Exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermions

Ryu Sasaki

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermions

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper constructs four types of exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermion systems, diagonalized by multivariate Krawtchouk, Meixner, and Rahman-like polynomials.

desk verdict Four new solvable free-fermion chains from multivariate polynomials — clean template work, with one genuine gap: the Meixner case needs an unproved completeness/self-adjointness assertion from the author's prior paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05455 v2 pith:L2MYNQPN submitted 2025-02-08 hep-th math-phmath.MPquant-ph

Ryu Sasaki This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thmath-phmath.MPquant-ph MSC 33C4533C7082B23

keywords exactlysolvablefermionsmultivariateorthogonalpolynomialsKrawtchoukMeixnerRahman-likefreereversibleMarkovchainsAomoto-Gelfandhypergeometricfunctions

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that every exactly solvable Hermitian matrix whose eigenvectors are a known multivariate orthogonal polynomial family defines an exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermion system, and it makes this concrete for four families: multivariate Krawtchouk, multivariate Meixner, and two Rahman-like families. In each case the fermion Hamiltonian $H_f = \sum_{x,y} c_x^\dagger H(x,y) c_y$ is diagonalized by the same orthonormal single-particle basis that diagonalizes $H$, with linear spectra for Krawtchouk and Meixner and multiplicative spectra for the Rahman types. The point is a new supply of exactly solvable interacting fermion models in more than one component, useful for testing many-body quantities.

What carries the argument

The central object is the one-particle matrix $H$. For Krawtchouk and Meixner it is a nearest-neighbor hopping matrix built from birth and death coefficients $B_j(x)$ and $D_j(x)$, explicitly $H(x,y)=\sum_j \big[(B_j+D_j)\delta_{x,y} - \sqrt{B_j(x)D_j(x+e_j)}\,\delta_{x+e_j,y} - \sqrt{B_j(x-e_j)D_j(x)}\,\delta_{x-e_j,y}\big]$. For the Rahman-like cases, $H = W^{-1/2} K W^{1/2}$, the similarity transform of a reversible Markov chain matrix $K$ by its stationary distribution $W$; this symmetrization makes $H$ real symmetric and gives wide-range, all-to-all couplings. The machinery reduces diagonalization of the many-body fermion Hamiltonian to the completeness and orthonormality of the single-particle basis $\hat{\varphi}_m$.

What would settle it

For the multivariate Meixner case on the infinite lattice $\mathbb{N}_0^n$, take $n=2$ and small parameters $\beta, c$, truncate to $|x|\le L$, compute the finite matrix (3.5), and compare its eigenvalues with $E(m)=m_1\lambda_1+m_2\lambda_2$. If the number of eigenvalues matching this linear formula with the correct multiplicities grows only finitely with $L$, or if the truncated operator is not symmetric with a self-adjoint continuum limit, the completeness assumption behind the exact solution is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that four explicitly constructed real symmetric matrices $H$ — coming from difference equations in the Krawtchouk and Meixner cases, and from reversible Markov chains symmetrized by the square root of the stationary distribution in the Rahman cases — are one-particle Hamiltonians of exactly solvable spinless fermion systems. The orthonormal eigenvectors are $\hat{\varphi}_m(x) = \sqrt{W(x)}\,P_m(x)\,/\,\sqrt{\bar{W}(m)}$, built from multivariate polynomials $P_m$ with weight $W$. The second-quantized Hamiltonian $H_f = \sum_{x,y} c_x^\dagger H(x,y) c_y$ becomes $\sum_m E(m)\,\hat{c}_m^\dagger \hat{c}_m$ after the unitary transformation $c_x = \sum_m \hat{\varphi}_m(x)\hat{c}_m$. The spectra are $E(m)=\sum_j m_j\lambda_j$ for Krawtchouk and Meixner, and $E(m)=\prod_i \lambda_i^{m_i}$ for both Rahman types, with the $\lambda_j$ being roots of the stated characteristic polynomials.

