Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Long-term stability of driven quantum systems and the time-dependent Bloch equation

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Under a strong time-dependent Hamiltonian plus a weak drive, a quantum system can stay in its initial eigenspace for arbitrarily long times, with leakage of order 1/γ.

desk verdict The abstract claims eternal O(γ^{-1}) adiabaticity for driven systems, but the body calls it a conjecture and a resonant two-level drive breaks it; the framework is useful, the headline claim is not. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.03639 v1 pith:XMKNOKAF submitted 2025-09-03 quant-ph math-phmath.MP

Zsolt Szabó , Kazuya Yuasa , Daniel Burgarth This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phmath-phmath.MP
keywords adiabatictheoremquantumleakageBlochequationeffectiveHamiltoniantime-dependentperturbationtheorylong-timestabilityLandau-Zenertransitionscontrol
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

This paper sets out to extend eternal adiabaticity—the result that a quantum system stays in each eigenspace of its strong Hamiltonian with leakage O(1/γ)—from time-independent to time-dependent driven systems. It derives the time-dependent Bloch equation from the theory of diagonal effective Hamiltonians and shows that the entire leakage problem collapses into one quantity: how far the Bloch wave operator U(t) is from the identity, uniformly in time. If that uniform distance is O(1/γ), then the true evolution is O(1/γ) close to a block-diagonal effective evolution, so the system never leaves its initial eigenspace no matter how long the drive lasts. The paper verifies this behavior in an exactly solvable Landau-Zener calculation and in numerical simulations of a driven three-level system. The general statement that the Bloch operator stays uniformly O(1/γ) close to the identity is put forward as a conjecture whose proof is left open.

What carries the argument

The time-dependent Bloch wave operator U(t). It is defined by the Bloch condition P_k U(t) P_k = P_k—trivial action inside each eigenspace—and satisfies the nonlinear operator Riccati equation U̇_k(t) = H(t)U_k(t) − U_k(t)H(t)U_k(t). Its explicit solution is U_k(t) = M(t)U_k(t0)[P_k M(t)U_k(t0)P_k]^{-1}, so it exists as long as those diagonal blocks stay invertible. The entire argument reduces leakage to one object: the uniform distance ||U(t)−1||, because a small distance implies M(t) is close to a block-diagonal evolution, and hence the population cannot leave its initial eigenspace.

What would settle it

Simulate the Bloch equation for a driven two- or three-level system with a non-crossing strong generator and a weak drive, scanning long times and resonant frequencies; if max_t ||U(t)−1|| grows without bound with the horizon T, or if any P_k M(t)U_k(t0)P_k becomes non-invertible before T, the uniform O(γ^{-1}) conjecture fails. The Landau-Zener and three-level examples in the paper are the two existing tests that do not fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that for a finite-dimensional system whose generator is a strong, non-crossing, time-dependent term γB̄(t) plus a weak drive C̄(t), leakage out of the eigenspaces of B̄ can be held at O(γ^{-1}) uniformly in time. The proof strategy is to move to the adiabatic frame, where the strong generator is block-diagonal with time-independent projectors, and then to compare the true evolution M(t) with the block-diagonal Bloch evolution M_Bloch(t). The comparison operator is the time-dependent Bloch wave operator U(t), defined by P_k U(t) P_k = P_k and obeying the nonlinear Riccati equation U̇_k = H U_k − U_k H U_k. The paper proves that a uniform bound ||U(t)−1|| ≤ δ force

