Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 85 references

How to seed ergodic dynamics of interacting bosons under conditions of many-body quantum chaos

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper shows that in a one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard chain, the onset of ergodic, quantum-chaotic dynamics after a quench is controlled by the initial Fock state's energy density, and derives closed-form thresholds for when that…

desk verdict Useful dynamical benchmark for chaos thresholds in the Bose-Hubbard model; the 'any Fock state' formula is plausible but under-tested. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13556 v2 pith:TG67UYPH submitted 2025-01-23 quant-ph

Lukas Pausch , Edoardo G. Carnio , Andreas Buchleitner , Alberto Rodríguez This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords many-bodyquantumchaosBose-HubbardmodelergodicdynamicsFockinitialstatesgeneralizedfractaldimensionthresholdultracoldatomsinopticallatticeslocalobservables
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's aim is to turn the ergodic (quantum-chaotic) phase of the one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model into something an experiment can see before measuring: for a quench starting from a given Fock state, the onset of ergodic dynamics is not fixed by the Hamiltonian alone but depends on the initial state's energy and its scaling with particle number. For three representative initial states — homogeneous density, staggered density, and a localized cloud — the authors identify the controlling parameter: the bare tunneling ratio $\gamma=J/U$ for states spread over the lattice, and the particle-scaled ratio $\eta=J/(UN)$ for the localized cloud. They confirm this with exact eigenstate data (via the generalized fractal dimension $\tilde{D}_1$) and with time evolution of local observables, where suppressed temporal fluctuations over up to 200 tunneling times mark the chaotic phase. They further derive closed-form threshold estimates, Eqs. (19)–(21), from the initial state's excess energy density above the ground state, making the onset of ergodicity analytically predictable for any Fock state.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing diagnostic is the finite-size generalized fractal dimension $\tilde{D}_1$ of eigenstates in Fock space, a number between 0 and 1 measuring how uniformly an eigenstate spreads over the Fock basis; the chaotic phase is identified by near-maximal $\tilde{D}_1$ and by a strongly suppressed variance of $\tilde{D}_1$ across close-in-energy eigenstates, matching the Gaussian Orthogonal Ensemble prediction. On the dynamical side, the argument runs through the temporal variance of local observables such as $\langle n_c(\tau)\rangle$ and $\Delta n_c^2(\tau)$, whose marked suppression in a $\gamma$ or $\eta$ window certifies ergodicity. The analytical threshold estimate comes from the crossing of the small-$\gamma$ and large-$\gamma$ asymptotes of the energy-density excess $(\omega-\omega_0)/J$, which yields Eqs. (19)–(21); the polynomial expansion of the time-evolution operator carries the dynamics to Hilbert-space dimensions of order $10^8$ without truncating on-site occupation.

What would settle it

Take a Fock state not among the three studied, compute its predicted threshold from Eq. (20), and measure the temporal variance of a local observable after a quench across a range of $\gamma$; if the minimum temporal variance occurs at a $\gamma$ that disagrees with the prediction beyond finite-size scatter for several system sizes, the crossing-point estimate is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the chaotic region exposed by the Hamiltonian's eigenstate structure leaves a clear, quantitative imprint in the dynamics of local observables, provided one follows the energy trajectory of the specific Fock state that seeds the evolution. For states spread over the whole lattice, the interaction-energy expectation value scales as $\langle h_{\mathrm{int}}\rangle\sim N$ at fixed density, so the chaos threshold in the thermodynamic limit is a fixed value of $\gamma$: $\gamma_c^h=1/2$ for the homogeneous state and $\gamma_c^s\to 1/2$ for the staggered state at unit density. For a cloud localized on $\ell=3$ sites, the energy scales as $N^2$, so the threshold is only well defined in the rescaled parameter $\eta=J/(UN)$, with $\eta_c^\ell=1/12$ in the thermodynamic limit. The dynamical signature is a sharp suppression of the temporal variance of the single-site density and of its fluctuations in the chaotic interval, decaying exponentially with system size, while both the interaction-dominated and the tunneling-dominated regimes retain persistent temporal fluctuations. The paper thus establishes a correspondence between spectral ergodicity, the energy scaling of the initial state, and experimentally observable equilibration on accessible time scales.

