Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Out-of-equilibrium inhomogeneous XX chains: Exact results and the hydrodynamic limit

T0 review · 6 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives the exact two-point correlator of an inhomogeneous XX chain after a quench and shows that in the hydrodynamic limit it is determined entirely by the transmission coefficient across the interface.

desk verdict Exact hydrodynamic-limit correlators for the step-potential XX chain: real novelty and good numerics, but the abstract overclaims and a typo breaks two intermediate equations. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.08205 v1 pith:LRFGAIRP submitted 2026-08-08 cond-mat.stat-mech cond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.str-elhep-thquant-ph

Vincenzo Alba , Federico Rottoli This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechcond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.str-elhep-thquant-ph
keywords XXchaininhomogeneousmagneticfieldquantumquenchRiemann-Hilbertproblemhydrodynamiclimittwo-pointcorrelationfunctiontransmissioncoefficientquasiparticlepicture
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 studies the time evolution of the XX spin chain with a step-like magnetic field, which after a Jordan-Wigner transformation is a free-fermion hopping problem on two half-chains with different chemical potentials. It establishes that the two-point fermionic correlation function after a quench from product initial states obeys a linear system whose exact solution can be obtained by reducing the frequency-space equation to a Riemann-Hilbert problem on the unit circle. The central result is that in the hydrodynamic limit $x,y,t\to\infty$ with fixed ratios $x/t,y/t$, every correlator collapses to explicit integrals over the single-particle transmission coefficient $T(k)$ across the interface, such as $G^{[+--]}_{x,y}(t)=\int_0^\pi \frac{dk}{2\pi}\mathrm{Re}[T(k)] e^{i(k+\pi)(x-y)}\Theta((x+y+2)/2+t v(k))\Theta(-x)\Theta(-y)$. The paper verifies these formulas against exact numerics and uses them to rederive the quasiparticle formula for the von Neumann entropy, giving the missing first-principles derivation of that picture for these quenches. If correct, the result reduces a non-equilibrium many-body problem to a scattering problem, with all large-scale correlation physics encoded in the interface transmission coefficient.

What carries the argument

The engine of the paper is the factorization $G_{xy}=\sum_k S_{k,x}\bar{S}_{k,y}$ of the correlator into single-particle mode functions, followed by a Laplace transform in time and Fourier transform in space that turns the equation of motion into a Riemann-Hilbert problem on the unit circle: find analytic functions inside and outside the circle whose jump across the circle is dictated by the magnetic-field step (Eq. (37)). The solution uses the Plemelj formula and residue calculus; the inverse transforms run along branch cuts in the $s$-plane, and the hydrodynamic limit is extracted by stationary phase and by the dominance of the pole at $s=s'$ in the double integral. This machinery converts the exact but unwieldy sums into transparent integrals involving only $\mathrm{Re}[T(k)]$ and the velocity $v(k)=J\sin k$.

