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

The Journal of Chemical Physics

The adiabatic theorem in the complex plane and the semiclassical calculation of nonadiabatic transition amplitudes

Jenn‐Tai Hwang, Philip Pechukas

Published Nov 15, 1977• 123 citations
Publisher

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the problem of calculating amplitudes for nonadiabatic transitions induced by a time-dependent Hamiltonian, in the semiclassical limit h/→0, with emphasis on questions relevant to semiclassical theories of electronically inelastic scattering. For this problem the semiclassical limit is mathematically equivalent to the adiabatic limit, and the adiabatic theorem says that all these transition amplitudes vanish in the limit; the question is, what is the asymptotic form of the nonadiabatic amplitudes, as they go to zero? We consider Hamiltonia that are analytic matrix functions of time. We prove a generalization of the adiabatic theorem to the complex time plane; paradoxically, the adiabatic theorem in the complex plane gives us directly the nonadiabatic amplitudes along the real time axis. We derive Dykhne’s remarkable formula for the two-state case, which says that the limiting form of the transition amplitude depends only on the energy curves of the two states, not on the nonadiabatic coupling which is responsible for transition between them. We discuss the three-state problem at length and show that the obvious generalization of the Dykhne formula is sometimes true, sometimes false. To indicate the scope of methods based on the adiabatic theorem in the complex plane, we give an elementary proof of the semiclassical formula for above-barrier reflection of a one-dimensional particle.

DOI
10.1063/1.434630

Related papers

Nonadiabatic transitions induced by a time-dependent Hamiltonian in the semiclassical/adiabatic limit: The two-state case

Jon P. Davis, Philip Pechukas

We show rigorously, within the two-state approximation, that in the semiclassical limit h/→0 a nonadiabatic transition induced by an analytic time-dependent Hamiltonian is localized to the vicinity of a complex crossing of the two adiabatic potential curves, with transition amplitude independent of the nonadiabatic coupling and given by a simple formula of A. M.Dykhne.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Apr 15, 1976•226 citations

Theory of inelastic scattering of a particle in the near-adiabatic limit

Lit-Deh Chang, Walter Kohn

A semiclassical theory for inelastic scattering of a particle by a two-state system in the near-adiabatic limit is developed. The exponentially small transition amplitude is calculated. The theory is an extension of Pokrovskii and Khalatnikov's theory for above-barrier reflection (Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 40, 1713 (1961) [Sov. Phys.---JETP 13, 1207 (1961)]). The analysis involves studies of the WKB solutions in the complex coordinate plane along certain contours. The region of validity of the theory is established. Our result has the same form as the Landau-Zener-Stueckelberg formula; however, our theory is applicable to more general systems. Numerical comparisons with exact solutions are presented; the differences between our results and exact solutions become negligible as the adiabatic limit is approached.

Physical Review A•Aug 1, 1987•0 citations

Variance of the energy of a quantum system in a time-dependent perturbation: Determination by nonadiabatic transition probabilities

Anirban Mandal, Katharine L. C. Hunt

For a quantum system in a time-dependent perturbation, we prove that the variance in the energy depends entirely on the nonadiabatic transition probability amplitudes bk(t). Landau and Lifshitz introduced the nonadiabatic coefficients for the excited states of a perturbed quantum system by integrating by parts in Dirac’s expressions for the coefficients ck(1)(t) of the excited states to first order in the perturbation. This separates ck(1)(t) for each state into an adiabatic term ak(1)(t) and a nonadiabatic term bk(1)(t). The adiabatic term follows the adiabatic theorem of Born and Fock; it reflects the adjustment of the initial state to the perturbation without transitions. If the response to a time-dependent perturbation is entirely adiabatic, the variance in the energy is zero. The nonadiabatic term bk(1)(t) represents actual excitations away from the initial state. As a key result of the current work, we derive the variance in the energy of the quantum system and all of the higher moments of the energy distribution using the values of |bk(t)|2 for each of the excited states along with the energy differences between the excited states and the ground state. We prove that the same variance (through second order) is obtained in terms of Dirac’s excited-state coefficients ck(t). We show that the results from a standard statistical analysis of the variance are consistent with the quantum results if the probability of excitation Pk is set equal to |bk(t)|2, but not if the probability of excitation is set equal to |ck(t)|2. We illustrate the differences between the variances calculated with the two different forms of Pk for vibration–rotation transitions of HCl in the gas phase.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Mar 12, 2020•2 citations

