Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 63 references

Wigner negativity and stellar rank for SU(1,1) states

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read On hyperbolic SU(1,1) phase space, coherent states always have strictly positive Wigner functions, so any Wigner negativity is an unambiguous signature of quantum behavior.

desk verdict Genuine extension of the SU(1,1) phase-space toolkit with a valid central positivity theorem, but one asserted identity and a metadata oddity need fixing before I'd trust the published version. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.22810 v3 pith:AN5KS2LD submitted 2026-07-24 quant-ph math-phmath.MP

A. B. Klimov , A. Muñoz , G. Leuchs , J.-P. Gazeau , L. L. Sanchez-Soto This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phmath-phmath.MP
keywords SU(11)symmetryWignerfunctionpositivityquasiprobabilitydistributionscoherentstatesstellarrankHusimiQzeroshyperbolicphasespacemultipolehierarchy
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 constructs a full family of s-ordered quasiprobability distributions for SU(1,1) systems, defined on the upper sheet of the two-sheeted hyperboloid and its stereographic image, the Poincaré disk. Its central claim is that the Wigner function of every Perelomov SU(1,1) coherent state is strictly positive, in sharp contrast to the SU(2) case. If this holds, every state with a nonnegative P representation — a classical state relative to the coherent-state convex hull — also has nonnegative Wigner function, making Wigner negativity an unambiguous, sufficient witness of nonclassicality. The paper also shows that zeros of the Husimi Q function imply Wigner negativity, while the converse fails, and introduces a multipole hierarchy as a complementary quantumness probe. A sympathetic reader would care because SU(1,1) symmetry governs squeezed light, two-photon physics, and nonlinear interferometry, where this result gives negativity a clear operational meaning.

What carries the argument

The central object is the SU(1,1)-invariant smoothing operator Φ_k(L^2), acting on the Laplace–Beltrami operator of the hyperboloid and generating the whole covariant s-ordered family. The argument rests on an infinite-product representation of its spectral function, Φ_k^t(λ)=∏_{n=0}^∞[b_nk/(b_nk+q)]^t with q=λ²+1/4 and b_nk=(n+c)(n+c+1), c=2k−1. Each factor is the Laplace transform of a Gamma density; convolution of these densities yields a nonnegative, normalized measure, and the operator limit becomes a positive superposition of hyperbolic heat semigroups. Because the heat kernel is strictly positive, the kernel g_t is positive for all t>0, which carries the entire positivity claim for co

What would settle it

Compute the spectral function Φ_k(λ) directly from its closed form, Eq. (32), for k=1, 3/2, 2 and a range of λ, and compare pointwise with the infinite product in Eq. (69); any discrepancy breaks the Laplace-transform proof. Alternatively, numerically integrate the kernel g_t(cosh ξ) in Eq. (30) and search for a negative value at some t>0 and ξ, which would directly refute the central positivity claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors prove that, on the two-sheeted hyperboloid, the covariant Wigner function is strictly positive for all Perelomov SU(1,1) coherent states and therefore for every P-positive convex mixture of them. The mechanism is structural: the smoothing kernel that connects s-ordered quasiprobabilities is positive, which they establish by representing the spectral function of the smoothing operator as a Laplace transform of a nonnegative convolution density and then as a superposition of hyperbolic heat-semigroup kernels, each of which strictly improves positivity. Consequently, negative Wigner volume in an SU(1,1) system is a sufficient and unambiguous signature of genuine quantum behavior, of