Load-bearing premise

The transformation that converts the true evolution into block-diagonal form stays uniformly close to the identity for all times—equivalently, the diagonal block that must be inverted in the Bloch solution never becomes singular.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Long-time adiabatic control can be designed around a time-uniform bound: if the Bloch operator stays close to the identity, the usual adiabatic error growth with total evolution time disappears.
  • The leakage problem becomes a one-operator estimate: compute or bound ||U(t)−1||, and the same quantity controls leakage, the quality of the Bloch effective Hamiltonian, and the existence of a nearby unitary block-diagonalizing transformation.
  • The Landau-Zener analysis shows the Bloch-operator norm reproduces the exact non-adiabatic transition probability, so the method captures non-perturbative physics in γ despite being a perturbative framework.
  • Both the identity and stationary initial conditions yield the same O(γ^{-1}) closeness in the tested examples, giving practitioners two practical choices for numerical leakage estimation.
  • When the Bloch operator is close to identity, a unitary effective evolution close to identity can be constructed by polar decomposition, preserving unitarity for further applications.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The missing step is a general proof that the diagonal blocks P_k M(t)U_k(t0)P_k never become singular; this is where a counterexample, if any, would likely appear.
  • A direct numerical search over near-resonant periodic drives with non-crossing strong spectra could test the conjecture: if ||U(t)−1|| grows with time or diverges, the time-dependent generalization fails in that regime.
  • If the conjecture is proved, it would extend the autonomous 'eternal adiabaticity' result to time-dependent generators and would give a parameter-free leakage bound for driven quantum gates, without the total-time factor.
  • The Bloch-equation viewpoint suggests that leakage is not a perturbative short-time effect but a global property of the wave operator; this reframes adiabatic error correction as keeping a nonlinear Riccati flow near the identity.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies finite-dimensional driven systems whose generator is γB̄(t)+C̄(t), with B̄ a skew-Hermitian strong drift and C̄ a weak drive. It derives the time-dependent Bloch equation for the wave operator U(t), gives the closed-form solution (15), and uses a uniform bound on ∥U(t)−1∥ to bound leakage (Eq. (9)) and to construct a unitary block-diagonalizing transformation (App. C). The stated central claim of the abstract is that, for arbitrary long times, leakage out of any eigenspace of the strong generator remains O(γ^{-1}). The paper presents an analytical Landau–Zener example with C̄=0 and a numerical three-level example with a time-independent strong part after the interaction-picture transform, and Section IV explicitly downgrades the general O(γ^{-1}) statement to a conjecture.

