Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 45 references

Evidence for Exceptional Points as Topological Defects

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A loop around an exceptional point turns a quantum state by a quarter-turn.

desk verdict A concrete new holonomy computation around an exceptional point, but the topological conclusion is invalid — the monodromy can live on a trivial bundle. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06548 v2 pith:EKVMYBJP submitted 2024-12-09 quant-ph

Chia-Yi Ju , Szu-Ming Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81Q1281Q7053C29 PACS 03.65.Vz03.65.-w
keywords exceptionalpointsholonomyHilbertspacebundlenon-Hermitianquantummechanicsparalleltransporttopologicaldefectsflatconnectiongates
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 argues that the full Hilbert space of a non-Hermitian quantum system, viewed as a vector bundle over time and parameter space, is locally flat yet globally nontrivial. The nontriviality shows up as holonomy: a generic quantum state transported around a closed loop that encircles an exceptional point does not return to itself. For their explicit two-level model, one circuit implements the linear map $I$ of order four, so four circuits are needed to restore the original state. Because the local curvature vanishes everywhere, the paper concludes that a nontrivial holonomy can only come from nontrivial topology, making exceptional points topological defects in the base space. It then suggests that winding around such defects could be used to implement quantum gates.

What carries the argument

The central object is the parallel-transport connection $\nabla_\mu=\partial_\mu+iK_\mu$ on the full Hilbert space bundle, where $K_0=H$ is the Hamiltonian and $K_i$ are the parameter-evolution generators. The generators are fixed, up to gauge, by the flatness condition $\partial_\mu K_\nu-\partial_\nu K_\mu+i[K_\mu,K_\nu]=0$. The argument's load-bearing computation is the path-ordered evolution operator $U[\gamma]=P\exp(-i\oint K_\mu\,dq^\mu)$: for a loop that avoids the exceptional points it returns $U=1$, while for a loop encircling one exceptional point it returns the order-four matrix $I$. The singularities of $K_x$ and $K_y$ at the exceptional points are what make the holonomy nontrivial.

What would settle it

Substitute the displayed $K_x$ and $K_y$ back into the flatness condition and compute the holonomy for several loop radii and gauge choices; if the result differs from $I$ or the order-four transformation disappears under a legitimate gauge transformation, the paper's central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the full Hilbert space bundle of a non-Hermitian system is topologically nontrivial even though it is locally flat, with each exceptional point acting as a topological defect. The demonstration uses the two-level Hamiltonian $H(x,y)=\begin{smallmatrix}-ix & 1+iy\\1+iy & ix\end{smallmatrix}$, whose two exceptional points at $\vec{r}_\pm=\pm\hat{e}_x$ sweep out two lines in the three-dimensional base space. Transporting an arbitrary state along a loop that encloses no exceptional point gives the identity holonomy, while a loop that winds once around one exceptional point gives $U[\gamma_-](2\pi;0)=\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\-1&0\end{smallmatrix}=I$, a matrix of order four. Since the connection is flat everywhere except at the exceptional-point lines, the nontrivial holonomy is attributed to the topology of the punctured base space $\mathbb{R}^3\setminus(\ell_+\cup\ell_-)$, whose homology the paper identifies as $\mathbb{Z}_4$. The paper concludes that exceptional points are topological defects and proposes winding around them as a mechanism for quantum gates.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on taking the displayed operators $K_x$ and $K_y$ as the true parallel-transport generators, and on assuming that the monodromy of a flat connection around a loop in a multiply connected base space reveals the topology of the bundle itself.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any state, not just an eigenstate, transported once around an exceptional point changes by the same matrix $I$; four windings are required to recover the original state.
  • The full Hilbert space bundle is locally flat but globally nontrivial, so the topology of the entire state space, not only of eigenstate subbundles, encodes information about non-Hermitian degeneracies.
  • Encircling the two exceptional points in the same orientation gives $I$ and $I^{-1}$, so the two defects carry opposite orientations.
  • The result turns exceptional-point encircling into a resource for holonomic quantum gates: choosing $|1\rangle=I|0\rangle$, each loop toggles between $|0\rangle$ and $|1\rangle$.
  • The punctured base space $\mathbb{R}^3\setminus(\ell_+\cup\ell_-)$ is claimed to have homology $\mathbb{Z}_4$, which is how the paper reconciles local flatness with nontrivial monodromy.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct next test is whether the order-four monodromy is a bundle invariant or a property of the chosen flat connection; a second flat connection on the same bundle with trivial holonomy would undercut the topological-defect reading.
  • The construction suggests a natural generalization to higher-order exceptional points, where the holonomy might have order three or six, which would extend the proposed quantum-gate mechanism.
  • In a photonic or mechanical two-mode system with tunable gain and loss, one could prepare a generic state, encircle an exceptional point, and tomographically verify whether the final state matches the predicted $I$ transformation.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper revisits the Hilbert-space-bundle description of non-Hermitian quantum systems. It reviews a framework in which the metric and the state are parallel transported in a combined time-parameter base space using evolution generators K_mu determined by flatness conditions. For the two-level non-Hermitian Hamiltonian H(x,y) of Eq. (32), the authors assert explicit evolution generators Kx and Ky (Eqs. (35)-(36)), solve the transport equation along circular parameter loops, and obtain trivial holonomy for loops enclosing no exceptional point and holonomy I = [[0,1],[-1,0]] for a loop enclosing one exceptional point (Eq. (57)). Since I^4 = 1, they conclude that the full Hilbert space bundle is topologically nontrivial and that exceptional points act as topological defects, citing a claimed Z4 homology of the base space.