Load-bearing premise

The appendix assumes, without derivation, that the spectral function of the smoothing operator can be written as the infinite product in Eq. (69); if that identity fails or needs modification for some Bargmann index k, the strict positivity of coherent-state Wigner functions does not follow as stated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any SU(1,1) state admitting a P representation with nonnegative P has a nonnegative Wigner function; observed negativity rules out such a classical decomposition.
  • The negativity volume defined in the paper provides a quantitative, symmetry-adapted measure of quantumness that is zero exactly on the classical set.
  • Zeros of the Husimi Q function are a sufficient witness of Wigner negativity, but absence of zeros does not imply classicality: lowering-operator eigenstates have zero-free Q yet Wigner-negative distributions.
  • The multipole bound q_ϱ(k,λ) ≤ q_CS(k,λ) is a necessary condition for classicality, so violating it certifies quantumness through covariant tensor-operator coefficients.
  • The full s-ordered quasiprobability toolkit applies directly to SU(1,1) interferometry and squeezed-state physics, where states that look nonclassical under Heisenberg-Weyl criteria can be classical relative to the SU(1,1) symmetry.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because strict positivity holds across the entire covariant family with s<1, it is plausible that Wigner-negative SU(1,1) states form a convex resource and that negativity volume is monotone under symmetry-adapted operations; this resource-theoretic consequence is left implicit in the paper.
  • The heat-kernel representation suggests a numerical route to evaluate g_t by sampling the positive convolution measure, allowing direct benchmarking of the positivity theorem for small Bargmann indices without relying on the infinite-product identity.
  • If the heat-semigroup argument generalizes to other noncompact symmetric spaces, similar classicality witnesses could emerge for metaplectic or conformal phase spaces; that is an extrapolation beyond the paper's claims.
  • The paper's distinction between classicality relative to SU(1,1) versus Heisenberg-Weyl criteria could be tested experimentally by preparing Perelomov coherent states in a parametric amplifier and verifying positive Wigner reconstructions, while their two-mode realizations appear squeezed.
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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a covariant family of s-ordered quasiprobability distributions for SU(1,1) systems, defined on the upper hyperboloid and the Poincaré disk. Its central claim is that the Wigner function (and every s<1 quasidistribution) is strictly positive for all Perelomov coherent states, so that any Wigner negativity is a sufficient witness of nonclassicality relative to P-positive states. The authors also analyze Q-function zeros (stellar rank) for basis, cat, and Barut-Girardello states, and introduce an SU(1,1) multipole hierarchy with a multipole-area classicality criterion. The proof of the main positivity theorem is delegated to an appendix using an infinite-product representation of the spectral function, Laplace transforms, complete monotonicity, and heat-kernel positivity.

Significance. If the main theorem holds, it provides a symmetry-adapted and operationally meaningful nonclassicality witness for SU(1,1) systems, which is particularly relevant for two-photon physics and nonlinear interferometry. The contrast with SU(2) — where spin coherent states can have negative Wigner functions — is conceptually important and, as far as I can tell, correct. The paper also gives explicit formulas for several families of states and a multipole expansion that may be useful for resource quantification. The appendix contains a substantial and mostly sound mathematical proof; the main missing piece is a derivation of the load-bearing infinite-product identity, which is asserted without proof.

