Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 73 references

Even-harmonic generation through nonequilibrium steady-state symmetry breaking

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In an inversion-symmetric Su-Schrieffer-Heeger chain coupled to dissipative boundaries, a reservoir-driven DC current breaks the inversion symmetry of the steady-state density matrix and thereby enables even harmonics in high-harmonic gener

desk verdict The even-harmonic observation is likely real, but the paper's DC-offset mechanism is wrong; it needs a corrected derivation before it can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27847 v1 pith:725ODJI3 submitted 2026-07-30 quant-ph physics.optics

Milad Jangjan , Arman Kashef , Siamak Pooyan , Stefan Scheel , Dieter Bauer This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.optics
keywords high-harmonicgenerationevenharmonicsinversionsymmetrySu-Schrieffer-HeegerchainLindbladmasterequationnonequilibriumsteadystatedissipativebreakingcorrelationmatrix
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

The paper argues that in a boundary-driven Su-Schrieffer-Heeger chain, coupling to source and sink reservoirs creates a nonequilibrium steady state carrying a DC current, and that this state—not the Hamiltonian—breaks inversion symmetry. As a result, even harmonics appear in the high-harmonic spectrum even though the lattice is centrosymmetric. The mechanism is presented as a general principle: harmonic selection rules in open quantum systems are governed by the symmetry of the full Liouvillian and its steady state, not just the Hamiltonian. If correct, this establishes transport current as a control knob for nonlinear optical spectra and HHG as a probe of steady-state currents.

What carries the argument

The analysis uses the Lindblad master equation reduced to a single-particle correlation matrix. The steady state is obtained by solving the Sylvester/Lyapunov equation, and its symmetry properties are compared with those of the coherent Liouvillian. The central symmetry argument is the half-cycle relation J(t+T/2) = -J(t) for a closed inversion-symmetric system; the paper claims that a finite Jdc in the open system breaks this antisymmetry and thereby allows even harmonics. The harmonic spectrum is computed from the Fourier transform of the laser-driven current expectation value.

What would settle it

Compute the harmonic spectrum of J(t) = Jdc + J_ac(t) where J_ac(t+T/2) = -J_ac(t) (as the paper's own analysis suggests holds approximately). The power spectrum contains no 2ω, 4ω peaks. To falsify, one can simulate the model and analyze the even harmonic intensities after subtracting the DC offset; if the even peaks persist, the offset is not the cause; if they disappear, the paper's stated mechanism is incomplete.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Even-order harmonics can be generated in an inversion-symmetric, noninteracting SSH chain by engineering a current-carrying nonequilibrium steady state. The Hamiltonian retains inversion symmetry and the driving field is symmetric, but the dissipative boundary terms (gain at one end, loss at the other) produce a steady-state density matrix that is not inversion-symmetric, lifting the selection rule that forbids even harmonics. The intensity of the even harmonics tracks the magnitude of the steady DC current, which is controlled by the reservoir coupling strength.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that a nonzero steady-state current appears as a constant offset that 'destroys the exact antisymmetry condition' is the load-bearing step; a constant offset alone does not generate even harmonics unless the oscillatory part of the current itself breaks half-cycle antisymmetry, which the paper asserts but does not derive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In centrosymmetric systems, the observation of even harmonics does not necessarily indicate structural inversion-symmetry breaking; it can be a signature of a reservoir-induced steady-state current.
  • The harmonic spectrum becomes a tool to monitor steady-state transport currents in nanoscale junctions, since even-harmonic intensity tracks the current.
  • Preparing a system in a current-carrying steady state (rather than the ground state) before applying the laser pulse is essential; otherwise no even harmonics appear.
  • The symmetry that matters for optical selection rules is that of the Liouvillian superoperator, not the bare Hamiltonian, for open quantum systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's analytic argument attributes even harmonics to the constant offset Jdc, but a constant current contributes only at zero frequency; the even peaks must come from J_ac(t) itself acquiring even-frequency components through the steady-state symmetry breaking. That step is not derived and is a testable gap.
  • If the mechanism is robust beyond the 1D SSH chain, similar boundary-driven nonequilibrium steady states in higher-dimensional centrosymmetric materials would produce even harmonics whose angular pattern could encode the direction of the DC current.
  • A concrete numerical test: subtract the steady-state current Jdc from the total current before Fourier analysis. If even peaks survive, the effect is in the oscillatory response; if they vanish, the offset argument is the sole cause.
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. The manuscript studies high-harmonic generation (HHG) in a boundary-driven Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) chain coupled to source and sink reservoirs. Using a correlation-matrix formulation of the Lindblad master equation, the authors compute the nonequilibrium steady state carrying a finite DC current, then apply a spatiotemporally shaped laser pulse and obtain HHG spectra from the time-dependent current. The central claim is that even harmonics appear even though the SSH Hamiltonian remains inversion-symmetric, because the dissipative boundary driving produces a current-carrying steady-state density matrix that breaks inversion symmetry; the even-harmonic intensity is claimed to be directly controlled by the transport current.

