Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 172 references

Dynamical Quantum Phase Transitions in a Pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian: The Imbalanced-Pairing Kitaev Model

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-31 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In a pseudo-Hermitian chain with imbalanced pairing, DQPTs require a real post-ramp spectrum; across two critical points they survive only below v_c = πγΔ²/ln(1+γ).

desk verdict Solid, new closed-form result for non-Hermitian ramp DQPTs; finite-ramp numerics rest on an unchecked asymptotic approximation. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.23956 v1 pith:RORN6WQU submitted 2026-07-27 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mechhep-th

R. Jafari , Alireza Akbari , Shukhrat Mardonov , H. Yavartanoo This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.stat-mechhep-th
keywords dynamicalquantumphasetransitionsnon-Hermitiansystemspseudo-HermitianHamiltonianimbalancedpairingLandau-ZenerdynamicsbiorthogonalLoschmidtechoexceptionalpointscriticalsweepvelocity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks when a non-Hermitian, but pseudo-Hermitian, superconducting chain driven by a linearly ramped chemical potential exhibits dynamical quantum phase transitions (DQPTs). Using a biorthogonal formalism, it shows that DQPTs happen only when the post-ramp Hamiltonian's quasiparticle spectrum is real, because the critical times require a real gap and a momentum mode with transition probability exactly 1/2. For positive non-Hermiticity parameter γ, crossing a single critical point always yields one family of DQPTs; crossing two critical or exceptional points yields two families only for sweep velocities below v_c = πγΔ²/ln(1+γ), which decreases to zero as γ approaches −1 and vanishes for γ < −1, where DQPTs are fully suppressed. The result turns the imbalance of pairing into a tunable control over dynamical criticality.

What carries the argument

The biorthogonal factorization of the Loschmidt echo into forward and reciprocal amplitudes reduces the many-body problem to per-mode two-level dynamics. The load-bearing identity is L_k(t) = 1 − 4p_k(1 − p_k) sin²(δε_k t/2), whose logarithmic zeros at p_k = 1/2 with real δε_k fix the DQPT times. The transition probability p_k comes from the exact solution of the pseudo-Hermitian Landau–Zener model (parabolic-cylinder functions), which in the asymptotic limit gives p_k = γ/(e^{πγΔ² sin²k/v} + γ − 1); the condition p_{π/2} = 1/2 immediately yields v_c.

What would settle it

Solve the exact two-level dynamics with the full parabolic-cylinder solution for µ_i = −3 and a finite µ_f (0.5 or 3), compute p_k without taking the asymptotic limit, and check whether p_{π/2} = 1/2 still occurs exactly at v_c = πγΔ²/ln(1+γ); any discrepancy shows the v_c boundary is an artifact of the infinite-range approximation. Alternatively, simulate the many-body chain for large N and look for the predicted nonanalytic cusps in the return rate at the critical times for γ just above −1.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper derives the mode-resolved biorthogonal Loschmidt echo L_k(t) = 1 − 4p_k(1 − p_k) sin²(δε_k t/2), so the return rate becomes nonanalytic when a mode satisfies p_{k*} = 1/2 and δε_{k*} is real. It then solves the ramp dynamics exactly through a non-Hermitian Landau–Zener problem, obtaining p_k = γ/(e^{πγΔ² sin²k/v} + γ − 1) in the asymptotic limit. Combining these, for a ramp crossing a single critical point (γ > 0), continuity of p_k from 1 at k = π to 0 at k → 0 guarantees a unique critical momentum and a single sequence of DQPT times. For a ramp crossing both critical (γ > 0) or both exceptional (γ < 0) points, p_{k=0} = p_{k=π} = 1 and the minimum sits at k = π/2, so DQPTs requir

Load-bearing premise

The finite-ramp results assume the asymptotic Landau–Zener formula for the transition probability p_k; if finite-time corrections from the full parabolic-cylinder solution are significant for the parameter ranges used in the figures, the quoted critical momenta and the critical velocity v_c could shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For γ > 0, a single-critical-point ramp produces a single family of DQPTs at any sweep speed, with the critical momentum k* continuously shifted by γ; even the sudden-quench limit retains a DQPT.
  • For a ramp crossing both critical points (γ > 0) or both exceptional points (−1 < γ < 0), DQPTs occur only for v < πγΔ²/ln(1+γ); ramps faster than this show no DQPTs.
  • The threshold velocity v_c decreases monotonically as γ is reduced, reaching zero at the staggered-pairing limit γ = −1; for γ < −1 DQPTs are absent at every sweep velocity.
  • The dynamical topological order parameter changes by one unit at each critical time: monotonically for a single critical momentum, and with alternating jumps and drops when two critical momenta coexist.
  • The critical times extracted from the biorthogonal return rate differ from those of the conventional Hermitian-conjugate return rate, occurring systematically earlier.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The formula v_c = πγΔ²/ln(1+γ) suggests a practical tuning knob: by adjusting the pairing imbalance γ, an experiment could either expose or hide DQPTs at a fixed ramp speed without changing the range of the sweep — a purely non-Hermitian effect with no Hermitian counterpart.
  • Because p_k was derived in the asymptotic limit µ_i→−∞, µ_f→+∞, the finite-ramp predictions (µ_i = −3 to µ_f = 0.5 and 3) should be checked with the full parabolic-cylinder solution; one test would be to see whether the p_k = 1/2 crossings in the figures shift when finite-time corrections are included.
  • The criterion 'real post-ramp spectrum plus a p_k = 1/2 mode' is likely transferable to other integrable pseudo-Hermitian two-band models under linear ramps, such as nonreciprocal hopping chains; testing it there would separate a general principle from a model-specific accident.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies dynamical quantum phase transitions (DQPTs) in a non-Hermitian imbalanced-pairing Kitaev chain under a linear ramp of the chemical potential, using a biorthogonal Loschmidt-echo framework. The central results are: (i) DQPTs require a post-ramp real quasiparticle spectrum and a mode k* with p_{k*}=1/2, giving critical times t*_n = π(2n+1)/δε_{k*}; (ii) for γ>0 a single-critical-point ramp always yields such a k*, with γ only shifting it; (iii) for a ramp crossing two critical/exceptional points, DQPTs exist only below v_c = πγΔ²/ln(1+γ), which vanishes as γ→−1+ and is absent for γ<−1. The authors derive an exact parabolic-cylinder solution for the two-mode dynamics and use the asymptotic Landau-Zener excitation probability, Eq. (56), to evaluate the return rate and DTOP.

