Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Intermediate Times Dilemma for Open Quantum System: Filtered Approximation to The Refined Weak Coupling Limit

Published 10 Jun 2021 in quant-ph | (2106.05776v3)

Abstract: The famous Davies-GKSL secular Markovian master equation is tremendously successful in approximating the evolution of open quantum systems in terms of just a few parameters. However, the fully-secular Davies-GKSL equation fails to accurately describe time scales short enough, i.e., comparable to the inverse of differences of frequencies present in the system of interest. A complementary approach that works well for short times but is not suitable after this short interval is known as the quasi-secular master equation. Still, both approaches fail to have any faithful dynamics in the intermediate time interval. Simultaneously, descriptions of dynamics that apply to the aforementioned "grey zone" often are computationally much more complex than master equations or are mathematically not well-structured. The filtered approximation (FA) to the refined weak coupling limit has the simplistic spirit of the Davies-GKSL equation and allows capturing the dynamics in the intermediate time regime. At the same time, our non-Markovian equation yields completely positive dynamics. We exemplify the performance of the FA equation in the cases of the spin-boson system and qutrit-boson system in which two distant time scales appear.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (41)
  1. R. Alicki and K. Lendi, Quantum Dynamical Semigroups and Applications, Lecture notes in physics (Springer-Verlag, 1987).
  2. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (2006).
  3. E. B. Davies, Comm. Math. Phys. 39, 91 (1974).
  4. V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys. 17, 821 (1976).
  5. G. Lindblad, Comm. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976).
  6. R. S. Whitney, J. Phys A: Math. Theor. 41, 175304 (2008).
  7. A. Ishizaki and G. R. Fleming, The Journal of Chemical Physics 130, 234111 (2009a).
  8. A. Ishizaki and G. R. Fleming, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 106, 17255 (2009b).
  9. R. Alicki, Phys. Rev. A 40, 4077 (1989).
  10. F. Bloch, Phys. Rev. 105, 1206 (1957).
  11. A. G. Redfield, IBM Journal of Research and Development 1, 19 (1957).
  12. A. Rivas, Physical Review A 95 (2017).
  13. A. Rivas, Entropy 21, 725 (2019).
  14. F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and U. Marzolino, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 88, 20011 (2009).
  15. F. Benatti, R. Floreanini, and U. Marzolino, Physical Review A 81, 10.1103/physreva.81.012105 (2010).
  16. D. Farina and V. Giovannetti, Phys. Rev. A 100, 012107 (2019).
  17. D. Davidović, Quantum 4, 326 (2020), Arxiv:2003.09063 .
  18. R. Hartmann and W. T. Strunz, Phys. Rev. A 101, 012103 (2020).
  19. M. Winczewski and R. Alicki, Renormalization in the theory of open quantum systems via the self-consistency condition (2023), arXiv:2112.11962 [quant-ph] .
  20. L. A. Correa and J. Glatthard, Potential renormalisation, lamb shift and mean-force gibbs state – to shift or not to shift? (2023), arXiv:2305.08941 [quant-ph] .
  21. J. D. Cresser and C. Facer 10.48550/ARXIV.1710.09939 (2017).
  22. A. Levy and R. Kosloff, Europhys. Lett. 107, 20004 (2014).
  23. E. B. Davies, Ann. I. H. Poincare 28, 91 (1978).
  24. A. Trushechkin, Phys. Rev. A 103, 062226 (2021).
  25. A. Rivas and S. F. Huelga, SpringerBriefs in Physics 10.1007/978-3-642-23354-8 (2012).
  26. M. Winczewski, [In preparation]  (2023).
  27. B. Vacchini, Phys. Rev. E 63, 066115 (2001).
  28. G. Kiršanskas, M. Franckié, and A. Wacker, Phys. Rev. B 97, 035432 (2018).
  29. A. Suárez, R. Silbey, and I. Oppenheim, The Journal of Chemical Physics 97, 5101 (1992).
  30. D. P. DiVincenzo, Phys. Rev. A 51, 1015–1022 (1995).
  31. A. Steane, Rep. Prog. Phys. 61, 117–173 (1998).
  32. D. Bouwmeester, A. Ekert, and A. Zeilinger, eds., The Physics of Quantum Information (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2000).
  33. G. M. Timofeev and A. S. Trushechkin, International Journal of Modern Physics A 37, 10.1142/s0217751x22430217 (2022).
  34. A. Suárez, R. Silbey, and I. Oppenheim, The Journal of chemical physics 97, 5101 (1992).
  35. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 210401 (2009).
  36. A. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 050403 (2010b).
  37. D. Chruściński, A. Kossakowski, and A. Rivas, Phys. Rev. A 83, 052128 (2011).
  38. Y. Tanimura, The Journal of Chemical Physics 153, 020901 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0011599 .
  39. C. Meier and D. J. Tannor, The Journal of Chemical Physics 111, 3365 (1999), _eprint: https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article-pdf/111/8/3365/10804029/3365_1_online.pdf.
  40. Y. Tanimura and R. Kubo, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 58, 101 (1989).
  41. J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori 10.1016/j.cpc.2012.11.019 (2012), arXiv:1211.6518 .
Citations (9)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.