Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 65 references

Dynamical Crossover in Landau$-$Zener Tunneling in Dissipative Rydberg Lattices

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 For fixed Rabi coupling, Landau–Zener tunneling in a dissipative Rydberg lattice is identical on the two sublattices up to a critical interaction strength $V_c$, and becomes sublattice-dependent beyond it.

desk verdict A clean numerical demonstration of a sublattice Landau–Zener crossover in a mean-field Rydberg model, but the central observable is never checked against the full Lindblad dynamics; the paper deserves a referee, not a desk reject. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10639 v1 pith:GGDQ3A7N submitted 2026-08-11 cond-mat.quant-gas

Suvechha Indu , Raka Dasgupta This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas PACS 67.85.-d42.50.Gy03.67.-a03.67.Bg05.70.Fh05.90.+m37.10.Jk03.65.Yz
keywords Landau-ZenertunnelingRydberglatticenon-HermitianHamiltoniandissipativequantumdynamicsmean-fieldapproximationavoidedcrossingblockadedynamicalcrossover
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

Using both the Lindblad master equation and an effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, this paper studies a dissipative Rydberg lattice whose detuning is swept linearly through a resonance. It argues that the Rydberg interaction strength $V$ controls a dynamical crossover in Landau–Zener tunneling: for $V \le V_c$ the two sublattices tunnel with identical probabilities, and for $V > V_c$ their probabilities become distinct, for a fixed Rabi coupling. The crossover is intrinsic to the Rabi-coupled system and survives in the coherent limit, and it is explained by whether the sublattice population imbalance vanishes at the avoided crossing. The paper also shows that stronger Rydberg interactions prolong the lifetime of Landau–Zener excitations when dissipation is weak and Rabi coupling is moderate, while at weak Rabi coupling the blockade suppresses the transition.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the mean-field no-jump effective Hamiltonian of Eq. (6), a $2\times2$ non-Hermitian matrix in which each sublattice's detuning is shifted by $V\rho_{EE}$ of the other sublattice. Its complex eigenenergies produce avoided crossings that drive the Landau–Zener transition, and the analytic formula $P_{LZ}=\exp(-\pi\Omega^2/(2|v|))$ is applied with the effective detuning. The order parameter $\theta=|\omega_1-\omega_2|/2$ tracks whether the population imbalance vanishes at the crossing; the equality $P_{LZ1}=P_{LZ2}$ holds exactly when $\omega_1=\omega_2$ at that instant. The self-consistent condition for the exceptional point, $t=V(1+\omega(t))/(2v)$, encodes the interaction-driven shift of the avoided-crossing time.

What would settle it

Carry out the full Lindblad evolution (including quantum jumps) for a finite Rydberg chain with the same parameters as in Figs. 9(c) and 9(d), and compute the sublattice-resolved Landau–Zener probabilities $P_{LZ1}$ and $P_{LZ2}$; the claimed crossover is ruled out if the probabilities stay equal for all $V$ within numerical error, or if their splitting appears at a value of $V$ far from the predicted $V_c$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, for fixed Rabi coupling $\Omega$, there exists a crossover Rydberg interaction strength $V_c$ such that the Landau–Zener probabilities of the two sublattices are identical for $V\le V_c$ and become distinct for $V>V_c$. The paper traces this to the effective detuning of each sublattice, which contains the other sublattice's mean Rydberg occupancy; the LZ probabilities are equal exactly when the sublattice population imbalance $\omega_1-\omega_2$ vanishes at the avoided crossing. For $V\le V_c$, rapid population redistribution at the crossing restores the uniform configuration ($\theta=0$); for $V>V_c$, the stronger blockade leaves a residual antiferromagnetic imbalance at the crossing and breaks the $Z_2$ sublattice symmetry. The crossover line $V_c(\Omega)$ is computed at zero and weak dissipation, and the paper additionally shows that the location of the avoided crossing in the real versus imaginary spectrum is governed by the ratio $\Omega/\gamma=1/2$.

