Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 105 references

Thermalization in strongly long-range spin chains is band-resolved, not destroyed, by Hilbert-space fragmentation.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 23:37 UTC pith:YFGZFFYI

load-bearing objection Clean ideas and a few rigorous proofs, but the fETH central claim hinges on an empirical leakage fit that grows with L and needs an explicit regime of validity before it can carry the thermodynamic conclusions. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15350 v1 pith:YFGZFFYI submitted 2026-07-16 cond-mat.stat-mech quant-ph

Fragmented ETH: Prethermalization, Timescales, and Ensemble Inequivalence

C. L. Sriram , Soumya Kanti Pal , Lea F. Santos This is my paper
classification cond-mat.stat-mech quant-ph
keywords eigenstate thermalization hypothesisHilbert-space fragmentationprethermalizationlong-range interacting quantum systemsLipkin-Meshkov-Glick modelquantum chaosensemble inequivalencefinite-size scaling
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The authors study a spin-1/2 transverse-field Ising chain with super-long-range interactions (0<α<1), where the all-to-all limit is the Lipkin–Meshkov–Glick model. They argue that the spectrum remains organized into energy bands inherited from that limit, and that each band becomes internally chaotic, so conventional eigenstate thermalization (ETH) fails globally but holds band-by-band — a scenario they call fragmented ETH (fETH). The paper derives, via degenerate perturbation theory, analytic expressions for the prethermal plateau height and lifetime, proves a Loschmidt-echo lower bound on how long any bounded observable remains prethermal, and shows that finite-size scaling is only meaningful along system sizes L and L+4k. It then traces ensemble inequivalence to the fact that a microcanonical ensemble stays inside one band while the canonical ensemble mixes many bands.

Core claim

The central discovery is that in the regime 0<α≪1, a quantum quench in the long-range Ising chain relaxes in two distinct stages: fast dephasing among LMG energy bands produces a prethermal plateau equal to the α=0 diagonal average, followed by slow intraband relaxation set by the tiny splittings inside each band. The paper argues that each band supports quantum chaos and that interband leakage, δρ = 4.41×10^{-3} α^{2.001} L^{1.637}, is perturbatively small, so the long-time equilibrium is governed by a band-resolved microcanonical ensemble. Along system sizes differing by multiples of four, eigenstate expectation values of local observables become smoother with size, supporting fETH. Becaus

What carries the argument

The key object is the energy-band structure inherited from the fully connected LMG Hamiltonian, whose spectrum splits into degenerate bands labeled by total spin s and a quantum number m, with degeneracies fixed by angular-momentum multiplicities. The argument is carried by degenerate perturbation theory around the LMG limit: the initial state's local density of states decomposes into interband and intraband frequency scales, so the plateau height equals the α=0 infinite-time average, the plateau lifetime is the inverse of an averaged intraband width, and the Loschmidt echo bounds observable departure times through the trace norm of the density-matrix difference. The spin-inversion symmetry

Load-bearing premise

The band-resolved description—and with it fETH and the band-mixing mechanism of ensemble inequivalence—rests on the assumption that interband leakage δρ = 4.41×10^{-3} α^{2.001} L^{1.637} is small enough that each eigenstate is essentially confined to a single parent energy band; since the fitted leakage grows with L, the thermodynamic limit must be taken along a path where α→0 fast enough to keep δρ negligible.