Analytical Treatment of Some Quantum Transitions in Molecular Dynamic Processes

Lukáš Pichl

They have analytically tested several quantum transitions in molecular dynamics. In addition, they have introduced applications of theoretical formalism in physics to economics. First, they have completed the semiclassical theory of nonadiabatic transitions in the exponential potential model. They treated a two-state quantum system, which commonly appears as a subsystem in many-state problems. They were concerned with one-dimensional Schroedinger equation, although the type or semiclassical approach which they used can be applied to higher-dimension potential surfaces by means of Fourier transform. In particular, they solved the case of repulsive exponentially growing potentials, that is the forward-back scattering. They re-expressed the nonadiabatic transition matrix, which describes the transition between the two states for one-direction passage, in terms of contour integrals in the complex coordinate plane. The integrands are adiabatic momenta derived from the eigenvalues of potential matrix. Such type of concept has the advantage that it can be applied to other models than just the exponential potential model. Based on this, they have obtained an analytical tool for describing one-transition point class of potential curve systems. Examples are Rosen-Zener-Demkov model and Landau-Zener-Stueckelberg model. The formalism, which they contributed to, is useful in describing physical processes such as the charge transfer, and it is suitable for shaping external fields or modulating their frequencies in order to achieve a desired state or a product with the theoretical 100% probability. Second, they have derived the first exact analytical solution for a diabatically avoided crossing model. The physical system is described with one-dimensional coupled potential well and barrier which do not intersect in the whole coordinate range. On the basis of special mathematical functions they derived the complete quantum mechanical solution for the wave functions and the transmission coefficient. They also analyzed this model semiclassically and compared it with the exact results. This comparison yields interesting implications on the validity and accuracy of semiclassical approximation. In particular, they solved the case of dramatically avoided crossing with exponentially steep potential curves, and obtained the probability of one-way passage through the interaction region. The overall behavior corresponds to the probability of tunneling through the single potential barrier. In addition, there are complete reflection resonances at discrete energies, resulting from the trapping of a wave in the potential well. The formalism of diabatically avoided crossing model is useful in laser control of molecular reactions. This is because the potential energy curves in realistic molecular systems can be shifted by the photon energy; the curves are coupled by the field intensity via the dipole moment. That is why the new topology of potential energy curves, which was so far broadly omitted, becomes practically interesting due to the development in lasers techniques. Third, they treated several two-state quantum systems common in molecular physics. The semiclassical conditions for the complete transmission and the complete reflection in one-dimensional scattering were given analytically. They discovered the possibility of these phenomena in energy ranges in which the complete reflection or the complete transmission are not commonly expected to occur. In particular, they have made use of the broadly shared assumption that the transitions between the states are localized phenomena. This enables them to separate the whole coordinate region into distinct subsets and to analyze the physics in each subset separately. Applying this approach, they obtained a fully algebraic problem, which can be treated e.g. by diagrammatic techniques. Let them also mention that the complete transmission or complete reflection conditions simplify the wave function, and hence the mathematical solution. The formalism which they used while deriving the semiclassical conditions for the resonant phenomena mentioned above can be further generalized. This will probably yield a whole spectrum of tools in the laser control of molecular processes. Fourth, they developed a powerful technique for solving integral equations with singular kernel. One of the physical formulations of scattering is the time-independent approach based on the Lippmann-Schwinger equation for the Green operator. They have developed a detailed technique how to treat the singularity in this equation. In particular, any scattering problem can be divided into two parts. The first one is the geometry of the system and the static interaction of its components. The second one is more dynamical: the singular equation for the Green operator including the variable energy of the scattering. They fix the most costly calculations in the static part. Then they solve the singularity analytically and thus obtain the cross section as a function of energy. The so far common approach is quite opposite: to fix the singularity first and then to recalculate heavily all the static part for any new value of energy. Obviously, their approach saves a considerable amount of computational time; therefore it is a good standpoint for treating large systems. The formalism above was proved to be extremely efficient taking the example of dissociative recombination H2+ + e- → H + H* because this is a diatomic system, quantum chemical data are easily available in the literature and they could demonstrate the superiority of their approach to the other approaches. Fifth, they suggested applications of basic physical concepts to economics. They introduced aggregate quantities in financial markets and interpreted these quantities as potential energy surfaces. They also formalized interactions between cyclic processes in terms of state to state transitions. Summarizing, they treated the exponential potential model of nonadiabatic transitions, introduced a new exactly solvable model of diabatically avoided crossing, discussed the semiclassical conditions for complete transmission and complete reflection from the viewpoint of laser control, contributed to scattering calculations, and introduced some interdisciplinary applications.