major comments (1)
  1. [Appendix, Eq. (69)] The positivity proof of the kernel g_t hinges on the representation Φ_k^t(λ) = ∏_{n=0}^∞ [b_nk/(b_nk+q)]^t with b_nk=(n+c)(n+c+1), q=λ^2+1/4, c=2k-1. This identity is stated as "can be represented" with no derivation or citation. It is the only step in the appendix that is not justified. I have independently verified it via the gamma product formula Γ(z)Γ(z̄)=∏[(n+c)(n+c+1)]/[(n+z)(n+z̄)] with z=c+1/2+iλ, so the result is correct; nevertheless, a reader cannot verify the central lemma without supplying this argument. Please add a short derivation (or a precise reference) and state the conditions on k and t exactly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 2 / Appendix] The abstract and Sec. 4 say "all Perelomov SU(1,1) coherent states", but the proof in Appendix A assumes c=2k-1>0, i.e., k>1/2. The case k=1/2 is called limiting but is not treated. Eq. (32) formally gives Φ_k=0 at k=1/2 while Eq. (27) gives a nonzero expression. Please state explicitly whether the theorem covers k>1/2 only, and spell out the limiting sense for k=1/2 if it is to be included.
  2. [Sec. 5, Eq. (43)] The normalization of the Barut-Girardello Q-function appears to be missing a factor 1/Γ(2k): from the overlap calculation one obtains Q_{k,z}(ζ)=N_{k,z}^2/Γ(2k) (1-|ζ|²)^{2k} exp[2 Re(z*ζ)], unless the constant N_{k,z} is redefined. Please check and fix.
  3. [Sec. 6] There are two typos: "sufficient witnes" should be "sufficient witness" in the paragraph after Eq. (65), and "It follows frrm (65)" should be "It follows from (65)" before Eq. (68).
  4. [Sec. 5, Eq. (45)] The asymptotic expansion for ζ_k(L²) is used to argue that the Barut-Girardello state has a Wigner function with negative regions. This is a heuristic argument; since the existence of a zero-free Q-function with negative W is an important counterexample, please either give a more rigorous justification or cite a source where the negativity is proven for finite k and z.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the positivity theorem is proven from a spectral-product identity, not assumed in the inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained rather than circular. The Wigner-positivity claim for coherent states reduces to Appendix A, where the kernel g_t(cosh ξ) is shown positive from the spectral symbol Φ_k(λ). The only asserted ingredient is Eq. (69), the infinite-product representation of Φ_k^t; this is an unproved but independently checkable Gamma-function identity, not a restatement of the desired positivity. The smoothing operator Φ_k(L2) and the Q = Φ_k P relation are imported from Ref. [58] (same research group) and the tensor basis from Ref. [60], but those are prior framework results; the target claim—strict positivity of the coherent-state Wigner function—is not assumed there and is proven in the appendix from the spectral symbol. No parameters are fitted, no 'prediction' is a renamed input, and no uniqueness theorem is invoked to force the conclusion. The statement that P-positive states have nonnegative W (Eq. 39) follows linearly from the proven coherent-state positivity. The only flagged soft spot is that Eq. (69) is asserted without derivation; this is an exposition/completeness concern, not circularity, and it verifies via the Gamma product formula.

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

No free parameters are fitted to data; k is a group-representation label, while ζ and s are state/ordering labels. The proof relies on one unproved product identity plus standard harmonic analysis and positivity of hyperbolic heat kernels. No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SU(1,1) positive discrete series irreps labeled by Bargmann index k (k=1/2 treated as limiting) are the relevant Hilbert-space setting.
    Sec. 2; the entire formalism is restricted to these irreps; other series may behave differently.
  • domain assumption The smoothing operator Φ_k(L2) with spectral symbol Eq. (32) from Ref [58] correctly implements all Stratonovich-Weyl conditions and the Q-P relation Eq. (26).
    Sec. 4, Eqs. (26)-(29); imported from same-group prior work; the central proof depends on it.
  • standard math Mehler-Fock harmonic analysis on H2+ with Plancherel measure λ tanh(πλ) is valid for square-integrable functions.
    Sec. 3, Eqs. (18)-(23); standard mathematical background.
  • standard math The Laplace-Beltrami heat kernel h_u(ζ,ζ') is strictly positive on H2+ for u>0 and improves positivity.
    Appendix, Eqs. (78)-(80); standard parabolic PDE result on hyperbolic space.
  • ad hoc to paper The spectral symbol admits the infinite-product representation Φ_k^t(λ)=∏_{n=0}∞(b_nk/(b_nk+q))^t with b_nk=(n+2k−1)(n+2k).
    Appendix, Eq. (69); asserted without proof, load-bearing for kernel positivity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Wigner negativity and stellar rank for SU(1,1) states." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AN5KS2LD

@misc{pith2026260722810,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Wigner negativity and stellar rank for SU(1,1) states},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AN5KS2LD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.22810}
}
abstract

Quasiprobability distributions for systems endowed with SU(1,1) dynamical symmetry have received surprisingly little attention, despite the central role of this symmetry in two-photon physics, squeezed states, and nonlinear interferometry. Here, we fill this gap by constructing a full covariant family of $s$-ordered quasiprobability distributions defined on the two-sheeted hyperboloid, or equivalently, on the Poincar\'e unit disk via stereographic projection. A key result is that the Wigner function is strictly positive for all Perelomov SU(1,1) coherent states, in sharp contrast to the SU(2) case. This positivity endows Wigner negativity with an unambiguous operational meaning: any negative volume is a direct signature of genuinely quantum behavior. We further examine the stellar rank of SU(1,1) states, defined through the zeros of the Husimi $Q$-function, and show how it compares with Wigner negativity as a geometry-adapted witness of nonclassicality in this setting. We further introduce a hierarchy of generalized multipoles through a harmonic expansion of the density operator on the hyperboloid, providing a complementary framework for probing quantumness. This offers a comprehensive toolkit for characterizing and quantifying quantum resources in SU(1,1) systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.22810 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Density plots of the real part of the harmonic functions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Plots of the Wigner function on the unit disk for the states discussed in the text. Upper [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Multipole norm as a function of the order [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references

