Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 64 references

Characterizing the transition from topology to chaos in a kicked quantum system

T0 review · 2 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 argues that chaos in a twice-kicked quantum top sets in when topologically protected bound states fill half the Hilbert space and dominates when they fill all of it, at $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_2=\pi(2j+1)/2$ and…

desk verdict A useful phenomenological map of the topology-to-chaos transition in a kicked top, but the paper's own Appendix C undercuts its central causal claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13831 v2 pith:7D4DS7CU submitted 2024-11-21 quant-ph

J. Mumford , H.-Y. Xie , R. J. Lewis-Swan This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords FloquetsystemstopologicallyprotectedboundstatesquantumchaoslevelspacingratioRényientropykickedtopcentralspinmodelchiralsymmetry
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 sets out to establish that the transition from topological to chaotic behavior in a periodically kicked quantum top coupled to a spin-1/2 particle is driven entirely by the breakdown of topologically protected bound states. As the two kick strengths grow, these bound states proliferate until they have no room to remain localized, then delocalize in stages and finally become random orthonormal vectors. The paper derives analytic predictions for the kick-strength product at which chaos first appears, $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_2 = \pi(2j+1)/2$, and at which it fully dominates, $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_3 = \pi(2j+1)$, by equating the mean-field bound-state count $N_T = 2\kappa_x\kappa_y/\pi$ to half and then all of the Hilbert space dimension. This matters because it yields a parameter-free, finite-size mechanism for the topology-to-chaos transition, supported by numerical level-spacing and Rényi-entropy results and by a proposed dynamical probe.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is the mean-field count of topologically protected bound states, $N_T=2\kappa_x\kappa_y/\pi$, obtained by approximating the discrete solutions of the mean-field quasi-energy condition, Eq. (6), as a continuous integral when $\kappa_x,\kappa_y\gg 1$; this count is compared with the total Hilbert space dimension $D=2(2j+1)$, and the predicted borders are exactly $N_T=D/2$ and $N_T=D$. The objects whose breakdown drives the transition are the chirally symmetric bound states at quasi-energies $0$ and $\pi$ of the Floquet operator, which belongs to the Altland-Zirnbauer class BDI (three anticommuting discrete symmetries squaring to unity). Their staged delocalization is tracked by the average level-spacing ratio $r$ and by the Rényi entropy $S_2$ of spin-coherent probe states on the Bloch sphere.