Load-bearing premise

The analytical threshold formulas rest on the assumption that the crossing point of the small-$\gamma$ and large-$\gamma$ asymptotic approximations to the energy-density excess marks the actual onset of chaos; if that crossing fails to track the true chaotic transition, the predicted thresholds would not hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At unit density, the chaos threshold for the homogeneous Fock state is $\gamma_c^h=1/2$ in the thermodynamic limit, so an experiment can place the system inside or outside the ergodic phase by choosing tunneling above or below this value.
  • Sudden-expansion experiments that start from localized clouds should compare runs at fixed $\eta=J/(UN)$ rather than fixed $\gamma$; otherwise different particle numbers or cloud sizes will display apparent threshold shifts.
  • In the chaotic phase, residual temporal fluctuations of local observables decay exponentially with system size, so larger lattices give a sharper dynamical demarcation of the chaotic region.
  • For any Fock initial state, the onset of chaos can be estimated analytically from the excess energy density above the ground state, without solving the full spectral problem.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper tests only three families of Fock states, but since Eq. (20) depends only on $\langle h_{\mathrm{int}}\rangle/N$, the same threshold formula should apply to arbitrary Fock states at fixed energy density; a numerical scan over randomly sampled Fock states would settle this.
  • The $\eta$-scaling for localized clouds implies a concrete experimental prescription the paper does not spell out: when varying the number of particles in an expansion experiment, the interaction strength should be rescaled accordingly to keep $\eta$ fixed, or the apparent chaotic boundary will shift.
  • The exponential decay of temporal fluctuations with system size is an eigenstate-thermalization-type signature viewed from the time domain; a natural extension is to track the width of the fluctuation-suppression interval in $\gamma$ as $L\to\infty$ to locate the exact thermodynamic boundary of the chaotic phase.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the 1D Bose-Hubbard model with hard-wall boundary conditions and asks how the onset of ergodic dynamics for Fock initial states is related to the spectral characterization of many-body quantum chaos. Three representative initial states are considered: a homogeneous density state, a staggered density state near mid-spectrum, and a localized cloud occupying three central sites. The authors compute the spectral chaos region via the variance of the generalized fractal dimension, track the energy trajectories of the initial states, and derive analytic estimates for the chaos threshold by equating the small- and large-tunneling asymptotics of the excess energy density above the ground state. They then simulate the time evolution up to 200 tunneling times using Chebyshev expansion and show that local observables—on-site densities, density fluctuations, and cloud width—exhibit a regime of strongly suppressed temporal fluctuations that matches the spectrally identified chaotic region. The central quantitative claims are the threshold formulas (19)–(21), the distinction between the control parameters γ=J/U and η=J/(UN), and the assertion that the onset of chaos for any Fock initial state can be estimated from its energy density.