Load-bearing premise

The whole diagonalization rests on the multivariate Krawtchouk, Meixner, and Rahman-like polynomials forming complete orthonormal eigenbases of the stated matrices with the stated weights and spectra; if any of those basis claims fails, the fermion solution fails with it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Four exactly solvable multicomponent free-fermion models are now available: two with nearest-neighbor hopping and two with all-to-all interactions.
All four have closed-form spectra, linear for Krawtchouk and Meixner and multiplicative for Rahman, so thermodynamic and correlation functions can be written down explicitly.
The dictionary $H \to H_f$ turns any future exactly solvable Hermitian matrix with a complete polynomial eigenbasis into a solvable fermion lattice model.
The Rahman-type models give fermionic realizations of reversible Markov chains, linking spectral theory of stochastic matrices to free-fermion physics.

Reading between the lines

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

The same construction should apply to q-analogues or other multivariate polynomial families once complete Hermitian eigenbases are known, yielding further exactly solvable fermion chains.
For the infinite-volume Meixner model, a rigorous treatment of the operator domain and self-adjointness is still needed; finite truncations used to verify spectra may hide boundary effects.
Entanglement entropy for these multicomponent chains should exhibit signatures of the lattice dimension $n$, and comparing $n=1$ with $n>1$ cases would isolate strictly multidimensional effects.
The Rahman-like Markov-chain route may let one engineer free-fermion models with prescribed stationary distributions, connecting stochastic processes to integrable fermion systems.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Read this as a testbed paper, not a conceptual advance. The genuinely new content is four exactly solvable free-fermion Hamiltonians — Krawtchouk, Meixner, and two Rahman-like families — whose single-particle eigenbases come from multivariate polynomials the author built in [8,9]. The H → H_f step is the same template as [13,14], and the paper says so. What you should know up front: three of the four models are in good shape; the Meixner model has a load-bearing gap this paper does not close.

The finite-lattice cases (Krawtchouk, both Rahman families) are solid. X is finite, H is a finite symmetric matrix, the spectral theorem supplies completeness, and the polynomial eigenbasis is quoted from published work. The fermion mapping is verified explicitly — orthogonal transformation preserves the canonical anticommutation relations. The Rahman cases come from reversible Markov chains via the square-root similarity transform, and the multiplicative spectra match the Perron–Frobenius bound −1 < E(m) ≤ 1. I spotted no circularity: the polynomials are inputs, not outputs, and nothing is fitted and relabeled as prediction.

The soft spot is the Meixner chain in §3. X = N_0^n is infinite and H in (3.5) is an unbounded symmetric matrix. The diagonalization (3.18) needs the completeness and self-adjointness in (3.10)–(3.12), which are asserted and cited to [8], not proved here. If the negative-multinomial moment problem is indeterminate, or H has several self-adjoint extensions, the inverse transform (3.16) and the anticommutation relations (3.17) become formal. I checked the surrounding algebra and it is consistent; the issue is analytic, not algebraic. Proportional to the whole paper, this affects one of four claims, but it is the only infinite-lattice claim, so it deserves an explicit flag in the review.

The citations look fair — Sasaki is generous with the earlier multivariate-polynomial literature (Griffiths, Iliev, Grünbaum–Rahman, Xu, etc.) and clearly identifies what is new here versus what reuses his own template. The paper is well organized and easy to read; the type (2) Rahman case is admittedly a 'change indices' repetition, which is acceptable for this format.

Who gets value: people building solvable free-fermion testbeds for entanglement and correlation studies, and physicists curious about multivariate orthogonal polynomials in lattice models. It is a modest, legitimate contribution. A referee should push on the Meixner operator domain and on the faithful transcription of the polynomial data from [8,9]; nothing else looks fragile.

Recommendation: send it to review. With a request that the Meixner claim be either proved or explicitly labeled as inherited from [8].

