Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Chaotic dynamics of Bose-Einstein condensates in a tilted optical lattice

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A tilted optical lattice drives a quasi-one-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate with AC/DC-modulated two- and three-body interactions through regular motion, small chaos, strong chaos, and global chaos as the tilt strength increases.

desk verdict A systematic parameter scan of stationary BEC spatial profiles is mislabeled as temporal chaotic dynamics; the central claim does not survive the spatial-to-temporal leap. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.00341 v1 pith:SHBW6GKL submitted 2025-05-31 quant-ph cond-mat.quant-gas

C. Selvaraju , S. Sabari , O.T. Lekeufack , F. Kenmogne , N. Athavan This is my paper
classification quant-phcond-mat.quant-gas PACS 03.75.Lm05.45.-a
keywords Bose-EinsteincondensatetiltedopticallatticechaosLyapunovexponentPoincarésectiontwo-bodyinteractionthree-bodyGross-Pitaevskiiequation
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 claims that a tilted optical lattice — a periodic light potential carrying an extra linear energy gradient $Fx$ — can drive a quasi-one-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate through a four-stage route to chaos when the two- and three-body interaction strengths each contain both a constant (DC) and a spatially oscillating (AC) part. The claim matters because the tilt strength then becomes a tunable control knob: keep it weak and the condensate's spatial profile stays ordered and coherent; raise it and the profile turns small-chaotic, then strongly chaotic, and eventually fully globally chaotic. The study maps the regular, small-chaos, strong-chaos, and global-chaos domains in the plane of lattice amplitude versus tilt for four combinations of the interaction terms, and confirms the transition with maximal Lyapunov exponents — the rates at which infinitesimally close trajectories separate — that grow from near zero to roughly 10 as the tilt $F$ rises from 0 to 1. A constant three-body interaction is singled out as the strongest chaos promoter, destroying all regular windows, while oscillating components shrink but do not eliminate the ordered regions.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the stationary-state reduction of the Gross-Pitaevskii equation, Eqs. (9a)–(9b). Substituting the stationary ansatz $\psi(x,t)=\phi(x)e^{-i\mu t}$ turns the time-independent equation into two coupled first-order ODEs in which the spatial coordinate $x$ plays the role of time: $d\phi/dx = y$ and $dy/dx = (g(x)\phi^2+\chi(x)\phi^4-\mu)\phi + (V_1\cos(k_1 x)+V_2\cos(k_2 x)+F x)\phi$. Integrating this flow along $x$ with a fourth-order Runge-Kutta scheme, the paper reads the $(\phi, y)$ plane as a phase portrait and applies the standard chaos toolbox — maximal Lyapunov exponent, Poincaré sections (stroboscopic slices of the phase flow), potential maps, and spatial wavefunction profiles — exactly as for a temporal dynamical system. This machinery is what converts a quantum bound-state problem into a classical chaos problem and lets the paper partition the $(V, F)$ parameter plane into regular, small-chaos, strong-chaos, and global-chaos domains.