Significance. If correct, the paper would provide a solvable example of DQPTs in a pseudo-Hermitian, particle-non-conserving system under continuous driving, with a closed-form critical velocity and a simple spectral criterion. Strengths include the exact parabolic-cylinder solution (Eqs. (53)–(54)), the explicit biorthogonal construction, and the parameter-free derivation of v_c from the Landau-Zener probability without fitting. The results are falsifiable via the predicted DQPT/no-DQPT boundary in the v–γ plane. However, the two load-bearing issues below—the use of an asymptotic LZ formula for finite ramps and the overgeneralized 'real spectrum only' claim—must be addressed before the results can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV–V, Eqs. (53)–(56), Figs. 2–3] Eq. (56) is derived in the asymptotic limit μ_i→−∞, μ_f→+∞ (see Eq. (55)), but Sec. V uses it for finite ramps (μ_i=−3; μ_f=0.5 and 3) in Figs. 2–3. The exact parabolic-cylinder solution, Eqs. (53)–(54), is never used to compute p_k for finite endpoints, and no finite-time correction estimate is given. The error is not perturbative: for the μ_i=−3→μ_f=0.5 ramp, the k=0 mode has Δ_k=0 and the same diagonal ground branch at both endpoints, so exactly p_{k=0}=0, whereas Eq. (56) gives p_{k=0}=1. Thus the plotted p_k, the extracted k*, and the Sec. V.A statement that DQPTs persist in the sudden-quench limit are unsupported. Recompute the finite-ramp figures from Eqs. (53)–(54) or restrict all numerical claims to the asymptotic protocol.
  2. [§II, Eqs. (28)–(29); Abstract] The abstract and the discussion around Eq. (29) claim DQPTs occur 'only when the post-ramp Hamiltonian possesses a real energy spectrum.' This does not follow from Eq. (28). L_k(t)=0 requires 4p_k(1−p_k) sin²(δε_k t/2)=1. For complex δε_k=a+ib and p_k≠1/2, real-time zeros exist: at t_n=2(π/2+nπ)/a, sin²(δε_k t_n/2)=cosh²(bt_n/2), so any p_k with 4p_k(1−p_k)=sech²(bt_n/2) yields a zero. Hence complex post-ramp spectra do not generically exclude DQPTs. Either prove these zeros are absent for the specific p_k of this model, or restate the claim as a sufficient condition for the p_k=1/2, real-δε mechanism.
  3. [§V.B, Eq. (58), Fig. 4; Abstract] Eq. (58) and Fig. 4 are derived from the asymptotic LZ probability and the text notes this for Eq. (56); however, the Abstract and Conclusion present v_c=πγΔ²/ln(1+γ) as a property of the model under a linear ramp. Because v_c→0 as γ→−1+, even small finite-ramp corrections could shift or eliminate the predicted DQPT region. Please state the protocol restriction explicitly in the Abstract/Conclusion, or extend the calculation of p_k to finite endpoints and show how v_c is modified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§V.A] The statement 'p_k→0 as k→0' is inconsistent with Eq. (56), which gives p_k→1 as k→0 for fixed v. This should be corrected either to the exact finite-ramp result or to the asymptotic-limit behavior.
  2. [Eqs. (14) and (27)] The symbol p_k is used for both the conventional Hermitian overlap and the biorthogonal transition probability; please use distinct notation to avoid confusion.
  3. [§III, Fig. 2] γ=0.00001 is plotted as a representative of γ→0, but γ=0 is defective and the LZ formula Eq. (56) is not defined there. Clarify the limiting procedure.
  4. [§II, Eq. (30)] The numerical evaluation of the Pancharatnam geometric phase and DTOP is not described; please provide the discretization or a citation.
  5. [§V.B, γ<0] For γ<0, the analytic continuation of ε_k and B_k through exceptional points is not specified; a branch convention is needed if exact finite-ramp calculations are performed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central v_c formula follows algebraically from an independent closed-form Landau-Zener probability and the standard p=1/2 Fisher-zero condition, with no target result fed back into the derivation.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing result, Eq. (58) v_c = πγΔ²/ln(1+γ), is obtained by combining two independent ingredients: (i) the mode-resolved excitation probability Eq. (56), p_k = γ/(e^{πλ²}+γ−1), which is taken from the parabolic-cylinder solution of the non-Hermitian Landau-Zener problem in Ref. [168], and (ii) the standard DQPT condition p_{k*} = 1/2 from Eq. (29), which arises from the vanishing of the argument in Eq. (28), 1 − 4p_k(1−p_k) sin²(δε_k t/2) = 0. Setting p_{k=π/2} = 1/2 and solving for v gives Eq. (58); this is pure algebra, not a fit to the paper's numerical DQPT data. The claim that DQPTs require a real post-ramp spectrum is a direct consequence of Eq. (29), where the critical time t*_n = π(2n+1)/δε_{k*} requires δε_{k*} to be real; this is a mathematical criterion rather than an input disguised as a prediction. The biorthogonal Loschmidt construction follows published frameworks Refs. [152,156], and the LZ evolution operator is cited from Ref. [168]; none of these are self-citations, and no load-bearing step reduces to the authors' own prior work. The self-citations that do appear (e.g., Refs. [18,47,76,79,80,82]) are used for contextual statements about ramped DQPTs and DTOP slope conventions, not to derive v_c or the DQPT criterion. A legitimate concern is that Figs. 2 and 3 use the asymptotic Eq. (56) for finite ramps (μ_i=−3, μ_f=0.5 or 3) without quantifying finite-time parabolic-cylinder corrections; however, that is a potential quantitative accuracy issue, not circularity, because the formula was not constructed from the paper's target predictions. The derivation is therefore self-contained with respect to its central claims.

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

The paper introduces no new entities; the biorthogonal partner state is a mathematical construction from prior literature. There are no fitted free parameters: w, Δ, γ, µ_i, µ_f, and v are physical or protocol parameters, and v_c is a derived quantity. The main unstated inputs are the biorthogonal normalization scheme, the chosen non-Hermitian Schrödinger evolution, and the asymptotic LZ approximation for finite ramps.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Biorthogonal framework of Refs [152-156] correctly defines normalized Loschmidt echo and transition probability for non-Hermitian evolution.
    Section II adopts the dual state Eq. (16) and Lk Eq. (21) from prior work; all DQPT criteria depend on these definitions.
  • domain assumption Time evolution is generated by the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian H_k via i d/dt |ψ⟩=H_k|ψ⟩ with biorthogonal normalization.
    Eqs. (24) and (50); alternative Lindblad or quantum-jump dynamics would give different p_k.
  • standard math The exact Landau-Zener solution of Torosov & Vitanov [168] applies to the pseudo-Hermitian H_k with the given U-matrix elements.
    The parabolic-cylinder solution is treated as a theorem for the stated non-Hermitian two-level ODE.
  • ad hoc to paper The asymptotic Landau-Zener formula Eq. (56) is a valid approximation for the finite ramps used in the numerical section.
    This is not justified by error estimates; potential finite-time corrections are not quantified.
  • ad hoc to paper For γ<0, square-root branch choices for ε_k and B_k provide a consistent analytic continuation of ground/excited branches through exceptional points.
    The eigenvector parametrization Eq. (44) becomes singular at B_k=0 (EPs); the paper states an alternative gauge exists but does not use it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical Quantum Phase Transitions in a Pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian: The Imbalanced-Pairing Kitaev Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RORN6WQU