What would settle it

Evaluate the full double integral (62) numerically for large $x,y,t$ with $x$ and $y$ far apart on the same side, or solve the linear system exactly, and compare with formulas (66)-(69); a mismatch would reveal the missing contribution of the $B(s,s')=\pi$ pole.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the hydrodynamic limit $x,y,t\to\infty$ with fixed $x/t$ and $y/t$, the two-point fermionic correlator is completely determined by the single-particle scattering data across the origin. For both points on the left of the interface the paper obtains (Eq. (66)) $G^{[+--]}_{x,y}(t)=\int_0^\pi \frac{dk}{2\pi}\mathrm{Re}[T(k)] e^{i(k+\pi)(x-y)}\Theta((x+y+2)/2+t v(k))\Theta(-x)\Theta(-y)$, with $v(k)=J\sin k$ and $T(k)$ the transmission coefficient (15). Analogous formulas hold for both points on the right and for one point on each side; in the across-interface case the momentum $k$ on one side is related to the momentum $k'=\arccos(h_L-h_R+\cos k)$ on the other by energy conservation, and the $\theta$ functions encode the light-cone condition set by the velocity. The paper derives these limiting expressions from the exact solution, not by postulating them, and it shows that in momentum space between mesoscopic cells the correlator becomes diagonal on each side of the interface with a transmission-reduction term. Together the formulas imply that in the scaling limit the initial state enters only through the choice of occupied sector, while the interface enters only through $\mathrm{Re}[T(k)]$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that in the limit $x,y,t\to\infty$ the double spectral integral (62) is dominated by the pole at $s=s'$ after stationary phase; the paper notes that a second pole at $B(s,s')=\pi$ is needed for correlations between distant cells, so if that pole dominance fails the explicit formulas would be incomplete.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the hydrodynamic limit, every large-scale fermionic correlator after a quench from the considered product states is fixed by the single-particle transmission coefficient $T(k)$ across the interface; the initial state enters only by selecting which $k$-sectors are occupied.
  • The mesoscopic-cell Fourier correlator is diagonal in momentum on each side of the interface, with a transmission-reduction term that accounts for particles that were transmitted away; across the interface, the two momenta are linked by energy conservation, $k'=\arccos(h_L-h_R+\cos k)$.
  • The correlator (66) yields the von Neumann entropy of a subsystem of length $\ell$ next to the origin as $S_A(t)=\int_0^\pi \frac{dk}{2\pi} \min(v(k)t,\ell)\, s(\mathrm{Re}[T(k)]/2)$, which coincides with the previously conjectured quasiparticle formula.
  • Numerical benchmarks confirm the hydrodynamic formulas at finite times: for the domain-wall-type quench the agreement is good already around $t\simeq 80$, while the N\'eel-state quench shows larger finite-time corrections, and the across-interface correlator decays as $|G_{xy}|\sim x^{-1/2}$ along $t=2x$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same Riemann-Hilbert reduction should transfer to other quadratic chains with a step-like inhomogeneity, for example the Kitaev chain with a step in the pairing term, with the transmission coefficient again playing the central role; the paper lists this as a future direction.
  • Including the second pole at $B(s,s')=\pi$ would supply the correlations between distant mesoscopic cells that the explicit formulas leave out, which are exactly the inputs needed for entanglement entropy of subsystems away from the interface.
  • The discontinuous behavior of $\mathrm{Re}\,G_{x,x+j}$ at $x/t=0$ for even $j$ is a sharp experimental signature that could be looked for in optical-lattice realizations of the step potential.
  • The predicted $x^{-1/2}$ decay of the across-interface correlator provides a quantitative finite-size target against which experiments or exact numerics can test the hydrodynamic limit.
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

6 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the out-of-equilibrium dynamics of the XX spin chain with a step-like magnetic field, mapping it to an inhomogeneous tight-binding fermionic model. The authors develop an exact solution for the two-point fermionic correlation function after quenches from product states by combining Laplace and Fourier transforms with a Riemann-Hilbert problem on the unit circle. They then derive hydrodynamic-limit formulas (x,y,t→∞ with fixed ratios) in which correlation functions are expressed through the single-particle transmission coefficient across the interface, and they benchmark these formulas against exact numerics for local densities, short-range correlators, and across-interface correlators. A final consistency check reproduces the quasiparticle entropy formula of Ref. [35] from the hydrodynamic correlator.

Significance. The paper addresses a paradigmatic exactly solvable inhomogeneous free-fermion quench and provides an ab initio route from the exact solution to the hydrodynamic/quasiparticle picture. The main strength is that the hydrodynamic formulas are derived, not postulated, and they contain no free parameters; the numerical benchmarks for the domain-wall and Néel-type quenches support the central formulas, and the reproduction of the entropy result of Ref. [35] is a valuable consistency check. If the issues below are fixed, the paper would be a substantial contribution to the exact treatment of defects and inhomogeneous fields in integrable systems. The current version, however, contains several load-bearing typos and an explicit incompleteness of the same-side hydrodynamic formulas that must be resolved before the abstract's unqualified claims are justified.