•Sep 29, 2000•0 citations

Extensions of the Adiabatic Theorem in Quantum Mechanics

Ralph H. Young, Walter J. Deal

In a quantum-mechanical problem with a slowly varying Hamiltonian, such as appears in a semiclassical treatment of inelastic atomic collisions, it is common to restrict attention to a small number of states among which transitions are anticipated. This procedure is justified by an extension of the conventional adiabatic theorem to nearly degenerate states. The correct mixing within the restricted basis is determined by a time-dependent variational principle. The contribution of states outside the basis vanishes as the time scale for variation of the Hamiltonian becomes large. A further generalization deals with pseudoeigenfunctions, such as appear in the theory of the Stark effect.

Physical Review A•Feb 1, 1970•10 citations

Adiabatic and nonadiabatic contributions to the energy of a system subject to a time-dependent perturbation: Complete separation and physical interpretation

Anirban Mandal, Katharine L. C. Hunt

When a time-dependent perturbation acts on a quantum system that is initially in the nondegenerate ground state ∣0> of an unperturbed Hamiltonian H(0), the wave function acquires excited-state components ∣k> with coefficients c(k)(t) exp(-iE(k)t/ℏ), where E(k) denotes the energy of the unperturbed state ∣k>. It is well known that each coefficient c(k)(t) separates into an adiabatic term a(k)(t) that reflects the adjustment of the ground state to the perturbation--without actual transitions--and a nonadiabatic term b(k)(t) that yields the probability amplitude for a transition to the excited state. In this work, we prove that the energy at any time t also separates completely into adiabatic and nonadiabatic components, after accounting for the secular and normalization terms that appear in the solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation via Dirac's method of variation of constants. This result is derived explicitly through third order in the perturbation. We prove that the cross-terms between the adiabatic and nonadiabatic parts of c(k)(t) vanish, when the energy at time t is determined as an expectation value. The adiabatic term in the energy is identical to the total energy obtained from static perturbation theory, for a system exposed to the instantaneous perturbation λH'(t). The nonadiabatic term is a sum over excited states ∣k> of the transition probability multiplied by the transition energy. By evaluating the probabilities of transition to the excited eigenstates ∣k'(t)> of the instantaneous Hamiltonian H(t), we provide a physically transparent explanation of the result for E(t). To lowest order in the perturbation parameter λ, the probability of finding the system in state ∣k'(t)> is given by λ(2) ∣b(k)(t)∣(2). At third order, the transition probability depends on a second-order transition coefficient, derived in this work. We indicate expected differences between the results for transition probabilities obtained from this work and from Fermi's golden rule.