Load-bearing premise

The crossover claim rests on the mean-field, no-jump description in which each sublattice feels only the other sublattice's average Rydberg occupancy; if quantum jumps or beyond-mean-field fluctuations change the residual population imbalance at the avoided crossing, the boundary $V_c$—and possibly the crossover itself—would differ from the full Lindblad dynamics.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For fixed $\Omega$, ramping $V$ across $V_c$ turns on sublattice-selective LZ excitation, providing a controllable switch between symmetric and symmetry-broken tunneling.
  • At moderate Rabi coupling and weak dissipation, increasing $V$ creates additional avoided crossings and extends the lifetime of the excited state; at low $\Omega$, the blockade widens the gap and suppresses the transition.
  • The ratio $\Omega/\gamma = 1/2$ separates parameter regions where the avoided crossing appears in the real part of the spectrum (above the ratio) or the imaginary part (below it).
  • The crossover exists in the fully coherent limit ($\gamma=0$), so it is intrinsic to the Rabi-coupled lattice and does not require dissipation.
  • Sublattice-resolved Landau–Zener probabilities can serve as a direct diagnostic of whether the $Z_2$ symmetry is restored at the avoided crossing.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If confirmed in a full Lindblad treatment that keeps quantum jumps, the crossover could be read as a dynamical phase boundary in the experimentally accessible $V$–$\Omega$ plane, and the line $V_c(\Omega)$ could be mapped with site-resolved imaging.
  • The same imbalance-restoration mechanism should appear in longer chains and two-dimensional arrays, where the two sublattices become the even and odd checkerboard sublattices; the critical $V$ may then depend on coordination number.
  • Because the no-jump approximation is validated only against order-parameter phase plots, not against the LZ probabilities themselves, the precise value of $V_c$ may shift under full Lindblad dynamics; a numerical test of $P_{LZ1}\neq P_{LZ2}$ at $V>V_c$ would settle this.
  • The criterion that $P_{LZ1}=P_{LZ2}$ whenever $\omega_1=\omega_2$ at the crossing suggests that any mechanism that pins a nonzero imbalance at the avoided crossing, such as longer-range interactions or staggered detunings, would also produce a dynamical crossover.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a two-level Rydberg lattice with a time-dependent detuning and dissipation, using two complementary approaches: a Lindblad master equation within a two-sublattice mean-field decoupling, and an effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian obtained by dropping the quantum-jump term. The authors map the model to a 2x2 mean-field Hamiltonian, analyze the complex energy spectra, identify avoided crossings, and define Landau-Zener probabilities for the two sublattices. Their main claim is a dynamical crossover in these sublattice-resolved Landau-Zener probabilities: for fixed Rabi coupling there is a critical Rydberg interaction strength Vc such that the two sublattice probabilities are identical for V≤Vc and become distinct for V>Vc. They also report that Rydberg interactions prolong the LZ excitation lifetime for moderate Rabi coupling and suppress it for weak Rabi coupling, and that the ratio Ω/γ=1/2 separates spectral regimes with avoided crossings in the real vs. imaginary parts.

