Monte Carlo approach to quantum work in strongly correlated electron systems

Jian-Jun Dong; Qian-Xi Zhao; Zi-Xiang Hu

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Monte Carlo approach to quantum work in strongly correlated electron systems

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

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

Pith's one-line read A Monte Carlo approach computes the quantum work distribution in a strongly correlated electron system, and its cumulants carry a clear signature of the metal–insulator phase transition.

desk verdict Useful first DQMC calculation of work statistics for a correlated lattice model, but the 'singularity' claim sits on finite-size data with no error bars or scaling. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.16758 v1 pith:44DI7PNP submitted 2025-05-22 cond-mat.stat-mech

Qian-Xi Zhao , Jian-Jun Dong , Zi-Xiang Hu This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.stat-mech PACS 02.70.Uu05.30.-d71.30.+h75.20.Hr

keywords quantumworkmomentgeneratingfunctiondeterminantMonteCarloIsing-Kondolatticemetal-insulatortransitionheavyfermionsnonequilibriumthermodynamics

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 develops a Monte Carlo method for computing the full moment generating function of quantum work in a strongly correlated electron system, and applies it to the Ising-Kondo lattice model. Its central claim is that, at low temperature, the mean irreversible work density and the first three cumulants of the work distribution display sharp features—cusps or steepest slopes—exactly at the metal–insulator phase transition, whereas at high temperature, where that transition becomes a smooth crossover, all such features vanish. If correct, quantum work statistics would provide a nonequilibrium thermodynamic probe of phase transitions in heavy-fermion systems, complementing equilibrium measurements. The method matters because previous calculations of work statistics were limited to single-particle, non-interacting, integrable, or one-dimensional systems.

What carries the argument

The central object is the moment generating function of quantum work, $G(R)=\langle e^{RW}\rangle$, whose derivatives at $R=0$ give the work cumulants. Because the $f$-electron spin at each site commutes with the Hamiltonian, the functional-field-integral representation reduces the trace in $G(R)$ to a sum over classical spin configurations of a determinant $\det[I+B]$, where for a sudden quench $B=e^{RA(s,J_1)}e^{-(\beta+R)A(s,J_0)}$. The Monte Carlo algorithm samples configurations with probability $P(\{s_j\})\propto e^{-Q(\{s_j\},0)}$ and evaluates $G(R)$ as a reweighted average of $e^{-[Q(R)-Q(0)]}$. That determinant evaluation is what makes the full work distribution accessible for a strongly correlated electron system.

What would settle it

Repeat the $T=0.2$ quench statistics with $\delta=0.05$ on lattices $L=8,12,16,24,32$ and track the cusp in $\langle w_{\mathrm{irr}}\rangle$ and $u_2$ plus the peak of $du_1/dJ_0$; if the peak height does not grow and its location does not converge to the equilibrium phase boundary from the Ising-Kondo phase diagram as $L$ increases, the claimed singularities are finite-size artifacts.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the work statistics of a sudden quench of the Kondo coupling $J$ in the Ising-Kondo lattice model contain a clear thermodynamic signature of the metal–insulator transition. At temperature $T=0.2$, the mean irreversible work density $\langle w_{\mathrm{irr}}\rangle$ and the scaled variance $u_2$ show a cusp at the phase boundary between the correlated metal and the antiferromagnetic insulator, while the scaled mean work density $u_1$ and the third cumulant $u_3$ show their steepest slope there. At $T=0.4$, the transition is a smooth crossover and the singular features disappear. The paper takes this contrast as evidence that quantum work is an effective thermodynamic tool for identifying metal–insulator phase transitions, and that determinant Monte Carlo evaluation of the moment generating function is a viable route to nonequilibrium quantum thermodynamics in strongly correlated systems.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the rounded bends and steepest slopes seen at $T=0.2$ on lattices of 8, 12, and 16 sites are finite-size shadows of true singularities at the metal–insulator transition, and would sharpen into non-analyticities as the lattice grows.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The same determinant representation extends to arbitrary time-dependent protocols $J(t)$, not just sudden quenches, because the matrix $B$ encodes the full time-ordered evolution, opening quench, ramp, and periodic-driving statistics to this Monte Carlo approach.
The Jarzynski equality applied to the sampled $G(R)$ yields the equilibrium free-energy difference between $J_0$ and $J_1$ from the same nonequilibrium sampling, so the method also produces equilibrium information.
At low temperature the sharp features in work cumulants coincide with the metal–insulator phase boundary, while at high temperature they vanish with the crossover, making quantum work statistics a candidate order-parameter-free diagnostic of the transition.