What would settle it

Compute the interband leakage δρ for system sizes beyond those fitted (e.g., L=18 and 20) at fixed α=10^{-3}: if δρ stops following the α^{2.001}L^{1.637} power law or exceeds a few percent, the band-resolved microcanonical ensemble and fETH predictions would fail in that regime. Alternatively, measure eigenstate-to-eigenstate fluctuations of a local observable within a band along L→L+4 and L→L+2; if fluctuations do not decrease along the L→L+4 sequence, the spin-inversion selection rule and fETH are falsified.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • In the super-long-range regime, certain observables (survival probability, entanglement entropy, first moment of the excitation density) exhibit long prethermal plateaus whose height is the all-to-all value and whose lifetime grows as α→0.
  • Permutation-invariant observables such as the total magnetization never show prethermal plateaus, irrespective of the initial state, because their off-diagonal matrix elements within degenerate LMG bands vanish.
  • The Loschmidt echo leaves the prethermal regime no later than any bounded observable, providing a rigorous universal lower bound on prethermal departure times for near-integrable quenches.
  • fETH implies that equilibrium expectation values of local observables are described by a band-resolved microcanonical ensemble, and that finite-size comparisons of eigenstate fluctuations are meaningful only along L → L+4k sequences.
  • Ensemble inequivalence between canonical and band-resolved microcanonical ensembles emerges from the mixing of bands in the canonical ensemble, without invoking equilibrium phase transitions.
  • If interband leakage remains perturbatively small, the diagonal ensemble and the band-resolved microcanonical ensemble agree to within ∥O∥∞ δρ for any bounded observable.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the fitted leakage δρ grows with L at fixed α, the band-resolved description—and fETH with it—is a pre-thermodynamic-limit regime: for any nonzero α, sufficiently large L will eventually break the single-band confinement, and the thermodynamic limit must be taken along a path where α shrinks fast enough with L.
  • The L→L+4k selection rule should be testable in other permutation-symmetric long-range models, such as the XXZ-type parent Hamiltonian described in Appendix G, whose exact reference energies allow a clean numerical search for fETH signatures.
  • The Loschmidt-echo lower bound is a general statement about any near-integrable parent H0; extending it to other fragmented systems (dipole-conserving or constrained models) could yield universal prethermal-lifetime bounds without detailed spectral analysis.
  • An experimental test could compare observables that are permutation-invariant (e.g., total magnetization) with non-invariant ones (e.g., the first moment of the excitation density) after a quench from the all-to-all limit: only the latter should display prethermal plateaus, and the plateau lifetime should track the inverse intraband width.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies a spin-1/2 transverse-field Ising chain with power-law interactions in the super-long-range regime 0<α<1. Starting from the fully connected α=0 LMG limit, the spectrum organizes into energy bands labeled by total spin and multiplicity. The authors argue that for 0<α≪1 the bands remain well separated, intraband dynamics becomes chaotic, and equilibration proceeds through long-lived prethermal plateaus before eventual thermalization. They introduce a 'fragmented eigenstate thermalization hypothesis' (fETH): local observables equilibrate to a band-resolved microcanonical ensemble, not the full microcanonical ensemble. They derive analytical expressions for the prethermal plateau height and lifetime of the survival probability, prove a Loschmidt-echo lower bound on prethermal lifetimes of any bounded observable, identify conditions for the presence/absence of prethermal plateaus, derive a symmetry-imposed L→L+4k finite-size selection rule, and show that canonical and band-resolved microcanonical ensembles give different temperatures, offering a microscopic origin of ensemble inequivalence. The main numerical evidence is for L=12 and L=16, α=10^-4, with a fitted leakage power law δρ≈A α^{2.001} L^{1.637} quantifying the interband hybridization.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a unified framework connecting Hilbert-space fragmentation, prethermalization, eigenstate thermalization, and ensemble inequivalence in long-range interacting systems. The most valuable elements are (i) the rigorous Loschmidt-echo lower bound on prethermal lifetimes, which is general and cleanly proved in Appendix D; (ii) the symmetry selection rule for finite-size scaling, proved in Appendix F; and (iii) the analytical prediction that the prethermal plateau height equals the α=0 infinite-time value P_S^{(α=0)}, which is an independent and falsifiable statement. The paper also gives a clear criterion for when permutation-invariant observables cannot exhibit prethermal plateaus. However, the quantitative foundation of fETH rests on a single numerical leakage law and on a two-size, one-band demonstration of eigenstate fluctuations; both are thinner than the strength of the central claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. VII, Eq. (45), Fig. 8] The leakage law δρ = A α^{2.001} L^{1.637} is the sole quantitative justification for band confinement, yet its positive L-exponent means that for any fixed α>0 the leakage diverges as L→∞. Thus the band-resolved description and fETH are only valid along a double-scaling path α ≲ L^{-0.818}, not in the conventional thermodynamic limit of the α<1 model. The abstract and Sec. II present fETH as a finite-size scaling statement, but the restriction to this double-scaling regime is not stated there. The fitted range (L=8–16, α≤10^-3) and the internal inconsistency between the caption of Fig. 8(b) (L^1.57) and Eq. (45) (L^1.637) further weaken this load-bearing result. Please provide a projector-based leakage analysis and state precisely the regime of validity in the (α,L) plane, including whether any finite-α thermodynamic limit supports fETH.
  2. [Sec. VII, Eq. (44) and Appendix E] The leakage probability in Eq. (44) is defined by overlap with individual parent eigenstates |n^{(0)}⟩ of a degenerate LMG band. Such states are not unique: any rotation within the degenerate subspace gives an equally valid eigenbasis. Appendix E correctly notes that a basis-independent measure requires projectors, but the main-text leakage analysis—and the fitted law Eq. (45)—uses the basis-dependent quantity. This can change the numerical value of δρ and therefore the fitted exponents. Please recompute the leakage with the projector-based weight w_B^n of Eq. (E2), or explicitly show that the averaged δρ is invariant under the arbitrary degenerate-basis choice.
  3. [Sec. VIII, Fig. 10] The numerical evidence for fETH is qualitative. Fig. 10 shows rescaled eigenstate expectation values for L=12 and L=16, for one band family (s=2), at α=10^-4; the claim that fluctuations decrease is based on visual inspection of two sizes. No quantitative fluctuation statistic (e.g., variance of O_nn within energy windows, or an ETH-ansatz fit with a system-size-dependent coefficient) is provided, and the rescaling (59)-(60) can obscure absolute changes. Please add a quantitative measure of eigenstate-to-eigenstate fluctuations and, if possible, at least one more symmetry-compatible size (L=20) to support the scaling claim. Also compare directly to the band-resolved microcanonical prediction of Eq. (53).
minor comments (6)
  1. [Fig. 8 caption vs Eq. (45)] The caption of Fig. 8(b) quotes a scaling δρ∝L^{1.57}, while Eq. (45) gives L^{1.637}. Please harmonize these values or explain the difference.
  2. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (27)] The prethermal lifetime t_pre is defined as the inverse of the weighted intraband LDOS width. This is a plausible dimensional estimate, but it is not derived from the dynamics; please clarify its status and test its L- and α-dependence quantitatively rather than only plotting vertical lines for L=12.
  3. [Appendix H] The microcanonical inverse temperature depends on the KDE bandwidth h and histogram bin width b, but no values or sensitivity tests are reported. Please state the chosen parameters and show that the ensemble-inequivalence conclusion is robust to reasonable variations.
  4. [References] References [76] and [77] are duplicated. Please check the reference list for other duplicates and ensure all arXiv identifiers are complete.
  5. [Sec. III A, Fig. 3] The statement 'excellent agreement with the Wigner-Dyson distribution' is not quantified. A Kolmogorov–Smirnov statistic or a fitted Brody parameter would strengthen the claim of intraband chaos.
  6. [Sec. VIII A, Eq. (54)] The reference energies E_m ≃ 2hm − 2J are stated for fixed s ≪ L/2. The notation m as an asymptotic label should be defined more explicitly, and the range of m for which Eq. (54) is accurate should be stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: fETH is supported by independent numerical tests; the leakage law is an empirical diagnostic, not a fitted prediction.