major comments (6)
  1. [Section 4, Eqs. (60) and (62)] The integrand contains the factor (λ'_+(s)-ρ'_+(s)) times (\bar λ'_+(s')-\bar λ'_+(s')), whose second factor is identically zero. As printed, the double integral in Eq. (60) and Eq. (62) vanishes, so the derivation of Eq. (66) cannot be reproduced. Please correct the typo, presumably to (\bar λ'_+(s')-\bar ρ'_+(s')), and re-check the subsequent algebra leading to the transmission-coefficient formula.
  2. [Section 4.1, paragraph after Eq. (80)] The authors explicitly state that Eqs. (66)-(73) keep only the pole at B(s,s')=0 and that the second pole at B(s,s')=π is needed for correlators between distant cells on the same side. Since the hydrodynamic limit allows separations x-y of order t, formulas (66)-(69) are therefore not the complete hydrodynamic limit for arbitrary same-side separations. The abstract and introduction present the hydrodynamic result without this qualification; please either include the B(s,s')=π contribution or explicitly restrict the claims to local correlators and to the leading across-interface behavior.
  3. [Section 3.3, Eq. (54)] The result for k<-1 is stated without derivation ("We do not show the derivation of the results"), although it is needed for the exact solution and is used to obtain the hydrodynamic formulas (68), (69), and (73) through the negative-k sector. Please provide a derivation or at least a detailed proof sketch of Eq. (54), including the exchange h_L↔h_R and the case separation x≤-1 versus x>-1.
  4. [Section 4, immediately after Eq. (62)] The conditions h_R<h_L and h_L-h_R<1 are imposed without explanation, while Section 3.3 discusses the regime h_L-h_R≤2. The case 1≤h_L-h_R<2 is neither treated nor excluded from the abstract's claims. Please explain the origin of the h_L-h_R<1 restriction and either extend the derivation to the full transmission window or state this restriction prominently in the abstract and introduction.
  5. [Section 4, Eq. (65)] As written, the identity has an incorrect sign for the + branch: ∫ dQ/(2πi) e^{iQx}/(Q+i0+) equals -Θ(-x), not Θ(-x); only the - branch gives Θ(x). Because this identity controls the theta-function supports in Eqs. (66)-(73), please correct Eq. (65) and specify unambiguously which regulator branch is used in the derivation for each term.
  6. [Section 2, Eqs. (13) and (15); Section 4, Eqs. (66)-(73) and (84)] The symbol T denotes both the transmission amplitude in Eq. (13) and the real transmission probability in Eq. (15). Eq. (66) refers to "T(k) is the transmission coefficient (15)" but then writes Re[T(k)], which is redundant if T is the real probability and meaningful only if T is the amplitude. Since the hydrodynamic formulas and the entropy formula (84) depend on which object is used, please introduce distinct symbols (for example T_amp and T_prob) and state explicitly which one enters each final formula.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3.3, below Eq. (56)] The coefficients A^{(j)}_\pm are said to be defined in Table 4, but the table containing these coefficients is Table 3; please renumber the cross-reference.
  2. [Section 4, Eqs. (59)-(73)] The notation G^{[σ1σ2σ3]}_{xy} is used without an explicit definition of the three labels; please define them (for example, signs of x and y and the sign of the k-sector) when the notation is introduced.
  3. [Section 3, Eq. (17) versus Eq. (22)] The Heaviside arguments for the h_L terms differ in form between Eq. (17) (Θ(-x-1) and Θ(-y-1)) and Eq. (22) (Θ(-x-1) only); please check the consistency of the convention at x=0 and state the convention Θ(0)=1 clearly.
  4. [Section 4, after Eq. (80)] The phrase "local correlators, i.e., for x≈y" is potentially misleading in the hydrodynamic limit, where x and y themselves diverge; please clarify that "local" means x-y fixed while x,y,t→∞.
  5. [Section 5, Fig. 4] The text states that G_{x,x+j} has a discontinuity at the origin for even j, but the mechanism behind this discontinuity is not explained; a brief comment in the main text would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation found: the hydrodynamic correlators are obtained from the exact solution and checked against independent numerics; self-citations are methodological or targets of proof, not inputs.