Reading between the lines

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

A finite-size scaling study of the cusp position and curvature at $L=8,12,16,24,32$ would test whether the rounded features sharpen into true non-analyticities in the thermodynamic limit; the paper does not report this scaling.
Because the same determinant object also controls Loschmidt-echo-type overlaps, the framework could be extended to dynamical quantum phase transitions in the Ising-Kondo model, though that connection is not made in the paper.
For models without conserved Ising spins, the determinant representation generically introduces a sign problem, so the practical reach of the method beyond Ising-Kondo-type models remains an open question.

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

The useful thing here is the numerical result: full work statistics, cumulants, and irreversible work density for a 2D Ising-Kondo lattice computed with determinant QMC. That specific calculation hasn't appeared before, as far as I know, and it's a natural extension of Dong-Yang's functional field integral formulation [39]. The determinant representation is standard, but applying it to the work MGF and sampling it with Metropolis is a legitimate new tool. The contrast between T=0.2 and T=0.4 is a nice demonstration that these quantities respond to the metal-insulator transition.

The problem is the word "singularities." The evidence is three lattice sizes (8, 12, 16) with no error bars, no finite-size scaling, and no stated time-slicing M. The cusps in Fig. 2 are smooth rounded features; whether they sharpen into non-analyticities in the thermodynamic limit is simply assumed. The derivative insets (du1/dJ0, du3/dJ0) are plotted without error bars and the values are small—those could be finite-difference noise. The authors don't report the R mesh or differentiation procedure either. For a claim about detecting a phase transition, you need to show the peak grows with L, or at least that the location extrapolates sensibly, and that the signal survives Monte Carlo noise. None of that is there.

Also, they never give the number of time slices M, even though the text acknowledges delta-t = tau/M affects precision. That's a basic reproducibility issue.

In fairness, these are addressable rather than fatal. The derivation is sound and the method is plausible. If they add error bars, do a scaling analysis, and benchmark against exact diagonalization on small systems (feasible for L=4), the paper would be much stronger. The high-T comparison is supportive but doesn't validate the low-T singularity claim.

My take: this is a reasonable first application of DQMC to work statistics, but the central claim overreaches the data. The paper deserves a serious referee, but the referee should request major revisions. I wouldn't cite the singularity result yet; I'd cite the method once it's backed up.

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a determinant quantum Monte Carlo method for computing the moment generating function G(R) of quantum work in the Ising-Kondo lattice model, with the numerical application focused on sudden quenches of the Kondo coupling. From Monte Carlo estimates of G(R), the authors extract the mean irreversible work density and the first three scaled cumulants, and they report cusp-like features or steepest-slope points at the low-temperature metal-insulator transition (T=0.2) that are absent at T=0.4. The paper presents these features as evidence that quantum work statistics can act as a thermodynamic probe of metal-insulator transitions in strongly correlated electron systems.

Significance. If the central claim survives scrutiny, the paper offers a useful new observable for correlated electron systems and connects quantum thermodynamics with phase transitions beyond exactly solvable or weakly interacting settings. The derivation of G(R) through the functional-field-integral and determinant representation is standard, and the Metropolis sampling scheme is clearly laid out, with the work statistics computed without fitting parameters to the phase diagram. The paper also checks the expected properties G(0)=1 and G(R)>0. However, the numerical evidence for the reported singularities is incomplete: the central conclusion rests on three finite lattice sizes without finite-size scaling and without any statistical uncertainties, so the significance of the claimed thermodynamic-limit behavior cannot yet be assessed at the level stated in the abstract.

major comments (4)

