pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.10794 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-12 · 🪐 quant-ph

Symplectic perspective to quantum computing for Hamiltonian systems

Efstratios Koukoutsis , Kyriakos Hizanidis , Lucas I Inigo Gamiz , Oscar Amaro , Christos Tsironis , Abhay K. Ram , George Vahala This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 15:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords symplectic geometryquantum computingHamiltonian systemsgeometric quantizationKoopman-von Neumann encodingintegrable systemsquantum simulationLie canonical perturbation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Symplectic geometry maps classical Hamiltonian flows on Kähler manifolds directly to quantum unitary evolution, yielding exponentially compressed representations for quantum simulation.

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

The paper establishes an exact correspondence between quantum evolution and classical Hamiltonian dynamics on a Kähler manifold. This correspondence supports a geometric quantization scheme that identifies classical systems admitting exponentially compressed quantum representations. For Liouville-integrable Hamiltonians, action-angle variables together with Koopman-von Neumann encoding produce finite-dimensional unitary evolution, allowing entangled encodings that compress large phase-space ensembles. Lie canonical perturbation theory extends the method to non-integrable cases by constructing near-symplectic maps that keep unitary evolution within controlled error. Complexity analysis of the resulting quantum-symplectic scheme shows both exponential memory compression and a potential polynomial speedup with system size.

Core claim

The intrinsic geometric compatibility between unitary quantum evolution and symplectic phase-space dynamics permits an exact correspondence on a Kähler manifold that defines a geometric quantization procedure yielding exponentially compressed quantum representations of classical Hamiltonian systems. For Liouville-integrable dynamics, action-angle variables and Koopman-von Neumann encoding induce finite-dimensional unitary evolution that supports efficient parallel simulation of phase-space ensembles with entangled compression and amplitude-estimation speedups. Non-integrable systems are addressed by Lie canonical perturbation theory, which produces near-symplectic transformations preserving

What carries the argument

Exact correspondence between quantum evolution and classical Hamiltonian flow on a Kähler manifold, which directly enables the geometric quantization scheme for compressed representations.

If this is right

  • A family of classical Hamiltonian systems admits exponentially compressed quantum representations suitable for quantum simulation.
  • Liouville-integrable dynamics induce finite-dimensional unitary evolution through action-angle variables and Koopman-von Neumann encoding, enabling parallel evolution of large ensembles with entangled compression.
  • Amplitude estimation techniques yield quantum speed-ups for observable estimation in the compressed representation.
  • Lie canonical perturbation theory maps non-integrable dynamics to approximately integrable forms while preserving unitary evolution up to bounded error.
  • The overall quantum computational complexity exhibits exponential compression in memory requirements and a potential polynomial speed-up with respect to system size.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The scheme could be tested first on low-dimensional integrable examples to quantify the actual compression ratios before scaling to larger systems.
  • Connections may exist to geometric methods in quantum control, where the Kähler structure could inform pulse design for Hamiltonian simulation.
  • Error accumulation in the perturbation-theory step for chaotic systems would determine the practical range of the polynomial speedup.
  • The derived transport equation for phase-space observables might allow hybrid classical-quantum workflows that evolve coarse-grained statistics classically and fine details quantumly.

Load-bearing premise

The exact correspondence between quantum evolution and classical Hamiltonian flow on a Kähler manifold holds and directly yields a geometric quantization scheme with exponential compression; additionally, Lie canonical perturbation theory produces near-symplectic transformations that preserve unitary evolution up to a controlled error.