full rationale

The central chain is self-contained. Section 3 starts from the exact linear equation of motion (17), adopts the factorization (21) (a representation, not an assumption equivalent to the result), solves the resulting Riemann-Hilbert problem (37)-(46), and performs inverse Fourier/Laplace transforms. The hydrodynamic formulas (66)-(73) follow by stationary phase, the Q-integral identity (65), and the previously computed single-particle transmission amplitude T(k) from the scattering ansatz (7)-(15). No parameter is fitted to correlator data: T(k) is fixed by the Hamiltonian and interface boundary conditions, not by G_xy. The numerical benchmarks in Section 5 compare the predictions with the exact solution of (17), external to the fitted formulas. The same-author citations are not load-bearing: Ref. [17] is cited for the factorization technique, and Ref. [35] is explicitly the object being proved ('they allow us to prove the results of Ref. [35]'), with Eq. (84) obtained from Eq. (66), not vice versa. Section 4.1 discloses a genuine limitation: the B(s,s')=pi pole is omitted from (66)-(73), so distant-cell correlations and entanglement are not fully captured; this narrows the scope but does not make the results circular. One internal-consistency defect should be noted separately: as printed, Eqs. (60) and (62) contain the factor (bar-lambda'_+(s') - bar-lambda'_+(s')), which is identically zero, so the intermediate integrand cannot be reproduced without a correction; this is an algebraic/typographical error, not a circular reduction of output into input. Overall, the derivation does not reduce to its inputs by construction, so no circular step is identified; the modest score reflects the presence of non-load-bearing same-author citations.

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

The central results contain no fitted parameters; h_L, h_R and J are inputs from the model. The factorisation (21) is an exact representation for Gaussian states. The only ad hoc element is the pole-dominance assumption used to evaluate the hydrodynamic limit.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Jordan-Wigner transformation maps the spin XX chain to a quadratic fermion Hamiltonian.
    Used in Section 2 to write the Hamiltonian as Eq. (2) and to justify single-particle scattering.
  • standard math The correlation matrix of a fermionic Gaussian state factorizes as G_xy = sum_k S_{k,x} \bar S_{k,y}.
    Eq. (21); exact for the product initial states considered because their correlation matrices are projectors in the site basis.
  • domain assumption A single incoming plane wave with momentum k_L, together with reflected and transmitted waves, fully determines the scattering amplitudes R and T.
    Section 2, Eqs. (7)-(15). Standard in single-particle scattering off a step; assumes the validity of the plane-wave ansatz and energy conservation.
  • ad hoc to paper In the hydrodynamic limit the double integral in Eq. (62) is dominated by the pole at s=s'; the Q-integral can be extended to infinity and evaluated with Eq. (65).
    Section 4, between Eqs. (63) and (66). The paper acknowledges in Section 4.1 that a second pole at B(s,s')=pi is required for non-local correlators, so this selective pole contribution is an assumption.
  • domain assumption Fields satisfy h_L, h_R > 0, h_L > h_R, and h_L - h_R < 1, ensuring a finite transmission window with real k_R.
    Stated in Section 4 before Eq. (62). For |h_L-h_R| >= 2, transmission vanishes and the hydrodynamic formulas do not apply.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Out-of-equilibrium inhomogeneous XX chains: Exact results and the hydrodynamic limit." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LRFGAIRP

@misc{pith2026260808205,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Out-of-equilibrium inhomogeneous XX chains: Exact results and the hydrodynamic limit},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LRFGAIRP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.08205}
}
abstract

We study the out-of-equilibrium dynamics in the XX chain with step-like magnetic field, which maps to an inhomogeneous tight-binding chain after Jordan-Wigner transformation. We obtain exact analytic expressions for the fermionic two-point correlation function after a quantum quench from several initial product states, both homogeneous and inhomogeneous ones. This is achieved by using a combination of Fourier and Laplace transforms, which al low us to map the problem to a standard Riemann-Hilbert problem on the unit circle. For arbitrary positions and times the correlators are not expressed in terms of elementary functions. However, in the hydrodynamic limit $x,y,t\to\infty$ with fixed ratios, we provide explicit formulas that depend only on the effective transmission coefficient across the origin. We benchmark our analytic predictions against exact numerical simulations and find excellent agreement in the hydrodynamic limit, apart from finite-time corrections.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.08205 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Setup employed in this work. We consider the inhomogeneous tight-binding [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Riemann-Hilbert problem Sb+(z) = f(z)Sb−(z)+g(z) (cf. (37)) for the functions Sb±(z) = Sb± k,q, on the unit circle C with z = e −iq. The functions f(z) and g(z) are defined in (37). We denote with l± and r± the zeros and the poles of f(z), respectively. where f(z) is the function defined in (38). Notice that in Eq. (40) we assume a specific choice for the branch cut of the logarithm function, for which ln(f(z)) is a… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (Left) Contour employed to compute the inverse Laplace transform in (52). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Dynamics of the two-point correlation functions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Dynamics of the fermion density after the quenches from the state (25) (left [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Dynamics of the off-diagonal correlator Re( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The off-diagonal fermionic correlator Gxy after the quench from the state (25) in the XX chain with hL = 1 and hR = 1/3. We plot |Gxy| versus x at fixed t = 2x and y = −x/3. The circles are exact numerical data. The dashed-dotted line is the result in the hydrodynamic …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [35]