[Fig. 2 and the paragraph describing it] The central claim of a singularity at the metal-insulator transition is not supported by the data shown. Fig. 2 presents results for L=8, 12, and 16 only, with no finite-size scaling or extrapolation to the thermodynamic limit. For a genuine nonanalyticity, the rounded features on finite lattices should sharpen with increasing L, yet the u2 curves in Fig. 2(c) show no systematic growth with system size and the three curves are visually nearly indistinguishable. Please provide a finite-size analysis (e.g., peak value versus L, data collapse, or an L-to-infinity extrapolation) or revise the wording to finite-size precursors rather than singularities.
[Figs. 2 and 3 and the paragraph after Eq. (14)] No statistical error bars are reported for any of the cumulants, derivatives, or the generating function itself. Because u2 and u3 are of order 10^-5 and 10^-4, respectively, and the insets of Figs. 2(b) and 2(d) show derivatives obtained from finite differences of Monte Carlo data, the apparent extrema could be statistical or finite-difference artifacts. Please report the number of independent samples, the R mesh and step size used for the derivatives, and standard errors on all plotted quantities, including the derivative insets.
[Eq. (8) and the sampling description] The paper advertises a general nonequilibrium framework, but the time-slicing parameter M (and hence Delta t) is never specified, and no convergence test with respect to M is given. For the sudden quench used in the numerics the evolution factor drops out of Eq. (14), which may explain why M is absent from the results, but the general claim associated with Eq. (8) requires a demonstration that the results converge as M increases. Either restrict the claims to sudden quenches or add a convergence check for a finite-time protocol.
[Eqs. (11)-(13)] The algorithm relies on P({s}) = e^{-Q({s},0)}/Z(0) being a well-defined probability, which requires det[I+B] > 0 for all sampled spin configurations. The manuscript does not prove this positivity or discuss the possibility of sign changes for general R or J(t). Please provide a positivity check for the parameters used and a comment on the regimes where the determinant weight may become invalid, since this is the basis for the Monte Carlo sampling.

minor comments (3)

[Title page] There are typographical errors on the title page ('Republi c', 'strong ly') that should be corrected.
[Eq. (2) and Eq. (4)] It would be clearer to state explicitly that the trace in Eq. (2) is over both the conduction-electron and local-spin sectors before the decomposition in Eq. (4) is introduced.
[Monte Carlo procedures, page 3] For reproducibility, please provide details of the thermalization length, acceptance rates, and the computational cost for L=16; the current description ('Repeat step (2) to thermalize the system') is underspecified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: work cumulants are computed from the Hamiltonian by determinant QMC with no fitted parameters; the phase-transition location is an external input from ref. [56].

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The moment generating function G(R) in Eq. (2) is the standard two-measurement work characteristic function; the determinant representation Eq. (7) follows from Grassmann Gaussian integration with the time-sliced matrix B in Eq. (8), which the paper states explicitly. The Monte Carlo estimator Eq. (13) is an exact importance-sampling reweighting of Eq. (11), and the cumulants are obtained by differentiating C(R)=ln G(R) at R=0; no parameter is fitted to any target quantity. The interpretation of the cusps as marking the metal-insulator transition relies on the equilibrium phase diagram imported from the external reference [56], not on the present data. Self-citations do appear: ref. [39] (by co-author Dong) supplies the functional field integral framework, and refs. [52-54] are methodological applications of determinant QMC to Kondo systems. None of these is load-bearing in the sense of forcing the reported singularities: the central determinant equation is rederived in the text, and the phase-transition location is external. The finite-size rounding and absence of error bars in Figs. 2-3 are correctness/robustness concerns, not circularity; they do not make the prediction equivalent to its input.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No model parameters are fitted to produce the claimed singularities; J0, δ, T, and L are input controls. The calculation relies on standard fermionic determinant identities and the two-measurement work protocol. The main under-justified assumption is positivity of the Monte Carlo weights for general protocols, along with the time-slicing convergence parameter.

free parameters (1)

time-slicing interval Δt (number of slices M) = not specified
The path integral for B in Eq. (8) requires a discretization of the time evolution; the manuscript never states M or Δt or convergence checks, yet cumulants come from numerical derivatives of G(R).