Significance. The explicit holonomy computation, if correct, is a concrete example of a locally flat connection with nontrivial monodromy around a removed line in parameter space, and the order-four monodromy is a clean mathematical fact. The paper contains no free parameters fitted to data, and the holonomy is computed rather than assumed. However, the advertised conclusion that the Hilbert space bundle is topologically nontrivial does not follow from the computation: a flat connection with nontrivial monodromy can live on a completely trivial vector bundle whenever the base space is not simply connected. Because the central topological interpretation is unsupported, the manuscript in its current form cannot be recommended.

major comments (4)
  1. [Secs. 4.2 and 5] The inference from Eq. (57) to a topologically nontrivial Hilbert space bundle is invalid. The base space R^3 \ (ell_+ union ell_-) deformation-retracts to S^1 wedge S^1, which is not simply connected, so flatness of a connection does not force trivial holonomy in that case. Moreover every rank-2 complex vector bundle over S^1 wedge S^1 is trivial, since pi_1(BU(2)) = pi_0(GL(2,C)) = 0. A minimal counterexample is the trivial bundle S^1 x C^2 with the constant connection A = -(sigma_y/4)dtheta, whose curvature vanishes and whose holonomy is exactly I. Therefore Eq. (57) records the monodromy of a flat connection, not a topological obstruction, and the statement 'since the bundle is locally flat, the presence of nontrivial holonomies implies that it is topologically nontrivial' does not follow.
  2. [Sec. 4.2, final paragraph] The claim that the parameter space M2 = R^2 \ {r_+, r_-} implies that the base space R^3 \ (ell_+ union ell_-) has 'homology group Z4' is incorrect. The first homology of both spaces is Z^2: H_1(R^2 \ {r_+,r_-}) is isomorphic to Z^2, and H_1(R^3 \ (ell_+ union ell_-)) is isomorphic to Z^2 as well. The group {1, I, I^2, I^3} is the holonomy group of the flat connection, not the homology group of the base space.
  3. [Sec. 4, Eqs. (35)-(36)] The operators Kx and Ky are asserted without derivation or verification. The central holonomy result in Eq. (57) depends on these operators, so the authors should either derive them from the determining equations in Eq. (27) or verify by direct substitution. No such verification is shown in the manuscript, and the paper does not explain how Eqs. (35)-(36) are obtained.
  4. [Sec. 1 and Fig. 1] The introductory analogy with the Möbius strip is misleading in the context of the present claim. The Möbius strip is a nontrivial real line bundle, whereas the paper concerns a rank-2 complex vector bundle; complex vector bundles of any rank over S^1 are trivial. The analogy therefore gives intuitive support for a statement that is not true for the bundles considered here.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are several typographical and grammatical errors, including 'Neveretheless', 'Morover', and 'To summarized'; these should be corrected in any revision.
  2. [Eq. (57)] Using the symbol I for the holonomy matrix is confusing because I is also used for the identity matrix; a different symbol such as J or R would improve readability.
  3. [Sec. 4.2] The statement that the base space is 'seemingly simply connected' is inaccurate: R^3 minus two lines is not simply connected, and this is precisely why flat connections can have nontrivial holonomy there. The text should state this directly.