What would settle it

A numerical scan of the average level spacing ratio $r$ for the Floquet operator at large $j$ (say $j=500$) as a function of $\kappa_x\kappa_y$ would settle the claim: if the crossover toward the COE value $r_{\mathrm{COE}}=4-2\sqrt{3}\approx0.536$ begins at a product clearly different from $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_2=\pi(2j+1)/2$, or if the chaotic plateau is not reached by $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_3=\pi(2j+1)$, the overlap-count prediction fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that increasing the kick strengths $\kappa_x$, $\kappa_y$ in the Floquet operator $\hat{U}_F = e^{-i(\kappa_y/j)\hat{J}_y\hat{\sigma}_y}e^{-i(\kappa_x/j)\hat{J}_x\hat{\sigma}_x}$ destroys the topologically protected bound states in a sequence of well-defined stages, and that this staged breakdown is the entire mechanism by which chaos emerges. For small kicks, bound states at quasi-energies $0$ and $\pi$ are localized and protected by chiral symmetry; as the kicks grow, the mean-field number of bound states $N_T=2\kappa_x\kappa_y/\pi$ increases. When $N_T$ reaches half of the Hilbert space dimension $2(2j+1)$, i.e., $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_2=\pi(2j+1)/2$, the bound states first lose their chiral-symmetry protection and the level statistics begin shifting from the degenerate sub-Poissonian regime; when $N_T$ fills the whole space, $(\kappa_x\kappa_y)_3=\pi(2j+1)$, the gap closes and the states become random orthonormal vectors with circular-orthogonal-ensemble statistics. The paper argues that this finite-size crowding of bound states, not the conventional drive-frequency versus bandwidth criterion, determines the onset and completion of chaos in this model.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted chaos boundaries rest on the assumption that the mean-field number of bound states stays accurate right up to the point where those states crowd together, and that chaos begins exactly when that number reaches half of the total number of quantum states and fully emerges when it reaches all of them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The onset and full emergence of chaos in this model are fixed by a simple count, $N_T = 2\kappa_x\kappa_y/\pi$ equal to half and then all of $2(2j+1)$, requiring no fitting parameters.
  • The average level spacing ratio $r$ and the Bloch-sphere-averaged Rényi entropy $S_2$ display the same four-stage behavior, so either observable can be used to locate the topological, quasi-integrable, transition, and chaotic regimes.
  • A late-time measurement of $\langle\hat{J}_z\rangle$ after many kicks distinguishes the chaotic stage: it stays at its initial value in the regular and topological stages and drops to zero almost immediately upon entering the chaotic region.
  • The conventional criterion for chaos in Floquet systems (drive frequency comparable to quasi-energy bandwidth) is not needed here; instead, the proliferation and overlap of bound states accounts for the transition.
  • The four-stage breakdown (loss of chiral-symmetry protection first, then gap closing, then full delocalization) implies that each stage may be separately observable in spectral statistics and wave-function localization.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension would be to apply the same overlap-count criterion to other Floquet systems with proliferating bound states, such as driven chiral quantum walks or Su-Schrieffer-Heeger chains, comparing a mean-field edge-state count with the Hilbert space dimension.
  • A finite-size scaling analysis of the level-spacing ratio near the two predicted borders could determine whether they are sharp phase transitions or broad crossovers; the paper does not perform such an analysis.
  • The dynamical probe could be quantified further by measuring the number of kicks needed for $\langle\hat{J}_z\rangle$ to decay, as a function of kick strength, and comparing the decay onset with the predicted third border in an experimental central-spin simulator.
  • The appendix's observation that the borders roughly survive when chiral symmetry is broken hints that the overlap count may be more robust than the topological protection itself; this is a point the paper leaves open.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the Floquet operator U_F = exp(-i kappa_y/j J_y sigma_y) exp(-i kappa_x/j J_x sigma_x) for a quantum top coupled to a spin-1/2 particle and characterizes the transition from topologically protected bound states to quantum chaos as the dimensionless kick strengths are increased. The paper identifies four stages in the quasi-energy spectrum, associates the second and third stages of delocalization with a mean-field count of bound states N_T = 2 kappa_x kappa_y / pi (Eq. 9), and predicts the chaos borders at (kappa_x kappa_y)_2 = pi(2j+1)/2 and (kappa_x kappa_y)_3 = pi(2j+1). The predictions are compared with exact diagonalization for j = 50, 250, 500 using the average level spacing ratio r and the Renyi entropy S_2, and a dynamical probe based on the mean and variance of J_z is proposed.

