Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Quartic level repulsion in a quantum chaotic three-body system without symplectic symmetry

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Weakly interacting three-body systems in a harmonic trap show the strongest level repulsion of random-matrix theory (beta=4), although they are spinless and lack the Kramers degeneracy that usually accompanies it.

desk verdict GSE without Kramers in a three-body trap is a real claim, but the lack of a quantitative completeness check leaves the thinned-GOE alternative alive. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.06772 v3 pith:YOIHMMS7 submitted 2025-10-08 cond-mat.quant-gas

Alex D. Kerin , Barbara Dietz , Joachim Brand This is my paper
classification cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords quantumchaosGaussiansymplecticensemblequarticlevelrepulsionthree-bodyproblemcontactinteractionsharmonictrapspectralformfactorRosenzweig-Portermodel
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 tries to establish that a three-body system of contact-interacting atoms in a harmonic trap — identical bosons or mass-imbalanced fermions — is quantum chaotic in the weak-interaction regime, with energy-level statistics matching the Gaussian symplectic ensemble (GSE): quartic level repulsion, the corresponding spectral form factor, and number variance. That is surprising because GSE statistics are normally tied to symplectic symmetry and Kramers degeneracy, both of which are absent here; the system is spinless and time-reversal invariant, which would normally imply GOE statistics. At the unitary (strong-interaction) limit, the dynamics become regular instead, with either Poisson or 'stick' spacing statistics depending on whether a mass-ratio angle is commensurate with pi. The transition between regular and chaotic is quantitatively captured by a single Rosenzweig-Porter parameter. If correct, this shows that the standard symmetry-to-ensemble assignment can fail in a physically realizable few-body system, with consequences for thermalization and for experiments on cold atoms in microtraps.

What carries the argument

The analysis runs on the numerically exact relative-motion spectrum obtained from the Bethe-Peierls boundary condition: for finite scattering length a variational matrix equation (Eq. 9) yields eigenvalues, while at unitarity a transcendental equation (Eq. 13) gives the ladder spectrum. Around each cluster of levels, the spectrum is unfolded cluster-by-cluster, and short-range order is quantified by the nearest-neighbor spacing distribution and long-range order by the spectral form factor and number variance. The Rosenzweig-Porter model provides the interpolating distribution between Poisson and GSE. The stick-versus-Poisson distinction at unitarity is traced to an asymptotic formula (Eq. 5)

What would settle it

Count all l=0 relative-energy eigenvalues in a fixed window by diagonalizing a large truncated version of Eq. (9) and compare with the known large-n count of the unitary spectrum; if the numerical count is about half the expected number, the S^4 repulsion is an artifact of level thinning. In parallel, a cold-atom experiment measuring survival probability after a quench would show whether the correlation-hole end carries the GSE logarithmic peak that a thinned GOE spectrum lacks.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central numerical discovery is that the unfolded level-spacing distribution of the l=0 relative-motion spectrum follows the GSE Wigner surmise P(S) ∝ S^4 exp(-A S^2) for weak contact interactions, with a correlation hole in the spectral form factor carrying the GSE logarithmic singularity and number variance matching the GSE prediction. This holds for both bosons and mass-imbalanced fermions, far from unitarity. At unitarity the same observables become regular: Poissonian when the angle K=arctan(...) is incommensurate with pi, and a discrete 'stick' distribution with only a few allowed spacings when K/pi is rational. The authors argue that because no Kramers doubling is present, the beta