Significance. If the crossover survives beyond the mean-field no-jump approximation, it would be an interesting interaction-driven dynamical effect in Rydberg lattices, potentially observable with current experimental parameters (the authors provide a mapping to 87Rb systems). The paper's spectral interpretation—connecting avoided crossings and sublattice asymmetry to the LZ dynamics—is useful and partially validated: the authors compare order-parameter phase plots from the Lindblad and non-Hermitian frameworks in Sec. III C and find reasonable agreement for weak dissipation. The work also provides a clear parameter mapping and a concrete prediction of Vc(Ω). However, the central claim is established only within the approximate model, and the validation against the full Lindblad dynamics is limited to the order parameter, not to the LZ probabilities themselves.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. VI, Fig. 9] The central result—that P_LZ1 and P_LZ2 are equal for V≤Vc and distinct for V>Vc—is computed entirely from the mean-field non-Hermitian model of Eq. (6). The validation in Sec. III C compares only the order parameter θ(t) between the Lindblad and non-Hermitian dynamics (Fig. 1), not the sublattice-resolved LZ probabilities. Because the quantum-jump term in Eq. (3) directly repopulates the ground state, it changes ρ_EE,j and hence the effective detunings in Eq. (6) at the avoided crossing; this could shift Vc or even eliminate the crossover in the full Lindblad dynamics. The paper should either compute P_LZ1 and P_LZ2 from the full Lindblad master equation for representative parameters on both sides of Vc, or provide a quantitative argument that the jump term cannot alter the qualitative crossover behavior.
  2. [Sec. VI, Eq. (11)] The analytic explanation of the crossover is not rigorous. Equation (11) is the standard Landau-Zener formula for a two-level system with a fixed linear detuning and constant coupling, but the effective detuning in Eq. (6) contains the self-consistent, time-dependent term Vρ_EE,2(t) (and similarly for sublattice 1). One cannot directly apply Eq. (11) to this situation. In addition, the statement that "P_LZ1 can be equal to P_LZ2 only if ω1=ω2" is too strong: equality of two transition probabilities does not imply equality of the corresponding effective detunings. The numerical extraction of Vc in Fig. 9(c)-(d) should be accompanied by a precise threshold criterion (e.g., a maximum allowed deviation between P_LZ1 and P_LZ2 in the post-sweep window) and by convergence checks with respect to the integration time step and the sweep range.
  3. [Sec. II and Sec. VI] At γ=0 the no-jump approximation is exact, but the two-sublattice mean-field decoupling of Eq. (6) is nowhere tested against the exact lattice Hamiltonian. Since the crossover is claimed to be an intrinsic property of the Rabi-coupled Rydberg lattice (Sec. VI: "irrespective of whether dissipation is present or not"), the absence of a comparison with exact diagonalization on small chains—for the same parameters and at γ=0—leaves the central claim as a property only of the mean-field model. This is particularly important in the regime where Vc/Ω is large (e.g., Ω=0.3, Vc=16 at γ=0), where the mean-field treatment is least controlled.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors, including "detunning", "Shrödinger", "the later approach" (should be "the latter approach"), "Rydberd", "subllatices", and "of of". The PACS number "3.67.-a" should likely be "03.67.-a".
  2. [Sec. V A, Fig. 6] The definition of LZ lifetime is imprecise: the caption states "We consider the window where the excited state occupation probability exceeds the ground state occupation probability," but the main text does not give a quantitative criterion for extracting the lifetime from the time traces. Please define it explicitly.
  3. [Sec. IV B, Eq. (9)] The exceptional-point condition in Eq. (9) is stated without derivation. It would be helpful to show explicitly how it follows from the 2x2 matrix in Eq. (6) by setting the discriminant to zero.
  4. [Figs. 7 and 8] The captions of Figs. 7 and 8 do not consistently specify which colors correspond to the two sublattices in the P_LZ panels. In particular, Fig. 7 mentions red and blue for ground and excited states but does not describe the magenta/cyan curves that appear in the text and in Fig. 8.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

The LZ-equalization criterion is self-definitional with the order parameter, though the crossover threshold itself is a numerical output.

  1. self definitional [Section VI (Dynamical Crossover), text following Eq. (11); see also Sec. V A and Fig. 6 caption]
    "However, in our system, the effective detuning is not simply ∆ = vt, but (−( iγ/2 + ∆(t)) + V ρ_EE,2 ) (Eq. 6) for sublattice 1, and (−( iγ/2 + ∆(t)) + V ρ_EE,1 ) (Eq. 6) for sublattice 2. Therefore, P_LZ1 can be equal to P_LZ2 only if ω_1 = ω_2 (Eq. 7)."