Significance. If the advertised O(γ^{-1}) eternal adiabatic bound for time-dependent strong generators were true, it would be a substantial extension of the time-independent 'eternal adiabaticity' results. The paper has genuine strengths: the derivation of the Bloch equation is self-contained, the solution formula (15) is exact, and the conditional bounds in Appendices A and C are straightforward and correct. The authors should also be credited for explicitly labelling the general claim as a conjecture in Section IV rather than hiding the gap. However, the central advertised result is not merely unproved; as stated it is false, because resonant drives with Fourier weight at the strong generator's Bohr frequency produce O(1) leakage.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract vs. Section IV] The abstract states as an established result that 'a system that starts in a particular eigenspace of the strong generator remains in the same respective eigenspace for arbitrary long times with an error of O(γ^{-1})'. Section IV, however, explicitly says that this is only a conjecture and calls for 'a rigorous proof similar to that in Ref. [6]'. The proven content of the paper is conditional: Eq. (9) and Appendix A bound leakage assuming a uniform bound ∥U(t)−1∥≤δ, and Appendix C constructs the unitary V(t) under the same assumption. Since the required δ=O(γ^{-1}) is never established, the paper's advertised theorem is unsupported. This is an internal inconsistency between the abstract and the body.
  2. [II, Eq. (1); IV] The claimed O(γ^{-1}) eternal bound is false as stated, even under the paper's assumptions. Take B̄=−iσ_z and C̄(t)=−i a cos(2γt)σ_x with fixed a and γ≫a. The generators are skew-Hermitian, the spectrum is constant and non-crossing, and the perturbation is weak relative to γ. In the interaction picture generated by −iγσ_z, the drive contains a resonant time-independent term −i(a/2)σ_x plus terms oscillating at frequency 4γ. For an initial state in the + eigenspace of σ_z, the population in the − eigenspace is sin²(a t/2)+O(a/γ). At t=π/a it is O(1), not O(γ^{-1}). No non-resonance or detuning condition appears in the manuscript's stated assumptions. This model therefore also refutes the Section IV conjecture as phrased.
  3. [III] Neither worked example tests the full time-dependent strong-generator regime. In Section III A the Landau–Zener example has C̄=0; the only time dependence is in B̄, and C(t) arises purely from the adiabatic-frame correction A(t). In Section III B, after the interaction-picture transform the strong part is the time-independent −iγ diag(0,0,1), and the drive is a detuned oscillation. Thus the examples do not probe the case of a genuinely time-dependent strong generator combined with a weak drive, and they cannot provide evidence for the missing uniform bound ∥U(t)−1∥=O(γ^{-1}). In particular, they avoid the resonant mechanism of the counterexample above.
  4. [II D, Eq. (15); Appendix B] The existence of the Bloch solution is load-bearing for the abstract's 'assured existence of solutions' claim, but it is only conditional. Eq. (15) and Appendix B require the diagonal block P_k M(t) U_k(t0) P_k to be invertible for all t in the domain. No proof of this invertibility is supplied; Appendix B states only that the solution exists 'as long as [the block] is non-vanishing', which is not the correct condition (it should be invertible on the block). Since uniform invertibility is needed for the wave operator to be defined for all times, this is another gap in the argument for the eternal bound.
minor comments (4)
  1. [II D, Eq. (14)] The derivation line '0 = Uk(t)H(t)Uk(t) − Uk(t)HBloch(t)' is dimensionally inconsistent and appears to have missing projectors. The final Bloch equation (14) is correct, but the intermediate step should be rewritten, e.g. by first showing P_k H_eff(t)=P_k H(t) U_k(t) and then substituting into Eq. (12).
  2. [Reference [33]] The reference is misspelled as 'Zeener'; it should be 'Zener'.
  3. [II C] The notation P_k is overloaded: before Section II A it denotes P_k(t), while after the adiabatic frame it denotes P_k(t0) with the argument suppressed. This makes the leakage definition and the equivalence ∥[1−P_k(t)]F(t)P_k(t0)∥=∥[1−P_k(t0)]M(t)P_k(t0)∥ unnecessarily hard to follow. A short notational clarification is needed.
  4. [Fig. 3] The caption says the plotted quantity is the Frobenius norm of ∥U(t)−1∥, but the y-axis label reads '|U-1|'. Please specify the norm unambiguously in both the caption and the axis label.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: derivations are self-contained; the central O(γ^{-1}) claim is explicitly left as a conjecture, not forced by construction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The time-dependent Bloch equation (14) is derived algebraically from the defining Bloch condition (13) and the general transformation identity (7)–(8), not assumed as an input. The closed-form solution (15) is obtained by substitution, and the leakage bound (9) follows from a proven operator inequality in Appendix A. The examples are genuine computations: the Landau–Zener model is solved exactly and reproduces the known e^{-πγ/2} transition amplitude, while the three-level example numerically integrates the Bloch equation for fixed parameters. No parameter is fitted to the target quantity and then renamed a prediction. The paper's central eternal-leakage statement is candidly labeled a conjecture in Section IV ('we conjecture that in the weak coupling limit of the time-dependent problem, the leakage would consistently be O(γ^{-1})'), so it is not presented as a derivation whose conclusion is encoded in its premises. The self-citations to Refs. [6,7] provide background and analogous time-independent results, but they are not load-bearing for the time-dependent derivation: the paper's own equations and numerics carry the argument. The gap between the abstract's strong formulation and the body's conjecture is a correctness/evidence concern, not circularity.

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

The framework relies on standard adiabatic assumptions and the finite-dimensional closed-system setting. The load-bearing unproven inputs are the invertibility of the diagonal block for all times and the conjecture that the Bloch operator stays uniformly close to the identity. No invented entities or fitted free parameters are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Adiabatic assumptions: eigenvalues of the strong generator non-crossing and continuously differentiable; projectors twice continuously differentiable.
    Invoked at the start of Section II to justify the adiabatic transporter W(t) in Eqs. (2)-(3).
  • domain assumption Finite-dimensional closed quantum system with skew-Hermitian generators.
    Stated in Section I: 'we will restrict ourselves to finite-dimensional closed quantum systems'.
  • ad hoc to paper The diagonal block P_k M(t) U_k(t0) P_k remains invertible for all t, so the Bloch solution (15) exists.
    The paper notes the inverse condition but does not prove it for general time-dependent generators; it is required for the Bloch operator to be finite for all times.
  • ad hoc to paper The Bloch wave operator from the stationary (or identity) initial condition remains uniformly O(γ^{-1}) close to identity for all t.
    This is the central conjecture of Section IV; it is not proven and is the load-bearing premise for the claimed eternal O(γ^{-1}) leakage.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Long-term stability of driven quantum systems and the time-dependent Bloch equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XMKNOKAF