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the numerical spectrum is complete: if the variational construction quietly dropped every second eigenvalue, the unfolded spectrum would look GSE even though the true system was GOE, and the paper does not show a quantitative level-count check.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • GSE statistics (beta=4) do not, by themselves, certify symplectic symmetry: a spinless, time-reversal-invariant system can mimic them, so Dyson-class assignments based on symmetry alone can be wrong.
  • Weakly interacting three-body systems in harmonic traps are chaotic in the RMT sense and should thermalize through the corresponding many-body mechanism, contradicting any simple integrability assumption for few-body trapped gases.
  • The strongly interacting unitary limit is not a single universality: depending on the mass ratio, it shows Poisson or stick statistics, so transport and relaxation properties should differ sharply across commensurate/incommensurate ratios.
  • The Rosenzweig-Porter parameter lambda gives a one-parameter quantitative account of the chaotic-to-regular crossover as scattering length varies, offering a benchmark for future spectral calculations.
  • The system is experimentally realizable with cold atoms in microtraps; the predicted spectral form factor could be observed through the survival probability after a quench.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If a level-completeness check confirms the spectrum is not a thinned GOE, the natural next step is to search for an effective antiunitary symmetry that squares to -1 in a reduced subspace; such a symmetry would make the system 'quaternion real' without Kramers degeneracy in the physical Hilbert space.
  • The commensurability criterion could be tested directly by tuning mass imbalance in a Fermi mixture: near unitarity, small changes in kappa should switch the level-spacing histogram between continuous Poisson and discrete stick.
  • Extending the same spectral analysis to four or more trapped particles would show whether the GSE-like repulsion is a few-body accident or a general mechanism in few-body traps.
  • An experimental time-domain probe — measuring survival probability in a single triad after a quench — could distinguish GSE from thinned-GOE by the presence of the logarithmic-bulge feature at the end of the correlation hole.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a numerical/semi-analytic study of three contact-interacting particles in a spherical harmonic trap (identical bosons or mass-imbalanced fermions) and reports spectral statistics of the l=0 relative-motion spectrum. For weak finite scattering length, the unfolded level-spacing distribution, spectral form factor, and number variance all match GSE (β=4) predictions, despite the system being spinless and time-reversal invariant with no Kramers degeneracy. In the unitary limit the authors report Poisson or 'stick' statistics depending on the commensurability of a mass-ratio angle K/π, and they describe the finite-a_s crossover with a Rosenzweig-Porter fit. The central claim is that GSE statistics arise without symplectic symmetry.

Significance. If established, the result would be a striking counterexample to the usual association of β=4 with symplectic symmetry and would broaden the scope of RMT universality in few-body quantum systems. The paper has genuine strengths: the GSE comparison uses fixed textbook predictions with no fitted parameters; three independent diagnostics (P(S), SFF, number variance) are consistent; the Rosenzweig-Porter parameter λ is explicitly a fit and is not used to force the β=4 result; and the semi-analytic construction yields large spectra for a physically realizable cold-atom system. However, the central claim rests on the completeness of the truncated numerical spectrum (Eq. 9). The manuscript explicitly considers and dismisses the 'thinned GOE' alternative on the basis of 'this appears to be untrue' (Discussion), without a quantitative level-count or basis-convergence check. Because thinning every second level of a GOE spectrum reproduces exactly the three GSE diagnostics used here, this gap is load-bearing.