Significance. If substantiated, the result would be conceptually significant: it identifies nonequilibrium steady-state symmetry breaking, rather than structural symmetry breaking, as a mechanism for modifying HHG selection rules in centrosymmetric systems, and it suggests a spectroscopic route to probing DC transport currents. The methodological core is solid: the correlation-matrix equation for quadratic fermions with linear Lindblad operators is exact, the Sylvester/Lyapunov steady-state solution is standard, and the Gaussian-state fidelity formula in Appendix C is a nontrivial and potentially useful contribution. The numerical setup is described in unusual detail. The weakness is the mechanistic argument: Section IV contains a mathematical error in the DC-offset explanation, and the paper does not provide the missing derivation connecting the asymmetric steady state to nonzero even Fourier components of the oscillatory current.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV, after Eq. (24)] The statement that a finite dc offset 'destroys the exact antisymmetry condition required for suppressing even harmonics' is incorrect. If J(t)=Jdc+Jac(t) with Jac(t+T/2)=-Jac(t), then the Fourier coefficients satisfy J_n=0 for all even n≠0; only J_0=Jdc is nonzero. The half-cycle condition J(t+T/2)=-J(t) is indeed violated, but the violation is at zero frequency, not at 2ω, 4ω, ... . Thus a constant offset alone cannot produce the even-harmonic peaks in Fig. 2(e). The authors must derive or demonstrate that the oscillatory part Jac(t) acquires nonzero even Fourier components because of Pρ_ss≠ρ_ss; this is the load-bearing step missing from the manuscript.
  2. [Section V, Figs. 3 and 4] The paper claims that the even-harmonic intensity is 'directly controlled by the transport current.' What is shown is a correlation with γ (and with relaxation time τ), not a causal dependence on Jdc. Since γ simultaneously changes the steady-state particle number, the Liouvillian gap, and the damping of laser-induced coherences, the correlation in Fig. 3(c) does not by itself isolate Jdc as the control parameter. A statement of direct control requires either a calculation in which Jdc is varied while other parameters are fixed, or an analytic expression for the even-harmonic amplitudes in terms of Jdc.
  3. [Section III, Eq. (17) and Fig. 2(e)] The power spectrum is computed from the raw current expectation, which contains a DC offset Jdc. With a finite pulse (ncyc=42), spectral leakage from the DC component produces a background at all frequencies, including even harmonics. The authors should state whether the DC component was subtracted before the FFT (or equivalently, whether the spectrum is evaluated only at nonzero frequencies) and should provide a leakage floor for the even-harmonic peaks. Without this, part of the even-harmonic signal could be an artifact of the finite time window.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 2 caption] The phrase 'calculations consider 7 photons in the spectral gap' is unclear; presumably 7ω0 = ΔE. Please reword.
  2. [Section II.D and V] The text uses both ω and ω0 for the carrier frequency. Define the notation once and use it consistently.
  3. [Eq. (16)] The spatial envelope contains both a Gaussian and a Hann window. Please specify x0 and clarify the relationship between σ and the Hann window; also state whether the envelope is normalized.
  4. [Section II.B] The phrase 'substituting ... into Eq. (4)' should refer to Eq. (2) or be rephrased, since Eq. (4) defines the jump operators.