Significance. If the analytic estimates are valid beyond the specific states tested, the paper provides a practically useful, parameter-free prediction: a Fock initial state's energy density above the ground state determines the tunneling strength at which it enters the ergodic phase, with a distinct scaling (γ versus η) depending on whether the state's interaction energy grows linearly or quadratically with N. The dynamical benchmarks use experimentally accessible observables and time scales, and the numerical effort is substantial: dynamics are propagated without truncating the local occupation number in Hilbert spaces up to dimension about 5.8×10^8 for N=L=17. The paper also gives correct credit to the earlier spectral diagnostics of Refs. [31–33] and does not fit the thresholds to the chaotic-phase data, so the comparison is a genuine test of the analytic expressions. The main weakness is that the central threshold derivation is a heuristic crossing-point estimate and is validated on only three purpose-built states at unit filling; the claim that the formula applies to 'any Fock initial state' therefore outruns the evidence presented.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV, Eqs. (18a)–(21)] The threshold formulas (19)–(21) are obtained by equating the two-term small-γ expansion (18a) with the large-γ asymptote (18b) of the energy-density excess. This is a heuristic crossing-point estimate: it assumes the truncated perturbation expansion is still reliable where it meets the asymptote, that the true excess curve crosses that asymptote only once, and that this energy crossover marks the eigenstate-ergodicity transition measured by var(D̃1). None of these assumptions is derived or systematically tested. The manuscript validates Eqs. (19)–(21) only for the three states |ψ_h⟩, |ψ_s⟩, and |ψ_ℓ⟩ at unit filling, mostly at N=L up to 17. Since the abstract and Sec. VI claim that 'the onset of chaos for any Fock initial state can be analytically estimated,' the paper needs a systematic comparison over a broad sample of Fock states—varying densities, site configurations, and system sizes—between the predicted γ_c or η_c and the spectral threshold extracted from var(D̃1) or from the dynamical ergodic regime. Without such a test, the central predictive claim is not established.
  2. [§II and §VI, Eqs. (8)–(12), (20)] Equation (20) predicts the threshold from ⟨h_int⟩/N alone, but Eq. (12) shows that the local density of states of a Fock state also depends on the spatial correlations ∑_j n_j n_{j+1}. Two Fock states with the same interaction energy can therefore have very different tunneling-generated spectral widths and eigenstate decompositions, so it is not evident that their chaos thresholds coincide. The claim that the threshold for 'any Fock initial state' is determined solely by its energy density requires either a proof that the LDOS correlations are irrelevant in the crossing region or a numerical scan that includes, for example, states with identical ⟨h_int⟩ but different numbers of nearest-neighbor domain walls. As it stands, the manuscript's own Eq. (12) suggests that the state-universality claim is missing a load-bearing validation.
  3. [Sec. VI and Figs. 5–7] The conclusion states a 'perfect correspondence' between the spectrally identified chaotic region and the emergence of ergodic dynamics, but the quantitative comparison in Figs. 5–7 is qualitative. For the homogeneous state, the spectrally and dynamically identified chaotic regime extends over roughly 0.2 ≲ γ ≲ 20 in Fig. 5, while the analytic threshold (19) gives γ_c^h = 1/2; for the staggered state the dynamical ergodic region is 0.5 ≲ γ ≲ 10 in Fig. 6(c), compared with γ_c^s → 1/2; and for the localized state the dynamical region is roughly 0.08 ≲ η ≲ 1 in Fig. 7(c), compared with η_c^ℓ = 1/12. The thresholds capture the lower edge reasonably, but the upper edge and the width of the ergodic window are not predicted. The wording should be softened to 'good qualitative agreement' unless a quantitative metric of correspondence (e.g., a threshold extraction with error bars) is provided.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 7 caption] The vertical dotted line in Fig. 7(c) is labeled η_c^s = 1/12 in the caption and text, but it corresponds to the localized state |ψ_ℓ⟩; this should be η_c^ℓ.
  2. [§V, time variance] The temporal variance (22) is evaluated over τ∈[100,200] without reporting statistical uncertainties or sensitivity to the choice of time window; adding a brief discussion or a check over a different window would strengthen the claim that the suppressed fluctuations are stationary.
  3. [§I and Sec. IV] The phrase 'vulgo chaotic' is informal; the paper otherwise maintains a consistent technical register, and a standard term such as 'the so-called chaotic phase' would be more appropriate.
  4. [Eq. (16)] The ground-state energy density expansion in Eq. (16) is stated to follow from standard perturbation theory, but the derivation is not shown; a one-sentence justification or a reference to the perturbation expansion in γ would help the reader verify the coefficient 2(n+1).
  5. [Table I] The staggered states are listed for L=11,13,14,16,17, but the construction rule ⌊(N−2)/3⌋ is not immediately transparent for all entries; a brief worked example beyond L=10 would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central thresholds are parameter-free analytic crossing estimates, independently benchmarked against spectral and dynamical numerics.

full rationale

The paper's quantitative predictions, Eqs. (19)-(21), are obtained by equating the small-gamma expansion (18a) with the large-gamma asymptote (18b) of the energy-density excess (omega - omega0)/J. These asymptotic forms follow from the exact Fock-state energy (Eq. 15) and from standard perturbation theory for the ground-state energy density (Eqs. 16-17), with no free parameter fitted to the chaotic-phase data. The resulting thresholds are then compared, not calibrated, against the spectral variance of the generalized fractal dimension (Figs. 1-2) and against Chebyshev time-evolution dynamics (Figs. 5-7). The spectral diagnostic var(Dtilde1) is attributed to the authors' prior Refs. [31-33,55], but those citations are not the sole support: the present paper recomputes the spectral data and benchmarks it against GOE predictions, so the self-citation is corroborated by in-paper, externally falsifiable numerics rather than being an unverified premise. The crossing-point estimate is explicitly a heuristic ('may be used as an estimate'), and its agreement with independent dynamics is the evidence offered, not an input. A possible weakness is that the general 'any Fock initial state' claim is validated on only three purpose-built states at unit filling, but that is a validation gap or correctness risk, not circularity: nothing in the derivation defines the target conclusion into the assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data for the central thresholds; the only fitted curve is the ancillary exponential decay of temporal fluctuations in the Fig. 5(b) inset. The axioms are standard quantum-chaos diagnostics plus the heuristic crossing-point rule, and no new entities are introduced.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The variance of the generalized fractal dimension of eigenstates, relative to GOE predictions, identifies the chaotic phase.
    Used throughout Sections III and IV to locate the chaotic region; based on the authors' prior work (Refs. 31-33).
  • ad hoc to paper The crossing point of the asymptotic expansions of the energy-density excess locates the chaos threshold.
    Introduced in Section IV, Eqs. (18)-(21); this heuristic is not derived from the eigenstate ergodicity criterion.
  • domain assumption Fock states in the on-site basis are the experimentally relevant initial states, and their energy expectation values determine the relevant spectral region.
    Stated in Section II and used throughout; consistent with cold-atom quench experiments.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of How to seed ergodic dynamics of interacting bosons under conditions of many-body quantum chaos." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TG67UYPH