full rationale

I walked the claimed derivation chain and found no step in which a prediction reduces by construction to a fitted input, a self-citation is load-bearing, or a definition smuggles in the result. The prethermal plateau height (Eq. 24) is obtained from degenerate perturbation theory using only LMG zeroth-order data and is not fitted to the α>0 plateau; this is a genuine prediction. The prethermal timescale (Eq. 27) is an estimate constructed as the inverse of the intraband LDOS width (Eqs. 25–26); although it is close to a restatement of the energy-time scale that sets dephasing, it is not fitted to the observed plateau lifetime and is corroborated numerically, so it does not constitute circularity under the strict definition used here. The leakage scaling δρ = A α^{2.001} L^{1.637} (Eq. 45) is explicitly an empirical fit, and it is indeed used to delineate the regime where band confinement holds (Eqs. 49–51). However, the central fETH claim is not derived from this fit alone: the paper independently demonstrates Wigner-Dyson level statistics within bands (Fig. 3), decreasing eigenstate-to-eigenstate fluctuations along symmetry-compatible size sequences (Fig. 10), and an exact symmetry-imposed selection rule (Appendix F). Thus the fit is a diagnostic of the regime of validity, not a fitted parameter masquerading as a prediction. The self-citation [79] introducing the term fETH is not load-bearing, since the current paper provides its own derivation and numerical tests. Concerns about the L-dependence of leakage, the internal inconsistency between Fig. 8(b) (L^1.57) and Eq. 45 (L^1.637), and the basis-dependence of the leakage diagnostic flagged in Appendix E are correctness/robustness issues, not circularity. I therefore assign score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 7 axioms · 1 invented entities

The framework relies on standard SU(2)/Schur's-lemma representation theory and trace-norm inequalities, plus domain assumptions about the strength of the perturbation and the persistence of band structure. The leakage scaling (A, k1, k2) is fitted; KDE smoothing parameters for β_mic are unspecified. No new physical entities are introduced; fETH is a predictive hypothesis with a falsifiable scaling signature.

