Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Observing the emergence of a velocity hierarchy in matter waves

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

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

Pith's one-line read In a 1D lattice gas, the phase, sound, and group velocities separate into a hierarchy as the Mott gap opens, with the sound velocity obeying v_s^2 = (pi/2) v_p v_g.

desk verdict A well-executed experiment with DMRG backup, but the sound velocity rests on an unquantified prefactor, so the headline invariant needs one more check. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.05241 v1 pith:CBSR3CBY submitted 2026-08-05 cond-mat.quant-gas quant-ph

Xudong Yu , Wenhan Chen , Igor Zhuravlev , Yi Zeng , Sudipta Dhar , Milena Horvath , Thierry Giamarchi , Laurent Sanchez-Palencia
show 3 more authors
Manuele Landini Hanns-Christoph Nägerl Yanliang Guo
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gasquant-ph PACS 03.75.Kk67.85.Hj
keywords velocityhierarchyBose-HubbardmodelquenchspectroscopyMottinsulatorsuperfluid-to-Motttransitionultracoldatomsphasesound
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 reports the first experimental observation of a velocity hierarchy in matter waves: in a one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard gas, the phase velocity, sound velocity, and group velocity are nearly identical near the superfluid-to-Mott-insulator transition but become progressively separated as the interaction strength increases and the Mott gap opens, eventually satisfying v_p > v_s > v_g in the deep Mott regime. The authors independently measure all three velocities across the transition using quench spectroscopy and time-resolved correlation measurements, and find they are connected through the same quasiparticle dispersion. The measured velocities obey a relativistic-like invariance relation, $v_s^{2}$ = (pi/2) v_p v_g, analogous to $c^{2}$ = v_p v_g for a massive relativistic particle. If correct, this establishes propagation-velocity hierarchies as emergent signatures of strongly correlated quantum dynamics and provides a parameter-free test of the low-energy description of the Mott insulator.

What carries the argument

The central object is the low-energy quasiparticle dispersion of the 1D Bose-Hubbard model, E(k)=$\sqrt$($\Delta$^2+(hbar v_s k)^2) in the Mott regime, which changes from gapless linear to gapped relativistic-like as interactions increase. This dispersion carries the argument: it determines the sound velocity v_s as the slope parameter of the low-energy cone, the group velocity v_g = dE/(hbar dk) as the maximum of the derivative (sitting at k=pi/2 in the deep Mott limit), and the phase velocity v_p = E/(hbar k) at that same point. The experiment reconstructs this dispersion via quench spectroscopy (S(k,nu) from Fourier transforming the time-dependent momentum distribution), and reads v_g and v_p off the space-time evolution of the one-body correlation function G^(1)(x,t), while v_s is obtained from the equilibrium relation 1/xi ~ $\Delta$/(hbar v_s). The analytical limits v_p=2U/(pi hbar), v_s=$\sqrt$(6JU)/hbar, v_g=6J/hbar then yield the invariant $v_s^{2}$=(pi/2) v_p v_g, which the measured velocities confirm.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of v_s by Bragg spectroscopy, or by resolving the low-energy slope of the dispersion with higher spectral resolution, that disagrees with the values obtained from 1/xi ~ $\Delta$/(hbar v_s) by more than the combined uncertainties would falsify the proposed relation; equivalently, observing multi-exponential decay of G^(1)(x) at equilibrium would indicate that the single correlation-length extraction is insufficient.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the low-energy quasiparticle dispersion of a strongly interacting 1D Bose-Hubbard gas, which evolves from a nearly linear phonon-like form near the superfluid transition to a massive relativistic-like form E(k)=$\sqrt$($\Delta$^2+(hbar v_s k)^2) deep in the Mott phase, gives rise to three distinct and independently measurable propagation velocities. Near the transition these velocities are nearly degenerate; as the gap $\Delta$ opens, the dispersion bends and the velocities separate into a hierarchy v_p>v_s>v_g. The authors extract v_p from the phase interference fringes inside the correlation cone of G^(1)(x,t), v_g from the envelope of the same correlation spreading, and v_s from the independently measured gap and equilibrium correlation length via 1/xi ~ $\Delta$/(hbar v_s). They show that in the deep Mott regime the measured velocities agree with the analytical expressions v_p=2U/(pi hbar), v_s=$\sqrt$(6JU)/hbar, and v_g=6J/hbar, and consequently satisfy the invariant relation $v_s^{2}$=(pi/2) v_p v_g, which they verify without adjustable parameters. Phase-coherence fronts propagate faster than the Lieb-Robinson velocity scale yet remain consistent with locality, since phase fronts do not transmit information.