major comments (2)
  1. [End Matter, Eq. (9); Discussion, p.4] The thinned-GOE alternative is dismissed with 'this appears to be untrue' but no quantitative check is provided. The GSE claim is made at finite a_s, where the spectrum comes from truncating Eq. (9). If the truncation systematically omitted every second eigenvalue in each cluster, the nearest-neighbor spacings would be sums of two GOE spacings and would show quartic repulsion; the SFF and number variance would also match GSE. The statement in the End Matter that Eq. (13) 'exhaust[s] the spectrum' concerns unitarity only and does not cover the finite-a_s regime. Please provide a level-count or basis-convergence test: e.g., the number of converged eigenvalues versus the dimension of the truncated basis, and a demonstration that varying the truncation does not alter the parity of the level count per cluster.
  2. [Figs. 2, 4, 5] The agreement with GSE is shown visually, but no quantitative goodness-of-fit or sample-size information is given for the SFF and number variance. Because the thinned-GOE alternative produces the same three diagnostics, a direct statistical comparison (e.g., Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of P(S) against the GSE and the thinned-GOE distributions) would be a decisive, inexpensive addition. Please also report the number of clusters and eigenvalues entering Figs. 4 and 5.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Level-spacing statistics, Eq. (5)] The asymptotic formula for α_{n,l} mod 2 is stated without proof or reference. Please provide a derivation in an appendix or a citation to a source where it is established.
  2. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption's description of the number of levels ('right two histograms ... ≈19000 levels. The rest ... ≈1100 except the top-left most ... ≈360') is confusing; please label each panel with its parameters and level count.
  3. [End Matter] The text uses 'laughlinian states'; please ensure the capitalization follows standard usage (Laughlinian).
  4. [General] Please state the truncation dimension used for the matrix in Eq. (9) and the convergence criterion for accepting eigenvalues, at least for the data shown in Figs. 2–5.
  5. [Level-spacing statistics, near Fig. 2] Typo: 'Possonian' should be 'Poissonian'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; central GSE claim rests on independent numerical spectra compared with external RMT benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper's central claim that a spinless, time-reversal-invariant three-body system shows GSE (β=4) level repulsion is based on numerically computed energy spectra compared against standard RMT predictions (Wigner surmise, Mehta's spectral form factor and number variance). These are external benchmarks, not derived from the model, and no parameter is fitted to force the β=4 result. The Rosenzweig-Porter parameter λ is explicitly and appropriately labeled as a best-fit quantity describing the crossover, so it is not a fitted input masquerading as a prediction. The only self-citations are Ref. [65] (co-authored by Dietz) for the analytic Rosenzweig-Porter spacing distribution and Ref. [46] (co-authored by Kerin) for the variational method; both are established, independently verifiable tools and do not carry the load of the main claim. The nearest candidate for a circular issue is the completeness of the numerically generated spectrum: the paper concedes that missing every second eigenvalue would mimic GOE-as-GSE, but asserts 'this appears to be untrue' without quantitative proof. However, this is a correctness or numerical-convergence risk, not a circular derivation: even if the spectrum were incomplete, the statistical indicators would still not be constructed from the claimed conclusion, and the derivation chain would remain input-to-output rather than output-to-input. The paper also openly states that it cannot yet identify which symmetry causes the GSE statistics, which further demonstrates that the result is not an artifact of an imported uniqueness theorem or ansatz. Overall, the derivation is self-contained with respect to RMT comparisons, and the minor self-citations are not load-bearing.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The core numerical claim adds no invented entities; it depends on the completeness of the computed spectrum (unverified), the unproved Eq. (5), and standard RMT/contact-interaction assumptions. The RP parameter and unfolding coefficients are the fitted parameters.

free parameters (3)
  • Rosenzweig-Porter λ(a_s) = varies with a_s; not tabulated
    Best-fit RP parameter for each scattering length (Fig. 3); describes interpolation between Poisson and GSE, explicitly a fit.
  • Unfolding coefficients a_n, b_n per cluster = not listed
    Fit of N_smooth(E) in Eq. (3) to each cluster's cumulative density; a flexible multi-parameter fit whose details affect the unfolded spacings.
  • Three-body parameter / matrix truncation size = not listed
    For bosons (Efimov states), the finite dimension of Eq. (9) sets the non-universal three-body parameter; acknowledged to exist, argued not to affect statistics.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Bethe-Peierls zero-range boundary condition (Eq. 2) defines the interaction.
    Standard model for ultracold s-wave interactions; assumes contact interaction valid for atoms in microtraps.
  • domain assumption A finite truncation of the variational matrix (9) captures all universal states needed for the spectral statistics; no levels are systematically missed.
    Completeness of the computed spectrum is asserted but not quantitatively demonstrated; the every-second-eigenvalue alternative is dismissed verbally.
  • ad hoc to paper Eq. (5) asymptotic formula for α_{n,l} mod 2 (stated without proof).
    Load-bearing for the claim that K/π commensurability controls unitary statistics; derivation not shown or cited.
  • domain assumption RMT statistical predictions (BGS conjecture) apply to a system with no clear classical analogue.
    The authors justify by pointing to nuclear systems; this is an assumption about universality.
  • domain assumption Per-cluster unfolding with Eq. (3) yields unbiased spacings.
    Standard unfolding assumption; the fit's many parameters could absorb long-range fluctuations but should not create short-range repulsion.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quartic level repulsion in a quantum chaotic three-body system without symplectic symmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YOIHMMS7