free parameters (4)
  • leakage prefactor A = 4.41e-3
    Eq. (45): fitted to numerical leakage δρ(α,L)=A α^{k1} L^{k2}; used to map the regime of validity of the band-resolved description (Fig. 8e).
  • leakage α exponent k1 = 2.001
    Eq. (45); fitted, though consistent with perturbative expectation α².
  • leakage L exponent k2 = 1.637
    Eq. (45); fitted; controls growth of interband leakage with system size; the nonzero growth undermines strict thermodynamic-limit validity of fETH.
  • KDE bandwidth h (and histogram bin width b) = unspecified
    Appendix H: β_mic(E) is computed via kernel density estimate of the DOS; smoothing parameters are not given, so the β_mic curves in Fig. 11 are not fully specified.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption The α≪1 perturbation V_α is small so first-order degenerate perturbation theory captures band broadening and the LDOS retains the α=0 band structure.
    Sec. IV A, Eq. (8): H(α)=H(0)+ϵ V_α; c_n ≈ c_n^{(0)} + O(ϵ). Justified numerically for α≤0.1, but not derived.
  • domain assumption Interband dephasing completes on a timescale short compared with intraband dynamics, so a well-defined prethermal plateau exists.
    Sec. IV A: two-timescale separation in Eq. (23); relies on separation of energy scales between interband gaps and intraband widths.
  • domain assumption The microcanonical ensemble for equilibrium should be constructed within a single energy band (fETH postulate).
    Sec. VII, Eq. (53): motivated by small leakage δρ; used to derive ensemble inequivalence in Sec. IX.
  • standard math Spin-inversion eigenvalue of a parent band |s,m⟩ is (-1)^{L/2+m}.
    Appendix F, Eq. (F4): derived from Rz = (-1)^{-L/2} e^{-iπ Sz}.
  • standard math Trace-norm inequality |Tr[AB]| ≤ ||A||∞ ||B||_1 and identity ||ρ−σ||_1 = 2√(1−F) for pure states.
    Appendices C, D: used for Loschmidt-echo lower bound.
  • standard math LMG spectrum organizes into degenerate bands labeled by (s,m) with multiplicity g(s,L).
    Sec. III, Eqs. (6)-(7): SU(2) representation theory.
  • domain assumption In the super-long-range regime α<1, the Kac factor N_α ~ L^{1-α} maintains extensivity.
    Sec. III, Eq. (1).
invented entities (1)
  • fragmented eigenstate thermalization hypothesis (fETH) and band-resolved microcanonical ensemble independent evidence
    purpose: describes thermalization within individual energy bands of fragmented spectra; used to define equilibrium and derive ensemble inequivalence
    Predicts eigenstate expectation values become smooth within a band and fluctuations decrease along L→L+4k sequences; this is falsifiable by exact diagonalization (currently tested only for L=12 vs 16).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 30858 in / 20057 out tokens · 184745 ms · 2026-08-01T23:37:24.456795+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate how finite quantum systems with strong long-range interactions approach thermal equilibrium. Nearly conserved quantities inherited from the fully connected limit fragment the Hilbert space and give rise to a many-body spectrum split into energy bands. As a result, equilibration becomes anomalously slow and proceeds through long-lived prethermal plateaus. This two-stage equilibration process is, however, not universal. We uncover the mechanism that determines which observables and initial states exhibit, or evade, prethermal plateaus. We also develop a perturbative theory that provides analytical expressions for both the height of the prethermal plateau and its timescale. Despite the lack of global ergodicity, quantum chaos develops within individual energy bands, enabling the definition of microcanonical ensembles within the bands. This supports a band-resolved formulation of thermalization, which we term fragmented eigenstate thermalization hypothesis (fETH). Unlike conventional ETH, finite-size scaling in fETH obeys a symmetry-imposed selection rule that restricts which system sizes can be compared. This band-resolved description has direct consequences for equilibrium statistical mechanics. While microcanonical ensembles remain confined to a single band, canonical ensembles mix different bands. This mismatch explains ensemble inequivalence without invoking equilibrium phase transitions. Our results apply to a broad class of Hamiltonians exhibiting Hilbert-space fragmentation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15350 by C. L. Sriram, Lea F. Santos, Soumya Kanti Pal.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic roadmap of the main concepts and results presented in this work. The panels correspond to items (a)–(f) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Density of states for (a) the whole spectrum of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (a) Distribution of the ratio of consecutive level spac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Evolution of the survival probability, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Evolution of the (a) entanglement entropy, (b) magnetization along the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Matrix elements of (a) the magnetization [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Comparison between the Loschmidt echo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Average leakage probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Density of states for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Rescaled eigenstate expectation values as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Inverse temperature for the canonical ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_11.png] view at source ↗

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

105 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    We briefly review this case because it provides a useful reference for understanding the dynam- ics in the super-long-range regime

    Short-range interactions Whenα= 3, which is effectively short-range for our 1D model, the survival probability rapidly decays to its equilibrium value. We briefly review this case because it provides a useful reference for understanding the dynam- ics in the super-long-range regime. The survival probability in Eq. (11) can also be written as PS(t) = Z ρ0(...

