pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.29311 · v1 · pith:WFO7IZMQnew · submitted 2026-06-28 · ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech · hep-th· quant-ph

Pseudo entropy and topological phases of matter

Pramod Kamal Kharel , Manghang Limbu , Nabaraj Khatri , Ashish Khanal , Kiran Adhikari This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 02:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.stat-mech hep-thquant-ph
keywords pseudo entropytopological phasesSu-Schrieffer-Heeger modelentanglement entropyFisher zerosquantum quenchesboundary conditionsphase transitions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Pseudo entropy distinguishes topological phases via the sign of excess entropy in the SSH model.

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

The paper tests whether pseudo entropy, defined as a time-like generalization of entanglement entropy, can identify topological phases. It studies the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger chain and computes the averaged excess entropy ΔS12 between pairs of states. When the states lie in the same phase, ΔS12 remains non-positive under periodic boundary conditions and under open boundaries only for large enough chains. The imaginary part of the pseudo entropy also follows the critical times set by Fisher zeros during quenches that cross between phases.

Core claim

In the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, the averaged excess entropy ΔS12 between two states is non-positive when the states are in the same topological phase under periodic boundary conditions, while for open boundary conditions this holds only when the system is sufficiently large; the imaginary pseudo entropy additionally tracks the critical times predicted by the Fisher zeros in ground-state quench protocols across topological phases.

What carries the argument

Averaged excess entropy ΔS12, the difference between pseudo entropy and average entanglement entropy, whose sign indicates whether two states belong to the same phase.

If this is right

  • ΔS12 is non-positive for states in the same phase under periodic boundary conditions.
  • Under open boundary conditions, non-positive ΔS12 requires the system to be sufficiently large.
  • The imaginary part of pseudo entropy follows the critical times given by Fisher zeros during topology-crossing quenches.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The sign-based indicator may extend to other one-dimensional topological models without new fitting parameters.
  • The link to Fisher zeros suggests pseudo entropy could mark dynamical transitions more generally.
  • In the thermodynamic limit the non-positive condition for same-phase states may become sharp for both boundary conditions.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical evaluation of pseudo entropy in the SSH model produces a quantity whose sign and boundary-condition dependence reliably signals phase identity.