What would settle it

Propagate the time-dependent normalized 1D Gross-Pitaevskii equation (Eq. 6) at the paper's own global-chaos point — case A with $g_0=-1$, $V_1=V_2=1$, $k_1=k_2=1$, $\mu=0.0001$, and $F=0.9$, where the maximal Lyapunov exponent is reported as about 9.8 — starting from two wavefunctions separated by $10^{-6}$. If the density profiles stay smooth and the separation remains bounded instead of growing exponentially, the spatial-ODE Lyapunov exponent does not describe BEC dynamics. A second check: the stationary solutions of Eqs. (9a)–(9b) must be normalizable ($\int \phi^2\,dx = N$) to be physical wavefunctions, but the unbounded tilt term $Fx$ and the absence of any normalization check leave that in doubt.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the stationary Gross-Pitaevskii equation for an attractive condensate in a tilted optical lattice, with interaction strengths $g(x)=g_0[a+b\sin(\Omega_1 x)]$ and $\chi(x)=\chi_0[c+d\sin(\Omega_2 x)]$, reduces to a low-dimensional dynamical system whose spatial profiles follow a deterministic route to chaos controlled by the tilt coefficient $F$. With only a constant two-body attraction ($g_0=-1$, $b=c=d=0$), increasing $F$ from 0 to 1 carries the system from periodic profiles ($F\le 0.18$) through small chaos ($0.19$–$0.59$) and strong chaos ($0.60$–$0.80$) into global chaos ($0.80$–$1.0$), with the maximal Lyapunov exponent climbing from about 0.35 to about 9.8. Adding a constant three-body term ($\chi_0=-1$) removes regularity entirely, holding the Lyapunov exponent near 9.7 at every sampled $F$; adding an oscillating two-body component restores a regular band but only for small lattice amplitudes; and activating all four AC and DC components leaves a sliver of order at the smallest $F$, upgrades small chaos to strong chaos across all lattice amplitudes, and leaves the global-chaos regime at high $F$ essentially untouched. The authors present these results as evidence that AC/DC management of the scattering length can stabilize or destabilize the condensate on demand, and they connect the global-chaos regime to modulational instability — the exponential growth of small density ripples.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that chaos in the stationary spatial equation represents the real dynamics of the condensate: the paper integrates over the spatial coordinate $x$ as if it were time, computes Lyapunov exponents and Poincaré sections along $x$, and labels the results as the BEC's dynamical evolution, even though the time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation is never solved. If spatial chaos of the stationary profile does not imply temporal chaos of the condensate, the central claim is unsupported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Tilt strength acts as a chaos dial: in the constant two-body case, $F \le 0.18$ yields ordered spatial profiles while $F \ge 0.8$ yields global chaos, so keeping the lattice tilt weak is enough to preserve regularity.
  • A constant three-body interaction is a universal chaos promoter: with it active, the entire sampled $(V, F)$ plane is globally chaotic with a Lyapunov exponent near 9.7, so suppressing three-body coupling is necessary for any regular window to exist.
  • Oscillating (AC) interaction components narrow the ordered region without stopping global chaos: with AC and DC two-body terms, regular motion survives only for small lattice amplitude $V$, and the global-chaos domain still takes over at high $F$.
  • With all four components active, the system is chaotic almost everywhere: a sliver of order survives only for $F \le 0.001$, strong chaos covers all lattice amplitudes at intermediate $F$, and global chaos dominates for $F \ge 0.6$.
  • The $(V, F)$ maps together with the Lyapunov-exponent curves provide a quantitative parameter guide for keeping BEC-based devices in coherent, predictable regimes, since chaotic regimes are presented as destroying quantum coherence and triggering modulational instability.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The four-case hierarchy hints at a stabilization strategy the authors leave implicit: an oscillating three-body component partly counteracts its own constant part, so a feedback-modulated interaction might restore a regular window that a static three-body term would destroy.
  • If the spatial-chaos reading is accepted, the phase maps double as design rules for quantum sensors and atom interferometers: operate in the regular windows (weak $F$, small $V$, the regions labeled A1 and A3) and avoid the globally chaotic domains.
  • The paper's own stabilization conjecture could be probed by adding a slow time modulation of the tilt $F$ itself: the maps suggest that sweeping $F$ across a chaos boundary would produce intermittent order-chaos bursts in the spatial profile, a signature an experiment could look for.
  • The kind of chaos found here is a property of the stationary spatial equation, linking the problem to spatial-chaos phenomena in optics and disordered media that the paper does not pursue; how that spatial chaos maps onto the condensate's temporal coherence is the natural open problem.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies a quasi-one-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate with two- and three-body interactions whose strengths contain both constant (DC) and spatially oscillating (AC) components, placed in a tilted optical lattice. Starting from the time-dependent Gross-Pitaevskii equation, the authors introduce a stationary ansatz (Eq. 7) and derive a time-independent ordinary differential equation (Eq. 8), which they reduce to the first-order spatial ODEs (9a)-(9b). Treating the spatial coordinate x as the evolution variable, they classify trajectories as regular, small chaos, strong chaos, and global chaos as the tilt strength F increases, using phase portraits, Poincaré-like sections, potential plots, spatial wavefunction profiles, and maximal Lyapunov exponents (Fig. 10). Four cases are compared: constant two-body interaction; constant two- and three-body interactions; AC+DC two-body interaction; and AC+DC two- and three-body interactions. The paper concludes that the AC/DC structure of the interactions strongly influences the transition to chaos and discusses implications for BEC stabilization and quantum technologies.