    In Sec. V A and Fig. 6, P_LZ is plotted as the time-dependent excited-state occupation probability; the caption states 'blue color indicates the same for the excited state population.' Eq. (7) gives ω_k = ρ_EE,k − ρ_GG,k = 2ρ_EE,k − 1 under normalization, so P_LZ1 = P_LZ2 is algebraically equivalent to ω_1 = ω_2 before any use of Eq. (6). The sentence 'P_LZ1 can be equal to P_LZ2 only if ω_1 = ω_2' therefore restates the definition of the order parameter rather than deriving the crossover from the LZ formula. Regime I/II are classified by exactly this equality of sublattice populations, so the analytical 'explanation' reduces to the classification criterion.

full rationale

The paper's central numerical observation, that there is a critical Rydberg strength V_c separating equal from sublattice-dependent Landau–Zener probabilities, is not a fitted-input circularity: V_c is extracted from dynamics, the residual imbalance at the avoided crossing is a dynamical output, and no parameter is fitted to the claim. However, the advertised analytical explanation in Section VI collapses into a self-definitional statement. P_LZ in the figures is the excited-state occupation probability, i.e. ρ_EE, and Eq. (7) defines ω_i as 2ρ_EE,i − 1; hence 'P_LZ1 = P_LZ2 only if ω_1 = ω_2' is true by construction, independent of the mean-field detuning in Eq. (6). Thus the Regime I/II distinction is a restatement of whether the sublattice population imbalance vanishes at the avoided crossing, the same order-parameter criterion used to define the phases. This is a partial circularity in the explanation, not in the existence of the crossover. The self-citations [50,51] are used for standard phase definitions and the mean-field ansatz; they are not load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and the LZ formula is cited to non-overlapping authors, so no self-citation chain forces the result. The no-jump/mean-field model is validated only against θ(t) phase plots in Sec. III C, not against Lindblad-resolved P_LZ curves; that is a substantial correctness/validation gap for the claimed generality, but it is not itself circularity. On balance, the central prediction is partly tautological, warranting a score of 5 rather than a higher score: the threshold and residual AFM content are independent, but the stated mechanism for the crossover reduces to the definition of the measured quantities.

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

The model inputs are physical parameters (Omega, gamma, v, V) stated in units of V0; no parameters are fitted to external data. The central claims rely on the mean-field and no-jump approximations, the two-sublattice ansatz, and the standard LZ formula. Vc is a numerically extracted threshold, not a fitted input.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math The dissipative dynamics is Markovian and of Lindblad form (Eq. 2).
    The paper models decay through a single Lindblad operator L=|G><E| with rate gamma; this is a standard open-system assumption.
  • domain assumption Mean-field replacement V sum_k |E><E|_k -> V rho_EE,k in Eq. (6).
    This turns the many-body lattice into a 2x2 self-consistent Hamiltonian; correlations and fluctuations are ignored.
  • domain assumption The lattice has exactly two uniform sublattices with populations omega1 and omega2.
    The order parameter theta and the sublattice-resolved LZ probabilities are built on this bipartite ansatz.
  • domain assumption The quantum-jump term in Eq. (3) can be neglected for the parameter regimes studied.
    H_eff spectra and LZ dynamics use no-jump evolution; the paper notes this is approximate and not trace-preserving but assumes the density matrix stays normalized.
  • standard math The standard Landau-Zener formula P=exp(-pi Omega^2/(2|v|)) applies to each sublattice after mean-field decoupling.
    Eq. (11) is used to interpret the numerically computed transition probabilities and to argue that equal probabilities require equal effective detunings.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dynamical Crossover in Landau$-$Zener Tunneling in Dissipative Rydberg Lattices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GGDQ3A7N

@misc{pith2026260810639,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dynamical Crossover in Landau$-$Zener Tunneling in Dissipative Rydberg Lattices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GGDQ3A7N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10639}
}
abstract