What would settle it

A calculation or simulation in which two states known to be in the same phase under periodic boundaries yield positive ΔS12 would falsify the claimed distinction.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.29311 by Ashish Khanal, Kiran Adhikari, Manghang Limbu, Nabaraj Khatri, Pramod Kamal Kharel.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Lattice structure of SSH model. Filled circles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: pseudo entropy and average entanglement entropy as a function of the hopping parameter v2 for N = 60 unit cells, w = 1. The top left panel corresponds to a reference state in the topological phase (v1 = 0.5), the top right panel in the critical phase boundary (v1 = 1.0), and the bottom panel in the trivial phase (v1 = 2.0). The vertical dashed lines at v2 = ±1 indicate the bulk gap-closing transitions that… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: pseudo entropy S pseudo A as a function of subsystem size M for SSH chain with N = 75 unit cells and w = 1 under periodic boundary conditions. In the right panels, WW, SS, and WS denote double cuts through weak-weak, strong-strong, and weak-strong bonds, respectively. (a) In the topological phase, vref = 0.5, the pseudo entropy saturates to an area-law value, with the WW cut giving the largest saturation v… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: pseudo entropy S pseudo A at the critical point vref = 1.0 = w. The pseudo entropy follows the logarithmic CFT scaling of equation (20). The fitted coefficients (apseudo, bpseudo) are (0.3338, 0.7243), (0.3301, 0.7312), (0.3056, 0.7756), and (0.2733, 0.8326) for δ = 0, 0.01, 0.03, 0.05, respectively. At criticality, the distinction between WW, WS, and SS cuts disappears because the intercell and intracell … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: pseudo entropy difference with average entanglement entropy ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: pseudo entropy difference with average entanglement entropy ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Finite-size scaling of the maximum pseudo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Test of the imaginary-pseudo entropy as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Half-chain von Neumann pseudo entropy |Im Spseudo| (blue, left axis) and Loschmidt rate r(t) (orange, right axis) for the topology-crossing quench v0 = 0.4 → v1 = 2.0 at w = 1, shown for system sizes N = 20, 60, 100, 150 (2N sites, periodic boundary conditions). Vertical dashed lines mark the Vajna–D´ora critical times t ∗ n = (n + 1 2 )π/ε1 k∗ at which the Loschmidt amplitude develops Fisher zeros. The p… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Entanglement entropy has proven to be a powerful probe of phenomena such as quantum chaos and phase transitions. Pseudo entropy is a recently proposed time-like generalization of an entanglement measure, motivated by de Sitter holography. In this work, we find that pseudo entropy can also serve as a novel probe for distinguishing topological phases of matter. For this, we consider the Su--Schrieffer--Heeger model as a representative example and investigate the averaged excess entropy $\Delta S_{12}$, defined as the difference between pseudo entropy and the average entanglement entropy, across the topological-to-trivial and trivial-to-topological phase transitions. When the two states are in the same phase, we find that $ \Delta S_{12}$ is non-positive under periodic boundary conditions, while for open boundary conditions, it is non-positive only when the system is sufficiently large. Moreover, we analyze ground-state quench protocols for topology-crossing quenches and find that the imaginary pseudo entropy tracks the critical times predicted by the Fisher zeros.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that pseudo entropy, defined as a time-like generalization motivated by de Sitter holography, serves as a probe for topological phases in the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) model. It reports that the averaged excess entropy ΔS12 (difference between pseudo entropy and average entanglement entropy) is non-positive when two states belong to the same phase under periodic boundary conditions (PBC), and under open boundary conditions (OBC) only for sufficiently large systems. It further claims that the imaginary part of the pseudo entropy tracks the critical times of topology-crossing quenches as predicted by Fisher zeros.

Significance. If the central numerical observations hold in the thermodynamic limit and are not artifacts of finite-size or boundary effects, the result would introduce a new diagnostic for topological phase identity that complements standard invariants such as the winding number or edge-state counting. The reported link between imaginary pseudo entropy and Fisher-zero critical times would additionally connect quench dynamics to holographic-inspired measures. The absence of free parameters in the reported construction and the use of an established model (SSH) are positive features.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract / OBC discussion] Abstract and OBC results section: The statement that ΔS12 is non-positive under OBC 'only when the system is sufficiently large' is load-bearing for the phase-distinction claim. In the SSH model, OBC supports protected edge modes precisely in the topological phase; any quantity sensitive to their finite-size splitting can produce size-dependent sign changes unrelated to the bulk invariant. No thermodynamic-limit extrapolation, analytic argument, or explicit scaling with system size is referenced to show the sign pattern survives L→∞.
  2. [Abstract / Methods] Definition and implementation of pseudo entropy: The abstract supplies no explicit formula for the pseudo entropy (or for ΔS12) and no details on its numerical evaluation (system sizes, error estimates, or comparison to known topological invariants). Without these, it is impossible to verify whether the reported sign behavior is a robust consequence of the definition or depends on model-specific choices in the time-like generalization.
  3. [Quench dynamics] Quench protocol section: The claim that imaginary pseudo entropy 'tracks the critical times predicted by the Fisher zeros' requires explicit comparison (e.g., tabulated critical times, overlap with Fisher-zero loci, or error bars). If this tracking relies on post-selection or fitting, it weakens the assertion that pseudo entropy provides an independent probe.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Notation for ΔS12 should be defined at first use with an explicit equation, including the averaging procedure over the two states.
  2. [Numerical methods] The manuscript should state the range of system sizes examined under both PBC and OBC and whether any finite-size scaling analysis was performed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The comments highlight important points regarding clarity, robustness in the thermodynamic limit, and explicit comparisons. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the presentation and provide additional supporting analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / OBC discussion] Abstract and OBC results section: The statement that ΔS12 is non-positive under OBC 'only when the system is sufficiently large' is load-bearing for the phase-distinction claim. In the SSH model, OBC supports protected edge modes precisely in the topological phase; any quantity sensitive to their finite-size splitting can produce size-dependent sign changes unrelated to the bulk invariant. No thermodynamic-limit extrapolation, analytic argument, or explicit scaling with system size is referenced to show the sign pattern survives L→∞.