Significance. If the interpretation were valid, the parameter maps in Figs. 2, 4, 6, and 8 could serve as a practical guide for avoiding chaotic condensate behavior in tilted optical lattices. However, the central inference—that spatial chaos of the stationary ODE represents temporal dynamical chaos of the condensate—is not established. The paper never integrates the time-dependent GP equation, and the Lyapunov exponents are computed along the spatial coordinate. The claimed agreement with analytical expectations is also not substantiated because no analytical criterion is derived. The paper does provide a systematic four-case numerical survey with multiple qualitative indicators, which could be a starting point for a study of spatial complexity of stationary profiles, but as written the central dynamical claim is unsupported.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III, Eqs. (9a)-(9b); Sections V-VI] The central claim of temporal chaotic dynamics is unsupported. The equations being integrated are the stationary spatial ODEs obtained from the time-independent ansatz (7), and the independent variable is the spatial coordinate x. The Lyapunov exponents in Fig. 10 are computed along x, not along time. A positive Lyapunov exponent for the stationary spatial flow does not imply that the solution ψ(x,t) of the time-dependent GP equation (6) is chaotic, and the paper never integrates Eq. (6) in time. Statements in Sections V and VI about 'wavefunction evolution', 'classical motion', and 'transition to chaos' therefore overstate what the numerics show. The manuscript should either solve the time-dependent GP equation and demonstrate temporal chaos, or explicitly restrict all claims to complexity of stationary spatial profiles.
  2. [Abstract and Section V] The claim that the Lyapunov exponent results are 'in agreement with analytical expectations' is unsupported. No analytical criterion for the onset or degree of chaos is derived anywhere in the paper; the thresholds quoted in Section V (e.g., F=0.180, 0.590, 0.800 for case A) are numerical observations from Fig. 10. Either provide the analytical derivation or remove this claim.
  3. [Section III and Figs. 3, 5, 7, 9] The 'Poincaré surfaces of section' are not well-defined as standard Poincaré sections because the system (9a)-(9b) is nonautonomous and contains the unbounded term F x; there is no periodic stroboscopic variable to define intersections. The plots labelled SOS appear to be continuous projections of the (φ, φ') trajectory rather than intersections with a transversal section. The chaos classification based on these plots needs a clearly specified construction.
  4. [Section II, Eqs. (6) and (8); Figs. 2-9] Because k1=k2=1, the potential terms V1 cos(k1 x)+V2 cos(k2 x) reduce to (V1+V2) cos x, so V1 and V2 are not independent; the text's 'V1 (or V2)' and the horizontal axis 'V' of the regime diagrams are ambiguous. In addition, the nondimensionalization connecting g0, χ0, µ, and F in Eq. (6) to the values used in the numerical integrations is not specified, which hinders reproducibility of the parameter maps.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section III, paragraph on indicators] The phrase 'spacial evaluation of wavefunction plot' should read 'spatial evolution of wavefunction plot'; similar typos appear throughout the text.
  2. [Reference list] Several references are garbled: Ref. [14] contains a corrupted author name, Ref. [38] spells 'Pramana' as 'Pranama', and Ref. [44] has 'fez-body' instead of 'few-body'. The reference list should be carefully corrected.
  3. [Section II, Eq. (7)] The stationary ansatz in Eq. (7) includes the factor e^{-i µ t / ℏ}, but Eq. (6) is written in dimensionless form with no ℏ; the notation should be made internally consistent.
  4. [Section IV A, first paragraph] The sentence 'For a weak value of the strength F, regular motion appear for all values of V' contains a subject-verb agreement error and should be rephrased.
  5. [Section V, final paragraph] The text refers to 'the strength of the magnetic field' when the control parameter is the tilt strength F; this appears to be a typo and should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the chaos classification and Lyapunov exponents come from direct numerical integration of the same model ODEs, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction; the main caveats are a self-referential consistency check and a spatial-to-temporal interpretation risk.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained: Eq. (6) is the dimensionless 1D GP equation, Eq. (7) is the standard stationary ansatz psi = phi(x) exp(-i mu t / hbar), and Eqs. (9a)-(9b) are the first-order spatial ODEs obtained by substitution. The chaos classification in Sec. IV and the Lyapunov exponents in Sec. V are computed from these same ODEs by numerical integration; no parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then 'predicted' elsewhere, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. The main self-referential element is that the Lyapunov curves of Fig. 10 are produced by the same spatial flow whose trajectory and Poincare plots were used to draw the regime diagrams, so the 'confirmation' is a consistency check rather than an independent validation; this lowers confidence but is not a definitional or fitted-input circularity. The paper also cites the authors' earlier works for the GP model and for an analogy to modulational instability (refs. [33,45,48]), but these citations do not carry the central claim, which rests on the paper's own numerics. The more serious concern, that positive Lyapunov exponents of the stationary spatial ODE are interpreted as temporal BEC chaos without integrating the time-dependent Eq. (6), is a validity and interpretation risk rather than a circularity, so it is not scored as circular here.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several arbitrary parameter choices (µ, g0, χ0, k1=k2=Ω1=Ω2=1), an unstandardized spatial-ODE-as-dynamics interpretation, and untested numerical assumptions. No new physical entity is introduced, but the parameter space is large and barely explored.