In this work, we investigate the excitation dynamics of a Rabi-coupled dissipative Rydberg lattice with a time-dependent detuning. The system is analyzed using (i) a Lindblad master equation within a mean-field approximation and (ii) an effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian framework. While the mean-field approach captures the emergence of an antiferromagnetic order in the Rydberg excitation profile, the non-Hermitian description provides direct insight into the complex energy spectrum and its avoided crossings, which govern the Landau$-$Zener dynamics. We identify a regime in which the sublattice population imbalance vanishes near the avoided crossing, resulting in identical Landau$-$Zener probabilities on the two sublattices. Beyond a critical effective blockade strength there is a dynamical crossover to another regime in which the sublattice population imbalance persists through the avoided crossing, giving rise to sublattice-dependent Landau$-$Zener probabilities. Furthermore, Rydberg interactions prolong the lifetime of Landau$-$Zener-induced excitations in the presence of weak dissipation and strong Rabi coupling. In contrast, for weak Rabi coupling, the Rydberg blockade inhibits excitation and suppresses the Landau$-$Zener transition probability.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10639 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Order parameter ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. FIG. 5. Real (Re(E)) and imaginary (Im(E)) part of the eigen-energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Real (Re(E)) and imaginary (Im(E)) part of the eigen-energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Landau-Zener transition probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Category-I: Landau-Zener transition probability ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Dynamical crossover in Landau-Zener transition probabil [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 53 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    7(a) and 7(b)

    Category-I: moderateΩ In this case, as Rydberg interactionV, increases, theP LZ lifetime increases as well, as evident from Figs. 7(a) and 7(b). Here,Ω(taken as 0.3 in Fig. 7) sends sufficient num- ber of atoms from the ground state to the Rydberg excited state, and directly competes with dissipation rateγthat brings back the atoms to the ground state. As...

    work page

  2. [2]

    8), so,Ωis not enough to send sufficient number of atoms from the ground state to the excited state

    Category-II : lowΩ Here, Rabi coupling is taken to be lower (0.03 in Fig. 8), so,Ωis not enough to send sufficient number of atoms from the ground state to the excited state. Moreover, an increasing Rydberg interaction expands the gap between the ground and the excited state. These two incidents affect the Landau-Zener transition probability. As a result,...

    work page 2000

  3. [3]

    Manzano, A short introduction to the lindblad master equa- tion, Aip advances10(2020)

    D. Manzano, A short introduction to the lindblad master equa- tion, Aip advances10(2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    4(b)), while the real part undergoes a real cross- ing (Fig

    the avoided crossing appears in the imaginary part of eigen spectra (Fig. 4(b)), while the real part undergoes a real cross- ing (Fig. 4(a)). In contrast, when the ratio is above this critical ratio (Ω/γ=3/4 in Fig. 5), the avoided crossing appears in the real spectrum (Fig. 5(a)) and the imaginary spectrum hosts a real crossing (Fig. 5(b)). V . LANDAU-ZE...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Roccati, G

    F. Roccati, G. M. Palma, F. Ciccarello, and F. Bagarello, Non- hermitian physics and master equations, Open Systems & In- formation Dynamics29, 2250004 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    6 (a)), a LZ transition oc- curs with infinite lifetime

    When dissipation is zero (Fig. 6 (a)), a LZ transition oc- curs with infinite lifetime. With higherγvalues (from 0.001 to 0.01), the life time decreases gradually (Figs. 6(b)-(d)). B. Dependency on Rydberg Interaction Although Landau-Zener lifetime does not depend much on Rydberg interaction at high dissipation (γ=0.4), there is a pronounced dependence at...

    work page 2000

  7. [7]

    Carmichael,An open systems approach to quantum optics: lectures presented at the Université Libre de Bruxelles October 28 to November 4, 1991(Springer, 1993)

    H. Carmichael,An open systems approach to quantum optics: lectures presented at the Université Libre de Bruxelles October 28 to November 4, 1991(Springer, 1993)

    1991

  8. [8]

    Breuer and F

    H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione,The theory of open quantum systems(OUP Oxford, 2002)

    2002

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    H. J. Carmichael,Statistical methods in quantum optics 1: mas- ter equations and F okker-Planck equations(Springer Science & Business Media, 2013)

    2013

  2. [10]

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

    2014

  3. [11]

