The Pancharatnam phase is a generalization of the Berry phase that applies to discrete sequences of quantum states. Here, we show that the Pancharatnam phase is a natural invariant for a wide class of quantum many-body dynamics involving measurements. We specifically investigate how a non-trivial Pancharatnam phase arises in the trajectories of Floquet quantum error-correcting codes and show that this phase can be extracted in a "computationally-assisted" interferometry protocol, involving additional post-processing based on the measurement record that defines a given quantum many-body trajectory. This Pancharatnam phase can also be directly related to the Berry phase accrued by continuous unitary evolution within a gapped phase. For the $\mathbb Z_2$ Floquet code of Hastings and Haah, we show that the associated family of unitary evolutions is the radical chiral Floquet phase. We demonstrate this correspondence explicitly by studying an exactly-solvable model of interacting spins.
The Pancharatnam phase is a generalization of the Berry phase that applies to discrete sequences of quantum states. Here, we show that the Pancharatnam phase is a natural invariant for a wide class of quantum many-body dynamics involving measurements. We specifically investigate how a non-trivial Pancharatnam phase arises in the trajectories of Floquet quantum error-correcting codes and show that this phase can be extracted in a "computationally-assisted" interferometry protocol, involving additional post-processing based on the measurement record that defines a given quantum many-body trajectory. This Pancharatnam phase can also be directly related to the Berry phase accrued by continuous unitary evolution within a gapped phase. For the Z2 Floquet code of Hastings and Haah, we show that the associated family of unitary evolutions is the radical chiral Floquet phase. We demonstrate this correspondence explicitly by studying an exactly-solvable model of interacting spins.
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 introduce a class of models, dubbed paired twist-defect networks, that generalize the structure of Kitaev's honeycomb model for which there is a direct equivalence between: (i) Floquet codes (FCs), (ii) adiabatic loops of gapped Hamiltonians, and (iii) unitary loops or Floquet-enriched topological orders (FETs) many-body localized phases. This formalism allows one to apply well-characterized topological index theorems for FETs to understand the dynamics of FCs, and to rapidly assess the code properties of many FC models. As an application, we show that the honeycomb Floquet code of Haah and Hastings is governed by an irrational value of the chiral Floquet index, which implies a topological obstruction to forming a simple, logical boundary with the same periodicity as the bulk measurement schedule. In addition, we construct generalizations of the honeycomb Floquet code exhibiting arbitrary anyon-automorphism dynamics for general types of Abelian topological order.
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
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.
Distinct from the dynamical phase, in a cyclic evolution, a system's state may acquire an additional component, a.k.a. geometric phase. 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 these geometric phases may exhibit a topological transition as a function of the measurement strength. We demonstrate and study this transition experimentally by using an optical platform where the qubit is represented by the polarization of light and the weak measurement is performed by means of coupling with the spatial degree of freedom. Our protocol can be interpreted in terms of environment-induced geometric phases, whose values are topologically determined by the environment-system coupling strength. Our results show that the two limits of geometric phase induced by sequences of either weak or projective measurements are topologically distinct.
Dynamical quantum phase transitions (DQPTs) are manifested by time-domain nonanalytic behaviors of many-body systems. Introducing a quench is so far understood as a typical scenario to induce DQPTs. In this work, we discover a type of DQPTs, termed Floquet DQPTs, as intrinsic features of time-periodic systems. Floquet DQPTs occur within each period of continuous driving, without the need for any quenches. In particular, in a harmonically driven spin chain model, we find analytically the existence of Floquet DQPTs in and only in a parameter regime hosting a certain nontrivial Floquet topological phase. The Floquet DQPTs are further characterized by a dynamical topological invariant defined as the winding number of the Pancharatnam geometric phase versus quasimomentum. These findings are experimentally demonstrated with a single spin in diamond. This work thus opens a door for future studies of DQPTs in connection with topological matter.