@misc{pith2026260723956,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical Quantum Phase Transitions in a Pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian: The Imbalanced-Pairing Kitaev Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RORN6WQU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.23956}
}
abstract

Although parity-time (PT)-symmetric Hamiltonians are often associated with real energy spectra, PT symmetry is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for a real spectrum. More generally, real spectra are associated with the broader class of pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians, of which PT-symmetric Hamiltonians constitute a simple subclass. Here, we investigate the nonequilibrium dynamics of the imbalanced-pairing Kitaev model, a prototypical pseudo-Hermitian system, under a linearly time-dependent chemical potential. The dynamics are analyzed within the biorthogonal framework using the concept of dynamical quantum phase transitions (DQPTs). We show that, under a linear ramp protocol, DQPTs occur only when the post-ramp Hamiltonian possesses a real energy spectrum. For positive values of the non-Hermiticity parameter ($\gamma>0$), where the energy spectrum remains entirely real, a ramp crossing a single quantum critical point gives rise to a single family of critical times, analogous to the Hermitian case. Furthermore, for ramps crossing two critical or exceptional points, the critical sweep velocity above which DQPTs disappear decreases as the non-Hermiticity parameter is reduced and vanishes in the staggered-pairing limit, $\gamma=-1$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.23956 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Equilibrium phase diagram of the imbalanced [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Transition probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Transition probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Dynamical phase diagram in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

172 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    At these points, the Hamiltonian be- comes defective and the biorthogonal basis breaks down

    Unlike ordinary Hermitian degeneracies, exceptional points are characterized by the simultaneous coalescence of both the quasiparticle energies and their correspond- ing eigenvectors. At these points, the Hamiltonian be- comes defective and the biorthogonal basis breaks down. Forγ <0, these exceptional points serve as the phase boundaries separating the p...

  2. [2]

    Dupont and J

    M. Dupont and J. E. Moore, Quantum criticality using a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. B106, L041109 (2022). 12

    2022

  3. [3]

    Langen, R

    T. Langen, R. Geiger, and J. Schmiedmayer, Ultracold atoms out of equilibrium, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics6, 201 (2015)

    2015

  4. [4]

    A. D. King, S. Suzuki, J. Raymond, A. Zucca, T. Lant- ing, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, S. Ejtemaee, E. Hoskin- son, S. Huang,et al., Coherent quantum annealing in a programmable 2,000 qubit ising chain, Nature Physics 18, 1324 (2022)

    2022

  5. [5]

    Keesling, A

    A. Keesling, A. Omran, H. Levine, H. Bernien, H. Pich- ler, S. Choi, R. Samajdar, S. Schwartz, P. Silvi, S. Sachdev,et al., Quantum kibble–zurek mechanism and critical dynamics on a programmable rydberg sim- ulator, Nature568, 207 (2019)

    2019

  6. [6]

    Polkovnikov, K

    A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Ven- galattore, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interacting quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 863 (2011)

    2011

  7. [7]

    Jafari and H

    R. Jafari and H. Johannesson, Loschmidt echo revivals: Critical and noncritical, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 015701 (2017)

    2017

  8. [8]

    Dziarmaga, Dynamics of a quantum phase transition: Exact solution of the quantum ising model, Phys

    J. Dziarmaga, Dynamics of a quantum phase transition: Exact solution of the quantum ising model, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 245701 (2005)

    2005

Show all 172 references
  1. [9]

    Francuz, J

    A. Francuz, J. Dziarmaga, B. Gardas, and W. H. Zurek, Space and time renormalization in phase transition dy- namics, Phys. Rev. B93, 075134 (2016)

    2016

  2. [10]

    Yang and Z

    X. Yang and Z. Cai, Dynamical transitions and criti- cal behavior between discrete time crystal phases, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 020602 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Col- loquium: Many-body localization, thermalization, and entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 021001 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Mishra, R

    U. Mishra, R. Prabhu, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Tun- ing interaction strength leads to an ergodic-nonergodic transition of quantum correlations in the anisotropic heisenberg spin model, Phys. Rev. A87, 052318 (2013)

    2013

  5. [13]

    Chanda, T

    T. Chanda, T. Das, D. Sadhukhan, A. K. Pal, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Static and dynamical quantum correlations in phases of an alternating-fieldxymodel, Phys. Rev. A94, 042310 (2016)

    2016

  6. [14]

    Awasthi, S

    N. Awasthi, S. Bhattacharya, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Universal quantum uncertainty relations between non- ergodicity and loss of information, Phys. Rev. A97, 032103 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    M. Heyl, A. Polkovnikov, and S. Kehrein, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in the transverse-field ising model, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 135704 (2013)

    2013

  8. [16]

    Hey and J

    M. Hey and J. C. Budich, Dynamical topological quan- tum phase transitions for mixed states, Phys. Rev. B 96, 180304 (2017)

    2017

  9. [17]

    Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a re- view, Reports on Progress in Physics81, 054001 (2018)

    M. Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a re- view, Reports on Progress in Physics81, 054001 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    Bhattacharya, S

    U. Bhattacharya, S. Bandyopadhyay, and A. Dutta, Mixed state dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B96, 180303 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    Jafari, Dynamical quantum phase transition and quasi particle excitation, Scientific reports9, 2871 (2019)

    R. Jafari, Dynamical quantum phase transition and quasi particle excitation, Scientific reports9, 2871 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    Sadrzadeh, R

    M. Sadrzadeh, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Dynami- cal topological quantum phase transitions at criticality, Phys. Rev. B103, 144305 (2021)

    2021

  13. [21]

    C. Y. Wong and W. C. Yu, Loschmidt amplitude spec- trum in dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B105, 174307 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    A. L. Corps and A. Rela˜ no, Dynamical and excited-state quantum phase transitions in collective systems, Phys. Rev. B106, 024311 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    A. L. Corps and A. Rela˜ no, Theory of dynamical phase transitions in quantum systems with symmetry- breaking eigenstates, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 100402 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    F. J. Gonz´ alez, A. Norambuena, and R. Coto, Dynam- ical quantum phase transition in diamond: Applica- tions in quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. B106, 014313 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    Bhattacharjee and A

    S. Bhattacharjee and A. Dutta, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in extended transverse ising models, Phys. Rev. B97, 134306 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Bhattacharya and A

    U. Bhattacharya and A. Dutta, Emergent topology and dynamical quantum phase transitions in two- dimensional closed quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B96, 014302 (2017)

    2017

  19. [27]