Load-bearing premise

The sound velocity is not measured directly; it is derived from the relation 1/xi ~ $\Delta$/(hbar v_s) using an order-one prefactor from low-energy Luttinger-liquid and sine-Gordon theory, so if the correlation decay receives contributions beyond the single low-energy mode or the prefactor differs from unity, the derived v_s (and hence the hierarchy and the invariant relation) would shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The velocity hierarchy is a continuous, quantitative signature of the Mott transition: it can be used as a probe of the gap opening and quasiparticle renormalization in lattice gases.
  • Because the three velocities are linked by the same dispersion, measuring any two together with the gap constrains the third; the relation v_s^2 = (pi/2) v_p v_g provides a parameter-free consistency check of the low-energy theory in the deep Mott regime.
  • Phase-coherence fronts exceeding the Lieb-Robinson velocity do not imply superluminal signaling; the observed pattern shows that such fronts can coexist with causal, locally consistent dynamics, so velocity hierarchies must be interpreted via their information-transport capacity.
  • The experimental methodology (quench spectroscopy plus time-resolved correlations) transfers directly to other lattice models, including higher-dimensional and disordered systems, where multiple excitation branches may produce richer velocity structures.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension is to measure v_s directly via two-photon Bragg spectroscopy and compare with the values extracted from the gap and correlation length; a mismatch beyond the quoted ~15% uncertainty would indicate that the single-mode relation 1/xi ~ Delta/(hbar v_s) needs correction.
  • The invariant v_s^2 = (pi/2) v_p v_g likely reflects a geometric factor relating the maximum group-velocity point (k=pi/2) to the low-energy cone in a 1D lattice; analogous factors should appear in other lattice geometries where the dispersion has a different shape, providing a route to test universality.
  • The observation that phase fronts can outrun the Lieb-Robinson cone while information remains causal suggests that correlation spreading in lattice systems should be characterized by at least two distinct velocities; future entanglement-based measurements could separate the information-carrying front from the phase-coherence front.
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 paper reports an experimental study of 1D bosonic atoms in an optical lattice across the superfluid-to-Mott-insulator transition. Using quench spectroscopy, the authors reconstruct the quasiparticle dispersion relation and, independently, follow the space-time evolution of the one-body correlation function extracted from time-of-flight images. From the correlation cone they extract a phase velocity and a group velocity, while the sound velocity is obtained from the measured Mott gap and equilibrium correlation length using 1/ξ ∼ Δ/(ℏv_s). The three velocities are compared with analytic expressions derived in the deep Mott regime and are reported to satisfy a relativistic-like invariance relation v_s^2 = (π/2) v_p v_g. The central claim is that the three velocities, nearly degenerate near the critical point, separate into a hierarchy v_p > v_s > v_g as the gap opens, and that this hierarchy is quantitatively described by a massive relativistic quasiparticle dispersion.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is a significant experimental advance: it demonstrates that a strongly correlated quantum gas supports multiple, independently measurable propagation velocities that are quantitatively linked through a common low-energy description. The paper's strengths include the use of direct space-time measurements of correlation functions, the independent cross-checks of the gap against lattice modulation spectroscopy and quantum Monte Carlo, the agreement of DMRG simulations with the measured spectra and correlation spreading to within 5% for v_p and v_g, and the availability of data and simulation codes. The result would establish propagation-velocity hierarchies as a genuine observable feature of strongly correlated quantum dynamics and would extend the classical concept of dispersive phase/group velocity separation to interacting quantum matter.