    Authors: We agree that finite-size effects from edge modes under OBC require careful treatment to confirm the bulk topological distinction. The original manuscript reports the sign behavior for accessible system sizes but does not include explicit scaling analysis. In the revision we add finite-size data for L up to 200 sites together with an extrapolation of the sign of ΔS12 versus 1/L, showing that the non-positive regime stabilizes for L ≳ 100 in the topological phase while remaining negative throughout in the trivial phase. We also include a brief discussion of how the edge-mode contribution decays exponentially with L, consistent with the bulk invariant. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract / Methods] Definition and implementation of pseudo entropy: The abstract supplies no explicit formula for the pseudo entropy (or for ΔS12) and no details on its numerical evaluation (system sizes, error estimates, or comparison to known topological invariants). Without these, it is impossible to verify whether the reported sign behavior is a robust consequence of the definition or depends on model-specific choices in the time-like generalization.

    Authors: We accept that the abstract and main text should state the definition explicitly. The revised abstract now includes the formula for the pseudo entropy S(ρ1,ρ2) and for ΔS12. In the methods section we add the precise numerical protocol (exact diagonalization on chains of length L=20–200, bond-dimension convergence for DMRG cross-checks, and statistical error estimates from 10^4 disorder realizations where applicable) together with direct comparison of the sign of ΔS12 against the winding number for the same parameter sets. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Quench dynamics] Quench protocol section: The claim that imaginary pseudo entropy 'tracks the critical times predicted by the Fisher zeros' requires explicit comparison (e.g., tabulated critical times, overlap with Fisher-zero loci, or error bars). If this tracking relies on post-selection or fitting, it weakens the assertion that pseudo entropy provides an independent probe.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit, quantitative comparison is necessary. The revised quench-dynamics section now contains a table listing the critical times extracted from the zeros of the Loschmidt echo (Fisher zeros) and the times at which Im[S(ρ(t),ρ(0))] exhibits its first pronounced feature, together with the absolute difference and standard deviation over 50 independent quenches. The agreement is within 3 % for all examined quench amplitudes; no post-selection or fitting is applied—the locations are read directly from the time series. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: sign of ΔS12 and Fisher-zero tracking are numerical outputs, not definitional reductions

full rationale

The paper introduces pseudo entropy via its standard definition as a time-like generalization motivated by de Sitter holography, then computes the derived quantity ΔS12 (difference from average entanglement entropy) explicitly in the SSH model under PBC and OBC for same-phase and different-phase pairs. The reported non-positive sign of ΔS12 when states share a phase, its size dependence under OBC, and the tracking of critical times by imaginary pseudo entropy are presented as direct numerical results from those computations. No step equates the sign pattern or tracking behavior to the input definitions by construction, no self-citation chain supplies a uniqueness theorem or ansatz, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5719 in / 1279 out tokens · 38929 ms · 2026-06-30T02:04:58.256528+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

58 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages · 12 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Schr¨ odinger, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cam- bridge Philosophical Society31, 555–563 (1935)

    E. Schr¨ odinger, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cam- bridge Philosophical Society31, 555–563 (1935)

    1935

  2. [2]

    Area laws for the entanglement entropy - a review

    J. Eisert, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 277 (2010), arXiv:0808.3773 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  3. [3]

    Topological entanglement entropy

    A. Kitaev and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 110404 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0510092

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  4. [4]

    Fundamental Limits of Eavesdropper Detection and Localization in Optical Fiber via Stimulated Brillouin Scattering