@misc{pith2026251006772,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quartic level repulsion in a quantum chaotic three-body system without symplectic symmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YOIHMMS7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.06772}
}
read the original abstract

Among the fundamental symmetry classes of quantum chaotic systems in Dyson's threefold way, the symplectic class is rarely observed in nature. Characterized by the strongest possible level repulsion in the energy spectrum, the symplectic symmetry class also implies a double (Kramers) degeneracy of levels. Studying the spectral statistics of three quantum particles (identical bosons or mass-imbalanced fermions) in a harmonic trap, we find numerical evidence for strong level repulsion in the regime of weak contact interactions. While the statistical indicators are consistent with quantum chaos in systems with symplectic symmetry, the absence of Kramers degeneracy rules out this symmetry. In the strongly-interacting unitary limit either Poissonian or stick statistics are observed (depending on commensurability of the mass ratio) indicating regular dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.06772 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The relative energy spectrum defined by Eqs. ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Transition from strong level repulsion to integrable statistics in the quantum three-body problem. Shown are the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Best-fit value for the Rosenzweig-Porter parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. The spectral form factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Parity-dependent double degeneracy and spectral statistics in the projected dice lattice

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    In the projected π-flux dice-lattice Hubbard model, even-N spectra are multi-block GOE while odd-N spectra are exactly doubly degenerate with GUE statistics between doublets.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 2 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Bohigas, M

    O. Bohigas, M. J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, Character- ization of chaotic quantum spectra and universality of level fluctuation laws, Phys. Rev. Lett.52, 1 (1984)

    1984

  2. [2]

    E. P. Wigner, Characteristic vectors of bordered matrices with infinite dimensions, The Collected Works of Eugene Paul Wigner: Part A: The Scientific Papers , 524 (1993)

    1993

  3. [3]

    Casati, F

    G. Casati, F. Valz-Gris, and I. Guarnieri, On the connec- tion between quantization of nonintegrable systems and statistical theory of spectra, Lettere al Nuovo Cimento (1971-1985)28, 279 (1980)

    1971

  4. [4]

    Haake, S

    F. Haake, S. Gnutzmann, and M. Ku´ s,Quantum Signa- tures of Chaos(Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2018)

    2018

  5. [5]

    H. J. St¨ ockmann,Quantum Chaos: An Introduction, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, 1999)

    1999

  6. [6]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system, Phys. Rev. A43, 2046 (1991)

  7. [7]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E50, 888 (1994)

    1994

  8. [8]

    Torres-Herrera and L

    E. Torres-Herrera and L. F. Santos, Dynamics at the many-body localization transition, Physical Review B 92, 014208 (2015)

    2015

Show all 91 references
  1. [9]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Advances in Physics65, 239 (2016)

    2016

  2. [10]

    E. J. Torres-Herrera and L. F. Santos, Dynamical man- ifestations of quantum chaos: correlation hole and bulge, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences375, 20160434 (2017)

    2017

  3. [11]

    E. J. Torres-Herrera and L. F. Santos, Extended noner- godic states in disordered many-body quantum systems, Annalen der Physik529, 1600284 (2017)

    2017

  4. [12]

    E. J. Torres-Herrera, A. M. Garc ´ ıa-Garc ´ ıa, and L. F. Santos, Generic dynamical features of quenched inter- acting quantum systems: Survival probability, density imbalance, and out-of-time-ordered correlator, Physical Review B97, 060303 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    L. F. Santos and E. J. Torres-Herrera, Nonequilibrium quantum dynamics of many-body systems, inChaotic, Fractional, and Complex Dynamics: New Insights and Perspectives(Springer, 2017) pp. 231–260

    2017

  6. [14]

    Schiulaz, E

    M. Schiulaz, E. J. Torres-Herrera, and L. F. Santos, Thouless and relaxation time scales in many-body quan- tum systems, Physical Review B99, 174313 (2019)

    2019

  7. [15]

    de la Cruz, S

    J. de la Cruz, S. Lerma-Hern´ andez, and J. G. Hirsch, Quantum chaos in a system with high degree of symme- tries, Physical Review E102, 032208 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Pal and D

    A. Pal and D. A. Huse, Many-body localization phase transition, Phys. Rev. B82, 174411 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    Serbyn, Z