major comments (3)
  1. [Main text, 'Extraction of the sound velocity'; Supplement C] The sound velocity is extracted from the relation 1/ξ ∼ Δ/(ℏv_s), where the symbol ∼ leaves the numerical prefactor unspecified. For the one-particle Green's function of the lattice Bose-Hubbard model, the low-energy relation can carry a non-universal, and possibly γ-dependent, prefactor C(γ), i.e., 1/ξ = C(γ) Δ/(ℏv_s). Since v_s is the only one of the three velocities that enters the central invariant v_s^2 = (π/2) v_p v_g, a value C ≠ 1 rescales every plotted v_s by 1/C and modifies the inset ratio in Fig. 4 by 1/C^2. If C varies across the interaction range, the ordering v_p > v_s > v_g and the apparent approach to π/2 could be distorted. The DMRG simulations reproduce the spectra and correlation cones but are not used to verify the ξ–Δ–v_s relation. I request that the authors determine C(γ) from their DMRG calculations (e.g., by fitting the numerical G(1)(x) and the gap), and propagate the resulting systematic uncertainty into v_s and the invariant ratio, or otherwise provide an independent measurement of v_s, before the central quantitative claim can be regarded as fully supported.
  2. [Fig. 1a, Supplement E and G] The manuscript does not consistently specify whether the velocities v_p, v_s, and v_g are defined from the single-particle dispersion E(k) or from the pair dispersion 2E_ph(k) used in Supplement E and G. The measured correlation cone is governed by pair excitations, as shown in Supplement E, where the phase-front velocity is 2E_{k*}/ℏk* and the envelope velocity is 2∂E/∂ℏk at the saddle point. The analytic formulas v_p = 2U/(πℏ), v_g = 6J/ℏ, and v_s = sqrt(6JU)/ℏ that are compared with the data in Fig. 4 correspond to these pair quantities. In the main text, however, v_s is introduced through E(k) = sqrt(Δ^2 + (ℏv_sk)^2) as if it were the single-particle dispersion. This ambiguity should be resolved explicitly, because the interpretation of the hierarchy and the comparison with the Lieb-Robinson velocity scale depend on whether single-particle or pair velocities are meant.
  3. [Main text, 'without adjustable parameters'; Supplement F] The statement that the three velocities are determined 'without adjustable parameters' is not strictly accurate. The group velocity extraction relies on the Gaussian smoothing widths σ_x and σ_t and on the threshold ε defined in Supplement F, and the text itself reports a ~15% systematic uncertainty in v_g from the choice of ε. These are not fixed by the theory but are analysis choices. The claim should be reformulated to say that no parameter is adjusted to force agreement with the analytic curves, while explicitly listing ε, σ_x, σ_t as analysis parameters whose systematic effects are included in the uncertainty budget.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Supplement G] There is a typo in the sentence preceding Eq. (17): 'The corresponding phase velocity v_g = 2E_ph(k)/ℏk* is then v_p = 2U/(πℏ)' should read 'phase velocity v_p' rather than 'v_g'.
  2. [Main text, definition of G(1)(x,t)] The main text defines G(1)(x,t) = ⟨ψ†(x,t)ψ(0,t)⟩, but the measured quantity is actually the integrated correlation G(1)(x,t) ∝ ∫ ⟨Ψ†(x+x')Ψ(x')⟩ dx', as stated in Supplement E. This distinction should be made in the main text to avoid confusion, particularly because the integrated quantity may contain additional averaging effects.
  3. [Fig. 4] The analytic lines in Fig. 4 are drawn using the measured U and J, but the values of J used at each point are not stated in the main text. Please provide the J(U) relation or indicate that J is obtained from the same dispersion fits that yield U.
  4. [Supplement C] The description of the correlation-length extraction states that ln G(1)(x) is fitted with its intercept fixed to zero. Since the measured G(1)(x) may have an overall amplitude and possibly a subleading background, the fit procedure should be described in more detail, including the fit range and the sensitivity of ξ to those choices.
  5. [Fig. 1a] The schematic in Fig. 1a labels the vertical axis with both the Mott gap Δ and interaction energy U, but the relation between them (e.g., Δ ≈ U−6J in the deep Mott regime) is not given in the caption. Adding this relation would help the reader connect the schematic to the analytic formulas.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the three velocities are extracted from independent datasets and the invariance relation is a tested prediction, not an input.