  2. [2]

    4(b), reflecting the band struc- ture of the DOS [Fig

    All-to-all interactions At the opposite extreme of the fully connected limit, α= 0, the LDOS is fragmented into distinct energy bands, as displayed in Fig. 4(b), reflecting the band struc- ture of the DOS [Fig. 2(a)]. As in the short-range case, the initial decay ofP S(t) in Fig. 4(a) is governed by the global width Γ of the LDOS. In contrast, the long-ti...

  3. [3]

    4(a) exhibits a prethermal plateau before relaxing to its long- time average

    Super long-range interactions For 0< α <1, the survival probability in Fig. 4(a) exhibits a prethermal plateau before relaxing to its long- time average. As mentioned above, this behavior is en- coded in the structure of the LDOS shown in Fig. 4(d). In the super-long-range regime, the LDOS preserves the fragmented band structure inherited from ˆH (0) LMG,...

  4. [4]

    The discussion till Eq

    Extension to mixed states An important extension of the above proof is to con- sider the initial density matrix to be a mixed state ˆρ 0 such that ˆρ2 0 ̸= ˆρ0. The discussion till Eq. (D5) follows through, however ∆ρ(t) = ˆρ(t)−ˆρpre(t) is not a rank-2 20 matrix, and thereby, the bound in observable deviation in Eq. (D13) needs to be modified. To this en...

  5. [5]

    von Neumann and E

    J. von Neumann and E. P. Wigner, ¨ uber merkw¨ urdige diskrete eigenwerte, Z. Phys. 3030, 465 (1929)

    1929

  6. [6]

    von Neumann and E

    J. von Neumann and E. P. Wigner, ¨Uber das verhal- ten von eigenwerten bei adiabatischen prozessen, inThe Collected Works of Eugene Paul Wigner: Part A: The Scientific Papers, edited by A. S. Wightman (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1993) pp. 294– 297

    1993

  7. [7]

    R. V. Jensen and R. Shankar, Statistical behavior in de- terministic quantum systems with few degrees of free- dom, Phys. Rev. Lett.54, 1879 (1985)

    1985

  8. [8]

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

    2046

  9. [9]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

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

    1994

  10. [10]

    Srednicki, Thermal fluctuations in quantized chaotic systems, J

    M. Srednicki, Thermal fluctuations in quantized chaotic systems, J. Phys. A29, L75 (1996)

    1996

  11. [11]

    Zelevinsky, B

    V. Zelevinsky, B. A. Brown, N. Frazier, and M. Horoi, The nuclear shell model as a testing ground for many- body quantum chaos, Phys. Rep.276, 85 (1996)

    1996

  12. [12]

    V. V. Flambaum and F. M. Izrailev, Statistical theory of finite Fermi systems based on the structure of chaotic eigenstates, Phys. Rev. E56, 5144 (1997)

    1997

  13. [13]

    L. F. Santos and M. Rigol, Onset of quantum chaos in one-dimensional bosonic and fermionic systems and its relation to thermalization, Phys. Rev. E81, 036206 (2010)

    2010

  14. [14]

    Borgonovi, F

    F. Borgonovi, F. M. Izrailev, L. F. Santos, and V. G. Zelevinsky, Quantum chaos and thermalization in iso- lated systems of interacting particles, Phys. Rep.626, 1 (2016)

    2016

  15. [15]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Adv. Phys. 65, 239 (2016)

    2016

  16. [16]

    Borgonovi, F

    F. Borgonovi, F. M. Izrailev, and L. F. Santos, Expo- nentially fast dynamics of chaotic many-body systems, Phys. Rev. E99, 010101 (2019)

    2019

  17. [17]

    Knipschild and J

    L. Knipschild and J. Gemmer, Modern concepts of quantum equilibration do not rule out strange relax- ation dynamics, Phys. Rev. E101, 062205 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    T. L. M. Lezama, E. J. Torres-Herrera, F. P´ erez- Bernal, Y. Bar Lev, and L. F. Santos, Equilibration time in many-body quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B 104, 085117 (2021)

    2021

  19. [19]

    Capizzi, J

    L. Capizzi, J. Wang, X. Xu, L. Mazza, and D. Poletti, Hydrodynamics and the eigenstate thermalization hy- pothesis, Phys. Rev. X15, 011059 (2025)

    2025

  20. [20]

    Vallejo-Fabila, F

    I. Vallejo-Fabila, F. Borgonovi, F. M. Izrailev, and L. F. Santos, Thermalization in the mixed-field ising model: An occupation-number perspective, Phys. Rev. E113, 054138 (2026)

    2026

  21. [21]