  5. [Appendix C, Eq. (25)] State explicitly that the squared Uhlmann fidelity convention is used and provide a standard reference for that convention.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the steady-state and HHG spectrum are computed from independent equations; the questionable DC-offset argument is a correctness gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The nonequilibrium steady state Css is obtained by solving the Sylvester/Lyapunov equation (Eq. 8) or the exact biorthonormal sum (Eq. 10), with only the SSH Hamiltonian and reservoir rates γ as inputs; the HHG power spectrum is then computed from the time-dependent current (Eq. 17) after propagating the driven open system. No harmonic order or even-harmonic yield is used to fit any parameter. The choice ω0 = ΔE/7 sets a frequency scale but does not encode even-harmonic selection. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. 13, 15, 16) are background on SSH/HHG and are not load-bearing for the central claim. The paper's own argument after Eq. (24) — that a DC offset Jdc destroys the half-cycle antisymmetry of J(t) and thereby lifts even-harmonic suppression — is mathematically unsupported (a constant offset contributes only at zero frequency), but that is a gap in the explanatory mechanism, not a circular reduction of the prediction to its inputs. The numerical observation is independent of the faulty verbal mechanism, so the paper should be scored low on circularity; the mechanistic concern belongs under correctness risk.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameter is fitted to the HHG spectrum; all listed parameters are model inputs or control knobs. The calculation relies on standard fermionic-Lindblad machinery and on assumed symmetries of the Hamiltonian and pulse. No new particles, forces, or materials are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • γ (gain/loss rate) = 10^-12 to 10^-3 (varied)
    Central control parameter; sets the steady-state current and relaxation rate. Not fitted to the HHG output, but scanned to demonstrate the crossover.
  • δ (dimerization) = 0.1
    Sets the band gap ΔE and dimerization pattern; a representative SSH parameter.
  • a (lattice constant) = 0.5
    Sets length and energy scales; model input.
  • ω0 (driving frequency) = ΔE/7 ≈ 0.043
    Chosen so that the 7th harmonic matches the band gap; affects the intra/interband interpretation.
  • E0 (peak field amplitude) = 0.0172 (0.4 ω0)
    Weak-field driving amplitude; chosen to stay in the perturbative HHG regime.
  • n_cyc (pulse cycles) = 42
    Pulse duration; the half-cycle symmetry of the envelope is approximate with O(1/n_cyc) corrections.
  • N (unit cells) = 40
    System size; the authors claim finite-size scaling shows size independence.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Lindblad master equation with Markovian local gain/loss reservoirs is the correct description of source/sink contacts.
    Sec. II.B, Eqs. (2)-(5). All results rest on this open-system model; the outlook notes Keldysh/NEGF as a more realistic alternative.
  • standard math Quadratic Hamiltonian and linear jump operators close the dynamics at the single-particle correlation-matrix level (Gaussianity preserved).
    Sec. II.B and Appendices A/C; standard result cited to Refs. [30,60,63-66].
  • standard math M is diagonalizable with a complete biorthonormal basis and all eigenvalues have negative real parts, so the steady-state integral converges.
    Appendix B states 'We assume that M is diagonalizable'; Eq. (10) requires this for the exact steady-state solution.
  • domain assumption The SSH Hamiltonian is inversion symmetric and the laser field obeys h(t+T/2) = -h(t) to O(1/n_cyc).
    Sec. IV, Eqs. (18)-(19); the finite sin² envelope only approximately satisfies half-cycle symmetry.
  • domain assumption The initial half-filled state has zero anomalous correlations A(0)=0, so the system remains pairing-free and the fidelity formula (25) applies.
    Appendix C, Eq. (C7); needed for the Gaussian-state fidelity analysis.
  • domain assumption The HHG spectrum is obtained from |FFT[⟨J(t)⟩]|² and is equivalent to dipole/acceleration forms.
    Sec. III, Eq. (17); finite-pulse FFT artifacts are not discussed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Even-harmonic generation through nonequilibrium steady-state symmetry breaking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/725ODJI3