    Xu, Topological classification of dynamical quan- tum phase transitions in the 1d xy model via criti- cal mode analysis, New Journal of Physics28, 054505 (2026)

    B.-M. Xu, Topological classification of dynamical quan- tum phase transitions in the 1d xy model via criti- cal mode analysis, New Journal of Physics28, 054505 (2026)

    2026

  20. [28]

    Parez and V

    G. Parez and V. Alba, Smearing of dynamical quan- tum phase transitions in dissipative free-fermion sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B113, 144310 (2026)

    2026

  21. [29]

    Parez and V

    G. Parez and V. Alba, Reduced fidelities for free fermions out of equilibrium: from dynamical quantum phase transitions to mpemba effect, Journal of Statisti- cal Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2026, 013103 (2026)

    2026

  22. [30]

    Novotn` y, J

    J. Novotn` y, J. Stˇ releˇ cek, P. Str´ ansk` y, and P. Cejnar, Tracing complex zeros of the quantum survival ampli- tude: How the energy distribution controls dynami- cal phase transitions, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.06849 10.48550/arXiv.2605.06849 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  23. [31]

    Xu and C.-Q

    B.-M. Xu and C.-Q. Wang, The singularities of the rate function of quantum coherent work in one-dimensional transverse field ising model, New Journal of Physics25, 073020 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    Luo, W.-L

    L.-Y. Luo, W.-L. Li, B.-M. Xu, and Z. Li, The in- trinsic connection between dynamical phase transitions and magnetization in the 1d xy model, arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.01259 10.48550/arXiv.2602.01259 (2026)

    2026 doi

  25. [33]

    Zhang, H.-C

    Z.-H. Zhang, H.-C. Kou, and P. Li, Interference of criti- cal dynamics associated with zero modes, arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.13200 10.48550/arXiv.2606.13200 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  26. [34]

    Kui´ c, A

    D. Kui´ c, A. Knapp, and D. ˇSaponja Milutinovi´ c, Fi- nite time path field theory and a new type of univer- sal quantum spin chain quench behavior, Universe11, 10.3390/universe11070230 (2025)

    2025 doi

  27. [35]

    L. C. C´ eleri, K. Zawadzki, I. Medina, and D. O. Soares-Pinto, Quantum state texture of dynam- ical criticality, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.04161 10.48550/arXiv.2605.04161 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  28. [36]

    Kheiri, S

    S. Kheiri, S. Kheiri, and S. Mahdavifar, Dynamical phase transitions and criticality-enhanced charging in a topological quantum battery, Phys. Rev. B113, 205150 (2026)

    2026

  29. [37]

    Liu, W.-H

    Z. Liu, W.-H. Nie, Y.-j. Yang, L.-C. Wang, and C.-s. Yu, Dynamical criticality behind energy-storage singularities in quantum batteries, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.10637 10.48550/arXiv.2605.10637 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  30. [38]

    P. H. S. Bento, A. del Campo, and L. C. C´ eleri, Krylov complexity and dynamical phase transition in 13 the quenched lipkin-meshkov-glick model, Phys. Rev. B 109, 224304 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    B. O. Goes, G. T. Landi, E. Solano, M. Sanz, and L. C. C´ eleri, Wehrl entropy production rate across a dynami- cal quantum phase transition, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033419 (2020)

    2020

  32. [40]

    B. Zhou, C. Yang, and S. Chen, Signature of a nonequi- librium quantum phase transition in the long-time av- erage of the loschmidt echo, Phys. Rev. B100, 184313 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    S. Ye, N. A. Khan, and M. Sajid, Disentangling con- nection between static and dynamical phase transitions, Phys. Rev. A111, 042208 (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    N. O. Abeling and S. Kehrein, Quantum quench dy- namics in the transverse field ising model at nonzero temperatures, Phys. Rev. B93, 104302 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    J. Lang, B. Frank, and J. C. Halimeh, Dynamical quan- tum phase transitions: A geometric picture, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 130603 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    J. Lang, B. Frank, and J. C. Halimeh, Concurrence of dynamical phase transitions at finite temperature in the fully connected transverse-field ising model, Phys. Rev. B97, 174401 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    B. Mera, C. Vlachou, N. Paunkovi´ c, V. R. Vieira, and O. Viyuela, Dynamical phase transitions at finite temperature from fidelity and interferometric loschmidt echo induced metrics, Phys. Rev. B97, 094110 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    Tang, X.-Y

    J.-C. Tang, X.-Y. Hou, and H. Guo, Geometry effect of dynamical quantum phase transitions at finite temper- atures, Phys. Rev. B111, 174310 (2025)

    2025

  39. [47]

    K. Yang, L. Zhou, W. Ma, X. Kong, P. Wang, X. Qin, X. Rong, Y. Wang, F. Shi, J. Gong, and J. Du, Flo- quet dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B100, 085308 (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    Zamani, R

    S. Zamani, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Floquet dynamical quantum phase transition in the extended xy model: Nonadiabatic to adiabatic topological transition, Phys. Rev. B102, 144306 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    J. Naji, M. Jafari, R. Jafari, and A. Akbari, Dissipative floquet dynamical quantum phase transition, Phys. Rev. A105, 022220 (2022)

    2022

  42. [50]

    Jafari and A

    R. Jafari and A. Akbari, Floquet dynamical phase tran- sition and entanglement spectrum, Phys. Rev. A103, 012204 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Kosior and K

    A. Kosior and K. Sacha, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in discrete time crystals, Phys. Rev. A97, 053621 (2018)

    2018

  44. [52]

    Jafari, A

    R. Jafari, A. Akbari, U. Mishra, and H. Johannes- son, Floquet dynamical quantum phase transitions un- der synchronized periodic driving, Phys. Rev. B105, 094311 (2022)

    2022

  45. [53]

    Kosior, A

    A. Kosior, A. Syrwid, and K. Sacha, Dynamical quan- tum phase transitions in systems with broken continu- ous time and space translation symmetries, Phys. Rev. A98, 023612 (2018)

    2018

  46. [54]

    J. Naji, R. Jafari, L. Zhou, and A. Langari, Engineer- ing floquet dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B106, 094314 (2022)

    2022

  47. [55]

    Cheng, Y

    Y. Cheng, Y. Zhang, T. Qiu, P. Xin, and B.-M. Xu, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in periodically driven 1d ising model, Communications in Theoretical Physics78, 075104 (2026)

    2026

  48. [56]

    Mas lowski and N

    T. Mas lowski and N. Sedlmayr, Dynamical bulk- boundary correspondence and dynamical quantum phase transitions in higher-order topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B108, 094306 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Wrze´ sniewski, I

    K. Wrze´ sniewski, I. Weymann, N. Sedlmayr, and T. Doma´ nski, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in a mesoscopic superconducting system, Phys. Rev. B 105, 094514 (2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    Mas lowski and N