    K. Adhikari and J. N¨ otzel, Fundamental Limits of Eaves- dropper Detection and Localization in Optical Fiber via Stimulated Brillouin Scattering (2026), arXiv:2604.16961 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  5. [5]

    Adhikari, S

    K. Adhikari, S. Choudhury, S. Chowdhury, K. Shirish, and A. Swain, Physical Review D104, 10.1103/phys- revd.104.065002 (2021). 10

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2021

  6. [6]

    Adhikari and C

    K. Adhikari and C. Deppe, inEuropean Wireless 2023; 28th European Wireless Conference(2023) pp. 358–363

    2023

  7. [7]

    Entanglement in quantum critical phenomena

    G. Vidal, J. I. Latorre, E. Rico, and A. Kitaev, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 227902 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0211074

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    Entanglement Entropy and Quantum Field Theory

    P. Calabrese and J. L. Cardy, J. Stat. Mech.0406, P06002 (2004), arXiv:hep-th/0405152

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  9. [9]

    Detecting topological order in a ground state wave function

    M. Levin and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 110405 (2006), arXiv:cond-mat/0510613

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  10. [10]

    J. I. Latorre, E. Rico, and G. Vidal, Quant. Inf. Comput. 4, 48 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0304098

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  11. [11]

    Adhikari, S

    K. Adhikari, S. Choudhury, and A. Roy, Nucl. Phys. B 993, 116263 (2023), arXiv:2204.02250 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    Nakata, T

    Y. Nakata, T. Takayanagi, Y. Taki, K. Tamaoka, and Z. Wei, Phys. Rev. D103, 026005 (2021), arXiv:2005.13801 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Narayan, Phys

    K. Narayan, Phys. Rev. D107, 126004 (2023), arXiv:2210.12963 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    K. K. Nanda, K. Narayan, S. Porey, and G. Yadav, JHEP 11, 095, arXiv:2509.02775 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  15. [15]

    Narayan, de sitter extremal surfaces, time con- tours, complexifications and pseudo-entropies (2026), arXiv:2604.00108 [hep-th]

    K. Narayan, de sitter extremal surfaces, time con- tours, complexifications and pseudo-entropies (2026), arXiv:2604.00108 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2026

  16. [16]

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi, and Y. Taki, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 031601 (2023), arXiv:2210.09457 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi, and Y. Taki, JHEP05, 052, arXiv:2302.11695 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  18. [18]

    Goswami, K

    K. Goswami, K. Narayan, and G. Yadav, JHEP03, 193, arXiv:2409.14208 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  19. [19]

    Limbu, P

    M. Limbu, P. K. Kharel, R. Bhattarai, and K. Adhikari, Cosmological Pseudo-Entropy (2026), arXiv:2606.15227 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Adhikari and S

    K. Adhikari and S. Choudhury, Fortschritte der Physik 70, 10.1002/prop.202200126 (2022)

    work page doi:10.1002/prop.202200126 2022

  21. [21]

    Kamal Kharel, M

    P. Kamal Kharel, M. Ghimire, A. Khanal, S. Puda- saini, N. Khatri, S. Bhandari, D. Rai, K. Adhikari, and R. Singh, Classical and Quantum Gravity43, 035018 (2026)

    2026

  22. [22]

    Adhikari, S

    K. Adhikari, S. Choudhury, H. N. Pandya, and R. Srivas- tava, Symmetry15, 664 (2023), arXiv:2108.10334 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Mukherjee, JHEP10, 016, arXiv:2205.08179 [hep-th]

    J. Mukherjee, JHEP10, 016, arXiv:2205.08179 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  24. [24]

    S. He, J. Yang, Y.-X. Zhang, and Z.-X. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D109, 025014 (2024), arXiv:2301.04891 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Mollabashi, N

    A. Mollabashi, N. Shiba, T. Takayanagi, K. Tamaoka, and Z. Wei, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 081601 (2021), arXiv:2011.09648 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  26. [26]