@misc{pith2026260727847,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Even-harmonic generation through nonequilibrium steady-state symmetry breaking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/725ODJI3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27847}
}
read the original abstract

High-harmonic generation (HHG) in inversion-symmetric systems is typically restricted to odd harmonics by symmetry. Here, we show that this selection rule can be broken without modifying the underlying Hamiltonian. We investigate a boundary-driven Su-Schrieffer-Heeger (SSH) chain coupled to source and sink reservoirs and demonstrate that dissipative dynamics generates a nonequilibrium steady state carrying a finite DC current. While the SSH Hamiltonian retains inversion symmetry, the current-carrying steady-state density matrix does not, leading to the emergence of even harmonics in the emitted spectrum. Using a correlation-matrix approach based on the Lindblad master equation, we obtain the steady state and calculate the resulting HHG response. We find that the intensity of the even harmonics is directly controlled by the transport current, establishing a link between nonequilibrium charge transport and HHG selection rules. Our results uncover a mechanism for even-harmonic generation that relies solely on nonequilibrium steady-state symmetry breaking and provide a route to probing transport currents through ultrafast nonlinear spectroscopy in centrosymmetric quantum systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27847 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. A 1D SSH chain coupled to a source reservoir (gain [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Applied electric field in time and space. (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Particle number vs. site index and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Harmonic spectra as a function of log [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: shows the time evolution of the fidelity for different dissipation strengths γ. For all values of γ, the fidelity approaches unity at long times, confirming convergence towards the unique steady state. However, the convergence rate depends strongly on the dissipa￾tion …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Coherent (Hamiltonian) Contribution For a quadratic Hamiltonian, h= X a,b habc† acb,(A4) the coherent contribution is ˙Cmn coh =−i⟨[c † mcn, h]⟩.(A5) 9 Using the CAR, the commutator of two quadratic fermionic operators is [c† mcn, c† acb] =δ nac† mcb −δ bmc† acn.(A6) Therefore, [c† mcn, h] = X a,b hab[c† mcn, c† acb] = X b hnbc† mcb − X a hamc† acn.(A7) T...

  2. [2]

    Dissipative Contribution The contribution from a single Lindblad operator is D[ρ] =LρL † − 1 2 {L†L, ρ}.(A10) 2.1 Particle Loss Reservoirs For a loss reservoir attached to sitep, Lloss p = q γp l cp,(A11) the dissipative contribution becomes ˙C(p,−) mn =γ p l ⟨c† pc† mcncp⟩ −1 2 ⟨{c† pcp, c† mcn}⟩ .(A12) Using the CAR, {c† pcp, c† mcn}=δ pmc† pcn +δ npc† ...

  3. [3]

    Coherent contribution.The averaged contribu- tion of the coherent part is i⟨[H, cmcn]⟩=−i X b hmbAbn +h nbAmb =−i hA+Ah T mn

    V anishing contribution of the pairing sector a. Coherent contribution.The averaged contribu- tion of the coherent part is i⟨[H, cmcn]⟩=−i X b hmbAbn +h nbAmb =−i hA+Ah T mn. (C3) b. Loss contribution.ForL= √γℓp cp, the opera- torc mcn contains no creation operator on the loss site and hence, the first term of the dissipation part reduces ton p cmcn where...

  4. [4]

    F rom correlation matrices to fidelity For pairing-free Gaussian states, the Uhlmann fidelity can be expressed entirely in terms of the single-particle correlation matrices. To derive this result, we first recall the modular Hamiltonian (also known as the entangle- ment Hamiltonian or fictitious Hamiltonian) representa- tion of a Gaussian state [67, 68]. ...

  5. [5]

    Vampa, T

    G. Vampa, T. J. Hammond, N. Thir´ e, B. E. Schmidt, F. L´ egar´ e, C. R. McDonald, T. Brabec, D. D. Klug, and P. B. Corkum, All-optical reconstruction of crystal band structure, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 193603 (2015)

    2015

  6. [6]

    Tancogne-Dejean, O

    N. Tancogne-Dejean, O. D. M¨ ucke, F. X. K¨ artner, and A. Rubio, Impact of the electronic band structure in high- harmonic generation spectra of solids, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 087403 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    McPherson, G

    A. McPherson, G. Gibson, H. Jara, U. Johann, T. S. Luk, I. A. McIntyre, K. Boyer, and C. K. Rhodes, Studies of multiphoton production of vacuum-ultraviolet radiation in the rare gases, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B4, 595 (1987)

    1987

  8. [8]

    Ferray, A

    M. Ferray, A. L’Huillier, X. F. Li, L. A. Lompr´ e, G. Main- fray, and C. Manus, Multiple-harmonic conversion of 1064 nm radiation in rare gases, J. Phys. B21, L31 (1988)

    1988

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    J. L. Krause, K. J. Schafer, and K. C. Kulander, High- order harmonic generation from atoms and ions in the high intensity regime, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 3535 (1992)