    T. Mas lowski and N. Sedlmayr, Quasiperiodic dynami- cal quantum phase transitions in multiband topological insulators and connections with entanglement entropy and fidelity susceptibility, Phys. Rev. B101, 014301 (2020)

    2020

  51. [59]

    Uhrich, N

    P. Uhrich, N. Defenu, R. Jafari, and J. C. Halimeh, Out-of-equilibrium phase diagram of long-range super- conductors, Phys. Rev. B101, 245148 (2020)

    2020

  52. [60]

    Y. Zeng, B. Zhou, and S. Chen, Dynamical singularity of the rate function for quench dynamics in finite-size quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B107, 134302 (2023)

    2023

  53. [61]

    Stumper, M

    S. Stumper, M. Thoss, and J. Okamoto, Interaction- driven dynamical quantum phase transitions in a strongly correlated bosonic system, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 013002 (2022)

    2022

  54. [62]

    W. C. Yu, P. D. Sacramento, Y. C. Li, and H.-Q. Lin, Correlations and dynamical quantum phase transitions in an interacting topological insulator, Phys. Rev. B 104, 085104 (2021)

    2021

  55. [63]

    Vijayan, L

    V. Vijayan, L. Chotorlishvili, A. Ernst, S. S. P. Parkin, M. I. Katsnelson, and S. K. Mishra, Topological dynam- ical quantum phase transition in a quantum skyrmion phase, Phys. Rev. B107, L100419 (2023)

    2023

  56. [64]

    Yu, Dynamical phase transition and scaling in the chiral clock potts chain, Phys

    X.-J. Yu, Dynamical phase transition and scaling in the chiral clock potts chain, Phys. Rev. A108, 062215 (2023)

    2023

  57. [65]

    S. M. Bhattacharjee, Complex dynamics approach to dynamical quantum phase transitions: The potts model, Phys. Rev. B109, 035130 (2024)

    2024

  58. [66]

    L. G. C. Lakkaraju, S. K. Haldar, and A. Sen(De), Pre- dicting a topological quantum phase transition from dy- namics via multisite entanglement, Phys. Rev. A109, 022436 (2024)

    2024

  59. [67]

    Puskarov and D

    T. Puskarov and D. Schuricht, Time evolution dur- ing and after finite-time quantum quenches in the transverse-field Ising chain, SciPost Phys.1, 003 (2016)

    2016

  60. [68]

    Haldar, S

    S. Haldar, S. Roy, T. Chanda, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Multipartite entanglement at dynamical quantum phase transitions with nonuniformly spaced criticalities, Phys. Rev. B101, 224304 (2020)

    2020

  61. [69]

    S. Ye, Z. Zhou, N. A. Khan, and G. Xianlong, Energy- dependent dynamical quantum phase transitions in qua- sicrystals, Phys. Rev. A109, 043319 (2024)

    2024

  62. [70]

    Jafari, H

    R. Jafari, H. Johannesson, A. Langari, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Quench dynamics and zero-energy modes: The case of the creutz model, Phys. Rev. B 99, 054302 (2019)

    2019

  63. [71]

    Mitra and S

    A. Mitra and S. C. L. Srivastava, Dynamical quantum phase transitions through the lens of mode dynamics, Phys. Rev. B113, 104309 (2026)

    2026

  64. [72]

    B. Zhou, Y. Zeng, and S. Chen, Exact zeros of the loschmidt echo and quantum speed limit time for the dynamical quantum phase transition in finite-size sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B104, 094311 (2021)

    2021

  65. [73]

    K. Cao, H. Guo, and G. Yang, Aperiodic dynamical quantum phase transition in multi-band bloch hamil- tonian and its origin, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter36, 155401 (2024). 14

    2024

  66. [74]

    Tian, H.-X

    T. Tian, H.-X. Yang, L.-Y. Qiu, H.-Y. Liang, Y.-B. Yang, Y. Xu, and L.-M. Duan, Observation of dynam- ical quantum phase transitions with correspondence in an excited state phase diagram, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 043001 (2020)

    2020

  67. [75]

    Schmitt and S

    M. Schmitt and S. Kehrein, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in the kitaev honeycomb model, Phys. Rev. B92, 075114 (2015)

    2015

  68. [76]

    Divakaran, S

    U. Divakaran, S. Sharma, and A. Dutta, Tuning the presence of dynamical phase transitions in a generalized xyspin chain, Phys. Rev. E93, 052133 (2016)

    2016

  69. [77]

    Zamani, J

    S. Zamani, J. Naji, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Scaling and universality at ramped quench dynamical quantum phase transitions, Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter36, 355401 (2024)

    2024

  70. [78]

    Zheng, X

    Z.-Y. Zheng, X. Liu, S. Lin, Y. Zhang, and S. Chen, Loschmidt echo zeros in finite-size quantum systems with linear quench, Phys. Rev. B113, L020301 (2026)

    2026

  71. [79]

    Jafari, A

    R. Jafari, A. Langari, S. Eggert, and H. Johannesson, Dynamical quantum phase transitions following a noisy quench, Phys. Rev. B109, L180303 (2024)

    2024

  72. [80]

    Baghran, R

    R. Baghran, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Competition of long-range interactions and noise at a ramped quench dynamical quantum phase transition: The case of the long-range pairing kitaev chain, Phys. Rev. B110, 064302 (2024)

    2024

  73. [81]

    Ansari, R

    S. Ansari, R. Jafari, A. Akbari, and M. Abdi, Scaling and universality at noisy quench dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B112, 054304 (2025)

    2025

  74. [82]

    Jafari, A

    R. Jafari, A. Akbari, M. Biderang, and J. Sirker, Noise-affected dynamical quantum phase tran- sitions (2025), arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.03005 10.48550/arXiv.2504.03005

    2025 doi arXiv

  75. [83]

    Kheiri, R

    S. Kheiri, R. Jafari, S. Mahdavifar, S. E. N. Oskoee, and A. Akbari, Dynamical phase diagram of the quantum ising model with cluster interaction under noiseless and noisy driven field, Scientific reports15, 44339 (2025)

    2025

  76. [84]

    Zhang, L

    X. Zhang, L. Hu, and F. Li, Universal scaling in loschmidt echo across quantum phase transitions un- der nonadiabatic dynamics, Phys. Rev. B112, 024310 (2025)

    2025

  77. [85]

    Zhang and F

    X. Zhang and F. Li, Fate of dynamical quan- tum phase transitions from sudden quench to slow quench limit, arXiv preprint, arXiv:2607.15649 10.48550/arXiv.2607.15649

    doi arXiv

  78. [86]

    Chen, J.-M

    Z. Chen, J.-M. Cui, M.-Z. Ai, R. He, Y.-F. Huang, Y.-J. Han, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Experimentally detect- ing dynamical quantum phase transitions in a slowly quenched ising-chain model, Phys. Rev. A102, 042222 (2020)