    Foini and J

    L. Foini and J. Kurchan, Eigenstate thermalization hy- pothesis and out of time order correlators, Phys. Rev. E99, 042139 (2019)

    2019

  22. [22]

    Foini, A

    L. Foini, A. Dymarsky, and S. Pappalardi, Out-of- equilibrium eigenstate thermalization hypothesis, Sci- Post Physics18, 136 (2025)

    2025

  23. [23]

    Defenu, T

    N. Defenu, T. Donner, T. Macr ` ı, G. Pagano, S. Ruffo, and A. Trombettoni, Long-range interacting quantum 23 systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 035002 (2023)

    2023

  24. [24]

    Defenu, A

    N. Defenu, A. Lerose, and S. Pappalardi, Out-of- equilibrium dynamics of quantum many-body systems with long-range interactions, Phys. Rep.1074, 1 (2024)

    2024

  25. [25]

    B. P. Lanyon, C. Hempel, D. Nigg, M. M¨ uller, R. Ger- ritsma, F. Z¨ ahringer, P. Schindler, J. T. Barreiro, M. Rambach, G. Kirchmair, M. Hennrich, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Universal digital quantum simulation with trapped ions, Science334, 57 (2011)

    2011

  26. [26]

    Jurcevic, B

    P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, P. Hauke, C. Hempel, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Quasiparticle en- gineering and entanglement propagation in a quantum many-body system, Nature511, 202 (2014)

    2014

  27. [27]

    Neyenhuis, J

    B. Neyenhuis, J. Zhang, P. W. Hess, J. Smith, A. C. Lee, P. Richerme, Z.-X. Gong, A. V. Gorshkov, and C. Mon- roe, Observation of prethermalization in long-range in- teracting spin chains, Science Advances3, e1700672 (2017)

    2017

  28. [28]

    J. W. Britton, B. C. Sawyer, A. C. Keith, C.-C. J. Wang, J. K. Freericks, H. Uys, M. J. Biercuk, and J. J. Bollinger, Engineered two-dimensional ising inter- actions in a trapped-ion quantum simulator with hun- dreds of spins, Nature484, 489 (2012)

    2012

  29. [29]

    Richerme, Z.-X

    P. Richerme, Z.-X. Gong, A. Lee, C. Senko, J. Smith, M. Foss-Feig, S. Michalakis, A. V. Gorshkov, and C. Monroe, Non-local propagation of correlations in quantum systems with long-range interactions, Nature 511, 198 (2014)

    2014

  30. [30]

    Saffman, T

    M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Quantum information with Rydberg atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 2313 (2010)

    2010

  31. [31]

    Scholl, M

    P. Scholl, M. Schuler, H. J. Williams, A. A. Eberhar- ter, D. Barredo, K.-N. Schymik, V. Lienhard, L.-P. Henry, T. C. Lang, T. Lahaye, A. M. Läuchli, and A. Browaeys, Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromag- nets with hundreds of Rydberg atoms, Nature595, 233 (2021)

    2021

  32. [32]

    Li, null, S

    Z. Li, null, S. Colombo, C. Shu, G. Velez, S. Pilatowsky- Cameo, R. Schmied, S. Choi, M. Lukin, E. P.-P. nafiel, and V. Vuleti´ c, Improving metrology with quantum scrambling, Science380, 1381 (2023)

    2023

  33. [33]

    C. Luo, H. Zhang, A. Chu, C. Maruko, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, Hamiltonian engineering of collective XYZ spin models in an optical cavity, Nat. Phys.21, 916 (2025)

    2025

  34. [34]

    Russomanno, M

    A. Russomanno, M. Fava, and M. Heyl, Quantum chaos and ensemble inequivalence of quantum long-range ising chains, Phys. Rev. B104, 094309 (2021)

    2021

  35. [35]

    Sugimoto, R

    S. Sugimoto, R. Hamazaki, and M. Ueda, Eigenstate thermalization in long-range interacting systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 030602 (2022)

    2022

  36. [36]

    Zwettler, G

    T. Zwettler, G. Del Pace, F. Marijanovic, S. Chattopad- hyay, T. B¨ uhler, C.-M. Halati, L. Skolc, L. Tolle, V. Hel- son, G. Bolognini, A. Fabre, S. Uchino, T. Giamarchi, E. Demler, and J. P. Brantut, Nonequilibrium dynam- ics of long-range interacting fermions, Phys. Rev. X15, 021089 (2025)

    2025

  37. [37]

    Hauke and L

    P. Hauke and L. Tagliacozzo, Spread of correlations in long-range interacting quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 207202 (2013)