The Journal of Chemical Physics•Oct 26, 2012•12 citations
This paper is concerned with the problem of calculating amplitudes for nonadiabatic transitions induced by a time-dependent Hamiltonian, in the semiclassical limit h/→0, with emphasis on questions relevant to semiclassical theories of electronically inelastic scattering. For this problem the semiclassical limit is mathematically equivalent to the adiabatic limit, and the adiabatic theorem says that all these transition amplitudes vanish in the limit; the question is, what is the asymptotic form of the nonadiabatic amplitudes, as they go to zero? We consider Hamiltonia that are analytic matrix functions of time. We prove a generalization of the adiabatic theorem to the complex time plane; paradoxically, the adiabatic theorem in the complex plane gives us directly the nonadiabatic amplitudes along the real time axis. We derive Dykhne’s remarkable formula for the two-state case, which says that the limiting form of the transition amplitude depends only on the energy curves of the two states, not on the nonadiabatic coupling which is responsible for transition between them. We discuss the three-state problem at length and show that the obvious generalization of the Dykhne formula is sometimes true, sometimes false. To indicate the scope of methods based on the adiabatic theorem in the complex plane, we give an elementary proof of the semiclassical formula for above-barrier reflection of a one-dimensional particle.
A semiclassical theory for inelastic scattering of a particle by a two-state system in the near-adiabatic limit is developed. The exponentially small transition amplitude is calculated. The theory is an extension of Pokrovskii and Khalatnikov's theory for above-barrier reflection (Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 40, 1713 (1961) [Sov. Phys.---JETP 13, 1207 (1961)]). The analysis involves studies of the WKB solutions in the complex coordinate plane along certain contours. The region of validity of the theory is established. Our result has the same form as the Landau-Zener-Stueckelberg formula; however, our theory is applicable to more general systems. Numerical comparisons with exact solutions are presented; the differences between our results and exact solutions become negligible as the adiabatic limit is approached.
For a quantum system in a time-dependent perturbation, we prove that the variance in the energy depends entirely on the nonadiabatic transition probability amplitudes bk(t). Landau and Lifshitz introduced the nonadiabatic coefficients for the excited states of a perturbed quantum system by integrating by parts in Dirac’s expressions for the coefficients ck(1)(t) of the excited states to first order in the perturbation. This separates ck(1)(t) for each state into an adiabatic term ak(1)(t) and a nonadiabatic term bk(1)(t). The adiabatic term follows the adiabatic theorem of Born and Fock; it reflects the adjustment of the initial state to the perturbation without transitions. If the response to a time-dependent perturbation is entirely adiabatic, the variance in the energy is zero. The nonadiabatic term bk(1)(t) represents actual excitations away from the initial state. As a key result of the current work, we derive the variance in the energy of the quantum system and all of the higher moments of the energy distribution using the values of |bk(t)|2 for each of the excited states along with the energy differences between the excited states and the ground state. We prove that the same variance (through second order) is obtained in terms of Dirac’s excited-state coefficients ck(t). We show that the results from a standard statistical analysis of the variance are consistent with the quantum results if the probability of excitation Pk is set equal to |bk(t)|2, but not if the probability of excitation is set equal to |ck(t)|2. We illustrate the differences between the variances calculated with the two different forms of Pk for vibration–rotation transitions of HCl in the gas phase.
They have analytically tested several quantum transitions in molecular dynamics. In addition, they have introduced applications of theoretical formalism in physics to economics. First, they have completed the semiclassical theory of nonadiabatic transitions in the exponential potential model. They treated a two-state quantum system, which commonly appears as a subsystem in many-state problems. They were concerned with one-dimensional Schroedinger equation, although the type or semiclassical approach which they used can be applied to higher-dimension potential surfaces by means of Fourier transform. In particular, they solved the case of repulsive exponentially growing potentials, that is the forward-back scattering. They re-expressed the nonadiabatic transition matrix, which describes the transition between the two states for one-direction passage, in terms of contour integrals in the complex coordinate plane. The integrands are adiabatic momenta derived from the eigenvalues of potential matrix. Such type of concept has the advantage that it can be applied to other models than just the exponential potential model. Based on this, they have obtained an analytical tool for describing one-transition point class of potential curve systems. Examples are Rosen-Zener-Demkov model and Landau-Zener-Stueckelberg model. The formalism, which they contributed to, is useful in describing physical processes such as the charge transfer, and it is suitable for shaping external fields or modulating their frequencies in order to achieve a desired state or a product with the theoretical 100% probability. Second, they have derived the first exact analytical solution for a diabatically avoided crossing model. The physical system is described with one-dimensional coupled potential well and barrier which do not intersect in the whole coordinate range. On the basis of special mathematical functions they derived the complete quantum mechanical solution for the wave functions and the transmission coefficient. They also analyzed this model semiclassically and compared it with the exact results. This comparison yields interesting implications on the validity and accuracy of semiclassical approximation. In particular, they solved the case of dramatically avoided crossing with exponentially steep potential curves, and obtained the probability of one-way passage through the interaction region. The overall behavior corresponds to the probability of tunneling through the single potential