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs four families of exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermion systems by taking Hamiltonians H that are real symmetric matrices with known orthogonal polynomial eigenbases, and mapping them to quadratic fermion Hamiltonians H_f = \sum_{x,y} c_x^\dagger H(x,y) c_y. The four systems are associated with (i) multivariate Krawtchouk polynomials on a finite lattice, (ii) multivariate Meixner polynomials on the semi-infinite lattice N_0^n, and (iii)–(iv) two types of Rahman-like polynomials on finite lattices. In each case the paper recalls the polynomial eigenvector equations from the author's previous work [8,9], defines the orthonormal single-particle wavefunctions \hat{\varphi}_m(x), introduces momentum-space fermions, and concludes that H_f is diagonal with spectrum E(m) = \sum_j m_j \lambda_j for the Krawtchouk and Meixner cases and E(m) = \prod_i \lambda_i^{m_i} for the Rahman-like cases. The finite-lattice cases are algebraic and complete modulo the eigenvalue formulas cited from [8,9]; the Meixner case additionally requires completeness and self-adjointness statements (3.10)–(3.12) that are asserted but not proved in the present paper.

Significance. If the cited polynomial results are taken as established, the paper provides a clean and fairly general recipe for translating exactly solvable real symmetric matrices into exactly solvable free-fermion Hamiltonians, and it demonstrates the recipe on four nontrivial multivariate families, including one infinite-lattice example. The finite-lattice fermion models (Krawtchouk and both Rahman-like types) are concrete and potentially useful as solvable inhomogeneous fermion chains with nearest-neighbour or wide-range interactions, and the construction is presented with explicit formulas for wavefunctions, spectra, and anticommutation relations. The paper is honest about relying on the author's earlier papers for the polynomial eigenbases, and it does not disguise fitted parameters as predictions. The main weakness is that the Meixner section relies on unproved completeness and operator-domain assertions for an unbounded infinite-dimensional matrix, so the exact-solvability claim for that case is not self-contained.

major comments (4)

[§3.1, Eqs. (3.10)–(3.12)] The Meixner case is the only infinite-lattice system, and its diagonalization requires that the functions {\hat{\varphi}_m} in (3.13) form a complete orthonormal basis of l^2(N_0^n) and that the symmetric matrix H in (3.5) is self-adjoint on a domain that makes (3.10) an operator equality. Equations (3.10)–(3.12) are asserted with a citation to [8], but the present paper gives neither a proof nor a statement of the operator domain, deficiency indices, or determinacy of the moment problem for the negative multinomial weight W(x,\beta,c). Without these, the inverse transformation (3.16) and the anticommutation relations (3.17) are formal, and (3.18) is not an equality of well-defined operators. This is load-bearing because the paper presents the Meixner fermion system as exactly solvable on equal footing with the three finite-lattice systems.
[§3.1, Eq. (3.7) and (3.8)] The orthogonality relation (3.8) is stated as \sum_x W(x,\beta,c)P_m P_{m'} = (1/\bar{W}(m))\delta_{mm'}, but the right-hand side involves \bar{W} defined by (3.9) with parameters \bar{c} given in (I.4.20), which are not reproduced in the manuscript. Since (3.8)–(3.13) are the only bridge between the polynomial results of [8] and the fermion diagonalization, the missing explicit definition of \bar{c}_j makes it impossible for a reader to verify the normalization or the completeness claim from the present text alone; this should either be included or the dependence on [8] made fully explicit.
[§2.2, Eq. (2.18)] In the finite Krawtchouk case the diagonalization is complete if the eigenvector formula (2.10) holds for every m \in X. The paper states this with reference to [8], but since X is finite and H in (2.6) is explicitly a real symmetric matrix, the spectral theorem gives a complete basis; the only nontrivial input is the explicit eigenvalue and eigenvector formula (2.7)–(2.12), which can be checked algebraically. This part is sound modulo that check, and it would strengthen the paper to say clearly that the finite-lattice cases do not require any operator-theoretic completeness argument beyond the spectral theorem.
[§4.2, Eq. (4.19) and surrounding text] For the Rahman-like polynomials of type (2), the paper states that formulas (4.12)–(4.19) need only change '(1)' to '(2)', but it does not display the type-(2) analogue of the key matrix H^{(2)}(x,y) from (4.12). Since the type-(2) Markov chain K^{(2)} in (4.5) uses N-|y| instead of N-|z| in the multinomial factor, the resulting symmetric matrix is not literally obtained by a trivial relabeling; the claim that the diagonalization goes 'exactly the same' should be substantiated by at least writing the type-(2) H and the type-(2) orthogonality relations, or by explicitly pointing to the corresponding equations in [9].