assumptions (4)

standard math Two-energy-measurement definition of quantum work and the Jarzynski equality for closed quantum systems.
Used in Eqs. (1)-(2) as the foundation for the work statistics and the free energy relation.
standard math Grassmann coherent-state integration converts the fermion trace into det[I+B] in Eq. (7).
Standard determinant QMC identity; needed to sample P({s}) in Eq. (12).
domain assumption The Ising-Kondo lattice model on a square lattice is a valid representative of heavy-fermion metal-insulator physics.
The phase diagram used to interpret the work statistics is imported from ref. [56].
ad hoc to paper The Metropolis weight P({s}) = e^{-Q}/Z is a positive probability, requiring det[I+B] > 0.
Positivity is not proven or discussed for general time-dependent protocols; it holds for the quenches considered if both exponential factors are positive definite.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Monte Carlo approach to quantum work in strongly correlated electron systems." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/44DI7PNP

@misc{pith2026250516758,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Monte Carlo approach to quantum work in strongly correlated electron systems},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/44DI7PNP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.16758}
}

read the original abstract

We develop a Monte Carlo framework to analyze the statistics of quantum work in correlated electron systems. Using the Ising-Kondo model in heavy fermions as a paradigmatic platform, we thoroughly illustrate the process of determining the moment generating function of quantum work under nonequilibrium conditions in detail. Based on this function, we systematically investigate essential statistical quantities, including the mean irreversible work density, the mean work density, variance, and the third central moment of quantum work across different quench processes. Our findings highlight distinct singularities in these quantities at the metal-insulator phase transition point at low temperatures. However, these singularities disappear, and the transition becomes a smooth crossover at high temperatures. This stark contrast underscores quantum work as an effective thermodynamic tool for identifying metal-insulator phase transitions. Our approach provides a promising new framework for investigating nonequilibrium quantum thermodynamics in strongly correlated electron systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.16758 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** illustrates the moment generating function for three distinct quench processes. As expected, all G(R) curves pass smoothly through the point G(0) = 1 and maintain G(R) > 0 for all R. The inset of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: (a) The mean irreversible work density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Work distribution for strongly coupled many-body open quantum systems
quant-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A time-dependent numerical renormalization group calculation reveals universal power-law and scaling behavior in the work distribution of quenched quantum impurity models.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 55 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[39]

Dong and Y.-F

J.-J. Dong and Y.-F. Yang, Functional ﬁeld integral ap- proach to quantum work, Phys. Rev. B 100, 035124 (2019)

work page 2019
[1]

Binder, L

F. Binder, L. A. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, and G. Adesso, Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime , (Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2018)

work page 2018
[2]

Deﬀner and S

S. Deﬀner and S. Campbell, Quantum Thermodynamics: An introduction to the thermodynamics of quantum in- formation, (Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, CA, 2019)

work page 2019
[3]

Alicki, G

R. Alicki, G. Barenboim, and A. Jenkins, Quantum ther- modynamics of de Sitter space, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123530 (2023)

work page 2023
[4]

Gatto, A

S. Gatto, A. Colla, H.-P. Breuer, and M. Thoss, Quantum thermodynamics of the spin-boson model using the prin- ciple of minimal dissipation, Phys. Rev. A 110, 032210 (2024)

work page 2024
[5]

Wu and J.-H

W. Wu and J.-H. An, Generalized Quantum Fluctuation Theorem for Energy Exchange, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 050401 (2024)

work page 2024
[6]

Kosloﬀ, Quantum Thermodynamics: A Dynamical Viewpoint, Entropy, 15, 2100 (2013)

R. Kosloﬀ, Quantum Thermodynamics: A Dynamical Viewpoint, Entropy, 15, 2100 (2013)

work page 2013
[7]

Vinjanampathy and J

S. Vinjanampathy and J. Anders, Quantum Thermody- namics, Contemp. Phys. 57, 545 (2016)

work page 2016

Show all 58 references

[8]

Millen and A

J. Millen and A. Xuereb, Perspective on quantum ther- modynamics, New J. Phys. 18, 011002 (2016)

2016
[9]

Dann and R

R. Dann and R. Kosloﬀ, Uniﬁcation of the ﬁrst law of quantum thermodynamics, New J. Phys. 25, 043019 (2023)

2023
[10]