  4. [Sec. 4.2, Eq. (56)] The branch choice for the fourth root in lambda_-(theta) is not fully specified; the positivity of the real part of the radicand is noted, but the authors should state explicitly which branch is used and why it makes lambda_- single-valued along the loop.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the holonomy in Eq. (57) is computed from explicit transport equations rather than fitted or assumed; the paper's topological inference is mathematically fragile but that is a correctness issue, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central result, U[gamma-](2*pi;0)=I in Eq. (57), is obtained by solving the transport equation (31) with the stated evolution generators Kx and Ky in Eqs. (35)-(36). No free parameter is fitted to the loop result, and the nontrivial holonomy is not an input to the solution. The paper's framework of metric compatibility, emergent parameter dimensions, and local flatness is imported from the authors' earlier work [19,21]; that self-citation is load-bearing for the formalism, but those references derive the parallel-transport structure from general assumptions and do not assume the EP holonomy found here, so the target result is not defined into existence by construction. The main weakness is the inference in Sec. 5 that local flatness plus nontrivial holonomy implies a topologically nontrivial Hilbert-space bundle; a flat connection with monodromy can exist on a trivial bundle over a nonsimply-connected base, and the base R^3 minus two lines has H_1 = Z xor Z rather than the claimed Z_4. That is a mathematical correctness risk, not a circular step, because the conclusion is not equivalent to the premises by construction. Therefore no circular reduction is present, and the paper should not receive a high circularity score.

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

No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The main inputs borrowed from prior work are the metric-compatible connection and local-flatness result; the gauge choice is an additional assumption, and the topological interpretation is the fragile step.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A Hermitian positive-definite metric G(t,q) exists that is compatible with the covariant derivative, allowing a well-defined Hilbert space inner product for non-Hermitian H.
    Invoked throughout Sec. 2; this is the foundation from prior work [19,21], not proven in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper The evolution generators Ki are determined by the flatness conditions and the gauge condition [dt Ki, H] = 0, and the resulting Kx and Ky in Eqs. (35)-(36) are valid on R^2 minus the EPs.
    The gauge condition is a choice made to simplify Eq. (24), and the paper asserts the solution without showing the algebra.
  • domain assumption The full Hilbert space bundle is locally flat, with F = 0, so nontrivial holonomy of the connection indicates nontrivial topology of the bundle.
    Local flatness is carried over from [21], but the inference from holonomy to bundle topology is the paper's central argument and is questionable because the base space is punctured.
  • standard math A state transported along a closed path in the base space is described by the evolution operator U solving Eq. (31).
    This is the standard definition of parallel transport; no independent justification is needed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Evidence for Exceptional Points as Topological Defects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EKVMYBJP

@misc{pith2026241206548,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Evidence for Exceptional Points as Topological Defects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EKVMYBJP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06548}
}
read the original abstract