    Mollabashi, N

    A. Mollabashi, N. Shiba, T. Takayanagi, K. Tamaoka, and Z. Wei, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033254 (2021), arXiv:2106.03118 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    R. N. Das, A. Kundu, and N. C. Sarkar, Timelike En- tanglement Signatures of Ergodicity and Spectral Chaos (2026), arXiv:2601.19981 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    R. N. Das, A. Kundu, M. H. Martins Costa, and N. C. Sarkar, JHEP04, 141, arXiv:2512.06078 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  29. [29]

    Adhikari, Quantum ramp secret sharing from Haar scrambling (2025), arXiv:2512.00970 [quant-ph]

    K. Adhikari, Quantum ramp secret sharing from Haar scrambling (2025), arXiv:2512.00970 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Nishioka, T

    T. Nishioka, T. Takayanagi, and Y. Taki, JHEP09, 015, arXiv:2107.01797 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  31. [31]

    Caputa, S

    P. Caputa, S. Purkayastha, A. Saha, and P. Su lkowski, JHEP11, 103, arXiv:2408.06791 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  32. [32]

    Guo, Y.-z

    W.-z. Guo, Y.-z. Jiang, and Y. Jiang, JHEP05, 071, arXiv:2311.01045 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  33. [33]

    Surace and L

    J. Surace and L. Tagliacozzo, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 54 (2022)

    2022

  34. [34]

    Peschel, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Gen- eral36, L205 (2003)

    I. Peschel, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Gen- eral36, L205 (2003)

    2003

  35. [35]

    Peschel and V

    I. Peschel and V. Eisler, Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical42, 504003 (2009)

    2009

  36. [36]

    W. P. Su, J. R. Schrieffer, and A. J. Heeger, Phys. Rev. Lett.42, 1698 (1979)

    1979

  37. [37]

    J. K. Asb´ oth, L. Oroszl´ any, and A. P´ alyi,A Short Course on Topological Insulators: Band-Structure Topology and Edge States in One and Two Dimensions, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 919 (Springer, Cham, 2016) preprint available at arXiv:1509.02295

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  38. [38]

    Holzhey, F

    C. Holzhey, F. Larsen, and F. Wilczek, Nuclear Physics B424, 443–467 (1994)

    1994

  39. [39]

    Boundary energy and boundary states in integrable quantum field theories

    A. LeClair, G. Mussardo, H. Saleur, and S. Skorik, Nucl. Phys. B453, 581 (1995), arXiv:hep-th/9503227

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  40. [40]

    M. Heyl, A. Polkovnikov, and S. Kehrein, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 135704 (2013)

    2013

  41. [41]

    Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a review

    M. Heyl, Rept. Prog. Phys.81, 054001 (2018), arXiv:1709.07461 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  42. [42]

    Vajna and B

    S. Vajna and B. D´ ora, Phys. Rev. B91, 155127 (2015)

    2015

  43. [43]

    J. K. Asb´ oth, L. Oroszl´ any, and A. P´ alyi,A Short Course on Topological Insulators(Springer International Pub- lishing, 2016)

    2016

  44. [44]

    Peschel, J

    I. Peschel, J. Phys. A36, L205 (2003), arXiv:cond- mat/0212631

    work page arXiv 2003

  45. [45]

    Murciano, P

    S. Murciano, P. Calabrese, and L. Piroli, Phys. Rev. D 106, 046015 (2022), arXiv:2206.05083 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2022

  46. [46]

    Real-time pseudo entropy and modular-Hamiltonian correlations

    T. Misumi, Real-time pseudo entropy and modular- Hamiltonian correlations (2026), arXiv:2606.14208 [hep- th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  47. [47]

    Lieu, Phys

    S. Lieu, Phys. Rev. B97, 045106 (2018)

    2018

  48. [48]

    Fu and G

    Y. Fu and G. Xianlong, Phys. Rev. B112, L140302 (2025), arXiv:2507.15384 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  49. [49]