  1. [1]

    F. E. Schroek.Quantum Mechanics on Phase Space. Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1996

    1996

  2. [2]

    W. P. Schleich.Quantum Optics in Phase Space. Wiley-VCH, Berlin, 2001

    2001

  3. [3]

    C. K. Zachos, D. B. Fairlie, and T. L. Curtright, editors.Quantum Mechanics in Phase Space. World Scientific, Singapore, 2005

    2005

  4. [4]

    Weinbub and D

    J. Weinbub and D. K. Ferry.Recent advances in Wigner function approaches, Appl. Phys. Rev.5, 041104 (2018)

    2018

  5. [5]

    A. A. Kirillov.Lectures on the Orbit Method, volume 64 ofGraduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, 2004

    2004

  6. [6]

    Perelomov.Generalized Coherent States and their Applications

    A. Perelomov.Generalized Coherent States and their Applications. Springer, Berlin, 1986

    1986

  7. [7]

    Gazeau.Coherent States in Quantum Physics

    J.-P. Gazeau.Coherent States in Quantum Physics. Wiley, New York, 2009

    2009

  8. [8]

    Robert and M

    D. Robert and M. Combescure.Coherent States and Applications in Mathematical Physics. Springer, Cham, second edition, 2021

    2021

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    Streltsov, G

    A. Streltsov, G. Adesso, and M. B. Plenio.Quantum coherence as a resource, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 041003 (2017)

    2017

  2. [10]

    Chitambar and G

    E. Chitambar and G. Gour.Quantum resource theories, Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 025001 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    V. V. Dodonov.‘Nonclassical’ states in quantum optics: a ‘squeezed’ review of the first 75 years, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt.4, R1 (2002)

    2002

  4. [12]

    Mandel.Sub-Poissonian photon statistics in resonance fluorescence, Opt

    L. Mandel.Sub-Poissonian photon statistics in resonance fluorescence, Opt. Lett.4, 205–207 (1979)

    1979

  5. [13]

    R. J. Glauber.Coherent and incoherent states of the radiation field, Phys. Rev.131, 2766–2788 (1963)

    1963

  6. [14]

    E. C. G. Sudarshan.Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams, Phys. Rev. Lett.10, 277–279 (1963). Accepted in Quantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0.15

    1963

  7. [15]

    U. M. Titulaer and R. J. Glauber.Correlation functions for coherent fields, Phys. Rev. 140, B676–B682 (1965)

    1965

  8. [16]

    K. C. Tan, S.Choi, and H. Jeong.Negativity of quasiprobability distributions as a measure of nonclassicality, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 110404 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    Chabaud, D

    U. Chabaud, D. Markham, and F. Grosshans.Stellar representation of non-Gaussian quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 063605 (2020)

    2020

  10. [18]

    Husimi.Some formal properties of the density matrix, Proc

    K. Husimi.Some formal properties of the density matrix, Proc. Phys. Math. Soc. Jpn. 22264–314 (1940)

    1940

  11. [19]

    Majorana.Atomi orientati in campo magnetico variabile, Nuovo Cimento9, 43–50 (1932)

    E. Majorana.Atomi orientati in campo magnetico variabile, Nuovo Cimento9, 43–50 (1932)

    1932

  12. [20]

    Kenfack and K

    A. Kenfack and K. Życzkowski.Negativity of the Wigner function as an indicator of non-classicality, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt.6, 396–404 ( 2004)

    2004

  13. [21]

    R. L. Hudson.When is the Wigner quasi-probability density non-negative?, Rep. Math. Phys.6, 249–252 (1974)

    1974

  14. [22]