Significance. If the central mechanism were established, the paper would provide a striking and falsifiable connection between topological bound-state proliferation and the emergence of ergodicity in a Floquet central-spin model. The border predictions are quantitative and are supported by exact diagonalization for several system sizes, and the proposed dynamical probe is experimentally relevant for the Rydberg/polar-molecule and NV-center platforms discussed in the text. However, the paper's own Appendix C demonstrates that the same predicted borders persist when chiral symmetry is broken and the topological bound states are destroyed, which directly undermines the claimed causal explanation. As it stands, the contribution is a potentially useful heuristic with an unexplained robustness, rather than an established mechanism.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III.B, Appendix C] The paper's central claim, stated in Section III.B, is that 'the transition to chaos can be formulated entirely in terms of the breakdown of the topologically protected bound states.' Appendix C contradicts this: after breaking chiral symmetry with the delta sigma_z term in Eq. (C1), the topological bound states are destroyed, yet Fig. 6(a) shows that the same two borders still 'fairly accurately predict the onset, then dominance of chaos.' The authors call this 'curious' but do not reconcile it. If the borders survive in a system without bound states, N_T is not the controlling mechanism but merely a proxy for kappa_x kappa_y. Please provide an explanation of both observations, or revise the 'entirely' claim and the abstract to reflect the more limited conclusion that the borders are empirical coincidences.
  2. [Section III.B, Eq. (9)] The second and third borders are obtained from the criterion that chaos emerges when the mean-field bound-state count N_T = 2 kappa_x kappa_y / pi equals half, then all, of the Hilbert-space dimension. This overlap criterion is asserted rather than derived: the analogy to quantum phase transitions, where susceptibilities diverge at a critical point, is not made quantitative, and no wavefunction-width, overlap, or level-spacing estimate is used to justify the specific thresholds N_T = (2j+1) and N_T = 2(2j+1). Without such a derivation the analytic predictions rest on an ad hoc finite-size assumption. The authors should derive this criterion from the dynamics or the level statistics, or explicitly present it as a heuristic.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section III.B] The first border (kappa_x kappa_y)_1 is introduced as 'determined numerically,' so the abstract's phrase 'analytic predictions for the onset and full emergence of chaos' is misleading for the onset; please state explicitly that only the second and third borders are analytic, and the first border is a numerical input.
  2. [Section III.B and Fig. 2 caption] The text refers to 'red triangle and black square data,' while the caption describes 'red triangles and black curves'; please make the legend and color references consistent.
  3. [Appendix B] There is a typo in the chiral symmetry paragraph: 'obatain' should be 'obtain.'
  4. [Reference [56]] The journal name 'npj Quauntum Information' should be 'npj Quantum Information.'
  5. [Section III.C] The term 'quasi-integrable' is used to describe the second region but is not defined; please clarify whether it refers to an approximate conservation law or to a specific level-statistics regime.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the chaos boundaries come from an independent mean-field bound-state count, not from the level statistics they predict.

full rationale

The central analytic predictions, (κxκy)2 = π(2j+1)/2 and (κxκy)3 = π(2j+1), follow from Eq. (9), an independent mean-field count N_T = 2κxκy/π of topologically protected bound states obtained by integrating Eq. (6) over the Bloch sphere; they are not fitted to the level-spacing ratio r of Eq. (8), the Rényi entropy of Eq. (10), or the dynamical probe of Sec. III.D. The mean-field count itself derives from the quasi-energy condition ε = 0, π in Eq. (5) and is derived in this paper, so reliance on Ref. [37] for the closed-form mean-field Hamiltonian is background support rather than a load-bearing self-citation. The first border is fixed numerically, but the second and third are analytic and are checked against independent numerical diagnostics. The overlap criterion (N_T equal to half or all of the Hilbert-space dimension) is physically motivated but not derived; that is a derivation gap or correctness risk, not circularity, because the predicted quantity (COE level statistics) is not used as an input. The manuscript's own Appendix C observation that the same borders survive when chiral symmetry is broken and the bound states are destroyed (Fig. 6(a)) does undercut the causal claim that the transition is 'entirely' due to bound-state breakdown, but that is an evidentiary inconsistency rather than a definitional or fitted-input circularity. Overall, no load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The only fitted quantity is the first border, which is numerically located. The central predictions rest on the four listed axioms, the most fragile being the finite-size overlap criterion.

free parameters (1)
  • First border (κxκy)_1 = π(2j+1)/4 ≈ πj/2 for large j
    The boundary between topological and quasi-integrable stages is not derived analytically; it is fixed by numerical observation of the mean level spacing ratio r in Fig. 3. The paper states it was 'determined numerically'.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Mean-field replacement of top operators by spin coherent state expectation values, Eq. (4).
    Used to derive bound-state locations Eq. (6)-(7); justified in the large-j limit where quantum fluctuations scale as j^{1/2}.
  • domain assumption Bulk-boundary correspondence and chiral symmetry protection of Floquet bound states at quasi-energy 0 and π, following Refs. [49,50] and prior work [37].
    Underpins the interpretation of mean-field solutions as topologically protected bound states.
  • domain assumption Continuum approximation converting sums over (n_x,n_y) to integrals, requiring κx,κy >> 1 and j >> 1.
    Used in Eq. (9) to obtain N_T = 2κxκy/π; overcounting from degenerate solutions is neglected as subleading in this limit.
  • ad hoc to paper Finite-size overlap criterion: chaos emerges when N_T reaches half or all of the Hilbert space dimension.
    The paper posits that bound states delocalize because they proliferate and overlap; this is the load-bearing heuristic for the predicted borders (κxκy)_2 and (κxκy)_3, not derived from the dynamics or level statistics.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Characterizing the transition from topology to chaos in a kicked quantum system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7D4DS7CU