@misc{pith2026250903639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Long-term stability of driven quantum systems and the time-dependent Bloch equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XMKNOKAF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.03639}
}
abstract

This study looks at the finite-dimensional adiabatic evolution influenced by weak perturbations, extending the analysis to the asymptotic time limit. Beginning with the fundamentals of adiabatic transformations and time-dependent effective Hamiltonians, we intuitively derive the Bloch equation. Our investigation of the solutions of the Bloch equation underscores the critical role of initial conditions and the assured existence of solutions, revealing the intricate link between leakage phenomena and the Bloch transformation. Numerical and analytical evaluations demonstrate that the leakage can remain small eternally. That is, a system that starts in a particular eigenspace of the strong generator remains in the same respective eigenspace for arbitrary long times with an error of $\mathcal{O}(\gamma^{-1})$, where $\gamma$ describes the ratio between the strength of the system's strong Hamiltonian and the perturbation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.03639 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: A Venn diagram of effective time-dependent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: The triad of the leakage - Bloch Hamiltonian [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: The Frobenius Norm of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_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

  1. Gorini-Kossakowski-Sudarshan-Lindblad equation in different bases: application to driven-dissipative two- and multilevel systems

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 3.5 of 10

    Correct choice and unitary transformation of the computational basis for the GKSL equation is essential to obtain physically consistent dynamics of driven-dissipative qubits and multilevel systems.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [6]

    Kato, On the adiabatic theorem of quantum mechanics, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 5, 435 (1950)

    T. Kato, On the adiabatic theorem of quantum mechanics, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 5, 435 (1950)

    work page 1950

  2. [1]

    Solving Landau-Zener The true evolution, F (t, t0), is solved by setting up the Landau-Zener problem as   ˙ϕ(t) ˙ψ(t)   = −i  γt γ γ −γt    ϕ(t) ψ(t)   , (18) from which a second order differential equation for ϕ(t) can be derived: ¨ϕ(t) = −iγϕ(t) − iγt ˙ϕ(t) − iγ ˙ψ(t) = −iγϕ(t) − γ2t2ϕ(t) − γ2ϕ(t). By rescaling the time and coupling variable...

    work page

  3. [2]

    U (t, t0) for Landau-Zener For the exactly solvable model of Landau-Zener, it is possible to obtain a closed-form solution of the Bloch wave operator following Eq. (15). The full evolution M (tf , t0) in the adiabatic frame for this problem is simply M (tf , t0) = W (tf , t0)F1(tf )F † 1 (t0), which in the computational basis is lim t→∞ M (t, −t) =   q...

    work page

  4. [3]

    Aliferis and B

    P. Aliferis and B. M. Terhal, Fault-tolerant quantum computation for local leakage faults, Quantum Information & Computation 7, 139 (2007)

    work page 2007

  5. [4]

    Motzoi, J

    F. Motzoi, J. M. Gambetta, P. Rebentrost, and F. K. Wilhelm, Simple Pulses for Elimination of Leakage in Weakly Nonlinear Qubits, Physical Review Letters 103, 110501 (2009), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 2009

  6. [5]

    K. C. Miao, M. McEwen, J. Atalaya, D. Kafri, L. P. Pryadko, A. Bengtsson, A. Opremcak, K. J. Satzinger, Z. Chen, P. V. Klimov, C. Quintana, R. Acharya, K. Anderson, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, J. C. Bardin, A. Bourassa, J. Bovaird, L. Brill, B. B. Buckley, D. A. Buell, T. Burger, B. Burkett, N. Bushnell, J. Campero, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, P. ...