    A. D. Pasquale, F. Rottoli and V. Alba,Entanglement dynamics after quenches with inhomogeneous hamiltonians(2026),2605.01595

    work page Pith review arXiv 2026

  2. [1]

    Calabrese, F

    P. Calabrese, F. H. L. Essler and G. Mussardo,Introduction to ‘Quantum Integra- bility in Out of Equilibrium Systems’, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2016(6), 064001 (2016), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2016/06/064001

    doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2016/06/064001 2016

  3. [2]

    Bertini, M

    B. Bertini, M. Collura, J. De Nardis and M. Fagotti,Transport in Out-of-Equilibrium XXZChains: Exact Profiles of Charges and Currents, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 207201 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.207201

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.207201 2016

  4. [3]

    O. A. Castro-Alvaredo, B. Doyon and T. Yoshimura,Emergent hydrodynamics in integrable quantum systems out of equilibrium, Phys. Rev. X6, 041065 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041065

    doi:10.1103/physrevx.6.041065 2016

  5. [4]

    Bastianello, V

    A. Bastianello, V. Alba and J.-S. Caux,Generalized hydrodynamics with space-time inhomogeneous interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 130602 (2019), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.130602

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.130602 2019

  6. [5]

    V. Alba, B. Bertini, M. Fagotti, L. Piroli and P. Ruggiero,Generalized-hydrodynamic approach to inhomogeneous quenches: correlations, entanglement and quantum ef- fects, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2021(11), 114004 (2021), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ac257d

    doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ac257d 2021

  7. [6]

    C. L. Kane and M. P. A. Fisher,Transport in a one-channel luttinger liquid, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 1220 (1992), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.1220

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.68.1220 1992

  8. [7]

    C. L. Kane and M. P. A. Fisher,Transmission through barriers and resonant tunnel- ing in an interacting one-dimensional electron gas, Phys. Rev. B46, 15233 (1992), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.46.15233

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.46.15233 1992

Show all 49 references
  1. [8]

    Bertini and M

    B. Bertini and M. Fagotti,Determination of the nonequilibrium steady state emerging from a defect, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 130402 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.130402

    2016 doi

  2. [9]

    Ljubotina, S

    M. Ljubotina, S. Sotiriadis and T. Prosen,Non-equilibrium quantum transport in presence of a defect: the non-interacting case, SciPost Phys.6, 4 (2019), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.6.1.004

    2019 doi

  3. [10]

    Gamayun, A

    O. Gamayun, A. Slobodeniuk, J.-S. Caux and O. Lychkovskiy,Nonequilibrium phase transition in transport through a driven quantum point contact, Phys. Rev. B103, L041405 (2021), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.103.L041405. 20 SciPost Physics Submission

    2021 doi

  4. [11]

    Berdanier, J

    W. Berdanier, J. Marino and E. Altman,Universal dynamics of stochas- tically driven quantum impurities, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 230604 (2019), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.230604

    2019 doi

  5. [12]

    del Vecchio del Vecchio, A

    G. del Vecchio del Vecchio, A. De Luca and A. Bastianello,Transport through interacting defects and lack of thermalisation, SciPost Phys.12, 060 (2022), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.12.2.060

    2022 doi

  6. [13]

    Biella, A

    A. Biella, A. De Luca, J. Viti, D. Rossini, L. Mazza and R. Fazio,Energy transport between two integrable spin chains, Phys. Rev. B93, 205121 (2016), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.93.205121

    2016 doi

  7. [14]

    Bastianello and A

    A. Bastianello and A. De Luca,Nonequilibrium steady state generated by a moving defect: The supersonic threshold, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 060602 (2018), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.060602