@misc{pith2026241113831,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Characterizing the transition from topology to chaos in a kicked quantum system},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7D4DS7CU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13831}
}
read the original abstract

This work theoretically investigates the transition from topology to chaos in a periodically driven system consisting of a quantum top coupled to a spin-1/2 particle. The system is driven by two alternating interaction kicks per period. For small kick strengths, localized topologically protected bound states exist, and as the kick strengths increase, these states proliferate. However, at large kick strengths they gradually delocalize in stages, eventually becoming random orthonormal vectors as chaos emerges. We identify the delocalization of the bound states as a finite size effect where their proliferation leads to their eventual overlap. This insight allows us to make analytic predictions for the onset and full emergence of chaos which are supported by numerical results of the quasi-energy level spacing ratio and R\'enyi entropy. A dynamical probe is also proposed to distinguish chaotic from regular behavior.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13831 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Central spin model and pulse sequence used to gener [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Quasi-energy spectrum and a topologically protected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Density plot of the average level spacing ratio, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Average R´enyi entropy and average level spacing ratio [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Density plots of the mean and standard deviation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Mean level spacing ratio when chiral symmetry is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [37]

    Characterizing the transition from topology to chaos in a kicked quantum system

    and the boundaries between these regions are home to topologically protected bound states. In this work, we show that increasing the kick strengths results in the breakdown of these bound states, but that this break- down takes place over two intermediate stages featuring progressive delocalization of the bound states, before the emergence of chaos charac...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  2. [1]

    Oka and S

    T. Oka and S. Kitamura, Floquet Engineering of Quan- tum Materials, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.10, 387 (2019)

    2019

  3. [2]

    We take{|ε n⟩}to be the basis of the Floquet operator, ˆUF , such that when|ψ(θ, ϕ)⟩is an eigenstate of ˆUF , IPR = 1 andS 2 = 0, but instead when|ψ(θ, ϕ)⟩is spread equally throughout the entire basis, IPR = [2(2j+ 1)] −1 and S2 = 1. In the limit of largej, spin coherent states have negligible quantum fluctuations (scaling asj 1/2) such that when they are...

    work page

  4. [3]

    Giergiel and K

    K. Giergiel and K. Sacha, Anderson localization of a Ry- dberg electron along a classical orbit, Phys. Rev. A95, 063402 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [4]

    Sacha, Anderson localization and Mott insulator phase in the time domain, Sci

    K. Sacha, Anderson localization and Mott insulator phase in the time domain, Sci. Rep.5, 10787 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [5]

    Goldman, G

    N. Goldman, G. Juzeli¯ unas, P. ¨Ohberg, and I. B. Spiel- man, Light-induced gauge fields for ultracold atoms, Rep. Prog. Phys.77, 126401 (2014)

    2014

  7. [6]

    L. Guo, M. Marthaler, and G. Sch¨ on, Phase Space Crys- tals: A New Way to Create a Quasisenergy Band Struc- ture, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 205303 (2013)

    work page 2013

  8. [7]

    Eckardt and E

    A. Eckardt and E. Anisimovas, High-frequency approx- imation for periodically driven quantum systems from a Floquet space perspective, New J. Phys.17, 093039 (2015)

    work page 2015

Show all 64 references
  1. [8]

    Goldman and J

    N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Periodically driven quan- tum systems: effective Hamiltonians and engineered gauge fields, Phys. Rev. X4, 031027 (2014)

    2014

  2. [9]