    Yoshikawa, K

    J. Yoshikawa, K. Makino, S. Kurata, P.van Loock, and A.Furusawa.Creation, storage, and on-demand release of optical quantum states with a negative Wigner function, Phys. Rev. X3, 041028 (2013)

    2013

  15. [23]

    Flühmann, T

    C. Flühmann, T. L. Nguyen, M. Marinelli, V. Negnevitsky, K. Mehta, and J. P. Home. Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator, Nature566, 513–517 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Y. Lu, I. Strandberg, F. Quijandría, G. Johansson, S. Gasparinetti, and P. Delsing. Propagating Wigner-negative states generated from the steady-state emission of a su- perconducting qubit, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 253602 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    R. L. Stratonovich.On distributions in representation space, JETP31, 1012–1020 (1956)

    1956

  18. [26]

    F. A. Berezin.General concept of quantization, Commun. Math. Phys.40, 153–174 (1975)

    1975

  19. [27]

    J. C. Varilly and J. M. Gracia-Bondía.The Moyal representation for spin, Ann. Phys. 190, 107–148 (1989)

    1989

  20. [28]

    A. B. Klimov, J. L. Romero, and H. de Guise.Generalized su(2) covariant Wigner functions and some of their applications, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.50, 323001 (2017)

    2017

  21. [29]

    Davis, M

    J. Davis, M. Kumari, R. B. Mann, and S. Ghose.Wigner negativity in spin-Jsystems, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033134 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Mukunda.Wigner distribution for angle coordinates in quantum mechanics, Am

    N. Mukunda.Wigner distribution for angle coordinates in quantum mechanics, Am. J. Phys.47, 182–187 (1979)

    1979

  23. [31]

    J. F. Plebański, M. Prazanowski, J. Tosiek, and F. K. Turrubiates.Remarks on de- formation quantization on the cylinder, Acta Phys. Pol. B31, 561–587 (2000)

    2000

  24. [32]

    Rigas, L

    I. Rigas, L. L. Sánchez-Soto, A. B. Klimov, J. Řeháček, and Z. Hradil.Orbital angular momentum in phase space, Ann. Phys.326, 426–439 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    H. A. Kastrup.Wigner functions for the pair angle and orbital angular momentum, Phys. Rev. A94, 062113 (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    Fabre, A

    N. Fabre, A. B. Klimov, R. Murenzi, J.-P. Gazeau, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto.Majorana stellar representation of twisted photons, Phys. Rev. Res.5, L032006 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Wodkiewicz and J

    K. Wodkiewicz and J. H. Eberly.Coherent states, squeezed fluctuations, and the SU(2) and SU(1,1) groups in quantum-optics applications, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B2, 458–466 (1985)

    1985

  28. [36]

    C. C. Gerry.Dynamics of SU(1,1) coherent states, Phys. Rev. A31, 2721–2723 (1985)

    1985

  29. [37]

    C. C. Gerry.Correlated two-mode SU(1, 1) coherent states: nonclassical properties, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B8, 685–690 (1991). Accepted in Quantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0.16

    1991

  30. [38]

    C. C. Gerry and R. Grobe.Two-mode intelligent SU(1,1) states, Phys. Rev. A51, 4123–4131 (1995)

    1995

  31. [39]

    J. P. Gazeau and M. A. del Olmo.SU(1,1)-displaced coherent states, photon counting, and squeezing, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B40, 1083–1091 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    M. A. del Olmo and J. P. Gazeau.Covariant integral quantization of the unit disk, J. Math. Phys.61, 022101 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    J. Jing, C. Liu, Z. Zhou, Z. Y. Ou, and W. Zhang.Realization of a nonlinear inter- ferometer with parametric amplifiers, Appl. Phys. Lett.99, 011110 (2011)

    2011

  34. [42]

    Hudelist, J

    F. Hudelist, J. Kong, C. Liu, J. Jing, Z. Y. Ou, and W. Zhang.Quantum metrology with parametric amplifier-based photon correlation interferometers, Nat. Commun.5, 3049 (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    Yurke, S

    B. Yurke, S. L. McCall, and J. R. Klauder.SU(2) and SU(1,1) interferometers, Phys. Rev. A33, 4033–4054 (1986)

    1986

  36. [44]