@misc{pith2026250113556,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: How to seed ergodic dynamics of interacting bosons under conditions of many-body quantum chaos},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TG67UYPH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13556}
}
read the original abstract

We demonstrate how the initial state of ultracold atoms in an optical lattice controls the emergence of ergodic dynamics as the underlying spectral structure is tuned into the quantum chaotic regime. Distinct initial states' chaos threshold values in terms of tunneling as compared to interaction strength are identified, as well as dynamical signatures of the chaos transition, on the level of experimentally accessible observables and time scales.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.13556 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Perspectives of the chaotic phase for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Dependence on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Spectral width [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Dynamical features of (a) on-site density expectation values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Dynamical observables for the initially staggered density configurations given in Table [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Dynamical observables for initially localized Fock states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    O.Hittmair, LehrbuchderQuantentheorie (VerlagKarlThiemig, München, 1972)

    1972

  2. [2]

    T.Geisel,G.Radons,andJ.Rubner,Kolmogorov-Arnol’d-Moser Barriers in the Quantum Dynamics of Chaotic Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.57, 2883 (1986)

    1986

  3. [3]

    M. L. Du and J. B. Delos, Effect of closed classical orbits on quantum spectra: Ionization of atoms in a magnetic field, Phys. Rev. Lett.58, 1731 (1987)

    1987

  4. [4]

    Brunner, L

    E. Brunner, L. Pausch, E. G. Carnio, G. Dufour, A. Rodríguez, and A. Buchleitner, Many-Body Interference at the Onset of Chaos, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 080401 (2023)

    2023

  5. [5]

    Giannoni, A

    M.-J. Giannoni, A. Voros, and J. Zinn-Justin, eds.,Chaos and QuantumPhysics,Écoled’étédephysiquethéoriquedesHouches, Session LII (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1989)

    1989

  6. [6]

    Buchleitner and D

    A. Buchleitner and D. Delande, Quantum dynamics of a circular rydberg state in a microwave field, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 3633 (1993)

    work page 1993

  7. [7]

    A. R. R. Carvalho and A. Buchleitner, Web-Assisted Tunneling In The Kicked Harmonic Oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 204101 (2004)

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    Brünner, G

    T. Brünner, G. Dufour, A. Rodríguez, and A. Buchleitner, Signa- tures of Indistinguishability in Bosonic Many-Body Dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 210401 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 85 references
  1. [9]

    Evrard, A

    B. Evrard, A. Pizzi, S. I. Mistakidis, and C. B. Dag, Quantum many-bodyscarsfromunstableperiodicorbits,Phys.Rev.B 110, 144302 (2024)

    2024

  2. [10]

    M. V. Berry, Regular and irregular semiclassical wavefunctions, J. Phys. A Gen. Phys.10, 2083 (1977)

    1977

  3. [11]

    G.Tanner,K.Richter,andJ.-M.Rost,Thetheoryoftwo-electron atoms: between ground state and complete fragmentation, Rev. Mod. Phys.72, 497 (2000)

    2000

  4. [12]

    M. C. Gutzwiller,Chaos in Classical and Quantum Mechanics (Springer, New York, 1990) arXiv:arXiv:1011.1669v3

    1990 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Laskar, Frequency analysis for multi-dimensional systems

    J. Laskar, Frequency analysis for multi-dimensional systems. globaldynamicsanddiffusion,PhysicaD:NonlinearPhenomena 67, 257 (1993)

    1993

  6. [14]

    J.vonMilczewski,G.H.F.Diercksen,andT.Uzer,Computation of the arnol’d web for the hydrogen atom in crossed electric and magnetic fields, Phys. Rev. Lett.76, 2890 (1996)

    1996

  7. [15]

    P.SchlagheckandA.Buchleitner,Stableclassicalconfigurations instronglydrivenhelium,PhysicaD:NonlinearPhenomena 131, 110 (1999), classical Chaos and its Quantum Manifestations

    1999

  8. [16]

    Stöber, A

    J. Stöber, A. Bäcker, and R. Ketzmerick, Quantum transport through partial barriers in higher-dimensional systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 047201 (2024)