    A. Y. Kitaev, Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons, Annals of Physics303, 2 (2003)

    2003

  3. [10]

    Bukov, L

    M. Bukov, L. D’Alessio, and A. Polkovnikov, Univer- sal high-frequency behavior of periodically driven sys- tems: from dynamical stabilization to Floquet engineer- ing, Adv. Phys.64, 129 (2015)

    2015

  4. [11]

    Stern and N

    A. Stern and N. H. Lindner, Topological Quantum Com- putation—From Basic Concepts to First Experiments, FIG. 6. Mean level spacing ratio when chiral symmetry is broken. (a) Mean level spacing ratio using the quasi-energies from (C1) as a function ofκ xκy. The parameter values ...

    2013

  5. [12]

    Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of Majorana fermions in solid state systems, Rep

    J. Alicea, New directions in the pursuit of Majorana fermions in solid state systems, Rep. Prog. Phys.75, 076501 (2012)

    2012

  6. [13]

    Weitenberg and J

    C. Weitenberg and J. Simonet, Tailoring quantum gases by Floquet engineering, Nat. Phys.17, 1342 (2021)

    2021

  7. [14]

    Koch and J

    F. Koch and J. C. Budich, Quantum non-Hermitian topo- logical sensors, Phys. Rev. Research4, 013113 (2022)

    2022

  8. [15]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Berreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, Realization of the Hofstadter 10 Hamiltonian with ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  9. [16]

    M. Kim, Z. Jacob, and J. Rho, Recent advances in 2D, 3D and higher-order topological photonics, Light Sci. Appl. 9, 130 (2020)

    2020

  10. [17]

    N. R. Cooper, J. Dalibard, and I. B. Spielman, Topo- logical bands for ultracold atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 015005 (2019)

    2019

  11. [18]

    Miyake, G

    H. Miyake, G. A. Siviloglou, C. J. Kennedy, W. C. Bur- ton, and W. Ketterle, Realizing the Harper Hamiltonian with laser-assisted tunneling in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 185302 (2013)

    2013

  12. [19]

    L. Ling, J. D. Joannopoulos, and Soljaˇ ci´ c, Topological photonics, Nat. Photon.8, 821 (2014)

    2014

  13. [20]

    M. C. Rechtsman, J. M. Zeuner, Y. Plotnik, Y. Lumer, D. Podolsky, F. Dreisow, S. Nolte, M. Segev, and A. Sza- meit, Photonic Floquet topological insulators, Nature 496, 196 (2013)

    2013

  14. [21]

    Ozawa, H

    T. Ozawa, H. M. Price, A. Amo, N. Goldman, M. Hafezi, L. Lu, M. C. Rechtsman, D. Schuster, J. Simon, O. Zil- bergberg, and I. Carusotto, Topological photonics, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 015006 (2019)

    2019

  15. [22]

    A. B. Khanikaev and G. Shvets, Two-dimensional topo- logical photonics, Nat. Photon.11, 763 (2017)

    2017

  16. [23]

    Boada, A

    O. Boada, A. Celi, J. I. Latorre, and M. Lewenstein, Quantum simulation of an extra dimension, Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 133001 (2012)

    2012

  17. [24]

    K. R. A. Hazzard and B. Gadway, Synthetic dimensions, Physics Today76, 62 (2023)

    2023

  18. [25]

    E. J. Meier, F. A. An, and B. Gadway, Observation of the topological soliton state in the Su-Schrieffer-Heeger model, Nat. Comm.7, 13986 (2016)

    2016

  19. [26]

    Ozawa and H

    T. Ozawa and H. M. Price, Topological quantum matter in synthetic dimensions, Nat. Rev. Phys.1, 349– (2019)

    2019

  20. [27]

    Mancini, G

    M. Mancini, G. Pagano, G. Cappellini, L. Livi, M. Rider, J. Catani, C. Sias, P. Zoller, M. Inguscio, M. Dalmonte, and L. Fallani, Observation of chiral edge states with neutral fermions in synthetic Hall ribbons, Science349, 1510 (2015)