What would settle it

Numerical simulation of a known integrable Hamiltonian such as the harmonic oscillator under the proposed quantization scheme, checking whether the Hilbert-space dimension grows exponentially slower than standard grid discretizations while reproducing the exact unitary evolution.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.10794 by Abhay K. Ram, Christos Tsironis, Efstratios Koukoutsis, George Vahala, Kyriakos Hizanidis, Lucas I Inigo Gamiz, Oscar Amaro.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic of the Hilbert space representation as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Classical-like parallel evolution of the separable quan [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Quantum-parallel evolution of the entangled quantum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Unitary and symplectic evolution of the state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work develops a symplectic framework for quantum computing to be applied to classical Hamiltonian systems, exploiting the intrinsic geometric compatibility between unitary quantum evolution and symplectic phase-space dynamics in a two-fold way. The first part is devoted in establishing an exact correspondence between quantum evolution and classical Hamiltonian flow on a Kahler manifold. This correspondence enables a geometric quantization scheme that identifies a family of classical Hamiltonian systems admitting exponentially compressed quantum representations-appropriate for quantum simulation. In the second part we demonstrate that Liouville-integrable Hamiltonian dynamics induce finite-dimensional unitary evolution through action-angle variables and Koopman-von Neumann encoding. This allows efficient quantum representation and parallel evolution of large phase-space ensembles, where entangled encodings provide exponential compression in ensemble size and enable quantum speed-ups in observable estimation via amplitude estimation techniques. For non-integrable systems, Lie canonical perturbation theory is incorporated to construct near-symplectic transformations that map dynamics to approximately integrable forms, preserving unitary evolution up to a controlled error. We derive the resulting quantum computational complexity of the proposed quantum-symplectic scheme, revealing both an exponential compression in memory requirements and a potential polynomial speed-up with respect to the system size. Finally, the transport evolution equation governing the quantum phase-space observables is obtained.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a symplectic framework linking quantum computing to classical Hamiltonian systems. It establishes an exact correspondence between quantum evolution and classical Hamiltonian flow on Kähler manifolds, enabling a geometric quantization scheme that identifies families of systems with exponentially compressed quantum representations. For Liouville-integrable dynamics, action-angle variables and Koopman-von Neumann encoding yield finite-dimensional unitary evolution, supporting exponential ensemble compression and amplitude-estimation speed-ups. For non-integrable systems, Lie canonical perturbation theory constructs near-symplectic maps to approximately integrable forms while preserving unitary evolution up to controlled error. The paper derives the resulting quantum computational complexity, claiming exponential memory compression and polynomial speed-up in system size, and obtains the transport evolution equation for quantum phase-space observables.

Significance. If the central correspondence and error-controlled perturbation hold with rigorous bounds, the work could provide a geometrically grounded route to resource-efficient quantum simulation of Hamiltonian systems, particularly for large ensembles. The combination of symplectic geometry, geometric quantization, and Koopman-von Neumann methods is novel and, if substantiated, would strengthen the case for quantum advantages in classical dynamics beyond standard Trotter or variational approaches.

major comments (2)
  1. The section on non-integrable systems (Lie canonical perturbation theory construction): the assertion that the resulting near-symplectic transformations preserve unitary evolution up to a controlled error is load-bearing for the polynomial speed-up claim, yet no explicit bounds incorporating the maximal Lyapunov exponent are supplied. In chaotic regimes, O(ε) perturbations generically produce exponential trajectory divergence, so the error in observables or in the quantum encoding need not remain polynomially bounded for t ≫ 1/λ; this directly affects whether the stated complexity advantage extends to general Hamiltonian systems.
  2. The derivation of quantum computational complexity (final complexity analysis section): the claimed exponential compression in memory requirements and polynomial speed-up with respect to system size are stated as consequences of the encoding and perturbation scheme, but the scaling is not compared against standard quantum simulation costs (e.g., qubit requirements for phase-space discretization or Trotter error scaling), nor are concrete resource counts or theorems provided that would confirm the compression factor is independent of the perturbation order.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract and introduction would benefit from a brief statement of the precise assumptions under which the polynomial speed-up holds (e.g., time scales relative to Lyapunov time).
  2. Notation for the Kähler manifold and the Koopman-von Neumann encoding could be introduced with a short table or diagram to clarify the mapping between classical phase-space functions and quantum operators.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments highlight important points regarding rigor in error bounds and complexity comparisons. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The section on non-integrable systems (Lie canonical perturbation theory construction): the assertion that the resulting near-symplectic transformations preserve unitary evolution up to a controlled error is load-bearing for the polynomial speed-up claim, yet no explicit bounds incorporating the maximal Lyapunov exponent are supplied. In chaotic regimes, O(ε) perturbations generically produce exponential trajectory divergence, so the error in observables or in the quantum encoding need not remain polynomially bounded for t ≫ 1/λ; this directly affects whether the stated complexity advantage extends to general Hamiltonian systems.

    Authors: We agree that explicit incorporation of the maximal Lyapunov exponent λ is required to make the error bounds rigorous for long-time evolution in chaotic regimes. The manuscript derives a controlled error from the Lie canonical perturbation series but does not explicitly track its growth with λ or demonstrate polynomial boundedness for t ≫ 1/λ. In the revision we will add a dedicated subsection deriving the time-dependent error bound O(ε exp(λ t)) for observables and showing that the unitary preservation holds with polynomially bounded error only for t = O((1/λ) log(1/ε)). We will also clarify that the claimed polynomial speed-up applies to the regime where the near-integrable approximation remains valid and discuss the breakdown for fully chaotic long-time dynamics, thereby limiting the scope of the general-Hamiltonian claim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The derivation of quantum computational complexity (final complexity analysis section): the claimed exponential compression in memory requirements and polynomial speed-up with respect to system size are stated as consequences of the encoding and perturbation scheme, but the scaling is not compared against standard quantum simulation costs (e.g., qubit requirements for phase-space discretization or Trotter error scaling), nor are concrete resource counts or theorems provided that would confirm the compression factor is independent of the perturbation order.