barrier. In addition, there are complete reflection resonances at discrete energies, resulting from the trapping of a wave in the potential well. The formalism of diabatically avoided crossing model is useful in laser control of molecular reactions. This is because the potential energy curves in realistic molecular systems can be shifted by the photon energy; the curves are coupled by the field intensity via the dipole moment. That is why the new topology of potential energy curves, which was so far broadly omitted, becomes practically interesting due to the development in lasers techniques. Third, they treated several two-state quantum systems common in molecular physics. The semiclassical conditions for the complete transmission and the complete reflection in one-dimensional scattering were given analytically. They discovered the possibility of these phenomena in energy ranges in which the complete reflection or the complete transmission are not commonly expected to occur. In particular, they have made use of the broadly shared assumption that the transitions between the states are localized phenomena. This enables them to separate the whole coordinate region into distinct subsets and to analyze the physics in each subset separately. Applying this approach, they obtained a fully algebraic problem, which can be treated e.g. by diagrammatic techniques. Let them also mention that the complete transmission or complete reflection conditions simplify the wave function, and hence the mathematical solution. The formalism which they used while deriving the semiclassical conditions for the resonant phenomena mentioned above can be further generalized. This will probably yield a whole spectrum of tools in the laser control of molecular processes. Fourth, they developed a powerful technique for solving integral equations with singular kernel. One of the physical formulations of scattering is the time-independent approach based on the Lippmann-Schwinger equation for the Green operator. They have developed a detailed technique how to treat the singularity in this equation. In particular, any scattering problem can be divided into two parts. The first one is the geometry of the system and the static interaction of its components. The second one is more dynamical: the singular equation for the Green operator including the variable energy of the scattering. They fix the most costly calculations in the static part. Then they solve the singularity analytically and thus obtain the cross section as a function of energy. The so far common approach is quite opposite: to fix the singularity first and then to recalculate heavily all the static part for any new value of energy. Obviously, their approach saves a considerable amount of computational time; therefore it is a good standpoint for treating large systems. The formalism above was proved to be extremely efficient taking the example of dissociative recombination H2+ + e- → H + H* because this is a diatomic system, quantum chemical data are easily available in the literature and they could demonstrate the superiority of their approach to the other approaches. Fifth, they suggested applications of basic physical concepts to economics. They introduced aggregate quantities in financial markets and interpreted these quantities as potential energy surfaces. They also formalized interactions between cyclic processes in terms of state to state transitions. Summarizing, they treated the exponential potential model of nonadiabatic transitions, introduced a new exactly solvable model of diabatically avoided crossing, discussed the semiclassical conditions for complete transmission and complete reflection from the viewpoint of laser control, contributed to scattering calculations, and introduced some interdisciplinary applications.
In a quantum-mechanical problem with a slowly varying Hamiltonian, such as appears in a semiclassical treatment of inelastic atomic collisions, it is common to restrict attention to a small number of states among which transitions are anticipated. This procedure is justified by an extension of the conventional adiabatic theorem to nearly degenerate states. The correct mixing within the restricted basis is determined by a time-dependent variational principle. The contribution of states outside the basis vanishes as the time scale for variation of the Hamiltonian becomes large. A further generalization deals with pseudoeigenfunctions, such as appear in the theory of the Stark effect.
When a time-dependent perturbation acts on a quantum system that is initially in the nondegenerate ground state ∣0> of an unperturbed Hamiltonian H(0), the wave function acquires excited-state components ∣k> with coefficients c(k)(t) exp(-iE(k)t/ℏ), where E(k) denotes the energy of the unperturbed state ∣k>. It is well known that each coefficient c(k)(t) separates into an adiabatic term a(k)(t) that reflects the adjustment of the ground state to the perturbation--without actual transitions--and a nonadiabatic term b(k)(t) that yields the probability amplitude for a transition to the excited state. In this work, we prove that the energy at any time t also separates completely into adiabatic and nonadiabatic components, after accounting for the secular and normalization terms that appear in the solution of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation via Dirac's method of variation of constants. This result is derived explicitly through third order in the perturbation. We prove that the cross-terms between the adiabatic and nonadiabatic parts of c(k)(t) vanish, when the energy at time t is determined as an expectation value. The adiabatic term in the energy is identical to the total energy obtained from static perturbation theory, for a system exposed to the instantaneous perturbation λH'(t). The nonadiabatic term is a sum over excited states ∣k> of the transition probability multiplied by the transition energy. By evaluating the probabilities of transition to the excited eigenstates ∣k'(t)> of the instantaneous Hamiltonian H(t), we provide a physically transparent explanation of the result for E(t). To lowest order in the perturbation parameter λ, the probability of finding the system in state ∣k'(t)> is given by λ(2) ∣b(k)(t)∣(2). At third order, the transition probability depends on a second-order transition coefficient, derived in this work. We indicate expected differences between the results for transition probabilities obtained from this work and from Fermi's golden rule.