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Burgarth, P

    D. Burgarth, P. Facchi, G. Gramegna, and K. Yuasa, One bound to rule them all: from Adiabatic to Zeno, Quantum 6, 737 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Burgarth, P

    D. Burgarth, P. Facchi, H. Nakazato, S. Pascazio, and K. Yuasa, Eternal adiabaticity in quantum evolution, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032214 (2021)

    work page 2021

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Szab´ o, S

    Z. Szab´ o, S. Gehr, P. Facchi, K. Yuasa, D. Burgarth, and D. Lonigro, Robust quantification of spectral transitions in perturbed quantum systems, Physical Review A 112, 032202 (2025)

    2025

  2. [10]

    Facchi, M

    P. Facchi, M. Ligab` o, and V. Viesti, Robustness of quantum symmetries against perturbations, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 58, 125305 (2025)

    2025

  3. [11]

    Facchi and S

    P. Facchi and S. Pascazio, Quantum Zeno dynamics: mathematical and physical aspects, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 41, 493001 (2008)

    2008

  4. [12]

    Facchi and M

    P. Facchi and M. Ligab` o, Quantum Zeno effect and dynamics, Journal of Mathematical Physics 51, 022103 (2010)

    2010

  5. [13]

    Venkatraman, X

    J. Venkatraman, X. Xiao, R. G. Corti˜ nas, A. Eickbusch, and M. H. Devoret, Static Effective Hamiltonian of a Rapidly Driven Nonlinear System, Physical Review Letters 129, 100601 (2022)

    2022

  6. [14]

    Floquet, Sur les ´ equations diff´ erentielles lin´ eaires ` a coefficients p´ eriodiques, Annales scientifiques de l’´Ecole normale sup´ erieure12, 47 (1883)

    G. Floquet, Sur les ´ equations diff´ erentielles lin´ eaires ` a coefficients p´ eriodiques, Annales scientifiques de l’´Ecole normale sup´ erieure12, 47 (1883)

  7. [15]

    Schmidt, J

    H.-J. Schmidt, J. Schnack, and M. Holthaus, Floquet theory of the analytical solution of a periodically driven two-level system, Applicable Analysis 100, 1 (2019)

    2019

  8. [16]

    J. R. Schrieffer and P. A. Wolff, Relation between the Anderson and Kondo Hamiltonians, Physical Review 149, 491 (1966), publisher: American Physical Society

    1966

  9. [17]

    Bravyi, D

    S. Bravyi, D. P. DiVincenzo, and D. Loss, Schrief- fer–Wolff transformation for quantum many-body sys- tems, Annals of Physics 326, 2793 (2011)

    2011

  10. [18]

    Goldin and Y

    Y. Goldin and Y. Avishai, Nonlinear response of a Kondo system: Perturbation approach to the time-dependent Anderson impurity model, Physical Review B 61, 16750 (2000)

    2000

  11. [19]

    L. S. Theis, F. Motzoi, S. Machnes, and F. K. Wilhelm, Counteracting systems of diabaticities using DRAG controls: The status after 10 years (a), EPL (Europhysics Letters) 123, 60001 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Malekakhlagh, E

    M. Malekakhlagh, E. Magesan, and D. C. McKay, First- principles analysis of cross-resonance gate operation, Physical Review A 102, 042605 (2020), publisher: American Physical Society

    2020

  13. [21]

    Malekakhlagh, E

    M. Malekakhlagh, E. Magesan, and L. C. G. Govia, Time-dependent Schrieffer-Wolff-Lindblad perturbation theory: Measurement-induced dephasing and second- order Stark shift in dispersive readout, Physical Review 14 A 106, 052601 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Bloch, Sur la th´ eorie des perturbations des ´ etats li´ es, Nuclear Physics 6, 329 (1958)

    C. Bloch, Sur la th´ eorie des perturbations des ´ etats li´ es, Nuclear Physics 6, 329 (1958)

    1958

  15. [23]

    I. Lindgren, The Rayleigh-Schrodinger perturbation and the linked-diagram theorem for a multi-configurational model space, Journal of Physics B: Atomic and Molecular Physics 7, 2441 (1974)