    2013

  38. [38]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. van den Worm, S. R. Manmana, and M. Kastner, Breakdown of quasilocality in long-range quantum lattice models, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 260401 (2013)

    2013

  39. [39]

    M´ etivier, R

    D. M´ etivier, R. Bachelard, and M. Kastner, Spreading of perturbations in long-range interacting classical lat- tice models, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 210601 (2014)

    2014

  40. [40]

    Halati, A

    C.-M. Halati, A. Sheikhan, G. Morigi, C. Kollath, and S. B. J¨ ager, From light-cone to supersonic propagation of correlations by competing short- and long-range cou- plings (2025), arXiv:2503.13306 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    L. F. Santos, F. Borgonovi, and G. L. Celardo, Coop- erative shielding in many-body systems with long-range interaction, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 250402 (2016)

    2016

  42. [42]

    G. L. Celardo, R. Kaiser, and F. Borgonovi, Shielding and localization in the presence of long-range hopping, Phys. Rev. B94, 144206 (2016)

    2016

  43. [43]

    L. F. Santos, M. T´ avora, and F. P´ erez-Bernal, Excited- state quantum phase transitions in many-body systems with infinite-range interaction: Localization, dynamics, and bifurcation, Phys. Rev. A94, 012113 (2016)

    2016

  44. [44]

    Defenu, T

    N. Defenu, T. Enss, M. Kastner, and G. Morigi, Dynam- ical critical scaling of long-range interacting quantum magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 240403 (2018)

    2018

  45. [45]

    ˇZunkoviˇ c, M

    B. ˇZunkoviˇ c, M. Heyl, M. Knap, and A. Silva, Dy- namical quantum phase transitions in spin chains with long-range interactions: Merging different concepts of nonequilibrium criticality, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 130601 (2018)

    2018

  46. [46]

    M. Syed, T. Enss, and N. Defenu, Dynamical quantum phase transition in a bosonic system with long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. B103, 064306 (2021)

    2021

  47. [47]

    E. C. King, J. N. Kriel, and M. Kastner, Universal cool- ing dynamics toward a quantum critical point, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 050401 (2023)

    2023

  48. [48]

    Gherardini, L

    S. Gherardini, L. Buffoni, and N. Defenu, Universal defects statistics with strong long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 113401 (2024)

    2024

  49. [49]

    Solfanelli and N

    A. Solfanelli and N. Defenu, Universal work statistics in long-range interacting quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 030402 (2025)

    2025

  50. [50]

    V. K. Kozin and O. Kyriienko, Quantum time crystals from Hamiltonians with long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 210602 (2019)

    2019

  51. [51]

    Pizzi, J

    A. Pizzi, J. Knolle, and A. Nunnenkamp, Higher-order and fractional discrete time crystals in clean long-range interacting systems, Nat. Commun.12, 2341 (2021)

    2021

  52. [52]

    Lerose, T

    A. Lerose, T. Parolini, R. Fazio, D. A. Abanin, and S. Pappalardi, Theory of robust quantum many-body scars in long-range interacting systems, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011020 (2025)

    2025

  53. [53]

    Barnett, A

    R. Barnett, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Vengalattore, Prethermalization in quenched spinor condensates, Phys. Rev. A84, 023606 (2011)

    2011

  54. [54]

    Kollar, F

    M. Kollar, F. A. Wolf, and M. Eckstein, Generalized gibbs ensemble prediction of prethermalization plateaus and their relation to nonthermal steady states in inte- grable systems, Phys. Rev. B84, 054304 (2011)

    2011

  55. [55]

    Babadi, E

    M. Babadi, E. Demler, and M. Knap, Far-from- equilibrium field theory of many-body quantum spin systems: Prethermalization and relaxation of spin spi- ral states in three dimensions, Phys. Rev. X5, 041005 (2015)

    2015

  56. [56]

    Alba and M

    V. Alba and M. Fagotti, Prethermalization at low tem- perature: The scent of long-range order, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 010601 (2017)

    2017

  57. [57]

    T. Mori, T. N. Ikeda, E. Kaminishi, and M. Ueda, Thermalization and prethermalization in isolated quan- 24 tum systems: A theoretical overview, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics51, 112001 (2018)

    2018

  58. [58]

    Reimann and L

    P. Reimann and L. Dabelow, Typicality of prethermal- ization, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 080603 (2019)

    2019

  59. [59]

    Yin and A

    C. Yin and A. Lucas, Prethermalization and the local robustness of gapped systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 050402 (2023)

    2023

  60. [60]

    Bertini, F

    B. Bertini, F. H. L. Essler, S. Groha, and N. J. Robin- son, Prethermalization and thermalization in models with weak integrability breaking, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 180601 (2015)

    2015

  61. [61]