    Ashida, Z

    Y . Ashida, Z. Gong, and M. Ueda, Non-hermitian physics, Ad- vances in Physics69, 249 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    A. J. Siegert, On the derivation of the dispersion formula for nuclear reactions, Physical Review56, 750 (1939)

    1939

  5. [13]

    Majorana, Scattering of anαparticle by a radioactive nu- cleus, EJTP3, 293 (2006)

    E. Majorana, Scattering of anαparticle by a radioactive nu- cleus, EJTP3, 293 (2006)

    2006

  6. [14]

    Feshbach, Unified theory of nuclear reactions, Annals of Physics5, 357 (1958)

    H. Feshbach, Unified theory of nuclear reactions, Annals of Physics5, 357 (1958)

    1958

  7. [15]

    Another widely studied class comprises effective non- Hermitian Hamiltonians having complex eigenvalues [19–24] describing dissipative open quantum systems [25]

    (for example, the PT-symmetric Hamiltonians [5, 6, 16– 18]), which possesses real spectra in the symmetry-unbroken phase. Another widely studied class comprises effective non- Hermitian Hamiltonians having complex eigenvalues [19–24] describing dissipative open quantum systems...

    2026 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Longstaffand E.-M

    B. Longstaffand E.-M. Graefe, Nonadiabatic transitions through exceptional points in the band structure of a pt- symmetric lattice, Physical Review A100, 052119 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    Melanathuru, S

    R. Melanathuru, S. Malzard, and E.-M. Graefe, Landau-zener transitions through a pair of higher-order exceptional points, Physical Review A106, 012208 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    E. J. Bergholtz, J. C. Budich, and F. K. Kunst, Excep- tional topology of non-hermitian systems, Reviews of Modern Physics93, 015005 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Kawabata, K

    K. Kawabata, K. Shiozaki, and S. Ryu, Topological field theory of non-hermitian systems, Physical review letters126, 216405 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-hermiticity versus pt symmetry: The necessary condition for the reality of the spectrum of a non- hermitian hamiltonian, Journal of Mathematical Physics43, 205 (2002)

    2002

  13. [21]

    C. M. Bender, Introduction to pt-symmetric quantum theory, Contemporary physics46, 277 (2005)

    2005

  14. [22]

    C. M. Bender, Making sense of non-hermitian hamiltonians, Reports on Progress in Physics70, 947 (2007)

    2007

  15. [23]

    X. Tong, G. Xianlong, and S.-p. Kou, Adiabatic-impulse ap- proximation in the non-hermitian landau-zener model, Physical Review B107, 104306 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    B. Zhu, R. Lü, and S. Chen, Pt symmetry in the non-hermitian su-schrieffer-heeger model with complex boundary potentials, Physical Review A89, 062102 (2014)

    2014

  17. [25]

    Modak and B

    R. Modak and B. P. Mandal, Eigenstate entanglement entropy in a pt-invariant non-hermitian system, Physical Review A103, 062416 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Zhang, K.-X

    J. Zhang, K.-X. Hu, C.-L. Zhang, X.-F. Nie, Z.-X. Zhang, Y . Yan, J. Cao, S. Zhang, and H.-F. Wang, Pt-symmetric phase transition and unidirectional accumulation of eigenstates in a non-hermitian system with a single impurity, Physical Review A110, 062216 (2024)

    2024

  19. [27]

    Ohlsson and S

    T. Ohlsson and S. Zhou, Transition probabilities for flavor eigenstates of non-hermitian hamiltonians in the pt-broken phase, Journal of Mathematical Physics62(2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    C. M. Bender, N. Hassanpour, D. W. Hook, S. Klevansky, C. Sünderhauf, and Z. Wen, Behavior of eigenvalues in a region of broken pt symmetry, Physical Review A95, 052113 (2017)

    2017

  21. [29]

    J. Li, T. Prosen, and A. Chan, Spectral statistics of non- hermitian matrices and dissipative quantum chaos, Physical re- view letters127, 170602 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Halder, S