    2015

  21. [28]

    D. Xie, W. Gou, T. Xiao, B. Gadway, and B. Yan, Topo- logical characterizations of an extended Su-Schrieffer- Heeger model, npj Quantum Inf.5, 55 (2019)

    2019

  22. [29]

    J. Deng, H. Dong, C. Zhang, Y. Wu, J. Yuan, X. Zhu, F. Jin, H. Li, Z. Wang, H. Cai, C. Song, H. Wang, J. Q. You, and D.-W. Wang, Observing the quantum topology of light, Science378, 966 (2022)

    2022

  23. [30]

    B. K. Stuhl, H.-I. Lu, L. M. Aycock, D. Genkina, and I. B. Spielman, Visualizing edge states with an atomic Bose gas in the quantum Hall regime, Science349, 1514 (2015)

    2015

  24. [31]

    D. A. Abanin, W. De Roeck, and F. m. c. Huveneers, Exponentially Slow Heating in Periodically Driven Many- Body Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 256803 (2015)

    2015

  25. [32]

    Cardano, A

    F. Cardano, A. D’Errico, A. Dauphin, M. Maffei, B. Pic- cirillo, C. de Lisio, G. De Filippis, V. Cataudella, E. San- tamato, L. Marrucci, M. Lewenstein, and P. Massignan, Detection of Zak phases and topological invariants in a chiral quantum walk of twisted photons, Nat. Comm....

    2017

  26. [33]

    Bilitewski and N

    T. Bilitewski and N. R. Cooper, Population dynamics in a Floquet realization of the Harper-Hofstadter Hamilto- nian, Phys. Rev. A91, 063611 (2015)

    2015

  27. [34]

    T. Mori, T. Kuwahara, and K. Saito, Rigorous Bound on Energy Absorption and Generic Relaxation in Periodi- cally Driven Quantum Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 120401 (2016)

    2016

  28. [35]

    Lazarides, A

    A. Lazarides, A. Das, and R. Moessner, Equilibrium states of generic quantum systems subject to periodic driving, Phys. Rev. B90, 012110 (2014)

    2014

  29. [36]

    Murakami, M

    Y. Murakami, M. Sch¨ uler, R. Arita, and P. Werner, Suppression of heating by multicolor driving protocols in Floquet-engineered strongly correlated systems, Phys. Rev. B108, 035151 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    D’Alessio and M

    L. D’Alessio and M. Rigol, Long-time Behavior of Iso- lated Periodically Driven Interacting Lattice Systems, Phys. Rev. X4, 041048 (2014)

    2014

  31. [39]

    Mumford, Many topological regions on the Bloch sphere of the spin-1/2 double-kicked top, Phys

    J. Mumford, Many topological regions on the Bloch sphere of the spin-1/2 double-kicked top, Phys. Rev. A 107, 053316 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Dobrzyniecki and M

    J. Dobrzyniecki and M. Tomza, Quantum simulation of the central spin model with a Rydberg atom and polar molecules in optical tweezers, Phys. Rev. A108, 052618 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Ashida, T

    Y. Ashida, T. Shi, R. Schmidt, H. R. Sadeghpour, J. I. Cirac, and E. Demler, Quantum Rydberg Central Spin Model, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 183001 (2019)

    2019

  34. [42]

    Childress, M

    L. Childress, M. V. G. Dutt, J. M. Taylor, A. S. Zi- brov, F. Jelezko, J. Wrachtrup, P. R. Hemmer, and M. D. Lukin, Coherent Dynamics of Coupled Electron and Nu- clear Spin Qubits in Diamond, Science314, 281 (2006)

    2006

  35. [43]

    E. M. Kessler, S. Yelin, M. D. Lukin, J. I. Cirac, and G. Giedke, Optical Superradiance from Nuclear Spin En- vironment of Single-Photon Emitters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 143601 (2010)

    2010

  36. [44]

    A. V. Khaetskii, D. Loss, and L. Glazman, Electron Spin Decoherence in Quantum Dots due to Interaction with Nuclei, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 186802 (2002)