    2020

  79. [87]

    Mishra, R

    U. Mishra, R. Jafari, and A. Akbari, Disordered kitaev chain with long-range pairing: Loschmidt echo revivals and dynamical phase transitions, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical53, 375301 (2020)

    2020

  80. [88]

    T. I. Vanhala and T. Ojanen, Theory of the loschmidt echo and dynamical quantum phase transitions in disor- dered fermi systems, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033178 (2023)

    2023

  81. [89]

    K. Cao, W. Li, M. Zhong, and P. Tong, Influence of weak disorder on the dynamical quantum phase transitions in the anisotropic xy chain, Phys. Rev. B102, 014207 (2020)

    2020

  82. [90]

    Jurcevic, H

    P. Jurcevic, H. Shen, P. Hauke, C. Maier, T. Brydges, C. Hempel, B. P. Lanyon, M. Heyl and, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Direct observation of dynamical quantum phase transitions in an interacting many-body system, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 080501 (2017)

    2017

  83. [91]

    Zhang, G

    J. Zhang, G. Pagano, P. W. Hess, A. Kyprianidis, P. Becker, H. Kaplan, A. V. Gorshkov, Z.-X. Gong, and C. Monroe, Observation of a many-body dynami- cal phase transition with a 53-qubit quantum simulator, Nature551, 601 (2017)

    2017

  84. [92]

    E. A. Martinez, C. A. Muschik, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, A. Erhard, M. Heyl, P. Hauke, M. Dalmonte, T. Monz, P. Zoller,et al., Real-time dynamics of lattice gauge theories with a few-qubit quantum computer, Nature 534, 516 (2016)

    2016

  85. [93]

    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, 10.1126/sci- adv.1700672 (2017)

    2017 doi

  86. [94]

    Smith, A

    J. Smith, A. Lee, P. Richerme, B. Neyenhuis, P. W. Hess, P. Hauke, M. Heyl, D. A. Huse, and C. Monroe, Many-body localization in a quantum simulator with programmable random disorder, Nature Physics12, 907 (2016)

    2016

  87. [95]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuletich, and M. D. Lukin, Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature551, 579 (2017)

    2017

  88. [96]

    Fl¨ aschner, D

    N. Fl¨ aschner, D. Vogel, M. Tarnowski, B. S. Rem, D.-S. L¨ uhmann, M. Heyl, J. C. Budich, L. Mathey, K. Sen- gstock, and C. Weitenberg, Observation of dynamical vortices after quenches in a system with topology, Na- ture Physics14, 265 (2017)

    2017

  89. [97]

    X.-Y. Guo, C. Yang, Y. Zeng, Y. Peng, H.-K. Li, H. Deng, Y.-R. Jin, S. Chen, D. Zheng, and H. Fan, Observation of a dynamical quantum phase transition by a superconducting qubit simulation, Phys. Rev. Ap- plied11, 044080 (2019)

    2019

  90. [98]

    K. Wang, X. Qiu, L. Xiao, X. Zhan, Z. Bian, W. Yi, and P. Xue, Simulating dynamic quantum phase transi- tions in photonic quantum walks, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 020501 (2019)

    2019

  91. [99]

    Xu, Q.-Q

    X.-Y. Xu, Q.-Q. Wang, M. Heyl, J. C. Budich, W.-W. Pan, Z. Chen, M. Jan, K. Sun, J.-S. Xu, Y.-J. Han, et al., Measuring a dynamical topological order param- eter in quantum walks, Light: Science & Applications 9, 1 (2020)

    2020

  92. [100]

    Nie, B.-B

    X. Nie, B.-B. Wei, X. Chen, Z. Zhang, X. Zhao, C. Qiu, Y. Tian, Y. Ji, T. Xin, D. Lu, and J. Li, Experi- mental observation of equilibrium and dynamical quan- tum phase transitions via out-of-time-ordered correla- tors, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 250601 (2020)

    2020

  93. [101]

    Vajna and B

    S. Vajna and B. D´ ora, Topological classification of dy- namical phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B91, 155127 (2015)

    2015

  94. [102]

    Karrasch and D

    C. Karrasch and D. Schuricht, Dynamical phase tran- sitions after quenches in nonintegrable models, Phys. Rev. B87, 195104 (2013)

    2013

  95. [103]

    Vajna and B

    S. Vajna and B. D´ ora, Disentangling dynamical phase transitions from equilibrium phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B89, 161105 (2014)

    2014

  96. [104]

    J. J. Mendoza-Arenas, Dynamical quantum phase tran- sitions in the one-dimensional extended fermi–hubbard model, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2022, 043101 (2022). 15

    2022

  97. [105]

    Mas lowski and N

    T. Mas lowski and N. Sedlmayr, The dynamical bulk boundary correspondence and dynamical quantum phase transitions in the benalcazar–bernevig–hughes model, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter36, 335401 (2024)

    2024

  98. [106]

    Mas lowski and N

    T. Mas lowski and N. Sedlmayr, The two dimensional dynamical bulk boundary correspondence: Beyond two band models, arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.10731 10.48550/arXiv.2606.10731 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  99. [107]

    Bhattacharyya, N

    S. Bhattacharyya, N. Sedlmayr,et al., On the re- lation between string order parameters, entangle- ment, and dynamical quantum phase transitions in topological dynamics, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.25611 10.48550/arXiv.2605.25611 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  100. [108]

    Sedlmayr, Dynamical phase transitions in topo- logical insulators, arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.02314 10.48550/arXiv.1910.02314 (2019)

    N. Sedlmayr, Dynamical phase transitions in topo- logical insulators, arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.02314 10.48550/arXiv.1910.02314 (2019)

    1910 doi arXiv

  101. [109]

    Khatun and S

    A. Khatun and S. M. Bhattacharjee, Boundaries and un- physical fixed points in dynamical quantum phase tran- sitions, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 160603 (2019)

    2019

  102. [110]

    Ding, Dynamical quantum phase transition from a critical quantum quench, Phys

    C. Ding, Dynamical quantum phase transition from a critical quantum quench, Phys. Rev. B102, 060409(R) (2020)

    2020

  103. [111]

    De Nicola, A

    S. De Nicola, A. A. Michailidis, and M. Serbyn, Entan- glement view of dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 040602 (2021)

    2021

  104. [112]

    A. D. Verga, Entanglement dynamics and phase tran- sitions of the floquet cluster spin chain, Phys. Rev. B 107, 085116 (2023)

    2023

  105. [113]

    Rossi and F

    L. Rossi and F. Dolcini, Nonlinear current and dynam- ical quantum phase transitions in the flux-quenched su-schrieffer-heeger model, Phys. Rev. B106, 045410 (2022)

    2022

  106. [114]