Studies have shown that quantum states reside in a Hilbert space bundle. When a quantum system depends on continuous external parameters, these parameters define additional dimensions in the base space of the bundle. While much of the existing literature focuses on eigenstate subbundles, where geometric properties like Berry curvature arise, this work considers the entire Hilbert space bundle. Although the Hilbert space bundle has been found to be locally flat, suggesting that the system's geometry may appear trivial, we revisit this assumption. Specifically, we examine how an arbitrary quantum state evolves when transported along closed parameter loops, a phenomenon characterized by holonomy. Our results demonstrate that nontrivial holonomy can emerge in the presence of exceptional points. Consequently, the topology of the full Hilbert space bundle is nontrivial, with exceptional points acting as topological defects.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06548 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Parallel transporting a vector around a closed path under different geometries (and topologies). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of the parameter space and base space of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Transport the state along the path γO. (a) State evolution in the parameter space along R⃗ O(θ) = r cos θ eˆx + r sin θ eˆy, which is the projection of γO onto the parameter space. No EPs are en￾circled by the closed path. (b) State evolution in the base space. The path does not enclose either of the lines swept out by the EPs. As a demonstration, we first discuss the case in which the state evolves around a region … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Transport the state along the path γ−. (a) State evolution in the parameter space along R⃗ −(θ) = (−1 + ρ cos θ) ˆex + ρ sin θ eˆy, which is the projection of γ− onto the parameter space. The EP at ⃗r− is enclosed by the loop. (b) State evolution in the base space. The…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Transport the state along the path γ+. (a) State evolution in the parameter space along R⃗ +(θ) = (1 − ρ cos θ) ˆex + ρ sin θ eˆy, i.e., a path encircles the EP at ⃗r+. (b) State evolution in the base space. The closed path γ+ encircles the line ℓ+ at t = 0. This path,…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    B. Peng, S. K. Ozdemir, W. Chen, F. Nori, and L. Yang, What is and what is not electromagnetically induced transparency in whispering-gallery microcavities, Nat. Commun. 5, 5082 (2014)

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Leykam, K

    D. Leykam, K. Y. Bliokh, C. Huang, Y. Chong, and F. Nori, Edge Modes, Degeneracies, and Topological Numbers in Non-Hermitian Systems , Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 040401 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Quijandr ´ ıa, U

    F. Quijandr ´ ıa, U. Naether, S. K.¨Ozdemir, F. Nori, and D. Zueco, PT -symmetric circuit QED , Phys. Rev. A 97, 053846 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Znojil, Composite Quantum Coriolis Forces, Mathematics 11, 1375 (2023)

    M. Znojil, Composite Quantum Coriolis Forces, Mathematics 11, 1375 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Znojil, Hybrid form of quantum theory with non-Hermitian Hamiltonians , Phys

    M. Znojil, Hybrid form of quantum theory with non-Hermitian Hamiltonians , Phys. Lett. A 457, 128556 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Znojil, Features, Paradoxes and Amendments of Perturbative Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics , Symmetry 16, 629 (2024)

    M. Znojil, Features, Paradoxes and Amendments of Perturbative Non-Hermitian Quantum Mechanics , Symmetry 16, 629 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Yang and Y.-C

    P.-Y. Yang and Y.-C. Tzeng, Entanglement Hamiltonian and effective temperature of non-Hermitian quantum spin ladders , SciPost Physics Core 7, 074 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    C. G. Feyisa, C.-Y. Liu, M. S. Hasan, J. S. You, H.-Y. Ku, and H. H. Jen, Robustness of tripartite entangled states in passive PT-symmetric qubits , (2024), arXiv:2411.17457

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    C. G. Feyisa, J. S. You, H.-Y. Ku, and H. H. Jen, Accelerating multipartite entanglement generation in non-Hermitian superconducting qubits, (2024), arXiv:2409.03414 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    C. M. Bender and S. Boettcher, Real Spectra in Non-Hermitian Hamiltonians Having PT Symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5243 (1998)

    1998

  3. [11]

    Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-Hermiticity and generalized PT - and CPT -symmetries, J

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-Hermiticity and generalized PT - and CPT -symmetries, J. Math. Phys. 44, 974 (2003)