    D. Halder, S. Ganguly, and S. Basu, Properties of the non- hermitian ssh model: role of symmetry, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter35, 105901 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Javanbakht, P

    S. Javanbakht, P. Nalbach, and M. Thorwart, Dissipative landau-zener quantum dynamics with transversal and longitu- dinal noise, Physical Review A91, 052103 (2015)

    2015

  24. [32]

    Saito, M

    K. Saito, M. Wubs, S. Kohler, Y . Kayanuma, and P. Hänggi, Dissipative landau-zener transitions of a qubit: Bath-specific and universal behavior, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics75, 214308 (2007)

    2007

  25. [33]

    M. Wubs, K. Saito, S. Kohler, P. Hänggi, and Y . Kayanuma, Gauging a quantum heat bath with dissipative landau-zener transitions, Physical review letters97, 200404 (2006). 9

    2006

  26. [34]

    X. Dai, R. Trappen, H. Chen, D. Melanson, M. Yurtalan, D. Tennant, A. Martinez, Y . Tang, E. Mozgunov, J. Gib- son,et al., Dissipative landau-zener tunneling in the crossover regime from weak to strong environment coupling, Nature Communications16, 329 (2025)

    2025

  27. [35]

    Militello, Three-state landau-zener model in the presence of dissipation, Physical Review A99, 033415 (2019)

    B. Militello, Three-state landau-zener model in the presence of dissipation, Physical Review A99, 033415 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    Arceci, S

    L. Arceci, S. Barbarino, R. Fazio, and G. E. Santoro, Dissipa- tive landau-zener problem and thermally assisted quantum an- nealing, Physical Review B96, 054301 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Nalbach and M

    P. Nalbach and M. Thorwart, Landau-zener transitions in a dis- sipative environment: Numerically exact results, Physical re- view letters103, 220401 (2009)

    2009

  30. [38]

    Chen, Landau-zener transitions in a fermionic dissipative en- vironment, Physical Review B101, 125426 (2020)

    R. Chen, Landau-zener transitions in a fermionic dissipative en- vironment, Physical Review B101, 125426 (2020)

    2020

  31. [39]

    Barra and M

    F. Barra and M. Esposito, Dissipation in small systems: Landau-zener approach, Physical Review E93, 062118 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Bonifacio, D

    M. Bonifacio, D. Domínguez, and M. J. Sánchez, Landau- zener-stückelberg interferometry in dissipative circuit quantum electrodynamics, Physical Review B101, 245415 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Ferrón, D

    A. Ferrón, D. Domínguez, and M. J. Sánchez, Dynamic transi- tion in landau-zener-stückelberg interferometry of dissipative systems: The case of the flux qubit, Physical Review B93, 064521 (2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    B. T. Torosov and N. V . Vitanov, Pseudo-hermitian landau- zener-stückelberg-majorana model, Physical Review A96, 013845 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    Minganti, A

    F. Minganti, A. Miranowicz, R. W. Chhajlany, and F. Nori, Quantum exceptional points of non-hermitian hamiltonians and liouvillians: The effects of quantum jumps, Physical Review A 100, 062131 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    Monkman and M

    K. Monkman and M. Berciu, Limits of the non-hermitian de- scription of decay models, Physical Review A113, 032213 (2026)

    2026

  37. [45]

    Chaduteau, D

    A. Chaduteau, D. K. Lee, and F. Schindler, Lindbladian versus postselected non-hermitian topology, Physical Review Letters 136, 016603 (2026)

    2026

  38. [46]

    K. G. Zloshchastiev and A. Sergi, Comparison and unification of non-hermitian and lindblad approaches with applications to open quantum optical systems, Journal of Modern Optics61, 1298 (2014)

    2014

  39. [47]

    Ebadi, T

    S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, A. Omran, D. Bluvstein, R. Samajdar, H. Pichler, W. W. Ho, et al., Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature595, 227 (2021)

    2021

  40. [48]