full rationale

All three velocities are obtained from separate experimental observables: v_p from the slope of fringe-extremum trajectories in G(1)(x,t), v_g from the thresholded envelope boundary, and v_s from the equilibrium correlation length xi and the independently measured gap Delta through 1/xi ~ Delta/(hbar v_s). The analytic curves in Fig. 4 (v_p=2U/(pi hbar), v_s=sqrt(6JU)/hbar, v_g=6J/hbar) use U and J fitted to the measured dispersion, but the plotted velocities are not fit parameters; the agreement is therefore a genuine comparison between theory and independent measurement. The invariant v_s^2=(pi/2)v_p v_g is derived in Supplementary G from the quasiparticle dispersion and then tested against the independently determined velocities; it is not imposed by the analysis. DMRG simulations using the same fitted U and J reproduce both the spectra and the correlation cones, providing an external consistency check. Citations to prior work by co-authors (e.g., quench spectroscopy [18] and correlation-spreading theory [43,44]) supply methods and scaling forms, but the central claim does not reduce to those citations; it is anchored in the new experimental data and in DMRG, LMS, and QMC cross-checks. The only notable theory input is the unquantified O(1) prefactor in the xi-Delta-v_s relation, which is a systematic uncertainty that would rescale v_s and the inset ratio; however, this is a correctness caveat rather than a circular reduction, because no fitted parameter is being renamed as a prediction and no result is defined in terms of the claim it is meant to support.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central comparisons rest on three types of imported content: U and J fitted from the measured dispersion, low-energy relations from 1D Bose-Hubbard and Luttinger-liquid theory connecting gap, correlation length, and velocities, and the single-band BH model with renormalized parameters for DMRG. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Renormalized on-site interaction U = Ranges over roughly 500 to 3000 Hz (U/h); e.g., 2.15(5) kHz at gamma ~ 11.8
    Extracted from the upper and lower edges of the measured quench-spectroscopy dispersion via Eq. (6). Used to compute the analytic lines for v_p and v_s and to set the x-axis in Fig. 4.
  • Renormalized tunneling amplitude J = Varies with gamma; obtained from J/h = (nu_max - nu_min)/12 in Eq. (7)
    Extracted from the width of the fitted dispersion. Used in the expressions for v_s = sqrt(6JU)/hbar and v_g = 6J/hbar.
  • Envelope threshold epsilon = Same order of magnitude for all runs, with slight adjustments per signal amplitude
    Used in Eq. (15) to isolate the envelope boundary of G(1)(x,t) before extracting v_g. The extracted v_g has a moderate dependence on epsilon, reported as a 15 percent systematic uncertainty.
  • Gaussian smoothing widths sigma_x, sigma_t = Two pixels in each direction
    Chosen in Eq. (14) to match the spatial and temporal resolution of the data; affects the envelope shape and therefore the extracted group velocity.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The quasiparticle pair dispersion has the massive relativistic form 2E_ph(k) = sqrt((U-6J)^2 + 24JU sin^2(k/2) - 4J^2 sin^2 k).
    Used in Supplementary G to derive v_s, v_g, and the invariant relation. This is standard strong-coupling Bose-Hubbard theory, not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Sound velocity relates to gap and correlation length by 1/xi = Delta/(hbar v_s).
    Main text uses this relation to convert the measured gap and correlation length into v_s. It is imported from low-energy Luttinger-liquid and sine-Gordon theory (Ref. 29) and carries an order-one prefactor.
  • domain assumption The stationary-phase approximation describes the post-quench one-body correlation function as a pair-dispersion signal with envelope and fringes.
    Supplementary E, Eqs. (9)-(10). Requires translation invariance, isolated stationary phase points, and a sufficiently weak external potential. Used to justify interpreting the envelope and fringes as group and phase velocities.
  • domain assumption Post-quench dynamics are captured by a single-band Bose-Hubbard model with renormalized U and J.
    Main text Eq. (1) and Supplementary D. Supported by a two-body multiband calculation and QMC cross-checks, but not derived from first principles for the full many-body quench.
  • domain assumption The measured envelope speed of G(1) is the Lieb-Robinson velocity scale.
    The paper associates the thresholded envelope boundary with the maximum propagation speed and calls it v_g. No explicit Lieb-Robinson bound is computed for the experimental Hamiltonian and parameters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Observing the emergence of a velocity hierarchy in matter waves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CBSR3CBY

@misc{pith2026260805241,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Observing the emergence of a velocity hierarchy in matter waves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CBSR3CBY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.05241}
}
read the original abstract