minor comments (5)

[Abstract and title] The abstract contains the typo 'Krawtcouk' (missing 'h'); the same typo appears at the end of §1. The title and terminology are otherwise clear.
[§2.1, Eq. (2.8)] The normalization of the Aomoto-Gelfand hypergeometric sum is not fully specified: the sum over matrices (c_{ij}) \in M_n(N_0) with \sum_{i,j} c_{ij} \le N is clear, but the ranges of the inner summations over i and j are implicit in the notation '\sum_{i,j} c_{ij}'. Consider adding explicit summation ranges to help readers not familiar with the convention.
[§3.1, Eq. (3.3)] The condition for summability of W(x,\beta,c) is given as |c|<1, which is correct, but it is worth stating explicitly that all formulas in §3 are only meaningful under this condition; the condition is not repeated in §3.2 where the fermion Hamiltonian is introduced.
[§4.1, Eq. (4.10)] The eigenvalue formula E(m) = \prod_i \lambda_i^{m_i} is stated with a reference to (II.3.25), but the Perron-Frobenius bound -1 < E(m) \le 1 is mentioned only in passing. Since this bound is used implicitly to justify the spectral interpretation, it would help to state it in the same equation block as the eigenvalue formula.
[General] The paper repeatedly cites 'I' and 'II' for [8] and [9] without a table mapping the equation numbers; e.g., (I.3.13), (I.4.14), (II.3.25) are used in the text. A short 'notation' remark or a table of cited equations would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: fermion diagonalization is a direct application of previously established polynomial eigenbases.

full rationale

The paper's derivation is not circular. The polynomial families and their orthonormal eigenvector/eigenvalue properties are imported from the author's earlier papers [8,9]; the fermion Hamiltonians are then simply H_f = sum_{x,y} c^\dagger_x H(x,y) c_y, and the diagonalization follows from the standard completeness relations (e.g., Eq. (2.11)) and the eigenvector equation (2.10), both asserted from the imported polynomial structure. No parameter is fitted from the fermion data, and no fermion quantity is fed back into the polynomial construction. The Rahman Hamiltonians are obtained from reversible Markov chains by a similarity transformation, which preserves the eigenvalue problem by construction, but this is an explicit construction rather than a disguised prediction. The same-author citations are load-bearing in the sense that they supply the polynomial eigenbases, but those properties are independent of the fermion application and are externally checkable algebraic/analytic identities: finite-dimensional for Krawtchouk and Rahman, and negative-multinomial orthogonality/completeness for Meixner. They therefore count as real evidence rather than circularity. The infinite-lattice Meixner completeness and self-adjointness issue around Eqs. (3.10)-(3.12) is an unproved operator-theoretic premise and hence a correctness risk, not a circular step.

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

No numbers are fitted to an empirical target; the listed parameters are arbitrary model inputs. The construction leans on the author's own prior papers [8,9] for the completeness and spectral properties of the polynomial systems, and on the standard free-fermion mapping. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)