    2018 doi

  8. [15]

    P. L. Krapivsky, K. Mallick and D. Sels,Free fermions with a localized source, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2019(11), 113108 (2019), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ab4e8e

    2019 doi

  9. [16]

    P. L. Krapivsky, K. Mallick and D. Sels,Free bosons with a localized source, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2020(6), 63101 (2020), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ab8118

    2020 doi

  10. [17]

    Alba and F

    V. Alba and F. Carollo,Noninteracting fermionic systems with localized losses: Exact results in the hydrodynamic limit, Phys. Rev. B105, 054303 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.105.054303

    2022 doi

  11. [18]

    Tarantelli and E

    F. Tarantelli and E. Vicari,Out-of-equilibrium quantum dynamics of fermionic gases in the presence of localized particle loss, Phys. Rev. A105, 042214 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.105.042214

    2022 doi

  12. [19]

    Eisler and I

    V. Eisler and I. Peschel,On entanglement evolution across defects in critical chains, Europhysics Letters99(2), 20001 (2012), doi:10.1209/0295-5075/99/20001

    2012 doi

  13. [20]

    Capizzi and V

    L. Capizzi and V. Eisler,Entanglement evolution after a global quench across a conformal defect, SciPost Phys.14, 070 (2023), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.14.4.070

    2023 doi

  14. [21]

    Calabrese, M

    P. Calabrese, M. Mintchev and E. Vicari,Entanglement entropy of quantum wire junctions, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical45(10), 105206 (2012), doi:10.1088/1751-8113/45/10/105206

    2012 doi

  15. [22]

    Mintchev and E

    M. Mintchev and E. Tonni,Modular Hamiltonians for the massless Dirac field in the presence of a defect, Journal of High Energy Physics2021(3), 205 (2021), doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2021)205

    2021 doi

  16. [23]

    Gruber and V

    M. Gruber and V. Eisler,Time evolution of entanglement negativity across a de- fect, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical53(20), 205301 (2020), doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ab831c

    2020 doi

  17. [24]

    Alba,Unbounded entanglement production via a dissipative impurity, SciPost Phys.12, 11 (2022), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.12.1.011

    V. Alba,Unbounded entanglement production via a dissipative impurity, SciPost Phys.12, 11 (2022), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.12.1.011

    2022 doi

  18. [25]

    Caceffo and V

    F. Caceffo and V. Alba,Entanglement negativity in a fermionic chain with dissipative defects: exact results, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2023(2), 023102 (2023), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/acb429. 21 SciPost Physics Submission

    2023 doi

  19. [26]

    Fraenkel and M

    S. Fraenkel and M. Goldstein,Entanglement measures in a nonequilibrium steady state: Exact results in one dimension, SciPost Phys.11, 085 (2021), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.11.4.085

    2021 doi

  20. [27]

    Capizzi, S

    L. Capizzi, S. Scopa, F. Rottoli and P. Calabrese,Domain wall melting across a defect, Europhysics Letters141(3), 31002 (2023), doi:10.1209/0295-5075/acb50a

    2023 doi

  21. [28]

    Gamayun, O

    O. Gamayun, O. Lychkovskiy and J.-S. Caux,Fredholm determinants, full count- ing statistics and Loschmidt echo for domain wall profiles in one-dimensional free fermionic chains, SciPost Phys.8, 36 (2020), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.8.3.036

    2020 doi

  22. [29]

    M. Saha, M. Kulkarni and A. Dhar,Generalised Hydrodynamics description of the Page curve-like dynamics of a freely expanding fermionic gas(2024),2402.18422

    2024 arXiv

  23. [30]

    T. Ray, A. Dhar and M. Kulkarni,Page curve like dynamics in interacting quantum systems(2025),2504.14675

    2025 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Kehrein,Page curve entanglement dynamics in an analytically solvable model, Phys

    S. Kehrein,Page curve entanglement dynamics in an analytically solvable model, Phys. Rev. B109, 224308 (2024), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.109.224308

    2024 doi

  25. [32]

    L. H. Li, S. Kehrein and S. Gopalakrishnan,Sharp Page transitions in generic Hamil- tonian dynamics, Phys. Rev. B112, 014307 (2025), doi:10.1103/vnzh-y22h