Ortega, E

A. Ortega, E. Mckay, ´A. M. Alhambra, and E. M.- Mart ´ ınez, Work Distributions on Quantum Fields, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 240604 (2019)

2019
[11]

Beyer, K

K. Beyer, K. Luoma, and W. T. Strunz, Work as an external quantum observable and an operational quan- tum work ﬂuctuation theorem, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033508 (2020)

2020
[12]

Pourhassan, S

B. Pourhassan, S. S. Wani, S. Soroushfarc and M. Faizal, Quantum work and information geometry of a quantum Myers-Perry black hole, J. High Energ. Phys. 2021, 27 (2021)

2021
[13]

Gardas, S

B. Gardas, S. Deﬀner, and A. Saxena, Non-hermitian quantum thermodynamics, Sci. Rep. 6, 23408 (2016)

2016
[14]

Wei, Quantum work relations and response theory in parity-time-symmetric quantum systems, Phys

B.-B. Wei, Quantum work relations and response theory in parity-time-symmetric quantum systems, Phys. Rev. E 97, 012114 (2018)

2018
[15]

Zhou, Z.-L

Z.-Y. Zhou, Z.-L. Xiang, J. Q. You, and F. Nori, Work statistics in non-Hermitian evolutions with Hermitian endpoints, Phys. Rev. E 104, 034107 (2021)

2021
[16]

Erdamar, M

S. Erdamar, M. Abbasi, B. Ha, W. Chen, J. Muldoon, Y. Joglekar, and K. W. Murch, Constraining work ﬂuctua- tions of non-Hermitian dynamics across the exceptional point of a superconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L022013 (2024)

2024
[17]

A. M. Lacerda, A. Purkayastha, M. Kewming, G. T. Landi, and J. Goold, Quantum thermodynamics with fast driving and strong coupling via the mesoscopic leads approach, Phys. Rev. B 107, 195117 (2023)

2023
[18]

A. M. Lacerda, M. J. Kewming, M. Brenes, C. Jackson, S. R. Clark, M. T. Mitchison, and J. Goold, Entropy pro- duction in the mesoscopic-leads formulation of quantum thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. E 110, 014125 (2024)

2024
[19]

ˇSafr´ anek, D

D. ˇSafr´ anek, D. Rosa, and F. C. Binder, Work Extraction from Unknown Quantum Sources, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 210401 (2023)

2023
[20]

Gherardini and G

S. Gherardini and G. D. Chiara, Quasiprobabilities in Quantum Thermodynamics and Many-Body Systems, PRX Quantum 5, 030201 (2024)

2024
[21]

Davoudi, C

Z. Davoudi, C. Jarzynski, N. Mueller, G. Oruganti, C. Powers, and N. Y. Halpern, Quantum Thermodynamics of Nonequilibrium Processes in Lattice Gauge Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 250402 (2024)

2024
[22]

Lobejko, J

M. Lobejko, J. Luczka, and P. Talkner, Work distribu- tions for random sudden quantum quenches, Phys. Rev. E 95, 052137 (2017)

2017
[23]

Francica and L

G. Francica and L. D. Anna, Quasiprobability distribu- tion of work in the quantum Ising model, Phys. Rev. B 108, 014106 (2023)

2023
[24]

Santini, A

A. Santini, A. Solfanelli, S. Gherardini, and M. Collur a, Work statistics, quantum signatures, and enhanced work extraction in quadratic fermionic models, Phys. Rev. B 108, 104308 (2023)

2023
[25]

Kiely, E

A. Kiely, E. O’Connor, T. Fogarty, G. T. Landi, and S. Campbell, Entropy of the quantum work distribution, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L022010 (2023)

2023
[26]

K. Pal, K. Pal, A. Gill, and T. Sarkar, Time evolution of spread complexity and statistics of work done in quantum quenches, Phys. Rev. B 108, 104311 (2023)

2023
[27]

Zawadzki, A

K. Zawadzki, A. Kiely, G. T. Landi, and S. Campbell, Non-Gaussian work statistics at ﬁnite-time driving, Phys. Rev. A 107, 012209 (2023)

