Abstract Dynamical anomalies are often observed near both the continuous and first-order phase transition points. We propose that the universal anomalies could originate from the geometric phase effects. A Pancharatnam-Berry phase is accumulated continuously in quantum states with the variation of tuning parameters. Phase transitions are supposed to induce an abrupt shift of the geometric phase. In our multi-level quantum model, the quantum interference induced by the geometric phase could prolong or shorten the relaxation times of excited states at phase transition points, which agrees with the experiments, models under sudden quenches and our semi-classical model. Furthermore, we find that by setting a phase shift of π, the excited state could be decoupled from the ground state by quantum cancellation so that the relaxation time even could diverge to infinity. Our work introduces the geometric phase to the study of conventional phase transitions as well as quantum phase transition, and could substantially extend the dephasing time of qubits for quantum computing.
Abstract Dynamical anomalies are often observed near both the continuous and first-order phase transition points. We propose that the universal anomalies could originate from the geometric phase effects. A Pancharatnam-Berry phase is accumulated continuously in quantum states with the variation of tuning parameters. Phase transitions are supposed to induce an abrupt shift of the geometric phase. In our multi-level quantum model, the quantum interference induced by the geometric phase could prolong or shorten the relaxation times of excited states at phase transition points, which agrees with the experiments, models under sudden quenches and our semi-classical model. Furthermore, we find that by setting a phase shift of π, the excited state could be decoupled from the ground state by quantum cancellation so that the relaxation time even could diverge to infinity. Our work introduces the geometric phase to the study of conventional phase transitions as well as quantum phase transition, and could substantially extend the dephasing time of qubits for quantum computing.
The geometric phase was first anticipated 1956 by Pancharatnam, in the context of polarised light. Much later, in 1984, Berry made an analogue discovery, but this time in the context of quantum mechanics. It turns our that the geometric phase, or Berry's phase, or the Pancharatnam phase, is a very general phenomenon. It is a phase shift that can be acquired by a system, when it has undergone a adiabatic process, bringing it back to its original initial conditions. If the parameter space of the involved Hamiltonian is curved, the final condition may involve a phase change. This effect has been demonstrated in a range of different interferometry experiments. Although the Pancharatnam phase has been seen, this has always been in studies involving the first order correlation, g(1), this is in the intereferogramm of two or more wave amplitudes. Here, we demonstrate experimental proofs of the effect of the Pancharatnam phase in intensity interferometry, or in other words, where the second order correlation factor g(2) is the relevant description of the interference.
In 1984 Berry addressed a quantum system undergoing a unitary and cyclic evolution under the action of a time-dependent Hamiltonian (M. V. Berry, 1984). The process was supposed to be adiabatic, meaning that the time scale of the system’s evolution was much shorter than the time scale of the changing Hamiltonian. Until Berry’s study, it was assumed that for a cyclic Hamiltonian the quantum state would acquire only so-called dynamical phases, deprived of physical meaning. Such phases could be eliminated by redefining the quantum state through a “gauge” transformation of the form |ψ〉 → eiα |ψ〉. However, Berry discovered that besides the dynamical, there was an additional phase that could not be “gauged away” and whose origin was geometric or topological. It depended on the path that |ψ〉 describes in the parameter space spanned by those parameters to which the Hamiltonian owed its time dependence. Berry’s discovery was the starting point for a great amount of investigations that brought to light topological aspects of both quantum and classical systems. Berry’s phase was soon recognized as a special case of more general phases that showed up when dealing with topological aspects of different systems. For example, the Aharonov-Bohm phase could be understood as a geometric phase. The rotation angle acquired by a parallel-transported vector after completing a closed loop in a gravitationally curved space-time region, is also a geometric, Berry-like phase. Another example is the precession of the plane of oscillation of a Foucault pendulum. Berry’s original formulation was directly applicable to the case of a spin-1/2 system evolving under the action of a slowly varying magnetic field that undergoes cyclic changes. A spin-1/2 system is a special case of a two-level system. Another instances are two-level atoms and polarized light, so that also in these cases we should expect to find geometric phases. In