n and N
Dimension and size of the finite lattices; arbitrary positive integers with N > n, chosen by hand as inputs to the polynomial families.
p_i (i=1,...,n)
Positive parameters defining the multinomial weight and the matrix F(p) for multivariate Krawtchouk fermions; arbitrary inputs, not fitted, but the spectrum depends on them.
c_i (i=1,...,n)
Positive parameters with |c| < 1 defining the negative multinomial weight and the matrix F(c) for multivariate Meixner fermions; arbitrary inputs.
alpha_i, beta_i (i=1,...,n)
Parameters 0 < alpha_i < 1, 0 < beta_i < 1, |beta| < 1 defining the binomial/multinomial convolutions and stationary distribution for Rahman-like fermions; arbitrary inputs.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Multivariate Krawtchouk polynomials form a complete orthonormal eigenbasis of H in Eq (2.6) with linear spectrum E(m) = sum_j m_j lambda_j, where lambda_j are roots of Det(lambda I - F(p)) = 0.
Invoked in Section 2.1, Eq (2.7), and cited to the author's paper [8]; not re-derived in this paper.
domain assumption Multivariate Meixner polynomials form a complete orthonormal eigenbasis of H in Eq (3.5) on l^2(N_0^n) with linear spectrum E(m) = sum_j m_j lambda_j.
Invoked in Section 3.1, Eqs (3.6) and (3.10)-(3.12); includes completeness and self-adjointness on an infinite lattice, which is not proven in this paper.
domain assumption Rahman-like polynomials of type (1) and (2) are complete left eigenvectors of reversible Markov matrices K^(i) with multiplicative spectra, and the symmetrized matrices H^(i) = W^(-1/2) K^(i) W^(1/2) have the same spectra.
Invoked in Section 4, Eqs (4.10)-(4.15); cited to the author's paper [9].
standard math The correspondence between Hermitian one-particle matrices and free-fermion quadratic Hamiltonians: if H has orthonormal eigenbasis phi_m, then H_f = sum c^dagger H c = sum E(m) c^dagger_m c_m.
Proven in Section 2.2, Eqs (2.14)-(2.18), using canonical anticommutation relations.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L2MYNQPN

@misc{pith2026250205455,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exactly solvable multicomponent spinless fermions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L2MYNQPN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05455}
}

abstract

By generalising the one to one correspondence between exactly solvable hermitian matrices $\mathcal{H}=\mathcal{H}^\dagger$ and exactly solvable spinless fermion systems $\mathcal{H}_f=\sum_{x,y}c_x^\dagger\mathcal{H}(x,y)c_y$, four types of exactly solvable multicomponent fermion systems are constructed explicitly. They are related to the multivariate Krawtcouk, Meixner and two types of Rahman like polynomials, constructed recently by myself. The Krawtchouk and Meixner polynomials are the eigenvectors of certain real symmetric matrices $\mathcal{H}$ which are related to the difference equations governing them. The corresponding fermions have nearest neighbour interactions. The Rahman like polynomials are eigenvectors of certain reversible Markov chain matrices $\mathcal{K}$, from which real symmetric matrices $\mathcal{H}$ are uniquely defined by the similarity transformation in terms of the square root of the stationary distribution. The fermions have wide range interactions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

[8]

Multivariate Kawtchouk polynomials as Birth and Death polynomials

R. Sasaki, “Multivariate Kawtchouk and Meixner polynomials as Birt h and Death polynomials,” The Ramanujan Journal (2025) 66, article 14 pages 1– 38, arXiv: 2305.08581v2[math.CA], arXiv:2310.04968[math.CA] . 12

work page Pith review arXiv 2025
[9]

Rahman polynomials

R. Sasaki, “Rahman like polynomials as eigenvectors of certain Mar kov chains,” The Ramanujan Journal (2025) 66, article 15 pages 1–20, arXiv:2310.17853v2[math.PR]

work page Pith review arXiv 2025
[1]

G. E. Andrews, R. Askey and R. Roy, Special Functions, Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, (1999)

work page 1999
[2]

Koekoek, P

R. Koekoek, P. A. Lesky and R. F. Swarttouw, Hypergeometric orthogonal polynomials and their q-analogues, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag Berlin- Heidelberg, (2010)

work page 2010
[3]

M. E. H. Ismail, Classical and quantum orthogonal polynomials in one variab le, Ency- clopedia of mathematics and its applications, Cambridge, (2005)

work page 2005
[4]

Orthogonal Polynomials from Hermitian Matrices

S. Odake and R. Sasaki, “Orthogonal Polynomials from Hermitian M atrices,” J. Math. Phys. 49 (2008) 053503 (43 pp), arXiv:0712.4106[math.CA]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008
[5]