    N. A. Khan, P. Wang, M. Jan, and G. Xianlong, Anoma- lous correlation-induced dynamical phase transitions, Scientific Reports13, 9470 (2023)

    2023

  107. [115]

    J. C. Halimeh, D. Trapin, M. Van Damme, and M. Heyl, Local measures of dynamical quantum phase transi- tions, Phys. Rev. B104, 075130 (2021)

    2021

  108. [116]

    Porta, F

    S. Porta, F. Cavaliere, M. Sassetti, and N. Traverso Ziani, Topological classification of dy- namical quantum phase transitions in the xy chain, Scientific Reports10, 12766 (2020)

    2020

  109. [117]

    Wang and X

    P. Wang and X. Gao, Connecting dynamical quantum phase transitions and topological steady-state transi- tions by tuning the energy gap, Phys. Rev. A97, 023627 (2018)

    2018

  110. [118]

    Yang and Z

    J. Yang and Z. Yan, Universal criterion and topologi- cal characterization of dynamical quantum phase tran- sitions in quenched dirac hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. B 113, 184309 (2026)

    2026

  111. [119]

    J. C. Budich and M. Heyl, Dynamical topological or- der parameters far from equilibrium, Phys. Rev. B93, 085416 (2016)

    2016

  112. [120]

    T. c. v. Prosen and I. Piˇ zorn, Quantum phase transi- tion in a far-from-equilibrium steady state of anxyspin chain, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 105701 (2008)

    2008

  113. [121]

    Dagvadorj, J

    G. Dagvadorj, J. M. Fellows, S. Matyja´ skiewicz, F. M. Marchetti, I. Carusotto, and M. H. Szyma´ nska, Nonequilibrium phase transition in a two-dimensional driven open quantum system, Phys. Rev. X5, 041028 (2015)

    2015

  114. [122]

    J. Jin, A. Biella, O. Viyuela, L. Mazza, J. Keeling, R. Fazio, and D. Rossini, Cluster mean-field approach to the steady-state phase diagram of dissipative spin systems, Phys. Rev. X6, 031011 (2016)

    2016

  115. [123]

    L. R. Bakker, M. S. Bahovadinov, D. V. Kurlov, V. Gritsev, A. K. Fedorov, and D. O. Krimer, Driven- dissipative time crystalline phases in a two-mode bosonic system with kerr nonlinearity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 250401 (2022)

    2022

  116. [124]

    A. S. Kazmina, I. V. Zalivako, A. S. Borisenko, N. A. Nemkov, A. S. Nikolaeva, I. A. Simakov, A. V. Kuznetsova, E. Y. Egorova, K. P. Galstyan, N. V. Semenin, A. E. Korolkov, I. N. Moskalenko, N. N. Abramov, I. S. Besedin, D. A. Kalacheva, V. B. Lubsanov, A. N. Bolgar, E. O. Ki...

    2024

  117. [125]

    M¨ uller, S

    M. M¨ uller, S. Diehl, G. Pupillo, and P. Zoller, En- gineered open systems and quantum simulations with atoms and ions, inAdvances in Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, Advances In Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, Vol. 61, edited by P. Berman, E. Ari- mondo, and C...

    2012

  118. [126]

    Leibfried, R

    D. Leibfried, R. Blatt, C. Monroe, and D. Wineland, Quantum dynamics of single trapped ions, Rev. Mod. Phys.75, 281 (2003)

    2003

  119. [127]

    Miri and A

    M.-A. Miri and A. Al` u, Exceptional points in op- tics and photonics, Science363, eaar7709 (2019), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.aar7709

    2019 doi

  120. [128]

    Clerk, K

    A. Clerk, K. Lehnert, P. Bertet, J. Petta, and Y. Naka- mura, Hybrid quantum systems with circuit quantum electrodynamics, Nature Physics16, 257 (2020)

    2020

  121. [129]

    P. M. Harrington, E. J. Mueller, and K. W. Murch, Engineered dissipation for quantum information science, Nature Reviews Physics4, 660 (2022)

    2022

  122. [130]

    L. Xiao, T. Deng, K. Wang, G. Zhu, Z. Wang, W. Yi, and P. Xue, Non-hermitian bulk–boundary correspon- dence in quantum dynamics, Nature Physics16, 761 (2020)

    2020

  123. [131]

    W. Zhu, X. Fang, D. Li, Y. Sun, Y. Li, Y. Jing, and H. Chen, Simultaneous observation of a topolog- ical edge state and exceptional point in an open and non-hermitian acoustic system, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 124501 (2018)

    2018

  124. [132]

    W. Gou, T. Chen, D. Xie, T. Xiao, T.-S. Deng, B. Gad- way, W. Yi, and B. Yan, Tunable nonreciprocal quan- tum transport through a dissipative aharonov-bohm ring in ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 070402 (2020)

    2020

  125. [133]

    C. M. Bender and S. Boettcher, Real spectra in non- hermitian hamiltonians having pt symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 5243 (1998)

    1998

  126. [134]

    Yao and Z

    S. Yao and Z. Wang, Edge states and topological invari- ants of non-hermitian systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 086803 (2018)

    2018

  127. [135]

    Zhang, T

    X. Zhang, T. Zhang, M.-H. Lu, and Y.-F. Chen, A review on non-hermitian skin effect, Advances in Physics: X7, 2109431 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1080/23746149.2022.2109431

    2022

  128. [136]

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, and F. K. Kunst, Excep- tional topology of non-hermitian systems, Rev. Mod. Phys.93, 015005 (2021). 16

    2021

  129. [137]

    Ashida, Z

    Y. Ashida, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, Non-hermitian physics, Advances in Physics69, 249 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1080/00018732.2021.1876991

    2020

  130. [138]

    H. Shen, B. Zhen, and L. Fu, Topological band theory for non-hermitian hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 146402 (2018)

    2018

  131. [139]

    Kawabata, K

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, M. Ueda, and M. Sato, Sym- metry and topology in non-hermitian physics, Phys. Rev. X9, 041015 (2019)

    2019

  132. [140]

    Okuma and M

    N. Okuma and M. Sato, Non-hermitian topological phe- nomena: A review, Annual Review of Condensed Mat- ter Physics14, 83 (2023)

    2023

  133. [141]

    Zhang, Q

    P. Zhang, Q. Li, C. Miao, Y. Xu, S. Yan, and X. Kong, Effects of the dzyaloshinsky-moriya interaction on en- tanglement and chiral criticality in a non-hermitian xy system, Phys. Rev. B113, 134433 (2026)

    2026

  134. [142]

    X. Z. Zhang and Z. Song, Non-hermitian anisotropicxy model with intrinsic rotation-time-reversal symmetry, Phys. Rev. A87, 012114 (2013)

    2013

  135. [143]