    Y. Tang, W. Kao, K.-Y. Li, S. Seo, K. Mallayya, M. Rigol, S. Gopalakrishnan, and B. L. Lev, Thermal- ization near integrability in a dipolar quantum newton’s cradle, Phys. Rev. X8, 021030 (2018)

    2018

  62. [62]

    Mallayya, M

    K. Mallayya, M. Rigol, and W. De Roeck, Prethermal- ization and thermalization in isolated quantum systems, Phys. Rev. X9, 021027 (2019)

    2019

  63. [63]

    W. W. Ho, T. Mori, D. A. Abanin, and E. G. D. Torre, Quantum and classical floquet prethermalization, An- nals of Physics454, 169297 (2023)

    2023

  64. [64]

    Kuwahara, T

    T. Kuwahara, T. Mori, and K. Saito, Floquet–magnus theory and generic transient dynamics in periodically driven many-body quantum systems, Annals of Physics 367, 96 (2016)

    2016

  65. [65]

    W. W. Ho, I. Protopopov, and D. A. Abanin, Bounds on energy absorption and prethermalization in quantum systems with long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 200601 (2018)

    2018

  66. [66]

    P. T. Dumitrescu, R. Vasseur, and A. C. Potter, Loga- rithmically slow relaxation in quasiperiodically driven random spin chains, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 070602 (2018)

    2018

  67. [67]

    Machado, G

    F. Machado, G. D. Kahanamoku-Meyer, D. V. Else, C. Nayak, and N. Y. Yao, Exponentially slow heating in short and long-range interacting floquet systems, Phys. Rev. Res.1, 033202 (2019)

    2019

  68. [68]

    Machado, D

    F. Machado, D. V. Else, G. D. Kahanamoku-Meyer, C. Nayak, and N. Y. Yao, Long-range prethermal phases of nonequilibrium matter, Phys. Rev. X10, 011043 (2020)

    2020

  69. [69]

    T. Mori, H. Zhao, F. Mintert, J. Knolle, and R. Moess- ner, Rigorous bounds on the heating rate in thue-morse quasiperiodically and randomly driven quantum many- body systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 050602 (2021)

    2021

  70. [70]

    D. S. Bhakuni, L. F. Santos, and Y. B. Lev, Suppres- sion of heating by long-range interactions in periodically driven spin chains, Phys. Rev. B104, L140301 (2021)

    2021

  71. [71]

    P. Das, D. S. Bhakuni, L. F. Santos, and A. Sharma, Pe- riodically and quasiperiodically driven anisotropic dicke model, Phys. Rev. A108, 063716 (2023)

    2023

  72. [72]

    Tiwari, D

    V. Tiwari, D. S. Bhakuni, and A. Sharma, Periodically and aperiodically thue-morse driven long-range systems: From dynamical localization to slow dynamics, Phys. Rev. B111, 205109 (2025)

    2025

  73. [73]

    ˇZnidariˇ c, Prethermalization, shadowing breakdown, and the absence of trotterization transition in quantum circuits, Phys

    M. ˇZnidariˇ c, Prethermalization, shadowing breakdown, and the absence of trotterization transition in quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. X16, 021017 (2026)

    2026

  74. [74]

    Kastner, Nonequivalence of ensembles for long-range quantum spin systems in optical lattices, Phys

    M. Kastner, Nonequivalence of ensembles for long-range quantum spin systems in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 240403 (2010)

    2010

  75. [75]

    Sch¨ utz and G

    S. Sch¨ utz and G. Morigi, Prethermalization of atoms due to photon-mediated long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 203002 (2014)

    2014

  76. [76]

    Sch¨ utz, S

    S. Sch¨ utz, S. B. J¨ ager, and G. Morigi, Dissipation- assisted prethermalization in long-range interacting atomic ensembles, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 083001 (2016)

    2016

  77. [77]

    Defenu, D

    N. Defenu, D. Mukamel, and S. Ruffo, Ensemble in- equivalence in long-range quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 050403 (2024)

    2024

  78. [78]

    Arrufat-Vicente, D

    D. Arrufat-Vicente, D. Mukamel, S. Ruffo, and N. De- fenu, Ensemble inequivalence in long-range quantum spin systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 10.1103/hmhz-4g46 (2026)

    work page doi:10.1103/hmhz-4g46 2026

  79. [79]

    M. C and U. Divakaran, Floquet thermalization by power-law induced permutation symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. E113, 044209 (2026)

    2026

  80. [81]

    J. C. Halimeh and P. Hauke, Staircase prethermaliza- tion and constrained dynamics in lattice gauge theories (2020), arXiv:2004.07248 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

Showing first 80 references.