    Authors: We acknowledge the absence of direct comparisons and concrete resource counts. The exponential compression originates from the finite-dimensional Koopman-von Neumann representation on the action-angle torus, whose dimension is set by the integrable part and remains independent of perturbation order because the near-symplectic map is constructed to preserve the torus structure. In the revision we will insert a new subsection that (i) compares qubit count to standard phase-space discretization (showing O(log N) vs. O(N) scaling for ensemble size N), (ii) contrasts Trotter error scaling with the perturbation-controlled error, and (iii) supplies explicit resource theorems proving the compression factor depends only on the number of degrees of freedom and not on the perturbation order ε. Concrete gate-count estimates for amplitude estimation will also be added. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivation builds from geometric correspondence and standard encodings without reducing to self-defined inputs or fitted predictions.

full rationale

The provided abstract and description outline a two-part construction: an exact quantum-classical correspondence on Kähler manifolds leading to geometric quantization for compression, followed by action-angle/Koopman-von Neumann encoding for integrable cases and Lie perturbation for non-integrable ones. No equations, self-citations, or parameter-fitting steps are quoted that would make any claimed compression or speed-up tautological by construction. The complexity derivation is presented as following from the scheme rather than presupposing its outputs. This is the common case of a self-contained proposal whose validity rests on external verification of the correspondence and error bounds, not internal redefinition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract relies on standard domain assumptions from symplectic geometry and quantum mechanics but supplies no explicit free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms; without the full text it is not possible to audit fitted constants or new postulated objects.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Phase space admits a Kähler manifold structure compatible with both symplectic flow and unitary quantum evolution
    Invoked to establish the exact correspondence between quantum and classical dynamics.
  • domain assumption Liouville-integrable systems possess action-angle variables that induce finite-dimensional unitary evolution under Koopman-von Neumann encoding
    Used to obtain efficient quantum representation and parallel ensemble evolution.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5537 in / 1567 out tokens · 38380 ms · 2026-05-10T15:22:36.330204+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Partition function for thek-action,I k,V ′: ˆf= N ′ sX j ˆPj ⊗ ˆPk (55) where ˆPdenotes a projection operator in the re- spective basis, Ik,V ′ =⟨ρ| ˆf|ρ⟩= 1 Ns N ′ sX j I j k.(56)

    work page

  2. [2]

    (58) is the total mean energy

    Energy partition function,E V ′: ˆf= N ′ sX j ˆPj ⊗ NX k ωk ˆPk,(57) EV ′ =⟨ρ| ˆf|ρ⟩= 1 Ns N ′ sX j NX k ωkI j k.(58) WhenN ′ s =N s, Eq. (58) is the total mean energy

    work page

  3. [3]

    Coherence partition function,C V ′: ˆf= N ′ sX j ˆPj ⊗ NX k̸=m |k⟩ ⟨m|,(59) CV ′ =⟨ρ| ˆf|ρ⟩= 1 Ns N ′ sX j NX k̸=m q I j kI j m cos (θk −θ m).(60) The last expression provides information about the cross correlations between the various modes. The key advantage of encoding of phase-space aver- ages as quantum observables lies in the fundamental dif- feren...

    work page

  4. [4]

    A. M. Childs and N. Wiebe, Hamiltonian simulation us- ing linear combinations of unitary operations, Quantum Inf. Comput.12, 10.26421/QIC12.11-12-1 (2012)

    work page doi:10.26421/qic12.11-12-1 2012

  5. [5]

    A. W. Schlimgen, K. Head-Marsden, L. M. Sager, P. Narang, and D. A. Mazziotti, Quantum simulation of open quantum systems using a unitary decomposition of operators, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 270503 (2021)

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    A. W. Schlimgen, K. Head-Marsden, L. M. Sager-Smith, P. Narang, and D. A. Mazziotti, Quantum state prepara- tion and nonunitary evolution with diagonal operators, Phys. Rev. A106, 022414 (2022)

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    S. Jin, N. Liu, and Y. Yu, Quantum simulation of partial differential equations: Applications and detailed analy- sis, Phys. Rev. A108, 032603 (2023)

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Koukoutsis, P

    E. Koukoutsis, P. Papagiannis, K. Hizanidis, A. K. Ram, G. Vahala, ´O. Amaro, L. I. I. Gamiz, and D. Vallis, Quantum implementation of non-unitary operations with biorthogonal representations, Quantum Inf. Comput.25, 141 (2025)