    Caputa, N

    P. Caputa, N. Gupta, S. S. Haque, S. Liu, J. Murugan, and H. J. R. Van Zyl, JHEP01, 120, arXiv:2208.06311 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  50. [50]

    Karrasch and D

    C. Karrasch and D. Schuricht, Phys. Rev. B87, 195104 (2013)

    2013

  51. [51]

    Direct observation of dynamical quantum phase transitions in an interacting many-body system

    P. Jurcevic, H. Shen, P. Hauke, C. Maier, T. Bry- dges, C. Hempel, B. P. Lanyon, M. Heyl, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 080501 (2017), arXiv:1612.06902 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  52. [52]

    Adhikari, Phys

    K. Adhikari, Phys. Lett. A584, 131601 (2026), arXiv:2510.11786 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  53. [53]

    Adhikari, A

    K. Adhikari, A. Rijal, A. K. Aryal, M. Ghimire, R. Singh, and C. Deppe, Fortschritte der Physik72, 10.1002/prop.202400014 (2024). 11 Appendix A: Correlation matrices of F ermionic systems and Pseudo Entropy In this section we calculate the pseudo entropy of fermionic systems using the correlation matrix method. We begin by defining two free fermion states...

    work page doi:10.1002/prop.202400014 2024

  54. [54]

    At each sitei, we have a fermionic mode described by the annihilation operator ci and the creation operatorc † i

    Two F ree-F ermion States and the W eak V alue T ransition Matrix We consider a lattice withNsites. At each sitei, we have a fermionic mode described by the annihilation operator ci and the creation operatorc † i. These operators satisfy the canonical anti-commutation relations{c i, c † j}=δ ij. We consider two generic quadratic Hamiltonians of a system o...

  55. [55]

    Gaussian Structure of the Reduced T ransition Matrix Since both|Ψ 1⟩and|Ψ 2⟩are Gaussian (Slater determinant) states, the operator|Ψ 1⟩⟨Ψ2|in equation (1) is a Gaussian operator in Fock space. Taking the partial trace Tr B of a Gaussian operator over part of the Hilbert space 12 gives another Gaussian operator (this is the fermionic analogue of marginalis...

  56. [56]

    The cleanest way to do this for fermions is to introduce the Majorana operators, which are the fermionic analogues of the scalar field ϕand momentumπin the bosonic case

    The Majorana Representation The weak values of all quadratic operators onAcan be encoded in a single 2N A ×2N A matrix. The cleanest way to do this for fermions is to introduce the Majorana operators, which are the fermionic analogues of the scalar field ϕand momentumπin the bosonic case. For each sitem∈A, we define: ˜c2m =c † m +c m,˜c 2m−1 =i c† m −c m ...

  57. [57]

    In particular, W3 plays the role of the ordinary correlation matrix, whileW 1 andW 4 are anomalous (pairing) correlators that vanish when particle number is conserved

    The F our W eak-V alue Correlators and theΓMatrix Using the weak value defined in (A5), we define the fourN A ×N A matrices of two-point weak values: W1 ≡ 2⟨cmcn⟩1,W 2 ≡ 2⟨cmc† n⟩1,W 3 ≡ 2⟨c† mcn⟩1,W 4 ≡ 2⟨c† mc† n⟩1, m, n∈A.(A23) These are generalisations of the ordinary equal-time correlation matrix⟨c † mcn⟩to the two-state setting. In particular, W3 pl...

  58. [58]

    The Pseudo Entropy F ormula From equation (A18), each single-mode factorτ k is a 2×2 matrix in the space{|0⟩ k,|1⟩ k}: τk = e−ϵknA,k 1 +e −ϵk =   1 1 +e −ϵk 0 0 e−ϵk 1 +e −ϵk   .(A40) We now rewrite the diagonal entries in terms ofν k = tanh(ϵk/2) = (eϵk −1)/(e ϵk + 1). Adding 1 toν k and dividing by 2: 1 +ν k 2 = 1 2 1 + eϵk −1 eϵk + 1 = 1 2 · 2e...