    M. V. Chekhova and Z. Y. Ou.Nonlinear interferometers in quantum opticsAdv. Opt. Photon.8, 104–155 (2016)

    2016

  37. [45]

    Orłowski and K

    A. Orłowski and K. Wódkiewicz.On the SU(1, 1) phase-space description of reduced and squeezed quantum fluctuations, J. Mod. Opt.37, 295–301 (1990)

    1990

  38. [46]

    M. A. Alonso, G. S. Pogosyan, and K. B. Wolf.Wigner functions for curved spaces. I. On hyperboloids, J. Math. Phys.43, 5857–5871 (2002)

    2002

  39. [47]

    P.delaHoz, A.B.Klimov, G.Björk, Y.H.Kim, C.Müller, Ch.Marquardt, G.Leuchs, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto.Multipolar hierarchy of efficient quantum polarization mea- sures, Phys. Rev. A88, 063803 (2013)

    2013

  40. [48]

    A. Z. Goldberg, A. B. Klimov, H. de Guise, G. Leuchs, G. S. Agarwal, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto.From polarization multipoles to higher-order coherences, Opt. Lett.47, 477–480 (2022)

    2022

  41. [49]

    A. Z. Goldberg, A. B. Klimov, M. Grassl, G. Leuchs, and L. L. Sánchez-Soto.Extremal quantum statesAVS Quantum Sci.2, 044701 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    A. Z. Goldberg, A. B. Klimov, G. Leuchs, and L. L. Sanchez-Soto.Covariant operator bases for continuous variables, Quantum8, 1363 (2024)

    2024

  43. [51]

    Bargmann

    V. Bargmann. .Irreducible unitary representations of the Lorentz group, Ann. Math. 48, 568–640 (1947)

    1947

  44. [52]

    Hasebe.Sp(4;R) squeezing for Bloch four-hyperboloid via the non-compact Hopf map, J

    K. Hasebe.Sp(4;R) squeezing for Bloch four-hyperboloid via the non-compact Hopf map, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.63, 055303 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    A. M. Perelomov.Coherent states for arbitrary Lie groups, Commun.Math. Phys.26, 222–236 (1972)

    1972

  46. [54]

    Brif and A

    C. Brif and A. Mann.Nonclassical interferometry with intelligent light, Phys. Rev. A 54, 4505–4518 (1996)

    1996

  47. [55]

    N. Ja. Vilenkin and A. U. Klimyk.Reperesentation of Lie Groups and Special Func- tions, volume 1. Springer, Berlin, 1991

    1991

  48. [56]

    Ueber eine mit den kugel-und Cylinderfunctionen verwandte Function und ihre Anwendung in der Theorie der Electricitätsvertheilung,Math

    F.G Mehler. Ueber eine mit den kugel-und Cylinderfunctionen verwandte Function und ihre Anwendung in der Theorie der Electricitätsvertheilung,Math. Ann.18, 161–194 (1881)

  49. [57]

    V. A. Fock. On the representation of an arbitrary function by an integral involving Legendre functions with complex index,Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR,39, 253–256 (1943)

    1943

  50. [58]

    A. B. Klimov, U. Seyfarth, H. de Guise, and L. L Sánchez-Soto.SU(1, 1) covariant s-parametrized maps, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.54, 065301 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    coherent

    A. O. Barut and L. Girardello.New “coherent” states associated with non-compact groups, Comm. Math. Phys.21,41–55 (1971). Accepted in Quantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0.17

    1971

  52. [60]

    Baltazar, I

    M. Baltazar, I. F. Valtierra, and A. B. Klimov.Quantum systems in the hyperbolic phase-space: Explicit maps, differential form of the star product and their applications, Ann. Phys.482, 170208 (2025)

    2025

  53. [61]

    Bluhm, V

    R. Bluhm, V. A. Kostelecký, and B. Tudose.Elliptical squeezed states and Rydberg wave packets, Phys. Rev. A52,2234–2244 (1995)

    1995

  54. [62]

    DLMF.NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions

  55. [63]

    D. V. Widder.The Laplace Transform. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1941. Accepted in Quantum 2017-05-09, click title to verify. Published under CC-BY 4.0.18

    1941

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.