Exactly solvable `discrete' quantum mechanics; shape invariance, Heisenberg solutions, annihilation-creation operators and coherent states

S. Odake and R. Sasaki, “Exactly solvable ‘discrete’ quantum mec hanics; shape invari- ance, Heisenberg solutions, annihilation-creation operators and c oherent states,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 119 (2008) 663-700, arXiv:0802.1075[quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008
[6]

Aomoto, M

K. Aomoto, M. Kita, Theory of Hypergeometric functions , Springer, Berlin (2011)

work page 2011

Show all 39 references

[7]

General theory of hypergeometric functions,

I. M. Gelfand, “General theory of hypergeometric functions,” Sov. Math. Dokl. 33 (1986) 573-577

1986
[10]

The Rahman polynomials are bispectral,

F. A. Gr¨ unbaum, “The Rahman polynomials are bispectral,” SIGM A 3 (2007) 065, 11pp, arXiv:0705.0468[math.CA]

2007 arXiv
[11]

On a family of 2-variable ortho gonal Krawtchouk polynomials,

F. A. Gr¨ unbaum and M. Rahman, “On a family of 2-variable ortho gonal Krawtchouk polynomials,” SIGMA 6 (2010) 090, 12 pages, arXiv:1007.4327[math.CA]

2010 arXiv
[12]

A System of multivariable Kraw tchouk polyno- mials and a probabilistic application,

F. A. Gr¨ unbaum and M. Rahman, “A System of multivariable Kraw tchouk polyno- mials and a probabilistic application,” SIGMA 7 (2011) 119, 17pp, arXiv:1106.1835 [math.PR]

2011 arXiv
[13]

Exactly Solvable Inhomogeneous Fermion Systems,

R. Sasaki, “Exactly Solvable Inhomogeneous Fermion Systems,” Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2024 123A03 (18 pages) arXiv:2410.07614[quant-ph]. DOI: 10.1093/ptep /ptae173

2024 arXiv
[14]

Lattice fermions with solvable wide range interaction s,

R. Sasaki, “Lattice fermions with solvable wide range interaction s,” Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2025 013A01 (11 pages), arXiv:2410.08467[quant-ph], https://doi.org /10.1093/ptep/ptae190

2025 arXiv
[15]

Entanglement of inhomogeneous free fermions on hyperplane latt ices,

P.-A. Bernard, N. Cramp´ e, R. I. Nepomechie, Gi. Parez, L. P. d’Andecy and L. Vinet, “Entanglement of inhomogeneous free fermions on hyperplane latt ices,” Nucl. Phys. B984 (2022) 115975, arXiv:2206.06509v3[cond-mat.stat-mech]

2022 arXiv
[16]

Orthogonal polynomials on the multinomial distr ibution,

R. C. Griffiths, “Orthogonal polynomials on the multinomial distr ibution,” Austral. J. Statist. 13 (1971) 27–35

1971
[17]

Orthogonal polynomials on the negative multino mial distribution,

R. C. Griffiths, “Orthogonal polynomials on the negative multino mial distribution,” J. multivariate Anal. 5 (1975) 271-277

1975
[18]

Multivariate Krawtchouk Polynomials and Compo sition Birth and Death Processes,

R. C. Griffiths, “Multivariate Krawtchouk Polynomials and Compo sition Birth and Death Processes,” Symmetry 8 (2016) 33 19pp. arXiv:1603.00196[math.PR]

2016 arXiv
[19]

Stochastic Process es and Special Func- tions: On the Probabilistic Origin of Some Positive Kernels Associated w ith Classical Orthogonal Polynomials,

R. D. Cooper, M. Hoare and M. Rahman M, “Stochastic Process es and Special Func- tions: On the Probabilistic Origin of Some Positive Kernels Associated w ith Classical Orthogonal Polynomials,” J. Math. Anal. Appl. 61 (1977) 262-291. 13

1977
[20]