    2003

  4. [12]

    C. M. Bender, J. Brod, A. Refig, and M. E. Reuter, The C operator in PT -symmetric quantum theories, J. Phys A: Math. Gen. 37, 10139 (2004)

    2004

  5. [13]

    C. M. Bender, Making sense of non-Hermitian Hamiltonians , Rep. Prog. Phys. 70, 947 (2007)

    2007

  6. [14]

    D. C. Brody, Biorthogonal quantum mechanics , J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47, 035305 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    Znojil, Theory of Response to Perturbations in Non-Hermitian Systems Using Five-Hilbert-Space Reformulation of Unitary Quantum Mechanics , Entropy-switz

    M. Znojil, Theory of Response to Perturbations in Non-Hermitian Systems Using Five-Hilbert-Space Reformulation of Unitary Quantum Mechanics , Entropy-switz. 22, 80 (2020). 11

    2020

  8. [16]

    Znojil, Quasi-Hermitian Formulation of Quantum Mechanics Using Two Conjugate Schr¨ odinger Equations, Axioms 12, 644 (2023)

    M. Znojil, Quasi-Hermitian Formulation of Quantum Mechanics Using Two Conjugate Schr¨ odinger Equations, Axioms 12, 644 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-Hermitian representation of quantum mechanics , Int

    A. Mostafazadeh, Pseudo-Hermitian representation of quantum mechanics , Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 7, 1191 (2010)

    2010

  10. [18]

    Mostafazadeh, Time dependent Hilbert spaces, geometric phases, and general covariance in quantum mechanics, Phys

    A. Mostafazadeh, Time dependent Hilbert spaces, geometric phases, and general covariance in quantum mechanics, Phys. Lett. A 320, 375 (2004)

    2004

  11. [19]

    C.-Y. Ju, A. Miranowicz, G.-Y. Chen, and F. Nori, Non-Hermitian Hamiltonians and no-go theorems in quantum information , Phys. Rev. A 100, 062118 (2019)

    2019

  12. [20]

    C.-Y. Ju, A. Miranowicz, F. Minganti, C.-T. Chan, G.-Y. Chen, and F. Nori, Einstein ’s Quantum Ele- vator: Hermitization of Non-Hermitian Hamiltonians via the Vielbein Formalism , Phys. Rev. Research 4, 023070 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    C.-Y. Ju, A. Miranowicz, Y.-N. Chen, G.-Y. Chen, and F. Nori, Emergent parallel transport and curva- ture in Hermitian and non-Hermitian quantum mechanics , Quantum 8, 1277 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    Kato, Perturbation theory for linear operators , 2nd ed., Grundlehren der mathematischen Wis- senschaften (Springer, Berlin, 1976)

    T. Kato, Perturbation theory for linear operators , 2nd ed., Grundlehren der mathematischen Wis- senschaften (Springer, Berlin, 1976)

    1976

  15. [23]

    W. D. Heiss, Exceptional points of non-Hermitian operators , J. Phys A: Math. Gen. 37, 2455 (2004)

    2004

  16. [24]

    Znojil, Passage through exceptional point: Case study , Proc

    M. Znojil, Passage through exceptional point: Case study , Proc. Royal Soc. A 476, 20190831 (2020)

    2020

  17. [25]

    Znojil, Paths of unitary access to exceptional points , J

    M. Znojil, Paths of unitary access to exceptional points , J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2038, 012026 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    Naikoo, R

    J. Naikoo, R. W. Chhajlany, and J. Ko lody´ nski, Multiparameter Estimation Perspective on Non- Hermitian Singularity-Enhanced Sensing , Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 220801 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Szekeres, On the singularities of a Riemannian manifold , Publ

    G. Szekeres, On the singularities of a Riemannian manifold , Publ. Math. Debrecen 7, 285 (1959)

    1959

  20. [28]