    2002

  37. [45]

    Khaetskii, D

    A. Khaetskii, D. Loss, and L. Glazman, Electron spin evolution induced by interaction with nuclei in a quan- tum dot, Phys. Rev. B67, 195329 (2003)

    2003

  38. [46]

    Exact dynamics in the inhomogeneous central-spin model, author = Bortz, Michael and Stolze, Joachim, Phys. Rev. B76, 014304 (2007)

    2007

  39. [47]

    Bortz, S

    M. Bortz, S. Eggert, C. Schneider, R. St¨ ubner, and J. Stolze, Dynamics and decoherence in the central spin model using exact methods, Phys. Rev. B82, 161308 (2010)

    2010

  40. [48]

    J. H. Shirley, Solution of the Schr¨ odinger Equation with a Hamiltonian Periodic in Time, Phys. Rev.138, B979 (1965)

    1965

  41. [49]

    Sambe, Steady States and Quasienergies of a Quantum-Mechanical System in an Oscillating Field, Phys

    H. Sambe, Steady States and Quasienergies of a Quantum-Mechanical System in an Oscillating Field, Phys. Rev. A7, 2203 (1973)

    1973

  42. [50]

    Grifoni and P

    M. Grifoni and P. H¨ anggi, Driven quantum tunneling, Physics Reports304, 229 (1998)

    1998

  43. [51]

    J. K. Asb´ oth, Symmetries, topological phases, and bound states in the one-dimensional quantum walk, Phys. Rev. B86, 195414 (2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    J. K. Asb´ oth and O. Hideaki, Bulk-boundary correspon- dence for chiral symmetric quantum walks, Phys. Rev. B 88, 121406(R) (2013)

    2013

  45. [53]

    M. R. Zirnbauer, Riemannian symmetric superspaces and their origin in random-matrix theory, J. Math. Phys.37, 4986 (1996)

    1996

  46. [54]

    Altland and M

    A. Altland and M. R. Zirnbauer, Nonstandard symme- try classes in mesoscopic normal-superconducting hybrid structures, Phys. Rev. B55, 1142 (1997)

    1997

  47. [55]

    Heinzner, A

    P. Heinzner, A. Huckleberry, and M. R. Zirnbauer, Sym- metry Classes of Disordered Fermions, Commun. Math. Phys.257, 725 (2005)

    2005

  48. [56]

    Song and E

    J. Song and E. Prodan, AIII and BDI topological systems 11 at strong disorder, Phys. Rev. B89, 224203 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    Mondragon-Shem, T

    I. Mondragon-Shem, T. L. Hughes, J. Song, and E. Pro- dan, Topological criticality in the chiral symmetric AIII class at strong disorder, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 046802 (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    L. M. Sieberer, T. Olsacher, A. Elben, M. Heyl, P. Hauke, F. Haake, and P. Zoller, Digital quantum simulation, Trotter errors, and quantum chaos of the kicked top, npj Quauntum Information5, 78 (2019)

    2019

  51. [59]

    A. Sen, D. Sen, and K. Sengupta, Analytic approaches to periodically driven closed quantum systems: meth- ods and applications, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.33, 443003 (2021)

    2021

  52. [60]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum Statistical Mechanics in a Closed System, Phys. Rev. A43, 2046 (1991)

    1991

  53. [61]

    Srednicki, Chaos and Quantum Thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and Quantum Thermalization, Phys. Rev. E50, 888 (1994)

    1994

  54. [62]

    Srednicki, Chaos and Quantum Thermalization, J

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and Quantum Thermalization, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.32, 1163 (1999)

    1999

  55. [63]

    This condition rigorously justifies the rotating-wave ap- proximation but when studying bound states away from the equatorial plane of the top’s Bloch sphere it may be sufficient to relax it to Ω≫∆, √2jχ

  56. [64]

    Gamel and D

    O. Gamel and D. F. V. James, Time-averaged quantum dynamics and the validity of the effective Hamiltonian model, Phys. Rev. A82, 052106 (2010)

    2010

Pith tools

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