    M. Serbyn, Z. Papi´ c, and D. A. Abanin, Local conserva- tion laws and the structure of the many-body localized states, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 127201 (2013)

    2013

  10. [18]

    V. E. Kravtsov, I. M. Khaymovich, E. Cuevas, and M. Amini, A random matrix model with localization and ergodic transitions, New J. Phys.17, 122002 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    M. Pino, J. Tabanera, and P. Serna, From ergodic to non-ergodic chaos in rosenzweig–porter model, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical52, 475101 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Alet and N

    F. Alet and N. Laflorencie, Many-body localization: An introduction and selected topics, Comptes Rendus Physique19, 498 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    ˇSuntajs, J

    J. ˇSuntajs, J. Bonˇ ca, T. Prosen, and L. Vidmar, Quan- tum chaos challenges many-body localization, Physical Review E102, 062144 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    V. B. Bulchandani, D. A. Huse, and S. Gopalakrishnan, Onset of many-body quantum chaos due to breaking in- tegrability, Physical Review B105, 214308 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Santhanam, S

    M. Santhanam, S. Paul, and J. B. Kannan, Quantum kicked rotor and its variants: Chaos, localization and beyond, Physics Reports956, 1 (2022)

    2022

  16. [24]

    Cohen-Tannoudji and D

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji and D. Gu´ ery-Odelin,Advances in Atomic Physics: An Overview(WORLD SCIENTIFIC, 2011)

    2011

  17. [25]

    W. D. Phillips and H. Metcalf, Laser deceleration of an atomic beam, Physical Review Letters48, 596 (1982)

    1982

  18. [26]

    Chu, Laser manipulation of atoms and particles, Sci- ence253, 861 (1991)

    S. Chu, Laser manipulation of atoms and particles, Sci- ence253, 861 (1991)

    1991

  19. [27]

    C. C. Tannoudji, G. Grynberg, and J. Dupont-Roe, Atom-photon interactions(New York, NY (United States); John Wiley and Sons Inc., 1992). 6

    1992

  20. [28]

    E. A. Burt, R. W. Ghrist, C. J. Myatt, M. J. Holland, E. A. Cornell, and C. E. Wieman, Coherence, Corre- lations, and Collisions: What One Learns about Bose- Einstein Condensates from Their Decay, Physical Review Letters79, 337 (1997)

    1997

  21. [29]

    B. D. Esry, C. H. Greene, and J. P. Burke, Recombination of Three Atoms in the Ultracold Limit, Physical Review Letters83, 1751 (1999)

    1999

  22. [30]

    Eismann, L

    U. Eismann, L. Khaykovich, S. Laurent, I. Ferrier- Barbut, B. S. Rem, A. T. Grier, M. Delehaye, F. Chevy, C. Salomon, L.-C. Ha,et al., Universal loss dynamics in a unitary bose gas, Physical Review X6, 021025 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Reynolds, E

    L. Reynolds, E. Schwartz, U. Ebling, M. Weyland, J. Brand, and M. Andersen, Direct measurements of col- lisional dynamics in cold atom triads, Physical Review Letters124, 073401 (2020)

    2020

  24. [32]

    A. R. Kolovsky and A. Buchleitner, Quantum chaos in the Bose-Hubbard model, Europhysics Letters68, 632 (2004)

    2004

  25. [33]

    Chakrabarti, A

    B. Chakrabarti, A. Biswas, V. K. B. Kota, K. Roy, and S. K. Haldar, Energy-level statistics of interacting trapped bosons, Physical Review A86, 013637 (2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    K. Roy, B. Chakrabarti, A. Biswas, V. K. B. Kota, and S. K. Haldar, Spectral fluctuation and 1/f α noise in the energy level statistics of interacting trapped bosons, Physical Review E85, 061119 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    Huber, O

    D. Huber, O. V. Marchukov, H. W. Hammer, and A. G. Volosniev, Morphology of three-body quantum states from machine learning, New Journal of Physics23, 065009 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    Fogarty, M