    Scholl, M

    P. Scholl, M. Schuler, H. J. Williams, A. A. Eberharter, D. Barredo, K.-N. Schymik, V . Lienhard, L.-P. Henry, T. C. Lang, T. Lahaye,et al., Quantum simulation of 2d antifer- romagnets with hundreds of rydberg atoms, Nature595, 233 (2021)

    2021

  41. [49]

    Levine, A

    H. Levine, A. Keesling, A. Omran, H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V . Vuleti ´c, and M. D. Lukin, High-fidelity control and entanglement of rydberg-atom qubits, Physical review letters121, 123603 (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    S. J. Evered, D. Bluvstein, M. Kalinowski, S. Ebadi, T. Manovitz, H. Zhou, S. H. Li, A. A. Geim, T. T. Wang, N. Maskara,et al., High-fidelity parallel entangling gates on a neutral-atom quantum computer, Nature622, 268 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Omran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner,et al., Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature551, 579 (2017)

    2017

  44. [52]

    Keesling, A

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

    2019

  45. [53]

    Varghese, S

    D. Varghese, S. Wüster, W. Li, and R. Nath, Maximally en- tangled rydberg-atom pairs via landau-zener sweeps, Physical Review A107, 043311 (2023)

    2023

  46. [54]

    Le Gal, X

    Y . Le Gal, X. Turkeshi, and M. Schirò, Entanglement dynam- ics in monitored systems and the role of quantum jumps, PRX Quantum5, 030329 (2024)

    2024

  47. [55]

    T. E. Lee, H. Häffner, and M. Cross, Antiferromagnetic phase transition in a nonequilibrium lattice of rydberg atoms, Phys- ical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics84, 031402 (2011)

    2011

  48. [56]

    S. Indu, A. Biswas, and R. Dasgupta, Different phases in a dis- sipative rydberg lattice: roles of occupancy and on-site inter- action, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics59, 035301 (2026)

    2026

  49. [57]

    Viteau, M

    M. Viteau, M. Bason, J. Radogostowicz, N. Malossi, O. Morsch, D. Ciampini, and E. Arimondo, Rydberg excita- tion of a bose–einstein condensate, Laser Physics23, 015502 (2013)

    2013

  50. [58]

    Beguin, A

    L. Beguin, A. Vernier, R. Chicireanu, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Direct measurement of the van der waals inter- action between two rydberg atoms, Physical review letters110, 263201 (2013)

    2013

  51. [59]

    Leung, D

    V . Leung, D. Pijn, H. Schlatter, L. Torralbo-Campo, A. La Rooij, G. Mulder, J. Naber, M. Soudijn, A. Tauschinsky, C. Abarbanel,et al., Magnetic-film atom chip with 10µm pe- riod lattices of microtraps for quantum information science with rydberg atoms, Review of Scientific In...

    2014

  52. [60]

    Singer, M

    K. Singer, M. Reetz-Lamour, T. Amthor, L. G. Marcassa, and M. Weidemüller, Suppression of excitation and spectral broad- ening induced by interactions in a cold gas of rydberg atoms, Physical Review Letters93, 163001 (2004)

    2004

  53. [61]

    W. Lee, M. Kim, H. Jo, Y . Song, and J. Ahn, Coherent and dissipative dynamics of entangled few-body systems of rydberg atoms, Physical Review A99, 043404 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    J. Day, E. Brekke, and T. Walker, Dynamics of low-density ul- tracold rydberg gases, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics77, 052712 (2008)

    2008

  55. [63]

    Niranjan, W

    A. Niranjan, W. Li, and R. Nath, Landau-zener transitions and adiabatic impulse approximation in an array of two rydberg atoms with time-dependent detuning, Physical Review A101, 063415 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    E. P. Glasbrenner and W. P. Schleich, The landau–zener formula made simple, Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Op- tical Physics56, 104001 (2023)

    2023

  57. [65]

    Sun, Derivation of the landau–zener formula via functional equations, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 58, 37LT01 (2025)

    C. Sun, Derivation of the landau–zener formula via functional equations, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 58, 37LT01 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

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