Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1010.1326 · Communications in Theoretical Physics

Sufficient Condition for Validity of Quantum Adiabatic Theorem

Yong Tao

Published Mar 1, 2012• 4 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In this paper, we attempt to give a sufficient condition of guaranteeing the validity of the proof of the quantum adiabatic theorem. The new sufficient condition can clearly remove the inconsistency and the counterexample of the quantum adiabatic theorem pointed out by Marzlin and Sanders [Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004) 160408].
DOI
10.1088/0253-6102/57/3/03

Related papers

Quantitative Conditions Do Not Guarantee the Validity of the Adiabatic Approximation

D. M. Tong, Kuldip Singh, L. C. Kwek +1 more

In this Letter, we point out that the widely used quantitative conditions in the adiabatic theorem are insufficient in that they do not guarantee the validity of the adiabatic approximation. We also reexamine the inconsistency issue raised by Marzlin and Sanders [Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004)] and elucidate the underlying cause.

arXiv:quant-ph/0509073•Physical Review Letters•Sep 9, 2005•153 citations

Quantum adiabatic theorem in light of the Marzlin-Sanders inconsistency

Juan Ortigoso

A consensus that questions the perfunctory use of the quantum adiabatic theorem has emerged since Marzlin and Sanders [Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004)] showed the existence of an inconsistency in the applicability of the theorem. Further analysis proved that the inconsistency may arise from the existence of resonant terms in the Hamiltonian, but recent work indicates that the debate about the full extent of the problem remains open. Here, we first show that key premises required in the standard demonstration of the theorem do not hold for a dual Hamiltonian involved in the Marzlin-Sanders inconsistency. Also, we show that two simple conditions can identify systems for which the adiabatic approximation fails, in spite of satisfying traditional quantitative conditions that were believed to guarantee its validity. Finally, we prove that the inconsistency only arises for Hamiltonians that contain resonant terms whose amplitudes go asymptotically to zero.

arXiv:1111.5195•Physical Review A•Sep 26, 2012•24 citations

Review of inconsistency of quantum adiabatic theorem

Yong Tao

In this paper, we note that there are two different types of inconsistencies of quantum adiabatic theorem in work of K. P. Marzlin and B. C. Sanders [Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408, 2004], MS inconsistency and MS counterexample. Nevertheless, these two types are often confused as one by many authors. We shall point out that the inconsistencies of quantum adiabatic theorem raised by the relevant references just can be classified as these two types.

arXiv:1010.1321•Oct 7, 2010•0 citations

Experimental Study of the Validity of Quantitative Conditions in the Quantum Adiabatic Theorem

Jiangfeng Du, Ling-Zhi Hu, Ya Wang +3 more

The quantum adiabatic theorem plays an important role in quantum mechanics. However, counter-examples were produced recently, indicating that their transition probabilities do not converge as predicted by the adiabatic theorem [K. P. Marzlin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004); D. M. Tong et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 110407 (2005)]. For a special class of Hamiltonians, we examine the standard criterion for adiabatic evolution experimentally and theoretically, as well as three newly suggested adiabatic conditions. We show that the standard criterion is neither sufficient nor necessary.

Physical Review Letters•Aug 7, 2008•73 citations

Reexamination of the quantum adiabatic theorem

Yan Zhao

The quantum adiabatic theorem is a widely applied result in quantum mechanics. However, recently, counterexamples were produced, indicating that the transition probabilities in some systems do not converge as predicted by the adiabatic theorem [K. P. Marzlin and B. C. Sanders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004)]. In this paper, we examine a proof of the adiabatic theorem, paying specific attention to the validity of the assumptions made in the proof. We show that the convergence of the transition probabilities is path dependent when the change in the Hamiltonian is large. Finally, we consider the application of this reformulated form of the adiabatic theorem to the adiabatic evolution paradigm in quantum computation.

Physical Review A•Mar 21, 2008•23 citations

Quantitative Condition is Necessary in Guaranteeing the Validity of the Adiabatic Approximation

D. M. Tong

The quantitative condition has been widely used in the practical applications of the adiabatic theorem. However, it had never been proved to be sufficient or necessary before. It was only recently found that the quantitative condition is insufficient, but whether it is necessary remains unresolved. In this Letter, we prove that the quantitative condition is necessary in guaranteeing the validity of the adiabatic approximation.

arXiv:1004.3100•Physical Review Letters•Mar 25, 2010•98 citations
A consensus that questions the perfunctory use of the quantum adiabatic theorem has emerged since Marzlin and Sanders [Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004)] showed the existence of an inconsistency in the applicability of the theorem. Further analysis proved that the inconsistency may arise from the existence of resonant terms in the Hamiltonian, but recent work indicates that the debate about the full extent of the problem remains open. Here, we first show that key premises required in the standard demonstration of the theorem do not hold for a dual Hamiltonian involved in the Marzlin-Sanders inconsistency. Also, we show that two simple conditions can identify systems for which the adiabatic approximation fails, in spite of satisfying traditional quantitative conditions that were believed to guarantee its validity. Finally, we prove that the inconsistency only arises for Hamiltonians that contain resonant terms whose amplitudes go asymptotically to zero.
The quantum adiabatic theorem plays an important role in quantum mechanics. However, counter-examples were produced recently, indicating that their transition probabilities do not converge as predicted by the adiabatic theorem [K. P. Marzlin et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004); D. M. Tong et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 110407 (2005)]. For a special class of Hamiltonians, we examine the standard criterion for adiabatic evolution experimentally and theoretically, as well as three newly suggested adiabatic conditions. We show that the standard criterion is neither sufficient nor necessary.
The quantum adiabatic theorem is a widely applied result in quantum mechanics. However, recently, counterexamples were produced, indicating that the transition probabilities in some systems do not converge as predicted by the adiabatic theorem [K. P. Marzlin and B. C. Sanders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 160408 (2004)]. In this paper, we examine a proof of the adiabatic theorem, paying specific attention to the validity of the assumptions made in the proof. We show that the convergence of the transition probabilities is path dependent when the change in the Hamiltonian is large. Finally, we consider the application of this reformulated form of the adiabatic theorem to the adiabatic evolution paradigm in quantum computation.