    T. Fogarty, M. ´A. Garc ´ ıa-March, L. F. Santos, and N. L. Harshman, Probing the edge between integrability and quantum chaos in interacting few-atom systems, Quan- tum5, 486 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    Lyd˙ zba and T

    P. Lyd˙ zba and T. Sowi´ nski, Signatures of quantum chaos in low-energy mixtures of few fermions, Physical Review A106, 013301 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    T. D. Anh-Tai, M. Mikkelsen, T. Busch, and T. Foga- rty, Quantum chaos in interacting Bose-Bose mixtures, SciPost Phys.15, 048 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    de la Cruz, C

    J. de la Cruz, C. Diaz-Mejia, S. Lerma-Hernandez, and J. G. Hirsch, Thermalization in trapped bosonic systems with disorder, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.04818 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    J. P. Kestner and L. M. Duan, Level crossing in the three- body problem for strongly interacting fermions in a har- monic trap, Physical Review A76, 033611 (2007)

    2007

  33. [41]

    X. J. Liu, H. Hu, and P. D. Drummond, Virial expan- sion for a strongly correlated fermi gas, Physical Review Letters102, 160401 (2009)

    2009

  34. [42]

    X. J. Liu, H. Hu, and P. D. Drummond, Three attrac- tively interacting fermions in a harmonic trap: Exact solution, ferromagnetism, and high-temperature thermo- dynamics, Physical Review A82, 023619 (2010)

    2010

  35. [43]

    Werner and Y

    F. Werner and Y. Castin, Unitary quantum three-body problem in a harmonic trap, Physical Review Letters97, 150401 (2006)

    2006

  36. [44]

    Werner and Y

    F. Werner and Y. Castin, Unitary gas in an isotropic harmonic trap: Symmetry properties and applications, Physical Review A74, 053604 (2006)

    2006

  37. [45]

    Werner,Trapped cold atoms with resonant interac- tions: unitary gas and three-body problem, Ph.D

    F. Werner,Trapped cold atoms with resonant interac- tions: unitary gas and three-body problem, Ph.D. thesis, Theses, Universit´ e Pierre et Marie Curieˆ a Paris VI, Paris France (2008)

    2008

  38. [46]

    A. D. Kerin and A. M. Martin, Energetics and efimov states of three interacting bosons and mass-imbalanced fermions in a three-dimensional spherical harmonic trap, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics56, 055201 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    M. V. Berry, M. Tabor, and J. M. Ziman, Level clustering in the regular spectrum, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences356, 375 (1997)

    1997

  40. [48]

    Dro˙ zd˙ z and J

    S. Dro˙ zd˙ z and J. Speth, Near-ground-state spectral fluc- tuations in multidimensional separable systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 529 (1991)

    1991

  41. [49]

    Chakrabarti and B

    B. Chakrabarti and B. Hu, Level correlation in coupled harmonic oscillator systems, Physics Letters A315, 93 (2003)

    2003

  42. [50]

    C. H. Joyner, S. M¨ uller, and M. Sieber, GSE statistics without spin, Europhysics Letters107, 50004 (2014)

    2014

  43. [51]

    Bethe and R

    H. Bethe and R. Peierls, Quantum theory of the diplon, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A- Mathematical and Physical Sciences148, 146 (1935)

    1935

  44. [52]

    Guhr and H

    T. Guhr and H. A. Weidenm¨ uller, Coexistence of collec- tivity and chaos in nuclei, Ann. Phys.193, 472 (1989)

    1989

  45. [53]

    Zelevinsky, Quantum chaos and complexity in nuclei, Ann

    V. Zelevinsky, Quantum chaos and complexity in nuclei, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.46, 237 (1996)

    1996

  46. [54]

    T. Guhr, A. M¨ uller-Groeling, and H. A. Weidenm¨ uller, Random-matrix theories in quantum physics: common concepts, Physics Reports299, 189 (1998)

    1998

  47. [55]

    H. A. Weidenm¨ uller and G. E. Mitchell, Random matri- ces and chaos in nuclear physics: Nuclear structure, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 539 (2009)

    2009

  48. [56]

    F. I. Giasemis,Quantum chaos in many-body systems without a classical analogue, Master’s thesis, National Technical University of Athens (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    Villase˜ nor, L