    2024

  9. [17]

    Jaksch, C

    D. Jaksch, C. Bruder, J. I. Cirac, C. W. Gardiner, and P. Zoller, Cold bosonic atoms in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 3108 (1998)

    1998

  10. [18]

    Trimborn, D

    F. Trimborn, D. Witthaut, and H. J. Korsch, Beyond mean-field dynamics of small Bose-Hubbard systems based on the number- conserving phase-space approach, Phys. Rev. A79, 013608 (2009)

    2009

  11. [19]

    A.BuchleitnerandA.R.Kolovsky,Interaction-InducedDecoher- ence of Atomic Bloch Oscillations, Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 253002 (2003)

    2003

  12. [20]

    A. R. Kolovsky and A. Buchleitner, Quantum chaos in the Bose-Hubbard model, Europhys. Lett.68, 632 (2004)

    2004

  13. [21]

    A. V. Ponomarev, J. Madroñero, A. R. Kolovsky, and A. Buch- 11 leitner, Atomic current across an optical lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 050404 (2006)

    2006

  14. [22]

    Biroli, C

    G. Biroli, C. Kollath, and A. M. Läuchli, Effect of Rare Fluctua- tions on the Thermalization of Isolated Quantum Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 250401 (2010)

    2010

  15. [23]

    Kollath, G

    C. Kollath, G. Roux, G. Biroli, and A. M. Läuchli, Statistical propertiesofthespectrumoftheextendedBose-Hubbardmodel, J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp.2010, P08011 (2010)

    2010

  16. [24]

    Beugeling, R

    W. Beugeling, R. Moessner, and M. Haque, Finite-size scaling of eigenstate thermalization, Phys. Rev. E89, 042112 (2014)

    2014

  17. [25]

    Beugeling, R

    W. Beugeling, R. Moessner, and M. Haque, Off-diagonal matrix elementsoflocaloperatorsinmany-bodyquantumsystems,Phys. Rev. E91, 012144 (2015)

    2015

  18. [26]

    Beugeling, A

    W. Beugeling, A. Andreanov, and M. Haque, Global charac- teristics of all eigenstates of local many-body Hamiltonians: participation ratio and entanglement entropy, J. Stat. Mech. The- ory Exp.2015, P02002 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Dubertrand and S

    R. Dubertrand and S. Müller, Spectral statistics of chaotic many- body systems, New J. Phys.18, 033009 (2016)

    2016

  20. [28]

    W.Beugeling,A.Bäcker,R.Moessner,andM.Haque,Statistical propertiesofeigenstateamplitudesincomplexquantumsystems, Phys. Rev. E98, 022204 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    de la Cruz, S

    J. de la Cruz, S. Lerma-Hernández, and J. G. Hirsch, Quantum chaos in a system with high degree of symmetries, Phys. Rev. E 102, 032208 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Russomanno, M

    A. Russomanno, M. Fava, and R. Fazio, Nonergodic behavior of the clean Bose-Hubbard chain, Phys. Rev. B102, 144302 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Pausch, E

    L. Pausch, E. G. Carnio, A. Rodríguez, and A. Buchleitner, Chaos and Ergodicity across the Energy Spectrum of Interacting Bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 150601 (2021)

    2021

  24. [32]

    Phys.23, 123036 (2021)

    L.Pausch,E.G.Carnio,A.Buchleitner,andA.Rodríguez,Chaos intheBose-Hubbardmodelandrandomtwo-bodyHamiltonians, New J. Phys.23, 123036 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    Pausch, A

    L. Pausch, A. Buchleitner, E. G. Carnio, and A. Rodríguez, Optimal route to quantum chaos in the Bose-Hubbard model, J. Phys. A55, 324002 (2022), arXiv:2205.04209

    2022 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Kollath, A

    C. Kollath, A. M. Läuchli, and E. Altman, Quench Dynamics andNonequilibriumPhaseDiagramoftheBose-HubbardModel, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 180601 (2007)

    2007

  27. [35]

    A. M. Läuchli and C. Kollath, Spreading of correlations and en- tanglementafteraquenchintheone-dimensionalBose-Hubbard model, J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp.2008, P05018 (2008)

    2008

  28. [36]

    Cramer, A

    M. Cramer, A. Flesch, I. P. McCulloch, U. Schollwöck, and J. Eisert, Exploring Local Quantum Many-Body Relaxation by Atoms in Optical Superlattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 063001 (2008)

    2008

  29. [37]

    Roux, Quenches in quantum many-body systems: One- dimensional Bose-Hubbard model reexamined, Phys

