64

1928
[52]

T. T. Wu. Ground State of a Bose System of Hard Spheres. Physical Reviews , 115:1390–1404, 1959

1959
[53]

Yau and J

H. Yau and J. Yin. The Second Order Upper Bound for the Ground Energy of a Bose Gas. Journal of Statistical Physics , 136(3):453–503, 2009. 65

2009

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Anapolitanos, M

I. Anapolitanos, M. Hott, and D. Hundertmark. Derivation of the Hartree equation for compound Bose gases in the mean field limit. Reviews in Mathematical Physics , 29(07):1750022, 2017. 61

work page 2017

[2] [2]

Basti, S

G. Basti, S. Cenatiempo, and B. Schlein. A new second-order upper bound for the ground state energy of dilute Bose gases. Forum of Mathematics, Sigma , 9:e74, 2021

work page 2021

[3] [3]

N. N. Bogolyubov. On the theory of superfluidity. Journal of Physics (USSR) , 11:77– 90, 1947

work page 1947

[4] [4]

Brietzke

B. Brietzke. On the second order correction to the ground state energy of the dilute Bose gas : PhD thesis., 2017

work page 2017

[5] [5]

Brietzke and J

B. Brietzke and J. P. Solovej. The Second-Order Correction to the Ground State Energy of the Dilute Bose Gas. Annales Henri Poincar´ e, 21(2):571–626, 2020

work page 2020

[6] [7]

Caraci, A

C. Caraci, A. Olgiati, D. Saint Aubin, and B. Schlein. Third order corrections to the ground state energy of a Bose gas in the Gross-Pitaevskii regime, 2023. ArXiv:2311.07433

arXiv 2023

[7] [8]

Chong, J

J. Chong, J. Lee, and Z. Sun. Quantitative Derivation of the Two- Component Gross-Pitaevskii Equation with Uniform-in-Time Convergence Rate,

work page

[8] [9]

De Oliveira and A

G. De Oliveira and A. Michelangeli. Mean-field dynamics for mixture condensates via Fock space methods. Reviews in Mathematical Physics , 31(08):1950027, 2019

work page 2019