    2025 doi

  26. [33]

    P. N. Jepsen, J. Amato-Grill, I. Dimitrova, W. W. Ho, E. Demler and W. Ketterle, Spin transport in a tunable heisenberg model realized with ultracold atoms, Nature 588(7838), 403 (2020), doi:10.1038/s41586-020-3033-y

    2020 doi

  27. [34]

    Bucciantini, S

    L. Bucciantini, S. Sotiriadis and T. Macr ` ı,Probing Klein tunnelling through quantum quenches, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical49(2), 025002 (2015), doi:10.1088/1751-8113/49/2/025002

    2015 doi

  28. [36]

    Calabrese and J

    P. Calabrese and J. Cardy,Evolution of entanglement entropy in one-dimensional systems, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2005(04), P04010 (2005), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2005/04/p04010

    2005 doi

  29. [37]

    Fagotti and P

    M. Fagotti and P. Calabrese,Evolution of entanglement entropy following a quantum quench: Analytic results for the XY chain in a transverse magnetic field, Phys. Rev. A78, 010306 (2008), doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.78.010306

    2008 doi

  30. [38]

    Alba and P

    V. Alba and P. Calabrese,Entanglement and thermodynamics after a quantum quench in integrable systems, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences114(30), 7947 (2017), doi:10.1073/pnas.1703516114,https://www.pnas.org/content/114/ 30/7947.full.pdf

    2017 doi

  31. [39]

    Alba and P

    V. Alba and P. Calabrese,Entanglement dynamics after quantum quenches in generic integrable systems, SciPost Phys.4, 17 (2018), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.4.3.017

    2018 doi

  32. [40]

    Klobas, B

    K. Klobas, B. Bertini and L. Piroli,Exact Thermalization Dynamics in the “Rule 54” Quantum Cellular Automaton, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 160602 (2021), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.160602

    2021 doi

  33. [41]

    Bertini, K

    B. Bertini, K. Klobas, V. Alba, G. Lagnese and P. Calabrese,Growth of r´ enyi en- tropies in interacting integrable models and the breakdown of the quasiparticle picture, Phys. Rev. X12, 031016 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.12.031016. 22 SciPost Physics Submission

    2022 doi

  34. [42]

    J. Viti, J. M. St´ ephan, J. Dubail and M. Haque,Inhomogeneous quenches in a free fermionic chain: Exact results, Epl115(4), 40011 (2016), doi:10.1209/0295- 5075/115/40011,1507.08132

    2016 arXiv

  35. [43]

    F. D. Gakhov,Boundary Value Problems, Courier Corporation, New York, ISBN 9780486662756, Translated from Russian (1990)

    1990

  36. [44]

    Caceffo and V

    F. Caceffo and V. Alba,Fate of entanglement in quadratic markovian dissipative systems, Phys. Rev. A113, 042436 (2026), doi:10.1103/f6q2-vkyv

    2026 doi

  37. [45]

    Parez and V

    G. Parez and V. Alba,Reduced fidelities for free fermions out of equilibrium: from dy- namical quantum phase transitions to Mpemba effect, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2026(1), 013103 (2026), doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ae3380

    2026 doi

  38. [46]

    Parez and V

    G. Parez and V. Alba,Smearing of dynamical quantum phase transitions in dissipative free-fermion systems, Phys. Rev. B113, 144310 (2026), doi:10.1103/gqv9-rfss

    2026 doi

  39. [47]

    Bertini, M

    B. Bertini, M. Fagotti, L. Piroli and P. Calabrese,Entanglement evolution and gen- eralised hydrodynamics: noninteracting systems, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical51, 39LT01 (2018), doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aad82e

    2018 doi

  40. [48]

    Bayona-Pena, M

    P. Bayona-Pena, M. Mazzoni and L. Piroli,Generalized hydrodynamics of free fermions under extensive-charge monitoring(2026),2604.05850

    2026 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Turkeshi, L

    X. Turkeshi, L. Piroli and M. Schir´ o,Enhanced entanglement negativity in boundary-driven monitored fermionic chains, Phys. Rev. B106, 024304 (2022), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.106.024304. 23

    2022 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.