2023
[28]

Jarzynski, Nonequilibrium Equality for Free Energy Diﬀerences, Phys

C. Jarzynski, Nonequilibrium Equality for Free Energy Diﬀerences, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2690 (1997)

1997
[29]

Jarzynski, Equilibrium free-energy diﬀerences fro m nonequilibrium measurements: A master-equation ap- proach, Phys

C. Jarzynski, Equilibrium free-energy diﬀerences fro m nonequilibrium measurements: A master-equation ap- proach, Phys. Rev. E 56, 5018 (1997)

1997
[30]

Silva, Statistics of the Work Done on a Quantum Crit- ical System by Quenching a Control Parameter, Phys

A. Silva, Statistics of the Work Done on a Quantum Crit- ical System by Quenching a Control Parameter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 120603 (2008)

2008
[31]

Z. Fei, N. Freitas, V. Cavina, H. T. Quan, and M. Espos- ito, Work Statistics across a Quantum Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 170603 (2020)

2020
[32]

Wu, J.-Fu Chen, and H

Y.-X. Wu, J.-Fu Chen, and H. T. Quan, Ergodicity Breaking and Scaling Relations for Finite-Time First- Order Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 177101 (2025)

2025
[33]

Solfanelli and N

A. Solfanelli and N. Defenu, Universal Work Statistics in Long-Range Interacting Quantum Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 030402 (2025)

2025
[34]

M. Heyl, A. Polkovnikov, and S. Kehrein, Dynamical Quantum Phase Transitions in the Transverse-Field Ising 6 Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 135704 (2013)

2013
[35]

Campisi and J

M. Campisi and J. Goold, Thermodynamics of quantum information scrambling, Phys. Rev. E 95, 062127 (2017)

2017
[36]

Chenu, I

A. Chenu, I. L. Egusquiza, J. M.-Vilaplana, and A. D. Campo, Quantum work statistics, Loschmidt echo and information scrambling, Sci. Rep. 8, 12634 (2018)

2018
[37]

Liu, Derivation of quantum work equalities using a quantum Feynman-Kac formula, Phys

F. Liu, Derivation of quantum work equalities using a quantum Feynman-Kac formula, Phys. Rev. E 86, 010103(R) (2012)

2012
[38]

Funo and H

K. Funo and H. T. Quan, Path Integral Approach to Quantum Thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 040602 (2018)

2018
[40]

T. Qiu, Z. Fei, R. Pan, and H. T. Quan, Path-integral approach to the calculation of the characteristic function of work, Phys. Rev. E 101, 032111 (2020)

2020
[41]

Qian and F

Y. Qian and F. Liu, Computing characteristic functions of quantum work in phase space, Phys. Rev. E 100, 062119 (2019)

2019
[42]

Fei and H

Z. Fei and H. T. Quan, Group-theoretical approach to the calculation of quantum work distribution, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033175 (2019)

2019
[43]

Fei and H

Z. Fei and H. T. Quan, Nonequilibrium Green’s Func- tion’s Approach to the Calculation of Work Statistics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 240603 (2020)

2020
[44]

Grabarits, M

A. Grabarits, M. Kormos, I. Lovas, and G. Zar´ and, Clas- sical theory of universal quantum work distribution in chaotic and disordered non-interacting Fermi systems, Sci. Rep. 12, 15017 (2022)

2022
[45]

J. Gu, F. Zhang, and H. T. Quan, Tensor-network ap- proach to work statistics for one-dimensional quantum lattice systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033193 (2022)

2022
[46]

Lin and C.-Y

F.-L. Lin and C.-Y. Huang, Work statistics for quantum spin chains: Characterizing quantum phase transitions, benchmarking time evolution, and examining passivity of quantum states, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023169 (2024)

2024
[47]

J. E. Gubernatis, N. Kawashima, and P. Werner, Quan- tum Monte Carlo Methods: Algorithms for Lattice Mod- els, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016)

2016
[48]

Farkaˇ sovsk´ y, H.ˇCenˇ carikov´ a, and S

P. Farkaˇ sovsk´ y, H.ˇCenˇ carikov´ a, and S. Mataˇ s, Numeri- cal study of magnetization processes in rare-earth tetra- borides, Phys. Rev. B 82, 054409 (2010)