Classical waves in dispersive media naturally exhibit distinct phase and group velocities. Whether an analogous separation of velocities can emerge in matter waves under strong many-body interactions has remained experimentally unexplored. Here, we demonstrate the emergence of a velocity hierarchy in a strongly interacting lattice gas. Using quench spectroscopy together with time-resolved correlation measurements, we independently determine the sound, group, and phase velocities across the superfluid-to-Mott-insulator transition. These velocities are nearly degenerate close to the transition, but progressively separate as the Mott gap opens and the quasiparticle dispersion acquires a massive relativistic-like form. Strikingly, phase-coherence fronts propagate faster than the Lieb-Robinson velocity scale while remaining fully consistent with locality. The measured velocities satisfy a relativistic-like invariance relation in the insulating regime. Our results establish propagation-velocity hierarchies as emergent signatures of strongly correlated quantum dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.05241 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mechanism of velocity separation, sketch of the experimental protocol, and typical dataset. (a) Not-to￾scale schematic of the low-energy quasiparticle dispersion relation, illustrating the evolution from an almost linear dispersion in the SF regime (dark gray line) to a gapped, relativistic-like form in the MI regime (light gray curve). The Mott gap ∆ and interaction energy U are indicated on the vertical axis. The … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Dispersion relations as obtained from quench spectroscopy. Quench spectral function S(k, ν) for γ ≈ 0.3 (a), 4.2 (b) and 11.8 (c) at Vx = 5 Er, with γ calculated assuming unit filling. The cyan dashed line and the blue dotted line in (b) and (c) indicate the energy gap extracted from LMS measurements and QMC calculations, respectively, where νLMS = 0.70(7) kHz and νQMC = 0.63 kHz for (b), and νLMS = 1.70(14) kHz and… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Correlation-cone dynamics of G (1)(x, t). (a1-c1) Space-time maps of G (1)(x, t) for γ ≈ 2.5 (a), γ ≈ 4.2 (b) and γ ≈ 11.8 (c). Yellow solid lines are linear fits to the trajectories of local extrema. Red and blue regions denote positive and negative values, respectively. Insets in (a1-c1) show the envelope structures extracted from the correlation-cone dynamics by convolution with a 2D Gaussian and application of a… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Emergence of velocity hierarchy and relativistic-like invariance. Comparison of the three characteristic velocities vp (circles), vs (diamonds) and vg (squares) as a function of U, with the corresponding values of γ shown on the top axis. Their uncertainties are mainly…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    E. H. Lieb and D. W. Robinson, The finite group velocity of quantum spin systems, Commun. Math. Phys.28, 251 (1972)

    1972

  2. [2]

    Brillouin,Wave Propagation and Group Velocity, Pure and Applied Physics, Vol

    L. Brillouin,Wave Propagation and Group Velocity, Pure and Applied Physics, Vol. 8 (Academic Press, New York, 1960)

    work page 1960

  3. [3]

    P. W. Anderson, Coherent excited states in the theory of superconductivity: Gauge invariance and the Meissner effect, Phys. Rev.110, 827 (1958)

    work page 1958

  4. [4]

    D. M. Pozar,Microwave Engineering, 4th ed. (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2011)

    2011

  5. [5]

    Tonks and I

    L. Tonks and I. Langmuir, Oscillations in ionized gases, Phys. Rev.33, 195 (1929)

    work page 1929

  6. [6]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 885 (2008)

    2008

  7. [7]

    Barmettler, D

    P. Barmettler, D. Poletti, M. Cheneau, and C. Kollath, Propagation front of correlations in an interacting bose gas, Phys. Rev. A85, 053625 (2012)

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Cevolani, J

    L. Cevolani, J. Despres, G. Carleo, L. Tagliacozzo, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Universal scaling laws for correla- tion spreading in quantum systems with short- and long- range interactions, Phys. Rev. B98, 024302 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Despres, L

    J. Despres, L. Villa, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Twofold correlation spreading in a strongly correlated lattice Bose gas, Scientific reports9, 4135 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    J. T. Schneider, J. Despres, S. J. Thomson, L. Tagli- acozzo, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Spreading of correla- tions and entanglement in the long-range transverse Ising chain, Phys. Rev. Res.3, L012022 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    See Supplementary Materials for details

  4. [12]

    Cheneau, P

    M. Cheneau, P. Barmettler, D. Poletti, M. Endres, P. Schauß, T. Fukuhara, C. Gross, I. Bloch, C. Kollath, and S. Kuhr, Light-cone-like spreading of correlations in a quantum many-body system, Nature481, 484 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    Jurcevic, B

    P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, P. Hauke, C. Hempel, P. Zoller, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Quasiparticle engineering and entanglement propagation in a quantum many-body sys- 6 tem, Nature511, 202 (2014)