Cumulative Bernoulli trials and Kraw tchouk processes,

M. R. Hoare and M. Rahman, “Cumulative Bernoulli trials and Kraw tchouk processes,” Stochastic Process. Appl. 16 (1983) 113–139

1983
[21]

Some multivariable orthogonal polynomials of the Askey tableau- discrete families,

M. V. Tratnik, “Some multivariable orthogonal polynomials of the Askey tableau- discrete families,” J. Math. Phys. 32 (1991), 2337-2342

1991
[22]

9j-symbols of the oscillator algebra and Krawtc houk polynomials in two variables,

A. Zhedanov, “9j-symbols of the oscillator algebra and Krawtc houk polynomials in two variables,” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 30 (1997) 8337-8353

1997
[23]

Zonal spherical functions on the complex reﬂec tion groups and ( m + 1, n + 1)-hypergeometric functions,

H. Mizukawa, “Zonal spherical functions on the complex reﬂec tion groups and ( m + 1, n + 1)-hypergeometric functions,” Adv. Math. 184 (2004) 1–17

2004
[24]

Orthogonal relations for multivariate Krawtcho uk polynomials,

H. Mizukawa, “Orthogonal relations for multivariate Krawtcho uk polynomials,” SIGMA 7 (2011) 017 5pp, arXiv:1009.1203[math.CO]

2011 arXiv
[25]

Mizukawa and H

H. Mizukawa and H. Tanaka, ( n + 1, m + 1)-hypergeometric functions associated to char- acter algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 132 (2004) 2613–2618

2004
[26]

Discrete orthogonal polynomials and diﬀeren ce equations of several variables,

P. Iliev and Y. Xu, “Discrete orthogonal polynomials and diﬀeren ce equations of several variables,” Adv. Math. 212 (2007) 1-36, arXiv:math.CA/0508039

2007
[27]

A probabilistic origin for a new class o f bivariate poly- nomials,

M. R. Hoare and M. Rahman, “A probabilistic origin for a new class o f bivariate poly- nomials,” SIGMA 4 (2008) 089, 18 pages, arXiv:0812.3879[math.CA]

2008 arXiv
[28]

The Rahman polynomials and the Lie algeb ra sl3(C),

P. Iliev and P. Terwilliger, “The Rahman polynomials and the Lie algeb ra sl3(C),” Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 364 (2012) 4225–4238, arXiv:1006.5062[math.RT]

2012 arXiv
[29]

Meixner polynomials in several variables satisfying bispe ctral diﬀerence equa- tions,

P. Iliev, “Meixner polynomials in several variables satisfying bispe ctral diﬀerence equa- tions,” Adv. in Appl. Math. 49 (2012) 15–23, arXiv:1112.5589[math.CA]

2012 arXiv
[30]

A Lie theoretic interpretation of multivariate hyperge ometric polynomials,

P. Iliev, “A Lie theoretic interpretation of multivariate hyperge ometric polynomials,” Compositio Math. 148 (2012) 991-1002, arXiv:1101.1683[math.RT]

2012 arXiv
[31]

Gaudin model for the multinomial distribution,

P. Iliev, “Gaudin model for the multinomial distribution,” Ann. Hen ri Poincar´ e25 (2024), no. 3, 1795–1810, arXiv:2303.08206v2[math-ph]

2024 arXiv
[32]

The multivariate Kraw tchouk polynomials as matrix elements of the rotation group representations on oscillato r states,

V. X. Genest, L. Vinet and A. Zhedanov, “The multivariate Kraw tchouk polynomials as matrix elements of the rotation group representations on oscillato r states,” J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 46 (2013) 505203, arXiv:1306.4256[math-ph]. 14

2013 arXiv
[33]

An introduction to multivariate K rawtchouk polyno- mials and their applications,

P. Diaconis and R. C. Griffiths, “An introduction to multivariate K rawtchouk polyno- mials and their applications,” J. Stat. Planning and Inference 154 (2014) 39-53, arXiv: 1309.0112[math.PR]

2014 arXiv
[34]