    G. Roux, Quenches in quantum many-body systems: One- dimensional Bose-Hubbard model reexamined, Phys. Rev. A 79, 021608(R) (2009)

    2009

  30. [38]

    Roux, Finite-size effects in global quantum quenches: Ex- amples from free bosons in an harmonic trap and the one- dimensional Bose-Hubbard model, Phys

    G. Roux, Finite-size effects in global quantum quenches: Ex- amples from free bosons in an harmonic trap and the one- dimensional Bose-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. A81, 053604 (2010)

    2010

  31. [39]

    P.Barmettler,D.Poletti,M.Cheneau,andC.Kollath,Propagation front of correlations in an interacting Bose gas, Phys. Rev. A85, 053625 (2012)

    2012

  32. [40]

    Vidmar, S

    L. Vidmar, S. Langer, I. P. McCulloch, U. Schneider, U. Scholl- wöck, and F. Heidrich-Meisner, Sudden expansion of Mott insu- lators in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B88, 235117 (2013)

    2013

  33. [41]

    Meinert, M

    F. Meinert, M. J. Mark, E. Kirilov, K. Lauber, P. Weinmann, M. Gröbner, and H.-C. Nägerl, Interaction-Induced Quantum Phase Revivals and Evidence for the Transition to the Quantum Chaotic Regime in 1D Atomic Bloch Oscillations, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 193003 (2014)

    2014

  34. [42]

    S.Sorg,L.Vidmar,L.Pollet,andF.Heidrich-Meisner,Relaxation andthermalizationintheone-dimensionalBose-Hubbardmodel: Acasestudyfortheinteractionquantumquenchfromtheatomic limit, Phys. Rev. A90, 033606 (2014)

    2014

  35. [43]

    Andraschko and J

    F. Andraschko and J. Sirker, Propagation of a single-hole defect in the one-dimensional Bose-Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B91, 235132 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    Rep.9, 4135 (2019)

    J.Despres,L.Villa,andL.Sanchez-Palencia,Twofoldcorrelation spreading in a strongly correlated lattice Bose gas, Sci. Rep.9, 4135 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Wittmann W., E

    K. Wittmann W., E. R. Castro, A. Foerster, and L. F. Santos, In- teracting bosons in a triple well: Preface of many-body quantum chaos, Phys. Rev. E105, 034204 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Commun.13, 2495 (2022)

    C.Berke,E.Varvelis,S.Trebst,A.Altland,andD.P.DiVincenzo, Transmonplatformforquantumcomputingchallengedbychaotic fluctuations, Nat. Commun.13, 2495 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    Basilewitsch, S.-D

    D. Basilewitsch, S.-D. Börner, C. Berke, A. Altland, S. Trebst, andC.P.Koch,Chaoticfluctuationsinauniversalsetoftransmon qubit gates, (2023), arXiv:2311.14592

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Börner, C

    S.-D. Börner, C. Berke, D. P. DiVincenzo, S. Trebst, and A. Alt- land, Classical chaos in quantum computers, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 033128 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    J. Choi, A. L. Shaw, I. S. Madjarov, X. Xie, R. Finkelstein, J. P. Covey,J.S.Cotler,D.K.Mark,H.-Y.Huang,A.Kale,H.Pichler, F. G. S. L. Brandão, S. Choi, and M. Endres, Preparing random statesandbenchmarkingwithmany-bodyquantumchaos,Nature 613, 468 (2023)

    2023

  42. [50]

    D. K. Mark, J. Choi, A. L. Shaw, M. Endres, and S. Choi, Benchmarking Quantum Simulators Using Ergodic Quantum Dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 110601 (2023)

    2023

  43. [51]

    Lewenstein, A

    M. Lewenstein, A. Sanpera, V. Ahufinger, B. Damski, A. Sen, andU.Sen,Ultracoldatomicgasesinopticallattices: mimicking condensedmatterphysicsandbeyond,Adv.Phys. 56,243(2007)

    2007

  44. [52]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.80, 885 (2008)

    2008

  45. [53]

    M.A.Cazalilla,R.Citro,T.Giamarchi,E.Orignac,andM.Rigol, One dimensional bosons: From condensed matter systems to ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 1405 (2011)

    2011

  46. [54]

    K. V. Krutitsky, Ultracold bosons with short-range interaction in regular optical lattices, Phys. Rep.607, 1 (2016)

    2016

  47. [55]

    Pausch,Eigenstate structure and quantum chaos in the Bose- HubbardHamiltonian,Dissertation,Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg (2022)