    1992

  2. [10]

    P. B. Corkum, Plasma perspective on strong field multi- photon ionization, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 1994 (1993)

    1994

  3. [11]

    K. J. Schafer, B. Yang, L. F. DiMauro, and K. C. Ku- lander, Above threshold ionization beyond the high har- monic cutoff, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 1599 (1993)

    1993

  4. [12]

    J. J. Macklin, J. D. Kmetec, and C. L. Gordon, High- order harmonic generation using intense femtosecond pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 766 (1993)

    1993

  5. [13]

    Ghimire, A

    S. Ghimire, A. D. DiChiara, E. Sistrunk, P. Agostini, L. F. DiMauro, and D. A. Reis, Observation of high-order harmonic generation in a bulk crystal, Nat. Phys.7, 138 (2011). 12

    2011

  6. [14]

    Vampa, C

    G. Vampa, C. R. McDonald, G. Orlando, P. B. Corkum, and T. Brabec, Semiclassical analysis of high harmonic generation in bulk crystals, Phys. Rev. B91, 064302 (2015)

    2015

  7. [15]

    H. Liu, Y. Li, Y. S. You, S. Ghimire, T. F. Heinz, and D. A. Reis, High-harmonic generation from an atomically thin semiconductor, Nat. Phys.13, 262 (2017)

    2017

  8. [16]

    Murakami, M

    Y. Murakami, M. Eckstein, and P. Werner, High- harmonic generation in Mott insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 057405 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    J¨ urß and D

    H. J¨ urß and D. Bauer, High-harmonic generation in Su- Schrieffer-Heeger chains, Phys. Rev. B99, 195428 (2019)

    2019

  10. [18]

    Yu, High-order harmonic generation from Su- Schrieffer-Heeger chains with edge states: Three-step processes and their interference, Phys

    C. Yu, High-order harmonic generation from Su- Schrieffer-Heeger chains with edge states: Three-step processes and their interference, Phys. Rev. A110, 033113 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Bauer and K

    D. Bauer and K. K. Hansen, High-harmonic generation in solids with and without topological edge states, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 177401 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Pooyan and D

    S. Pooyan and D. Bauer, Harmonic generation with topological edge states and electron-electron interaction, Phys. Rev. B111, 014308 (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    M. L. Bera, J. O. de Almeida, M. Dziurawiec, M. P lodzie´ n, M. M. Ma´ ska, M. Lewenstein, T. Grass, and U. Bhattacharya, Topological phase detection through high-harmonic spectroscopy in extended Su-Schrieffer- Heeger chains, Phys. Rev. B108, 214104 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    Ghimire and D

    S. Ghimire and D. A. Reis, High-harmonic generation from solids, Nat. Phys.15, 10 (2019)

    2019

  15. [23]

    S. M. Cavaletto, K. M. Kowalczyk, F. O. Navarrete, and J. Rivera-Dean, The attoscience of strong-field-driven solids, Nat. Rev. Phys.7, 38 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    Navarrete, M

    F. Navarrete, M. F. Ciappina, and U. Thumm, Crystal- momentum-resolved contributions to high-order har- monic generation in solids, Phys. Rev. A100, 033405 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

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

    1979

  18. [26]

    Q. Ma, X. Bian, and H. Du, Role of symmetry break- ing in high-order harmonic generation from Su-Schrieffer- Heeger systems, Phys. Rev. B106, 125117 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    Y. Ding, J. Li, X. Xu,et al., Terahertz-assisted even har- monics generation in silicon, iScience25, 103750 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    Hohenleutneret al., High-harmonic generation from a thin-film crystal perturbed by a quasi-static terahertz field, Nat

    M. Hohenleutneret al., High-harmonic generation from a thin-film crystal perturbed by a quasi-static terahertz field, Nat. Commun.14, 2603 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    M. S. Mrudul and G. Dixit, High harmonic generation in graphene–boron nitride heterostructures, J. Mater. Chem. C8, 12085 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Neufeld and O

    O. Neufeld and O. Cohen, Even harmonic generation in isotropic media of dissociating homonuclear molecules, Sci. Rep.6, 32653 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Z. Zhou, K. J. Yuan, and A. D. Bandrauk, Generation of enhanced even harmonics in temporally separated two- color laser fields, J. Electron Spectrosc. Relat. Phenom. 233, 22 (2019)