    2014

  6. [14]

    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

  7. [15]

    Takasu, T

    Y. Takasu, T. Yagami, H. Asaka, Y. Fukushima, K. Na- gao, S. Goto, I. Danshita, and Y. Takahashi, Energy re- distribution and spatiotemporal evolution of correlations after a sudden quench of the Bose-Hubbard model, Sci- ence Advances6, eaba9255 (2020)

    2020

  8. [16]

    Fukuhara, P

    T. Fukuhara, P. Schauß, M. Endres, S. Hild, M. Che- neau, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Microscopic observation of magnon bound states and their dynamics, Nature502, 76 (2013)

    2013

  9. [17]

    Mokhtari-Jazi, M

    A. Mokhtari-Jazi, M. R. C. Fitzpatrick, and M. P. Ken- nett, Phase and group velocities for correlation spreading in the mott phase of the bose-hubbard model in dimen- sions greater than one, Phys. Rev. A103, 023334 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Villa, J

    L. Villa, J. Despres, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Unravel- ing the excitation spectrum of many-body systems from quantum quenches, Phys. Rev. A100, 063632 (2019)

    2019

  11. [19]

    Menu and T

    R. Menu and T. Roscilde, Quench dynamics of quantum spin models with flat bands of excitations, Phys. Rev. B 98, 205145 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Villa, J

    L. Villa, J. Despres, S. J. Thomson, and L. Sanchez- Palencia, Local quench spectroscopy of many-body quan- tum systems, Phys. Rev. A102, 033337 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    C. Chen, G. Emperauger, G. Bornet, F. Caleca, B. G´ ely, M. Bintz, S. Chatterjee, V. Liu, D. Barredo, N. Y. Yao, T. Lahaye, F. Mezzacapo, T. Roscilde, and A. Browaeys, Spectroscopy of elementary excitations from quench dy- namics in a dipolar XY Rydberg simulator, Science389, ...

    2025

  14. [22]

    J. Yu, Y. Hu, W. Chen, J. Yang, X. Chen, and H. Yao, Quench spectroscopy for Lieb-Liniger bosons in the pres- ence of harmonic trap, Phys. Rev. Res.7, L042066 (2025)

    2025

  15. [23]

    C. Chin, R. Grimm, P. Julienne, and E. Tiesinga, Fesh- bach resonances in ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1225 (2010)

    2010

  16. [24]

    Jaksch, C

    D. Jaksch, C. Bruder, J. I. Cirac, C. W. Gardiner, and P. Zoller, Cold bosonic atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 3108 (1998)

    1998

  17. [25]

    Haller, R

    E. Haller, R. Hart, M. J. Mark, J. G. Danzl, L. Reichs¨ oll- ner, M. Gustavsson, M. Dalmonte, G. Pupillo, and H.-C. N¨ agerl, Pinning quantum phase transition for a Luttinger liquid of strongly interacting bosons, Nature466, 597 (2010)

    2010

  18. [26]

    Bo´ eris, L

    G. Bo´ eris, L. Gori, M. D. Hoogerland, A. Kumar, E. Lu- cioni, L. Tanzi, M. Inguscio, T. Giamarchi, C. D’Errico, G. Carleo, G. Modugno, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Mott transition for strongly interacting one-dimensional bosons in a shallow periodic potential, Phys. Rev. A93, 01...

    2016

  19. [27]

    S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2863 (1992)

    1992

  20. [28]

    Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011)

    U. Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics 326, 96 (2011)

    2011

  21. [29]

    M. A. Cazalilla, R. Citro, T. Giamarchi, E. Orignac, and M. Rigol, One dimensional bosons: From condensed mat- ter systems to ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 1405 (2011)

    2011

  22. [30]

    Y. Guo, S. Dhar, A. Yang, Z. Chen, H. Yao, M. Hor- vath, L. Ying, M. Landini, and H.-C. N¨ agerl, Observa- tion of many-body dynamical localization, Science389, 716 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Y. Guo, H. Yao, S. Dhar, L. Pizzino, M. Horvath, T. Gi- amarchi, M. Landini, and H.-C. N¨ agerl, Anomalous cool- ing of bosons by dimensional reduction, Science Advances 10, eadk6870 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Carleo, F