    L. Pausch,Eigenstate structure and quantum chaos in the Bose- HubbardHamiltonian,Dissertation,Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg (2022)

    2022

  48. [56]

    Cheneau, P

    M. Cheneau, P. Barmettler, D. Poletti, M. Endres, P. Schauß, T. Fukuhara, C. Gross, I. Bloch, C. Kollath, and S. Kuhr, Light- cone-like spreading of correlations in a quantum many-body system, Nature481, 484 (2012)

    2012

  49. [57]

    Meinert, M

    F. Meinert, M. J. Mark, E. Kirilov, K. Lauber, P. Weinmann, M.Grobner,A.J.Daley,andH.-C.Nagerl,Observationofmany- body dynamics in long-range tunneling after a quantum quench, Science344, 1259 (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    A. M. Kaufman, M. E. Tai, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, P. M. Preiss, and M. Greiner, Quantum thermalization through entanglement in an isolated many-body system, Science353, 794 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    Rispoli, A

    M. Rispoli, A. Lukin, R. Schittko, S. Kim, M. E. Tai, J. Léonard, and M. Greiner, Quantum critical behaviour at the many-body localization transition, Nature573, 385 (2019)

    2019

  52. [60]

    Lukin, M

    A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, M. E. Tai, A. M. Kaufman, S. Choi, V. Khemani, J. Léonard, and M. Greiner, Probing entanglement in a many-body-localized system, Science364, 256 (2019)

    2019

  53. [61]

    Bohrdt, S

    A. Bohrdt, S. Kim, A. Lukin, M. Rispoli, R. Schittko, M. Knap, M.Greiner,andJ.Léonard,AnalyzingNonequilibriumQuantum 12 States through Snapshots with Artificial Neural Networks, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 150504 (2021)

    2021

  54. [62]

    Takasu, T

    Y. Takasu, T. Yagami, H. Asaka, Y. Fukushima, K. Nagao, S.Goto,I.Danshita,andY.Takahashi,Energyredistributionand spatiotemporal evolution of correlations after a sudden quench of the Bose-Hubbard model, Sci. Adv.6, eaba9255 (2020)

    2020

  55. [63]

    Léonard, S

    J. Léonard, S. Kim, M. Rispoli, A. Lukin, R. Schittko, J. Kwan, E.Demler,D.Sels,andM.Greiner,Probingtheonsetofquantum avalanches in a many-body localized system, Nat. Phys.19, 481 (2023)

    2023

  56. [64]

    Phys.8, 325 (2012)

    S.Trotzky,Y.A.Chen,A.Flesch,I.P.McCulloch,U.Schollwöck, J.Eisert,andI.Bloch,Probingtherelaxationtowardsequilibrium in an isolated strongly correlated one-dimensional Bose gas, Nat. Phys.8, 325 (2012)

    2012

  57. [65]

    Bordia, H

    P. Bordia, H. P. Lüschen, S. S. Hodgman, M. Schreiber, I. Bloch, and U. Schneider, Coupling Identical one-dimensional Many- Body Localized Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 140401 (2016)

    2016

  58. [66]

    Rubio-Abadal, J.-Y

    A. Rubio-Abadal, J.-Y. Choi, J. Zeiher, S. Hollerith, J. Rui, I.Bloch,andC.Gross,Many-BodyDelocalizationinthePresence of a Quantum Bath, Phys. Rev. X9, 041014 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    J. P. Ronzheimer, M. Schreiber, S. Braun, S. S. Hodgman, S. Langer, I. P. McCulloch, F. Heidrich-Meisner, I. Bloch, and U. Schneider, Expansion Dynamics of Interacting Bosons in Homogeneous Lattices in One and Two Dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 205301 (2013)

    2013

  60. [68]

    Khemani, D

    J.-Y.Choi,S.Hild,J.Zeiher,P.Schauß,A.Rubio-Abadal,T.Yef- sah, V. Khemani, D. A. Huse, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Exploring themany-bodylocalizationtransitionintwodimensions,Science 352, 1547 (2016)

    2016

  61. [69]

    Lindinger, A

    J. Lindinger, A. Buchleitner, and A. Rodríguez, Many-Body MultifractalitythroughoutBosonicSuperfluidandMottInsulator Phases, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 106603 (2019)

    2019

  62. [70]

    However, as they all have the same energy and similar energywidths,theywillexhibitqualitativelythesamedynamical behavior

    Note that this staggered state is not uniquely defined, since the sites may be sorted into any order without changing the energy. However, as they all have the same energy and similar energywidths,theywillexhibitqualitativelythesamedynamical behavior