    D. Villase˜ nor, L. F. Santos, and P. Barberis-Blostein, Breakdown of the quantum distinction of regular and chaotic classical dynamics in dissipative systems, Physi- cal Review Letters133, 240404 (2024)

    2024

  50. [58]

    Endo and Y

    S. Endo and Y. Castin, The interaction-sensitive states of a trapped two-component ideal Fermi gas and application to the virial expansion of the unitary Fermi gas, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical49, 265301 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    C. J. Bradly and J. Brand, Prospects for creating a metastable Laughlinian few-boson gas with cold atoms, in preparation

  52. [60]

    G´ omez, R

    J. G´ omez, R. A. Molina, A. Rela˜ no, and J. Retamosa, Misleading signatures of quantum chaos, Physical Review E66, 036209 (2002)

    2002

  53. [61]

    A. A. Abul-Magd and A. Y. Abul-Magd, Unfolding of the spectrum for chaotic and mixed systems, Physica A: Sta- tistical Mechanics and its Applications396, 185 (2014)

    2014

  54. [62]

    S. M. Abuelenin, On the spectral unfolding of chaotic and mixed systems, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications492, 564 (2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    M. L. Mehta,Random Matrices(Academic Press Lon- don, 1990)

    1990

  56. [64]

    Repulsion of Energy Levels

    N. Rosenzweig and C. E. Porter, “Repulsion of Energy Levels” in Complex Atomic Spectra, Physical Review 120, 1698 (1960)

    1960

  57. [65]

    ˇCadeˇ z, D

    T. ˇCadeˇ z, D. K. Nandy, D. Rosa, A. Andreanov, and B. Dietz, The Rosenzweig–Porter model revisited for the three Wigner–Dyson symmetry classes, New Journal of Physics26, 083018 (2024)

    2024

  58. [66]

    Schierenberg, F

    S. Schierenberg, F. Bruckmann, and T. Wettig, Wigner 7 surmise for mixed symmetry classes in random matrix theory, Phys. Rev. E85, 061130 (2012)

    2012

  59. [67]

    T. A. Brody, J. Flores, J. B. French, P. A. Mello, A. Pandey, and S. S. Wong, Random-matrix physics: spectrum and strength fluctuations, Reviews of Modern Physics53, 385 (1981)

    1981

  60. [68]

    Liu, Spectral form factors and late time quantum chaos, Physical Review D98, 086026 (2018)

    J. Liu, Spectral form factors and late time quantum chaos, Physical Review D98, 086026 (2018)

    2018

  61. [69]

    J. Li, S. Yan, T. Prosen, and A. Chan, Spectral form fac- tor in chaotic, localized, and integrable open quantum many-body systems, arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.01641 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Prakash, J

    A. Prakash, J. Pixley, and M. Kulkarni, Universal spec- tral form factor for many-body localization, Physical Re- view Research3, L012019 (2021)

    2021

  63. [71]

    D. A. Zarate-Herrada, L. F. Santos, and E. J. Torres- Herrera, Generalized survival probability, Entropy25, 205 (2023)

    2023

  64. [72]

    A. K. Das, C. Cianci, D. G. Cabral, D. A. Zarate- Herrada, P. Pinney, S. Pilatowsky-Cameo, A. S. Matsoukas-Roubeas, V. S. Batista, A. del Campo, E. J. Torres-Herrera,et al., Proposal for many-body quan- tum chaos detection, Physical Review Research7, 013181 (2025)

    2025

  65. [73]

    F. J. Dyson, The threefold way. algebraic structure of symmetry groups and ensembles in quantum mechanics, Journal of Mathematical Physics3, 1199 (1962)

    1962

  66. [74]

    Berry, Semiclassical formula for the number variance of the riemann zeros, Nonlinearity1, 399 (1988)

    M. Berry, Semiclassical formula for the number variance of the riemann zeros, Nonlinearity1, 399 (1988)

    1988

  67. [75]

    Scharf, B

    R. Scharf, B. Dietz, M. Ku´ s, F. Haake, and M. V. Berry, Kramers'degeneracy and quartic level repulsion, Euro- phys. Lett. (EPL)5, 383 (1988)