fact, the first experimental test of Berry’s phase was done using polarized, classical light (A. Tomita, 1986). Pancharatnam (S. Pancharatnam, 1956) anticipated Berry’s phase when he proposed, back in 1956, how to decide whether two polarization states are “in phase”. Pancharatnam’s prescription is an operational one, based upon observing whether the intensity of the interferogram formed by two polarized beams has maximal intensity. In that case, the two polarized beams are said to be “in phase”. Such a definition is analogous to the definition of distant parallelism in differential geometry. Polarized states can be subjected to different transformations which could be cyclic or not, adiabatic or not, unitary or not. The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects
We investigate the dynamical quantum phase transition (DQPT) in the multi-band Bloch Hamiltonian of the one-dimensional periodic Kitaev model, focusing on quenches from a Bloch band. By analyzing the dynamical free energy and Pancharatnam geometric phase (PGP), we show that the critical times of DQPTs deviate from periodic spacing due to the multi-band effect, contrasting with results from two-band models. We propose a geometric interpretation to explain this non-uniform spacing. Additionally, we clarify the conditions needed for DQPT occurrence in the multi-band Bloch Hamiltonian, highlighting that a DQPT only arises when the quench from the Bloch states collapses the band gap at the critical point. Moreover, we establish that the dynamical topological order parameter, defined by the winding number of the PGP, is not quantized but still exhibits discontinuous jumps at DQPT critical times due to periodic modulation. Additionally, we extend our analysis to mixed-state DQPT and find its absence at non-zero temperatures.
Distinct from the dynamical phase, in a cyclic evolution, a system's state may acquire an additional component, a.k.a. geometric phase. The latter is a manifestation of a closed path in state space. Geometric phases underlie various physical phenomena, notably the emergence of topological invariants of many-body states. Recently it has been demonstrated that geometric phases can be induced by a sequence of generalized measurements implemented on a single qubit. Furthermore, it has been predicted that such geometric phases may exhibit a topological transition as function of the measurement strength. Here, we demonstrate and study this transition experimentally employing an optical platform. We show the robustness to certain generalizations of the original protocol, as well as to certain types of imperfections. Our protocol can be interpreted in terms of environment-induced geometric phases.
We study the time evolution of geometric phases of one-dimensional topological models under the quench dynamics. Taking the Creutz ladder model as an example, it is found that the Berry phase is fixed as the parameter is suddenly tuned across the topological phase boundary, given that the inversion symmetry of the model is preserved. At finite temperature, the Uhlmann phase displays abrupt jumps between the two quantized values, which indicates the topological transition at certain times after the quench. Both the Berry and Uhlmann phase will deviate from quantized values if the inversion symmetry if the model is broken.
Quantum phase transitions manifest as an abrupt change in the ground state of a many-body system; yet it is an open question whether this sudden change necessarily precludes a continuous dynamical connection between the two phases. We introduce a classification of quantum phase transitions based on this geometric aspect of the ground-state manifold, that differs from known classifications. By leveraging the framework of counterdiabatic driving, we explicitly construct schedules that dynamically connect one phase to another. This strategy allows us to uncover a large class of quantum phase transitions, where the states on both sides are separated only by a finite geometric distance in the thermodynamic limit. We term such transitions traversable, since exact counterdiabatic driving links the two phases via a finite dynamical protocol in the thermodynamic limit. We show that multiple known transitions fall into this class -- e.g., symmetry-breaking transitions obeying hyperscaling and discontinuous transitions with an enhanced continuous symmetry. We further show the existence of quantum phase transitions that cannot be crossed dynamically even with the help of nonlocal counterdiabatic driving, as they would require divergent amplitudes and frequencies. Geometrically, these nontraversable transitions correspond to an infinite distance separating the two phases of matter; we show that the class comprises continuous transitions exhibiting mean-field universality, and discontinuous transitions arising from the competition between metastable minima. Our geometric classification goes beyond the known taxonomy, is independent of local order parameters and renormalization group fixed points, and has direct implications for the complexity of state preparation and adiabatic quantum computation.