free parameters (7)
  • chemical potential µ = 0.0001
    Set to 0.0001 in all simulations; regime boundaries are conditional on this arbitrary choice.
  • two-body interaction amplitude g0 = -1
    Attractive case only; the paper does not scan g0, so the phase diagrams apply only to this value.
  • three-body interaction amplitude χ0 = -1
    Attractive case only; chosen by hand and not varied.
  • lattice wave vectors k1, k2 = 1, 1
    Set equal to 1 throughout; this merges the two lattice terms into a single cosine and is not justified as physical.
  • spatial modulation frequencies Ω1, Ω2 = 1, 1
    Set equal to 1 throughout; the 'AC' oscillation is spatial, not temporal, and the frequency choice is arbitrary.
  • interaction modulation weights a,b,c,d = 0 or 1 depending on case
    Chosen by hand to switch DC/AC parts on and off; the resulting phase diagrams depend on these choices.
  • initial conditions for ϕ and y = not specified
    Described only as 'convenient'; the chaotic classification can depend on initial conditions and is not explored.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Quasi-1D reduction via Gaussian ansatz
    The radial motion is assumed strongly confined so that ψ = ϕ0(ρ)ϕ(x,t), leading to the 1D GP equation (Eq. 5). This is standard but restricts validity.
  • domain assumption Stationary ansatz ψ = ϕ(x) e^(-iµt/ℏ)
    Used in Eq. (7) to reduce the time-dependent equation to a stationary ODE. The subsequent chaos analysis treats the spatial coordinate x as the evolution variable, an unstated and critical assumption.
  • standard math Fourth-order Runge-Kutta with step 0.005 is accurate
    The paper states this integrator and step size but gives no convergence tests or comparison with other methods.
  • standard math Lyapunov exponent computed by periodic renormalization is a valid chaos indicator
    Standard technique, but the implementation details (number of steps, renormalization interval, initial separation) are not specified.
  • domain assumption Spatially sinusoidal scattering length is physically realizable as 'AC' management
    The paper calls g0[a + b sin(Ω1 x)] an AC component of the interaction, but no experimental protocol for a spatially modulated scattering length is given; the temporal AC management cited in refs [23-26] is not the same.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chaotic dynamics of Bose-Einstein condensates in a tilted optical lattice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SHBW6GKL

@misc{pith2026250600341,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chaotic dynamics of Bose-Einstein condensates in a tilted optical lattice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SHBW6GKL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.00341}
}
read the original abstract