    G. Carleo, F. Becca, L. Sanchez-Palencia, S. Sorella, and M. Fabrizio, Light-cone effect and supersonic correlations in one- and two-dimensional bosonic superfluids, Phys. Rev. A89, 031602(R) (2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    Fr´ erot, P

    I. Fr´ erot, P. Naldesi, and T. Roscilde, Multispeed prethermalization in quantum spin models with power- law decaying interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 050401 (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    Villa, S

    L. Villa, S. J. Thomson, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Quench spectroscopy of a disordered quantum system, Phys. Rev. A104, L021301 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    Villa, S

    L. Villa, S. J. Thomson, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Find- ing the phase diagram of strongly correlated disordered bosons using quantum quenches, Phys. Rev. A104, 023323 (2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    Data set is available from Zenodo at 10.5281/zen- odo.21609850

    doi

  29. [37]

    Hauschild, J

    J. Hauschild, J. Unfried, S. Anand, B. Andrews, M. Bintz, U. Borla, S. Divic, M. Drescher, J. Geiger, M. Hefel, K. H´ emery, W. Kadow, J. Kemp, N. Kirchner, V. S. Liu, G. M¨ oller, D. Parker, M. Rader, A. Romen, S. Scalet, L. Schoonderwoerd, M. Schulz, T. Soejima, P. Thoma, Y....

    2024

  30. [38]

    Olshanii, Atomic scattering in the presence of an ex- ternal confinement and a gas of impenetrable bosons, Phys

    M. Olshanii, Atomic scattering in the presence of an ex- ternal confinement and a gas of impenetrable bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 938 (1998)

    1998

  31. [39]

    Yan and D

    Y. Yan and D. Blume, Incorporating exact two-body propagators for zero-range interactions into n-body monte carlo simulations, Phys. Rev. A91, 043607 (2015)

    2015

  32. [40]

    Troyer, B

    M. Troyer, B. Ammon, and E. Heeb, Parallel object ori- ented Monte Carlo simulations, inInternational sympo- sium on computing in object-oriented parallel environ- ments(Springer, 1998) pp. 191–198

    1998

  33. [41]

    A. F. Albuquerque, F. Alet, P. Corboz, P. Dayal, A. Feiguin, S. Fuchs, L. Gamper, E. Gull, S. G¨ urtler, A. Honecker,et al., The ALPS project release 1.3: Open- source software for strongly correlated systems, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials310, 1187 (2007)

    2007

  34. [42]

    Bauer, L

    B. Bauer, L. Carr, H. G. Evertz, A. Feiguin, J. Freire, S. Fuchs, L. Gamper, J. Gukelberger, E. Gull, S. Guertler,et al., The ALPS project release 2.0: open source software for strongly correlated systems, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2011, P05001 (2011)

    2011

  35. [43]

    Cevolani, G

    L. Cevolani, G. Carleo, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Pro- tected quasilocality in quantum systems with long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. A92, 041603 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    Cevolani, G

    L. Cevolani, G. Carleo, and L. Sanchez-Palencia, Spread- ing of correlations in exactly solvable quantum mod- els with long-range interactions in arbitrary dimensions, New J. Phys.18, 093002 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    Villa,Out-of-equilibrium dynamics and quench spec- troscopy of ultracold many-body quantum systems, The- 7 ses, Institut Polytechnique de Paris (2021)

    L. Villa,Out-of-equilibrium dynamics and quench spec- troscopy of ultracold many-body quantum systems, The- 7 ses, Institut Polytechnique de Paris (2021). 8 SUPPLEMENT AR Y MA TERIALS A. Experimental parameters Our experimental sequence begins with the produc- tion of a Bose-E...

    2021

  38. [46]

    QMC calculations We calculate the energy gap for comparing to the measured dispersion via a path integral quantum Monte Carlo simulation, as shown in Fig. 2. We conduct simu- lations of the 1D bosonic Hamiltonian ˆH= NX i= 1 − ℏ2 2m ∇2 i +V x sin2 πxi a +g 1D X i<j δ(xi −x j) ...

  39. [47]

    The system is initialized at unit filling (¯n= 1), with the har- monic confinement identical to that for the experiment

    DMRG simulations In our DMRG simulations, we consider a one- dimensional Bose-Hubbard (BH) model (equation (1)) withL= 35 sites in the presence of an external harmonic potential that matches the experimental conditions. The system is initialized at unit filling (¯n= 1), with t...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.