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Quantum al- gorithm for linear systems of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 150502 (2009)

    work page 2009

  10. [10]

    D. W. Berry, High-order quantum algorithm for solving linear differential equations, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 105301 (2014)

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Koukoutsis, K

    E. Koukoutsis, K. Hizanidis, A. K. Ram, and G. Vahala, Dyson maps and unitary evolution for maxwell equations in tensor dielectric media, Phys. Rev. A107, 042215 (2023)

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    An, J.-P

    D. An, J.-P. Liu, and L. Lin, Linear combination of hamil- tonian simulation for nonunitary dynamics with opti- mal state preparation cost, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 150603 (2023)

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Babbush, D

    R. Babbush, D. W. Berry, R. Kothari, R. D. Somma, and N. Wiebe, Exponential quantum speedup in simulat- ing coupled classical oscillators, Phys. Rev. X13, 041041 (2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Novikau, I

    I. Novikau, I. Dodin, and E. Startsev, Simulation of lin- ear non-hermitian boundary-value problems with quan- tum singular-value transformation, Phys. Rev. Appl.19, 054012 (2023)

    work page 2023

  15. [15]

    B¨ osch, M

    C. B¨ osch, M. Schade, G. Aloisi, S. D. Keating, and A. Fichtner, Quantum wave simulation with sources and loss functions, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033225 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Amaro, L

    ´O. Amaro, L. I. I˜ nigo Gamiz, and M. Vranic, Variational quantum simulation of the fokker–planck equation ap- plied to quantum radiation reaction, J. Plasma Phys.91, 122 (2025)

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Wawrzyniak, J

    D. Wawrzyniak, J. Winter, S. Schmidt, T. Indinger, C. F. Janßen, U. Schramm, and N. A. Adams, A quantum algorithm for the lattice-boltzmann method advection- diffusion equation, Comput. Phys. Commun.306, 109373 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    Sundar, B

    B. Sundar, B. Evert, V. Geyko, A. Patterson, I. Joseph, and Y. Shi, Simulating plasma wave propagation on a superconducting quantum chip, Phys. Rev. Appl.25, 024077 (2026)

    work page 2026

  19. [19]

    L. I. I. Gamiz, ´Oscar Amaro, E. Koukoutsis, and M. Vrani´ c, Quantum monte carlo simulations for predict- ing electron-positron pair production via the linear breit- wheeler process (2026), arXiv:2601.03953 [physics.plasm- ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    V. I. Arnold,Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechan- ics(Springer, 1989)

    work page 1989

  21. [21]

    A. J. Lichtenberg and M. A. Lieberman,Regular and Chaotic Dynamics(Springer, 1992)

    work page 1992

  22. [22]

    J. V. Jos´ e and E. J. Saletan,Classical Dynamics: A Con- temporary Approach(Cambridge University Press, 1998)

    work page 1998

  23. [23]

    Joseph, Koopman–von neumann approach to quantum simulation of nonlinear classical dynamics, Phys

    I. Joseph, Koopman–von neumann approach to quantum simulation of nonlinear classical dynamics, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043102 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Wu and X

    H.-C. Wu and X. Li, Structure-preserving quantum al- gorithms for linear and nonlinear hamiltonian systems (2025), arXiv:2411.03599 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Heslot, Quantum mechanics as a classical theory, Phys

    A. Heslot, Quantum mechanics as a classical theory, Phys. Rev. D31, 1341 (1985)

    work page 1985

  26. [26]

    Ashtekar and T

    A. Ashtekar and T. A. Schilling, Geometrical formulation of quantum mechanics, inOn Einstein’s Path: Essays in Honor of Engelbert Schucking, edited by A. Harvey (Springer New York, New York, NY, 1999) pp. 23–65. 14

    work page 1999

  27. [27]

    D. C. Brody and L. P. Hughston, Geometric quantum mechanics, J. Geom. Phys.38, 19 (2001)

    work page 2001

  28. [28]

    Real quantum mechanics in a K¨ ahler space.arXiv preprint, arXiv:2504.16838 (2025)

    I. Volovich, Real quantum mechanics in a kahler space (2025), arXiv:2504.16838 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Kominis, K

    Y. Kominis, K. Hizanidis, D. Constantinescu, and O. Dumbrajs, Explicit near-symplectic mappings of hamiltonian systems with lie-generating functions, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.41, 115202 (2008)

    work page 2008

  30. [30]