    1974

  16. [24]

    Durand, Direct determination of effective Hamilto- nians by wave-operator methods

    P. Durand, Direct determination of effective Hamilto- nians by wave-operator methods. I. General formalism, Physical Review A 28, 3184 (1983)

    1983

  17. [25]

    Jolicard, Effective hamiltonian theory: an intermedi- ate representation method for the wave operator calcula- tion, Chemical Physics 115, 57 (1987)

    G. Jolicard, Effective hamiltonian theory: an intermedi- ate representation method for the wave operator calcula- tion, Chemical Physics 115, 57 (1987)

    1987

  18. [26]

    Jolicard and E

    G. Jolicard and E. Austin, On the recursive integration of stationary and time-dependent Bloch wave operator equations, Chemical Physics Letters 180, 503 (1991)

    1991

  19. [27]

    Jolicard, J

    G. Jolicard, J. P. Killingbeck, A. Grosjean, and J.-M. Zucconi, A new time-dependent wave operator approach to the internal eigenstate problems for large matrices, The Journal of Chemical Physics 111, 7272 (1999)

    1999

  20. [28]

    Jolicard and J

    G. Jolicard and J. P. Killingbeck, The Bloch wave operator: generalizations and applications: II. The time- dependent case, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36, R411 (2003)

    2003

  21. [29]

    J. P. Killingbeck and G. Jolicard, The Bloch wave operator: generalizations and applications: Part I. The time-independent case, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36, R105 (2003)

    2003

  22. [30]

    Nenciu, Linear adiabatic theory

    G. Nenciu, Linear adiabatic theory. Exponential esti- mates, Communications in Mathematical Physics 152, 479 (1993)

    1993

  23. [31]

    Burgarth, P

    D. Burgarth, P. Facchi, H. Nakazato, S. Pascazio, and K. Yuasa, Generalized Adiabatic Theorem and Strong- Coupling Limits, Quantum 3, 152 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    Gaeta, ed., Perturbation theory: mathematics, meth- ods and applications (Springer, New York, NY, 2022) oCLC: 1357257929

    G. Gaeta, ed., Perturbation theory: mathematics, meth- ods and applications (Springer, New York, NY, 2022) oCLC: 1357257929

    2022

  25. [33]

    Abou-Kandil, G

    H. Abou-Kandil, G. Freiling, V. Ionescu, and G. Jank, Matrix Riccati equations: in control and systems theory, edited by H. Abou-Kandil, Systems & control (Birkh¨ auser, 2003)

    2003

  26. [34]

    Jolicard, Effective Hamiltonian Theory and Molecular Dynamics, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 46, 83 (1995)

    G. Jolicard, Effective Hamiltonian Theory and Molecular Dynamics, Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 46, 83 (1995)

    1995

  27. [35]

    Zeener, Non-adiabatic crossing of energy levels, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London

    C. Zeener, Non-adiabatic crossing of energy levels, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character 137, 696 (1932)

    1932

  28. [36]

    L. T. A. Ho and L. F. Chibotaru, A simple derivation of the landau–zener formula, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 16, 6942 (2014), publisher: The Royal Society of Chemistry

    2014

  29. [37]

    Matus, J

    F. Matus, J. Stˇ releˇ cek, and P. Cejnar, Analytic approach to the Landau–Zener problem in bounded parameter space, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 56, 235303 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    Nist digital library of mathematical functions, dlmf.nist.gov/12.8, accessed: 2021-09-30

    2021

  31. [39]

    P. J. Liebermann and F. K. Wilhelm, Optimal Qubit Control Using Single-Flux Quantum Pulses, Physical Review Applied 6, 024022 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Abou-Kandil, Matrix Riccati Equations in Con- trol and Systems Theory , 1st ed., Systems & Control: Foundations & Applications (Birkh¨ auser Basel, Basel, 2003)

    H. Abou-Kandil, Matrix Riccati Equations in Con- trol and Systems Theory , 1st ed., Systems & Control: Foundations & Applications (Birkh¨ auser Basel, Basel, 2003)

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.