This study investigates the emergence of chaotic dynamics in Bose-Einstein condensates (BECs) subjected to both alternating (AC) and constant (DC) components of the interaction strength, modeled through the scattering length. We systematically explore how the interplay of AC and DC nonlinearities affect the dynamical evolution of the condensate under a tilted optical lattice potential. Various types of chaos are identified across different parametric regimes, with numerical simulations revealing a clear distinction between regular and chaotic domains. The width of the regular domains is quantified, and the influence of AC and DC components in promoting stochastic behavior is highlighted. Lyapunov exponents, Poincar\'e sections, and other chaos indicators then confirm the transition to chaotic dynamics, in agreement with analytical expectations. A qualitative conjecture is proposed for the role of these interactions in BEC stabilization. Our findings offer insights into the dynamic control of BECs, with potential applications in quantum simulation and coherent matter-wave engineering, in line with entanglement and quantum transport, that are crucial for developing robust and reliable quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.00341 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Schematic representation of the BEC system under a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color online) Chaotic domains for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Results for parameter sets A1, B1, C1, and D1 from Fig 2. Rows from top to bottom correspond to A1–D1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Color online) Chaotic domains for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Results for parameter sets A2, B2, C2, and D2 from Fig. 4. Each row (top to bottom) corresponds to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Chaotic domains for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Results for parameter sets A3, B3, C3, D3, and E3 from Fig. 6. Rows from top to bottom correspond to A3–E3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (Color online) Chaotic domains for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Results for parameter sets A4, B4, C4, and D4 from Fig. 8. Rows from top to bottom correspond to A4–D4. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Lyapunov exponent results for cases A–D from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Anderson, J.R

    M.H. Anderson, J.R. Ensher, M.R. Matthews, C.E. Wie- man, E.A. Cornell,Observation of Bose-Einstein Con- densate in a dilute atomic vapor, Science269, 198 (1995)

    work page 1995

  2. [2]

    Bradley, C.A

    C.C. Bradley, C.A. Sackett, J.J. Tollett, R.G. Hulet,Ev- idence of Bose-Einstein condensation in an atomic gas with attractive interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 1687 (1995)

    work page 1995

  3. [3]

    Davis, M.-O

    K.B. Davis, M.-O. Mewes, M.R. Andrews, N.J. Van Druten, D.S. Durfee, D.M. Kurn, W. Ketterle,Bose- Einstein condensation in a gas of sodium atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 3969 (1995)

    work page 1995

  4. [4]

    Kevrekidis, R

    P.G. Kevrekidis, R. Carretero-Gonzalez, G. Theocharis, D.J. Frantzeskakis and B.A. Malomed,Vortices in a Bose–Einstein condensate confined by an optical lattice, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.36, 3467 (2003)

    work page 2003

  5. [5]

    Sabari,Vortex formation and hidden vortices in dipo- lar Bose–Einstein condensates, Phys

    S. Sabari,Vortex formation and hidden vortices in dipo- lar Bose–Einstein condensates, Phys. Lett. A381, 3062 (2017)

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Thiruvalluvar, S

    R.T. Thiruvalluvar, S. Sabari, K. Porsezian, P. Muru- ganandam,Vortex formation and vortex lattices in a Bose-Einstein condensate with Lee-Huang-Yang (LHY) correction, Physica E107, 54 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Sabari, R.K

    S. Sabari, R.K. Kumar, L. Tomio,Vortex dynamics and turbulence in dipolar Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A109, 023313 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Tomio, A

    L. Tomio, A. Silva, S. Sabari, R.K. Kumar,Dynamical Vortex Production and Quantum Turbulence in Perturbed Bose-Einstein Condensates, Few-Body Systems65, 13 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Sabari, R

    S. Sabari, R. Sasireka, R. Radha, A. Uthayakumar, L. Tomio,Vortices in Tunable Dipolar Bose-Einstein con- densates with Attractive Interactions, Phys. Rev. A111, 053320 (2025)

    2025

  2. [10]

    Nkenfack, O.T

    C.E. Nkenfack, O.T. Lekeufack, F. Kenmogne, R. Yamapi and E. Kengne,Elastic interaction of second-order rogue matter waves for the modified Gross–Pitaevskii equation with time-dependent trapping potential and gain/loss, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 191, 115820 (2025)

    2025

  3. [11]

    Nkenfack, O.T

    C.E. Nkenfack, O.T. Lekeufack, S. Sabari, R. Yamapi, and T.C. Kofane,Controlling second-order rogue mat- ter wave and line bright soliton dynamics in 2D Bose–Einstein Condensate with higher-order interactions and gain/loss atoms, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals198, 116534 (2025)

    2025

  4. [12]

    Komineas and N

    S. Komineas and N. Papanicolaou,Solitons, solitonic vortices, and vortex rings in a confined Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys: Rev. A68043617 (2003)

    2003

  5. [13]

    Dalfovo, S

    F. Dalfovo, S. Giorgini, L.P. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari, Theory of Bose-Einstein condensation in trapped gases, 12 Rev. Mod. Phys.71, 463 (1999)