    1988

  68. [76]

    Sacha and J

    K. Sacha and J. Zakrzewski, Driven rydberg atoms reveal quartic level repulsion, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 2269 (2001)

    2001

  69. [77]

    Kuemmeth, K

    F. Kuemmeth, K. I. Bolotin, S.-F. Shi, and D. C. Ralph, Measurement of discrete energy-level spectra in individ- ual chemically synthesized gold nanoparticles, Nano Lett. 8, 4506 (2008)

    2008

  70. [78]

    Rehemanjiang, M

    A. Rehemanjiang, M. Allgaier, C. Joyner, S. M¨ uller, M. Sieber, U. Kuhl, and H. J. St¨ ockmann, Microwave realization of the gaussian symplectic ensemble, Physical review letters117, 064101 (2016)

    2016

  71. [79]

    Akila and B

    M. Akila and B. Gutkin, GSE spectra in uni-directional quantum systems, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical52, 235201 (2019)

    2019

  72. [80]

    J. Lu, J. Che, X. Zhang, and B. Dietz, Experimental and numerical investigation of parametric spectral properties of quantum graphs with unitary or symplectic symmetry, Phys. Rev. E102, 022309 (2020)

    2020

  73. [81]

    J. Che, N. Gluth, S. K¨ ohnes, T. Guhr, and B. Dietz, Experimental study of the distributions of off-diagonal scattering-matrix elements of quantum graphs with sym- plectic symmetry, Phys. Rev. E112, 034208 (2025)

    2025

  74. [82]

    Serwane, G

    F. Serwane, G. Z¨ urn, T. Lompe, T. Ottenstein, A. Wenz, and S. Jochim, Deterministic preparation of a tunable few-fermion system, Science332, 336 (2011)

    2011

  75. [83]

    Z¨ urn, F

    G. Z¨ urn, F. Serwane, T. Lompe, A. N. Wenz, M. G. Ries, J. E. Bohn, and S. Jochim, Fermionization of two distinguishable fermions, Physical Review Letters108, 075303 (2012)

    2012

  76. [84]

    Z¨ urn, A

    G. Z¨ urn, A. N. Wenz, S. Murmann, A. Bergschneider, T. Lompe, and S. Jochim, Pairing in few-fermion sys- tems with attractive interactions, Physical Review Let- ters111, 175302 (2013)

    2013

  77. [85]

    Murmann, A

    S. Murmann, A. Bergschneider, V. M. Klinkhamer, G. Z¨ urn, T. Lompe, and S. Jochim, Two fermions in a double well: Exploring a fundamental building block of the hubbard model, Physical Review Letters114, 080402 (2015)

    2015

  78. [86]

    Werner and Y

    F. Werner and Y. Castin, General relations for quan- tum gases in two and three dimensions: Two-component fermions, Physical Review A86, 013626 (2012)

    2012

  79. [87]

    Gross and I

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, Quantum simulations with ultra- cold atoms in optical lattices, Science357, 995 (2017)

    2017

  80. [88]

    Sch¨ afer, T

    F. Sch¨ afer, T. Fukuhara, S. Sugawa, Y. Takasu, and Y. Takahashi, Tools for quantum simulation with ultra- cold atoms in optical lattices, Nature Reviews Physics2, 411 (2020)

    2020

  81. [89]

    C. B. Da˘ g, S. I. Mistakidis, A. Chan, and H. R. Sadegh- pour, Many-body quantum chaos in stroboscopically- driven cold atoms, Communications Physics6, 136 (2023)

    2023

  82. [90]

    Busch, B

    T. Busch, B. G. Englert, K. Rza˙ zewski, and M. Wilkens, Two cold atoms in a harmonic trap, Foundations of Physics28, 549 (1998)

    1998

  83. [91]

    Blume, M

    D. Blume, M. W. C. Sze, and J. L. Bohn, Harmoni- cally trapped four-boson system, Physical Review A97, 033621 (2018). End Matter We briefly review the derivations of the three-body relative energy spectrum. For finitea s we consider an ansatz wave function of the form [42] ψre...

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.