Hahn, Jacobi, and Krawtchouk polynomials of several v ariables,

Y. Xu, “Hahn, Jacobi, and Krawtchouk polynomials of several v ariables,” Journal of Approximation Theory 195 (2015) 19-42, arXiv:1309.1510[math.CA]

2015 arXiv
[35]

Birth and death pr ocesses and quantum spin chains,

F. A. Gr¨ unbaum, L. Vinet and A. Zhedanov “Birth and death pr ocesses and quantum spin chains,” J. Math. Phys. 54 062101 (2013), arXiv:1205.4689v2[quant-ph]

2013 arXiv
[36]

Free-Fermion ent anglement and or- thogonal polynomials,

N. Cramp´ e, R. I. Nepomechie and L. Vinet, “Free-Fermion ent anglement and or- thogonal polynomials,” J. Stat. Mech. 093101 (2019), arXiv:1907.00044[cond-mat. stat-phys]

2019 arXiv
[37]

Fermionic logarithmic negat ivity in the Krawtchouk chain,

G. Blanchet, G. Parez and L. Vinet, “Fermionic logarithmic negat ivity in the Krawtchouk chain,” J. Stat. Mech. 113101 (2024), arXiv:2408.16531[cond-mat. stat-phys]

2024 arXiv
[38]

Entanglement entropy of inhomogeneous XX spin chains with algebraic interactions,

F. Finkel and A. Gonz´ alez-L´ opez, “Entanglement entropy of inhomogeneous XX spin chains with algebraic interactions,” JHEP 1 (2021), arXiv:2107.12200v2[cond-mat. str-el]

2021 arXiv
[39]

A short review on entanglement in q uantum spin systems,

J. I. Latorre and A. Riera, “A short review on entanglement in q uantum spin systems,” Journal of Physics A Mathematical General 42 no. 50, (Dec, 2009 ) 504002, arXiv: 0906.1499 [cond-mat.stat-mech] . 15

2009 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [8]

Multivariate Kawtchouk polynomials as Birth and Death polynomials

R. Sasaki, “Multivariate Kawtchouk and Meixner polynomials as Birt h and Death polynomials,” The Ramanujan Journal (2025) 66, article 14 pages 1– 38, arXiv: 2305.08581v2[math.CA], arXiv:2310.04968[math.CA] . 12

work page Pith review arXiv 2025

[2] [9]

Rahman polynomials

R. Sasaki, “Rahman like polynomials as eigenvectors of certain Mar kov chains,” The Ramanujan Journal (2025) 66, article 15 pages 1–20, arXiv:2310.17853v2[math.PR]

work page Pith review arXiv 2025

[3] [1]

G. E. Andrews, R. Askey and R. Roy, Special Functions, Encyclopedia of mathematics and its applications, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, (1999)

work page 1999

[4] [2]

Koekoek, P

R. Koekoek, P. A. Lesky and R. F. Swarttouw, Hypergeometric orthogonal polynomials and their q-analogues, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag Berlin- Heidelberg, (2010)

work page 2010

[5] [3]

M. E. H. Ismail, Classical and quantum orthogonal polynomials in one variab le, Ency- clopedia of mathematics and its applications, Cambridge, (2005)

work page 2005

[6] [4]

Orthogonal Polynomials from Hermitian Matrices

S. Odake and R. Sasaki, “Orthogonal Polynomials from Hermitian M atrices,” J. Math. Phys. 49 (2008) 053503 (43 pp), arXiv:0712.4106[math.CA]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008

[7] [5]

Exactly solvable `discrete' quantum mechanics; shape invariance, Heisenberg solutions, annihilation-creation operators and coherent states

S. Odake and R. Sasaki, “Exactly solvable ‘discrete’ quantum mec hanics; shape invari- ance, Heisenberg solutions, annihilation-creation operators and c oherent states,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 119 (2008) 663-700, arXiv:0802.1075[quant-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2008

[8] [6]

Aomoto, M

K. Aomoto, M. Kita, Theory of Hypergeometric functions , Springer, Berlin (2011)

work page 2011