    1999

  6. [14]

    K⁄tieacce♪tlowercaseohler, K

    T. K⁄tieacce♪tlowercaseohler, K. G´ ora and P.S. Julienne,Production of cold molecules via magnetically tunable Feshbach resonances, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 1311 (2006)

    2006

  7. [15]

    Sabari, R.V.J

    S. Sabari, R.V.J. Raja, K. Porsezian, P. Muruganan- dam,Stability of trapless Bose–Einstein condensates with two-and three-body interactions, J. Phys. B:43, 125302 (2010)

    2010

  8. [16]

    Sabari, K

    S. Sabari, K. Porsezian, and P. Muruganandam,Dy- namical stabilization of two-dimensional trapless Bose- Einstein condensates by three-body interaction and quan- tum fluctuations, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals103, 232 (2017)

    2017

  9. [17]

    Sabari, R.K

    S. Sabari, R.K. Kumar, R. Radha, and B.A. Mal- omed,Interplay between Binary and Three-Body Interac- tions and Enhancement of Stability in Trapless Dipolar Bose–Einstein Condensates, Applied Sciences12, 1135 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    Sabari, R.K

    S. Sabari, R.K. Kumar, P. Muruganandaam and R. Radha,Stability window of polariton Bose-Einstein con- densates, Phys. Rev. B105, 224315 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    Sasireka, O.T

    R. Sasireka, O.T. Lekeufack, A. Uthayakumar, S. Sabari, Stability analysis of 3D cubic-quintic Gross–Pitaevskii equation with elastic and inelastic collisions, AIP Ad- vances15, 045208 (2025)

    2025

  12. [20]

    Sasireka, O.T

    R. Sasireka, O.T. Lekeufack, A. Uthayakumar, S. Sabari, Stability analysis of Bose gas: effect of external trapping and three-body interaction with Gross–Pitaevskii equation in Tonks–Girardeau regimes, J. Korean Phys. Soc.1, 12 (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Byrnes, K

    T. Byrnes, K. Wen and Y. Yamamoto,Macroscopic quan- tum computation using Bose-Einsten condensates, Phys. Rev. A85, 040306(R) (2012)

    2012

  14. [22]

    Pelegri, J

    G. Pelegri, J. Mompart and V. Ahufinger,Quantum sens- ing using imbalanced counter-rotating Bose-Einstein con- densate modes, New J. Phys.20, 103001 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    Thiruvalluvar and S

    R.T. Thiruvalluvar and S. Sabari,Stabilization of trap- less Bose-Einstein condensates without any management, Phys. Lett. A383, 2033 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Sabari and B

    S. Sabari and B. Dey,Stabilization of trapless dipolar Bose-Einstein condensates by temporal modulation of the contact interaction, Phys. Rev. E98, 042203 (2018)

    2018

  17. [25]

    Tamithiruvalluvar, S

    R. Tamithiruvalluvar, S. Sabari, and K. Porsezian,Stabi- lization of repulsive trapless Bose–Einstein condensates, J. Phys. B:51, 165202 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Saito and M

    H. Saito and M. Ueda,Dynamically stabilized bright solitons in a two-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 040403 (2003)

    2003

  19. [27]

    Syu, D.-S

    W.-C. Syu, D.-S. Lee, and C.-Y. Lin,Regular and chaotic behavior of collective atomic motion in two-component Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. A101, 063622 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Nkenfack, O.T

    C.E. Nkenfack, O.T. Lekeufack, R. Yamapi, and E. Kengne,Bright solitons and interaction in the higher- order Gross-Pitaevskii equation investigated with Hirota’s bilinear method, Phys. Lett. A,511, 129563 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Sabari, C.P

    S. Sabari, C.P. Jisha, K. Porsezian and V. Brazhnny, Dynamical stability of dipolar Bose-Einstein condensates with temporal modulation of the s-wave scattering length, Phys. Rev. E92, 032905 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Sasireka, S

    R. Sasireka, S. Sabari, A. Uthayakumar and L. Tomio, Domain formation of modulation instability in spin-orbit- Rabi coupled Gross-Pitaevskii equation with cubic-quintic interactions, Phys. Lett. A480, 128987 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Gutzwiller,Chaos in classical and quantum me- chanics, Springer Verlag, New York (1990)