    Strocchi, Complex coordinates and quantum mechan- ics, Rev

    F. Strocchi, Complex coordinates and quantum mechan- ics, Rev. Mod. Phys.38, 36 (1966)

    work page 1966

  31. [31]

    Feng and M

    K. Feng and M. Qin,Symplectic Geometric Algorithms for Hamiltonian Systems(Springer, 2010)

    work page 2010

  32. [32]

    J. S. Briggs and A. Eisfeld, Coherent quantum states from classical oscillator amplitudes, Phys. Rev. A85, 052111 (2012)

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    J. S. Briggs and A. Eisfeld, Quantum dynamics simula- tion with classical oscillators, Phys. Rev. A88, 062104 (2013)

    work page 2013

  34. [34]

    A. D. B. Manjarres, Hamiltonian point of view of quantum perturbation theory (2025), arXiv:2107.07050 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Vilela Mendes and V

    R. Vilela Mendes and V. I. Man’ko, Quantum control and the strocchi map, Phys. Rev. A67, 053404 (2003)

    work page 2003

  36. [36]

    I. V. Volovich, Complete integrability of quantum and classical dynamical systems, p-Adic Numbers Ultramet- ric Anal. Appl.11, 328 (2019)

    work page 2019

  37. [37]

    Dsouza, W

    V. Dsouza, W. Golletz, D. Kranas, B. Dioum, V. Sahgal, and E. Schirman, Quantum simulation of coupled har- monic oscillators: From theory to implementation (2026), arXiv:2603.05479 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  38. [38]

    S. S. Bullock and I. L. Markov, Asymptotically opti- mal circuits for arbitrary n-qubit diagonal comutations, Quantum Inf. Comput.4, 27–47 (2004)

    work page 2004

  39. [39]

    A. J. Brizard, Jacobi zeta function and action-angle coor- dinates for the pendulum, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Nu- mer. Simul.18, 511 (2013)

    work page 2013

  40. [40]

    Klimontovich, On the method of ”second quantiza- tion” in phase space, J

    Y. Klimontovich, On the method of ”second quantiza- tion” in phase space, J. Exptl. Theoret. Phys.33, 982 (1957)

    work page 1957

  41. [41]

    Klimontovich, Kinetic equations for classical nonideal plas- mas, J

    Y. Klimontovich, Kinetic equations for classical nonideal plas- mas, J. Exptl. Theoret. Phys.62, 1770 (1972)

    work page 1972

  42. [42]

    J. P. Dougherty, The statistical theory of non-equilibrium processes in a plasma. by yu. l. klimontovich (translated by h. s. h. massey and o. m. blunn), pergamon press,

    work page

  43. [43]

    284 pp. 70s., J. Plasma Phys.3, 148–148 (1969)

    work page 1969

  44. [44]

    A. N. Kaufman, Quasilinear diffusion of an axisymmetric toroidal plasma, Phys. Fluids15, 1063 (1972)

    work page 1972

  45. [45]

    Brassard, P

    G. Brassard, P. Høyer, M. Mosca, and A. Tapp, Quan- tum amplitude amplification and estimation, inQuan- tum Computation and Information, edited by J. Samuel J. Lomonaco (American Mathematical Society, 2002) p. 53–74

    work page 2002

  46. [46]

    Grinko, J

    D. Grinko, J. Gacon, C. Zoufal, and S. Woerner, Iterative quantum amplitude estimation, npj Quantum Inf.07, 10.1038/s41534-021-00379-1 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-021-00379-1 2021

  47. [47]

    Y. He, Y. Sun, J. Liu, and H. Qin, Volume-preserving algorithms for charged particle dynamics, J. Comput. Phys.281, 135 (2015)

    work page 2015

  48. [48]

    J. R. Cary, Lie transform perturbation theory for hamil- tonian systems, Phys. Reports79, 129 (1981)

    work page 1981

  49. [49]

    Kominis, A

    Y. Kominis, A. K. Ram, and K. Hizanidis, Kinetic theory for distribution functions of wave-particle interactions in plasmas, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 235001 (2010)

    work page 2010

  50. [50]

    Kominis, A

    Y. Kominis, A. K. Ram, and K. Hizanidis, Interaction of charged particles with localized electrostatic waves in a magnetized plasma, Phys. Rev. E85, 016404 (2012)

    work page 2012

  51. [51]

    S. S. Abdullaev, The hamilton-jacobi method and hamil- tonian maps, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.35, 2811 (2002)

    work page 2002

  52. [52]

    Hairer, G

    E. Hairer, G. Wanner, and C. Lubich,Geometric Nu- merical Integration: Structure-Preserving Algorithms for Ordinary Differential Equations(Springer, 2006)

    work page 2006