  63. [71]

    Thus, as𝛾→∞ , the corresponding𝜀isentirelydefinedbythespectralbounds 𝐸max= −𝐸min= 2𝑁𝐽, yielding𝜀→ 0.5

    This is due to the fact that the mean energy of any Fock state depends only on the interaction term. Thus, as𝛾→∞ , the corresponding𝜀isentirelydefinedbythespectralbounds 𝐸max= −𝐸min= 2𝑁𝐽, yielding𝜀→ 0.5

  64. [72]

    Haake, S

    F. Haake, S. Gnutzmann, and M. Kuś,Quantum Signatures of Chaos, edited by H. Haken, Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018)

    2018

  65. [73]

    Itmustbenoted,though,thatthethermodynamiclimithereunder closer inspection isdistinctfrom the semiclassical limit which is attheverycoreofquantumchaos,inasmuchas,inthelatterlimit, characteristic quantum features are compared to a well-defined underlying classical phase space st...

  66. [74]

    E. R. Castro, K. W. W., J. Chávez-Carlos, I. Roditi, A. Foerster, and J. G. Hirsch, Quantum-classical correspondence in a triple- well bosonic model: From integrability to chaos, Phys. Rev. A 109, 032225 (2024)

    2024

  67. [75]

    Hiller, T

    M. Hiller, T. Kottos, and T. Geisel, Complexity in parametric Bose-Hubbard Hamiltonians and structural analysis of eigen- states, Phys. Rev. A73, 061604(R) (2006)

    2006

  68. [76]

    Hiller, T

    M. Hiller, T. Kottos, and T. Geisel, Wave-packet dynamics in energy space of a chaotic trimeric Bose-Hubbard system, Phys. Rev. A79, 023621 (2009)

    2009

  69. [77]

    Note that the oscillations observable on transient time scales before equilibration can be attributed to particles being reflected at the edge sites: Such oscillations are prominently seen in the chaotic𝛾-range, and the their frequency is found to decrease as the lattice, and ...

  70. [78]

    Srednicki, Thermal fluctuations in quantized chaotic systems, J

    M. Srednicki, Thermal fluctuations in quantized chaotic systems, J. Phys. A. Math. Gen.29, L75 (1996)

    1996

  71. [79]

    Srednicki, The approach to thermal equilibrium in quantized chaotic systems, J

    M. Srednicki, The approach to thermal equilibrium in quantized chaotic systems, J. Phys. A. Math. Gen.32, 1163 (1999)

    1999

  72. [80]

    Venzl, A

    H. Venzl, A. J. Daley, F. Mintert, and A. Buchleitner, Statistics ofSchmidtcoefficientsandthesimulabilityofcomplexquantum systems, Phys. Rev. E79, 056223 (2009)

    2009

  73. [81]

    Weiße and H

    A. Weiße and H. Fehske, Chebyshev Expansion Techniques, in Comput. Many-Particle Phys.(Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008) pp. 545–577

    2008

  74. [82]

    Balay, S

    S. Balay, S. Abhyankar, M. F. Adams, S. Benson, J. Brown, P.Brune,K.Buschelman,E.Constantinescu,L.Dalcin,A.Dener, V. Eijkhout, J. Faibussowitsch, W. D. Gropp, V. Hapla, T. Isaac, P. Jolivet, D. Karpeev, D. Kaushik, M. G. Knepley, F. Kong, S. Kruger, D. A. May, L. C. McInnes, R....

    2023

  75. [83]

    Balay, W

    S. Balay, W. D. Gropp, L. C. McInnes, and B. F. Smith, Effi- cient management of parallelism in object oriented numerical software libraries, inModern Software Tools in Scientific Com- puting, edited by E. Arge, A. M. Bruaset, and H. P. Langtangen (Birkhäuser Press, 1997) pp. 163–202

    1997

  76. [84]

    Balay, S

    S. Balay, S. Abhyankar, M. F. Adams, S. Benson, J. Brown, P. Brune, K. Buschelman, E. M. Constantinescu, L. Dalcin, A.Dener, V.Eijkhout, J.Faibussowitsch, W.D.Gropp, V.Hapla, T. Isaac, P. Jolivet, D. Karpeev, D. Kaushik, M. G. Knepley, F. Kong, S. Kruger, D. A. May, L. C. McInn...

    2023

  77. [85]

    V.Hernandez,J.E.Roman,andV.Vidal,SLEPc: Ascalableand flexible toolkit for the solution of eigenvalue problems, ACM Trans. Math. Software31, 351 (2005)

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.