    2019

  24. [32]

    Kanega and M

    M. Kanega and M. Sato, High-harmonic generation in graphene under the application of a dc electric current: From perturbative to nonperturbative regime, Phys. Rev. B110, 035303 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    Tuovinen and Y

    R. Tuovinen and Y. Pavlyukh, Electroluminescence recti- fication and high harmonic generation in molecular junc- tions, Nano Lett.24, 9096 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    A. Nava, G. Campagnano, P. Sodano, and D. Giuliano, Lindblad master equation approach to the topological phase transition in the disordered Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Phys. Rev. B107, 035113 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    F. Yang, P. Molignini, and E. J. Bergholtz, Dissipative boundary state preparation, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 043229 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Yang, Q.-D

    F. Yang, Q.-D. Jiang, and E. J. Bergholtz, Liouvillian skin effect in an exactly solvable model, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023160 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    F. Song, S. Yao, and Z. Wang, Non-Hermitian skin effect and chiral damping in open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 170401 (2019)

    2019

  30. [38]

    Popkov and G

    V. Popkov and G. M. Sch¨ utz, Solution of the Lindblad equation for spin helix states, Phys. Rev. E95, 042128 (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    Floss, D

    C. Floss, D. Manzano, A. Eckardt, and W. H¨ ausler, Real- space perspective on dephasing in solid-state high har- monic generation, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 043005 (2024)

    2024

  32. [40]

    Klett, H

    M. Klett, H. Cartarius, D. Dast, J. Main, and G. Wunner, Topological edge states in the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model subject to balanced particle gain and loss, Eur. Phys. J. D72, 214 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Dangel, M

    F. Dangel, M. Wagner, H. Cartarius, J. Main, and G. Wunner, Topological invariants in dissipative exten- sions of the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Phys. Rev. A98, 013628 (2018)

    2018

  34. [42]

    P. H. Guimar˜ aes, G. T. Landi, and M. J. de Oliveira, Nonequilibrium quantum chains under multisite Lind- blad baths, Phys. Rev. E94, 032139 (2016)

    2016

  35. [43]

    He and C.-C

    Y. He and C.-C. Chien, Particle and thermal transport through one dimensional topological systems via Lind- blad formalism, Phys. Lett. A473, 128826 (2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    Piˇ zorn, One-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model far from equilibrium, Phys

    I. Piˇ zorn, One-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model far from equilibrium, Phys. Rev. A88, 043635 (2013)

    2013

  37. [45]

    Ekman and E

    C. Ekman and E. J. Bergholtz, Liouvillian skin effects and fragmented condensates in an integrable dissipative Bose-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Res.6, L032067 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    Prosen, Third quantization: A general method to solve master equations for quadratic open Fermi systems, New J

    T. Prosen, Third quantization: A general method to solve master equations for quadratic open Fermi systems, New J. Phys.10, 043026 (2008)

    2008

  39. [47]

    A. Nava, M. Rossi, and D. Giuliano, Lindblad equation approach to the determination of the optimal working point in nonequilibrium stationary states of an interact- ing electronic one-dimensional system: Application to the spinless Hubbard chain in the clean and in the weakly ...

    2021

  40. [48]

    Tarantelli and E

    F. Tarantelli and E. Vicari, Quantum critical systems with dissipative boundaries, Phys. Rev. B104, 075140 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Prosen and E

    T. Prosen and E. Ilievski, Nonequilibrium phase transi- tion in a periodically driven XY spin chain, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 060403 (2011)

    2011

  42. [50]

    S. Lieu, M. McGinley, and N. R. Cooper, Tenfold way for quadratic Lindbladians, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 040401 (2020)

    2020

  43. [51]

    McDonald and A

    A. McDonald and A. A. Clerk, Third quantization of open quantum systems: Dissipative symmetries and con- nections to phase-space and Keldysh field-theory formu- lations, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 033107 (2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    S. S. Hegde, T. Ehmcke, and T. Meng, Edge-selective extremal damping from topological heritage of dissipative Chern insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 256601 (2023). 13

    2023

  45. [53]

    L. Mao, T. Deng, and P. Zhang, Boundary condition independence of non-Hermitian Hamiltonian dynamics, Phys. Rev. B104, 125435 (2021)