2010
[49]

Y. Kato, I. Martin, and C. D. Batista, Stability of the Spontaneous Quantum Hall State in the Triangu- lar Kondo-Lattice Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 266405 (2010)

2010
[50]

Ishizuka and Y

H. Ishizuka and Y. Motome, Partial Disorder in an Ising- Spin Kondo Lattice Model on a Triangular Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 257205 (2012)

2012
[51]

M. M. Maska and N. Trivedi, Temperature-driven BCS- BEC crossover and Cooper-paired metallic phase in cou- pled boson-fermion systems, Phys. Rev. B 102, 144506 (2020)

2020
[52]

J.-J. Dong, D. Huang, and Y.-F. Yang, Mutual informa- tion, quantum phase transition, and phase coherence in Kondo systems, Phys. Rev. B 104, L081115 (2021)

2021
[53]

Dong and Y.-F

J.-J. Dong and Y.-F. Yang, Development of long-range phase coherence on the Kondo lattice, Phys. Rev. B 106, L161114 (2022)

2022
[54]

Qin, J.-J

Q. Qin, J.-J. Dong, Y. Sheng, D. Huang, and Y.-F. Yang, Superconducting ﬂuctuations and charge-4e pla- quette state at strong coupling, Phys. Rev. B 108, 054506 (2023)

2023
[55]

A. E. Sikkema, W. J. L. Buyers, I. Aﬄeck, and J. Gan, Ising-Kondo lattice with transverse ﬁeld: A possible f- moment Hamiltonian for URu 2Si2, Phys. Rev. B 54, 9322 (1996)

1996
[56]

W.-W. Yang, J. Zhao, H.-G. Luo, and Y. Zhong, Exactly solvable Kondo lattice model in the anisotropic limit, Phys. Rev. B 100, 045148 (2019)

2019
[57]

Yang, Y.-X

W.-W. Yang, Y.-X. Li, Y. Zhong, and H.-G. Luo, Doping a Mott insulator in an Ising-Kondo lattice: Strange metal and Mott criticality , Phys. Rev. B 104, 165146 (2021)

2021
[58]

X. Zhou, J. Fan, and S. Jia, Magnetic order and strongly correlated eﬀects in the one-dimensional Ising-Kondo lat- tice, Phys. Rev. B 109, 195112 (2024)

2024

Pith tools

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

[1] [39]

Dong and Y.-F

J.-J. Dong and Y.-F. Yang, Functional ﬁeld integral ap- proach to quantum work, Phys. Rev. B 100, 035124 (2019)

work page 2019

[2] [1]

Binder, L

F. Binder, L. A. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, and G. Adesso, Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime , (Springer, Cham, Switzerland, 2018)

work page 2018

[3] [2]

Deﬀner and S

S. Deﬀner and S. Campbell, Quantum Thermodynamics: An introduction to the thermodynamics of quantum in- formation, (Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, CA, 2019)

work page 2019

[4] [3]

Alicki, G

R. Alicki, G. Barenboim, and A. Jenkins, Quantum ther- modynamics of de Sitter space, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123530 (2023)

work page 2023

[5] [4]

Gatto, A

S. Gatto, A. Colla, H.-P. Breuer, and M. Thoss, Quantum thermodynamics of the spin-boson model using the prin- ciple of minimal dissipation, Phys. Rev. A 110, 032210 (2024)

work page 2024

[6] [5]

Wu and J.-H

W. Wu and J.-H. An, Generalized Quantum Fluctuation Theorem for Energy Exchange, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 050401 (2024)

work page 2024

[7] [6]

Kosloﬀ, Quantum Thermodynamics: A Dynamical Viewpoint, Entropy, 15, 2100 (2013)

R. Kosloﬀ, Quantum Thermodynamics: A Dynamical Viewpoint, Entropy, 15, 2100 (2013)

work page 2013

[8] [7]

Vinjanampathy and J

S. Vinjanampathy and J. Anders, Quantum Thermody- namics, Contemp. Phys. 57, 545 (2016)

work page 2016