    M.C. Gutzwiller,Chaos in classical and quantum me- chanics, Springer Verlag, New York (1990)

    1990

  24. [32]

    Haake,Quantum signatures of chaos, (Springer, berlin, 1990)

    F. Haake,Quantum signatures of chaos, (Springer, berlin, 1990)

    1990

  25. [33]

    Lekeufack, S

    O.T. Lekeufack, S. Sabari, S.B. Yamgoue and T.C. Ko- fane,Effects of quantum corrections on the modulational instability of Bose-Einstein condensates trapped in a pe- riodic optical lattice, Phys. Scr.95, 115804 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Franzosi and V

    R. Franzosi and V. Penna,Chaotic behavior, collective modes, and self-trapping in the dynamics of three cou- pled Bose-Einstein CondensatesPhys. Rev. E67, 046227 (2003)

    2003

  27. [35]

    Smerzi, S

    A. Smerzi, S. Fantoni, S. Giovanazzi, and S.R. Shenoy, Quantum coherent atomic tunneling between two trapped Bose-Einstein Condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 4950 (1997)

    1997

  28. [36]

    Smerzi and S

    A. Smerzi and S. Fantoni,Large amplitude oscillations of a Bose condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 3589 (1997)

    1997

  29. [37]

    Kagan, E.L

    Y. Kagan, E.L. Surkov, and G.V. Shlyapnikov,Evolution of a Bose gas in anisotropic time-dependent traps, Phys. Rev. A55, R18 (1997)

    1997

  30. [38]

    Uzar,Chaotic and regular behaviours of classical and fractional Gross–Pitaevskii equations including two- body, three-body and higher-order interactions, Pranama J

    N. Uzar,Chaotic and regular behaviours of classical and fractional Gross–Pitaevskii equations including two- body, three-body and higher-order interactions, Pranama J. Phys.97, 36 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    Chen and Q

    L. Chen and Q. Zhu,Chaotic dynamics of Bose-Einstein Condensate induced by density-dependent Gauge field, New J. Phys.24, 053044 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    Furuya, M.C

    K. Furuya, M.C. Nemes, and G.Q. Pellegrino,Quantum dynamical manifestation of chaotic behavior in the pro- cess of entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 5524 (1998)

    1998

  33. [41]

    Song and D.L

    P.H. Song and D.L. Shepelyansky,Quantum computing of quantum chaos and imperfection effects, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 2162 (2001)

    2001

  34. [42]

    Zhi-Xiaa, N.W

    W. Zhi-Xiaa, N.W. Zheng-Guo, C. Fu-Zhong, L. Xue- Shen, and C. Lei,Chaos in Bose-Einstein condensate, Chin. Phys. B19(11), 113205 (2010)

    2010

  35. [43]

    Nemirovskii,Chaotic vortex filaments in a Bose- Einstein condensate and in superfluid helium, Quantum Electron.48, 405 (2018)

    S.K. Nemirovskii,Chaotic vortex filaments in a Bose- Einstein condensate and in superfluid helium, Quantum Electron.48, 405 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    Zhang, J

    T. Zhang, J. Schloss, A. Thomasen, L. O’Riordan, T. Busch and A. White,Chaotic fez-body vortex dynamics in rotating Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 054701 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    Sabari, O.T

    S. Sabari, O.T. Lekeufack, R. Radha, T.C. Kofane,In- terplay of three-body and higher-order interactions on the modulational instability of Bose-Einstein condensate, JOSA B37, A54 (2020)

    2020

  38. [46]

    Tabor,Chaos and integrability in nonlinear dynamics, John Wiley and Sons, New York, (1989)

    M. Tabor,Chaos and integrability in nonlinear dynamics, John Wiley and Sons, New York, (1989)

    1989

  39. [47]

    Lekeufack, S.B

    O.T. Lekeufack, S.B. Yamgoue and T.C. Kofane,Quan- tum chaology in the multiple well adjustable potential hetero-structure, Eur. Phys. J. D48, 261 (2008)

    2008

  40. [48]

    Lekeufack and T.C

    O.T. Lekeufack and T.C. Kofane,Semiquantum chaotic manifestations of modulational instability, Phys. Scr.87, 035001 (2013)

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.