    2021

  46. [54]

    E. G. Cinnirella, A. Nava, G. Campagnano, and D. Giu- liano, Fate of high winding number topological phases in the disordered extended Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Phys. Rev. B109, 035114 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    R. H. Bartels, Solution of the matrix equation ax+ xb= c [f4], Commun. ACM15, 820 (1972)

    1972

  48. [56]

    Wang and W

    W. Wang and W. Yi, Dynamic transition of the density- matrix topology under parity-time symmetry, Phys. Rev. B110, 155141 (2024)

    2024

  49. [57]

    van Caspel and V

    M. van Caspel and V. Gritsev, Symmetry-protected co- herent relaxation of open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A97, 052106 (2018)

    2018

  50. [58]

    Cai and T

    Z. Cai and T. Barthel, Algebraic versus exponential deco- herence in dissipative many-particle systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 150403 (2013)

    2013

  51. [59]

    Bandrauk, S

    A. Bandrauk, S. Chelkowski, D. J. Diestler, J. Manz, and K.-J. Yuan, Quantum simulation of high-order harmonic spectra of the hydrogen atom, Phys. Rev. A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics79, 023403 (2009)

    2009

  52. [60]

    J. C. Baggesen and L. B. Madsen, On the dipole, veloc- ity and acceleration forms in high-order harmonic gener- ation from a single atom or molecule, J. Phys. B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics44, 115601 (2011)

    2011

  53. [61]

    O. E. Alon, V. Averbukh, and N. Moiseyev, Selection rules for the high harmonic generation spectra, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 3743 (1998)

    1998

  54. [62]

    Ceccherini, D

    F. Ceccherini, D. Bauer, and F. Cornolti, Dynamical symmetries and harmonic generation, J. Phys. B34, 5017 (2001)

    2001

  55. [63]

    Neufeld, D

    O. Neufeld, D. Podolsky, and O. Cohen, Floquet group theory and its application to selection rules in harmonic generation, Nat. Commun.10, 405 (2019)

    2019

  56. [64]

    Carollo, B

    A. Carollo, B. Spagnolo, and D. Valenti, Uhlmann cur- vature in dissipative phase transitions, Sci. Rep.8, 9852 (2018)

    2018

  57. [65]

    Bravyi, Lagrangian representation for fermionic linear optics, Quantum Inf

    S. Bravyi, Lagrangian representation for fermionic linear optics, Quantum Inf. Comput.5, 216 (2005)

    2005

  58. [66]

    Araki, On quasifree states of CAR and Bogoliubov automorphisms, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences6, 385 (1970)

    H. Araki, On quasifree states of CAR and Bogoliubov automorphisms, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences6, 385 (1970)

    1970

  59. [67]

    Brodier and A

    O. Brodier and A. M. O. D. Almeida, Symplectic evo- lution of Wigner functions in Markovian open systems, Phys. Rev. E69, 016204 (2004)

    2004

  60. [68]

    Ferraro, S

    A. Ferraro, S. Olivares, and M. G. A. Paris,Gaus- sian States in Quantum Information(Bibliopolis, Napoli, 2005)

    2005

  61. [69]

    E. M. Graefe, B. Longstaff, T. Plastow, and R. Schubert, Lindblad dynamics of Gaussian states and their superpo- sitions in the semiclassical limit, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 51, 365203 (2018)

    2018

  62. [70]

    Christie, J

    R. Christie, J. Eastman, R. Schubert, and E.-M. Graefe, Quantum-jump vs stochastic Schr¨ odinger dynamics for Gaussian states with quadratic Hamiltonians and lin- ear Lindbladians, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.55, 455302 (2022)

    2022

  63. [71]

    Peschel, Calculation of reduced density matrices from correlation functions, J

    I. Peschel, Calculation of reduced density matrices from correlation functions, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.36, L205 (2003)

    2003

  64. [72]

    Peschel and V

    I. Peschel and V. Eisler, Reduced density matrices and entanglement entropy in free lattice models, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.42, 504003 (2009)

    2009

  65. [73]

    Uhlmann, ”transition probability” in the state space of a *-algebra (1976)

    A. Uhlmann, ”transition probability” in the state space of a *-algebra (1976)

    1976

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.