    Dembowski, B

    C. Dembowski, B. Dietz, H.-D. Gr¨ af, H. L. Harney, A. Heine, W. D. Heiss, and A. Richter, Encircling an exceptional point , Phys. Rev. E 69, 056216 (2004)

    2004

  21. [29]

    Zhong, M

    Q. Zhong, M. Khajavikhan, D. N. Christodoulides, and R. El-Ganainy, Winding around non-Hermitian singularities, Nat. Commun. 9, 4808 (2018)

    2018

  22. [30]

    K.¨Ozdemir, S

    S ¸. K.¨Ozdemir, S. Rotter, F. Nori, and L. Yang, Parity–time symmetry and exceptional points in pho- tonics, Nat. Mater. 18, 783 (2019)

    2019

  23. [31]

    I. I. Arkhipov, A. Miranowicz, F. Minganti, S. K. ¨Ozdemir, and F. Nori, Dynamically crossing diabolic points while encircling exceptional curves: A programmable symmetric-asymmetric multimode switch , Nat. Commun. 14, 2076 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    I. I. Arkhipov, F. Minganti, A. Miranowicz, S. K. ¨ ozdemir, and F. Nori, Restoring Adiabatic State Transfer in Time-Modulated Non-Hermitian Systems , Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 113802 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    D.-G. Lai, A. Miranowicz, and F. Nori, Nonreciprocal Topological Phonon Transfer Independent of Both Device Mass and Exceptional-Point Encircling Direction , Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 243602 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Beniwal, A

    D. Beniwal, A. Laha, A. Miranowicz, and S. Ghosh, Parametrically encircled higher-order exceptional points in anti-parity-time symmetric optical microcavities , (2024), arXiv:2405.08850

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    A. Roy, A. Laha, A. Biswas, A. Miranowicz, B. P. Pal, and S. Ghosh,Dynamically Encircled Higher-order Exceptional Points in an Optical Fiber , (2024), arXiv:2411.14874

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Kawabata, T

    K. Kawabata, T. Bessho, and M. Sato, Classification of Exceptional Points and Non-Hermitian Topo- logical Semimetals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 066405 (2019). 12

    2019

  29. [37]

    H. Hu, S. Sun, and S. Chen, Knot topology of exceptional point and non-Hermitian no-go theorem, Phys. Rev. Research 4, l022064 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    F. Yang, C. S. Prasad, W. Li, R. Lach, H. O. Everitt, and G. V. Naik, Non-Hermitian metasurface with non-trivial topology, Proc. Spie. 11, 1159 (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    Okuma and M

    N. Okuma and M. Sato, Non-Hermitian Topological Phenomena: A Review , Annu. Rev. Conden. Ma. P. 14, 83 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    M. V. Berry, Quantal Phase Factors Accompanying Adiabatic Changes, Proc. Royal Soc. London A 392, 45 (1984)

    1984

  33. [41]

    Mehri-Dehnavi and A

    H. Mehri-Dehnavi and A. Mostafazadeh, Geometric phase for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians and its holonomy interpretation, J. Math. Phys. 49, 082105 (2008)

    2008

  34. [42]

    Ju and F.-H

    C.-Y. Ju and F.-H. Huang, Quantum State Behavior at Exceptional Points and Quantum Phase Tran- sitions, (2024), arXiv:2403.16503

    2024

  35. [43]

    Tzeng, C.-Y

    Y.-C. Tzeng, C.-Y. Ju, G.-Y. Chen, and W.-M. Huang, Hunting for the non-Hermitian exceptional points with fidelity susceptibility , Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013015 (2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    Tu, Y.-C

    Y.-T. Tu, Y.-C. Tzeng, and P.-Y. Chang, R´ enyi entropies and negative central charges in non-Hermitian quantum systems , SciPost Phys. 12, 194 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    Y.-T. Tu, I. Jang, P.-Y. Chang, and Y.-C. Tzeng, General properties of fidelity in non-Hermitian quantum systems with PT symmetry , Quantum 7, 960 (2023). 13

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.