    C. Li, G. Zhang, X. Z. Zhang, and Z. Song, Conventional quantum phase transition driven by a complex param- eter in a non-hermitianPT −symmetric ising model, Phys. Rev. A90, 012103 (2014)

    2014

  136. [144]

    T. E. Lee and C.-K. Chan, Heralded magnetism in non-hermitian atomic systems, Phys. Rev. X4, 041001 (2014)

    2014

  137. [145]

    W. D. Heiss, The physics of exceptional points, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical45, 444016 (2012)

    2012

  138. [146]

    K. L. Zhang and Z. Song, Quantum phase transition in a quantum ising chain at nonzero temperatures, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 116401 (2021)

    2021

  139. [147]

    Zhou, Q.-h

    L. Zhou, Q.-h. Wang, H. Wang, and J. Gong, Dynami- cal quantum phase transitions in non-hermitian lattices, Phys. Rev. A98, 022129 (2018)

    2018

  140. [148]

    Zhou and Q

    L. Zhou and Q. Du, Non-hermitian topological phases and dynamical quantum phase transitions: a generic connection, New Journal of Physics23, 063041 (2021)

    2021

  141. [149]

    Das Agarwal, T

    K. Das Agarwal, T. K. Konar, L. G. C. Lakkaraju, and A. Sen(De), Detecting exceptional points through dy- namics in non-hermitian systems, Phys. Rev. A110, 012226 (2024)

    2024

  142. [150]

    Mondal and T

    D. Mondal and T. Nag, Persistent anomaly in dynamical quantum phase transition in long-range non-hermitian p-wave kitaev chain, The European Physical Journal B 97, 59 (2024)

    2024

  143. [151]

    Mondal and T

    D. Mondal and T. Nag, Anomaly in the dynamical quan- tum phase transition in a non-hermitian system with ex- tended gapless phases, Phys. Rev. B106, 054308 (2022)

    2022

  144. [152]

    Tang, X.-Y

    J.-C. Tang, X.-Y. Hou, M.-Z. Wang, and H. Guo, Thermal suppression of dynamical quantum phase transitions in finite-dimensional systems a quasi- hermitian framework, arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.12838 10.48550/arXiv.2607.12838 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  145. [153]

    Jing, J.-J

    Y. Jing, J.-J. Dong, Y.-Y. Zhang, and Z.-X. Hu, Biorthogonal dynamical quantum phase transitions in non-hermitian systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 220402 (2024)

    2024

  146. [154]

    F. Wang, G. Liang, Z. Zhao, and B.-M. Xu, A re- fined biorthogonal framework for non-hermitian quan- tum theory and its application in dynamical phase tran- sition, arXiv e-prints , arXiv (2026)

    2026

  147. [155]

    H. Gu, Y. Zhao, S. Cheng, Y. Xie, X. Yang, and Y. Chen, Biorthogonal dynamical quantum phase tran- sitions in a non-hermitian kitaev chain, arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.15982 10.48550/arXiv.2605.15982 (2026)

    2026 doi arXiv

  148. [156]

    Fu and G

    Y. Fu and G. Xianlong, Anatomy of non-hermitian dy- namical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B112, L140302 (2025)

    2025

  149. [157]

    M. Deng, W. Li, K. Hu, C. Sun, and F. Li, Nonadiabatic dynamics and universal behaviors in non-hermitian sys- tems under biorthogonal framework, Phys. Rev. B112, L020306 (2025)

    2025

  150. [158]

    Mondal and T

    D. Mondal and T. Nag, Finite-temperature dynamical quantum phase transition in a non-hermitian system, Phys. Rev. B107, 184311 (2023)

    2023

  151. [159]

    C. Li, X. Z. Zhang, G. Zhang, and Z. Song, Topological phases in a kitaev chain with imbalanced pairing, Phys. Rev. B97, 115436 (2018)

    2018

  152. [160]

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity versus pt symme- try: The necessary condition for the reality of the spec- trum of a non-hermitian hamiltonian, Journal of Math- ematical Physics43, 205 (2002)

    2002

  153. [161]

    Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity versus pt- symmetry

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity versus pt- symmetry. ii. a complete characterization of non- hermitian hamiltonians with a real spectrum, Journal of Mathematical Physics43, 2814 (2002)

    2002

  154. [162]

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity versus pt- symmetry iii: Equivalence of pseudo-hermiticity and the presence of antilinear symmetries, Journal of Mathematical Physics43, 3944 (2002)

    2002

  155. [163]

    Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity and generalized pt- and cpt-symmetries, Journal of Mathematical Physics44, 974 (2003)

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity and generalized pt- and cpt-symmetries, Journal of Mathematical Physics44, 974 (2003)

    2003

  156. [164]

    MOSTAF AZADEH, Pseudo-hermitian representa- tion of quantum mechanics, International Journal of Ge- ometric Methods in Modern Physics07, 1191 (2010)

    A. MOSTAF AZADEH, Pseudo-hermitian representa- tion of quantum mechanics, International Journal of Ge- ometric Methods in Modern Physics07, 1191 (2010)

    2010

  157. [165]

    C. Yang, L. Li, and S. Chen, Dynamical topological invariant after a quantum quench, Phys. Rev. B97, 060304(R) (2018)

    2018

  158. [166]

    Tang, X.-Y

    J.-C. Tang, X.-Y. Hou, Z. Zhou, H. Guo, and C.-C. Chien, Uhlmann quench and geometric dynamic quan- tum phase transition of mixed states, Phys. Rev. B110, 134319 (2024)

    2024

  159. [167]

    X. Wang, Z. Zhou, J.-C. Tang, X.-Y. Hou, H. Guo, and C.-C. Chien, Interferometric geometric phases of PT-symmetric quantum mechanics, Phys. Rev. B109, 245411 (2024)

    2024

  160. [168]

    Guo, X.-Y

    H. Guo, X.-Y. Hou, Y. He, and C.-C. Chien, Dynamic process and uhlmann process: Incompatibility and dy- namic phase of mixed quantum states, Phys. Rev. B 101, 104310 (2020)

    2020

  161. [169]

    B. T. Torosov and N. V. Vitanov, Pseudo-Hermitian Landau-Zener-Stuckelberg-Majorana model, Phys. Rev. A96, 013845 (2017)

    2017

  162. [170]

    Szeg¨ o, A

    G. Szeg¨ o, A. erd´ elyi, w. magnus, f. oberhettinger and fg tricomi, higher transcendental functions, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society60, 405 (1954)

    1954

  163. [171]

    Abramowitz, I

    M. Abramowitz, I. A. Stegun, and R. H. Romer, Hand- book of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables (1988)

    1988

  164. [172]

    Dutta and A

    A. Dutta and A. Dutta, Probing the role of long-range interactions in the dynamics of a long-range kitaev chain, Phys. Rev. B96, 125113 (2017)

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed July 31, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.