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

Pancharatnam and Berry Phases in Three-Level Photonic Systems

Ben-Aryeh, Y

Published Jan 13, 2003• 4 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

A theoretical analysis of Pancharatnam and Berry phases is made for biphoton three-level systems, which are produced via frequency degenerate co-linear spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The general theory of Pancharatnam phases is discussed with a special emphasis on geodesic 'curves'in Hilbert space. Explicit expressions for Pancharatnam, dynamical and geometrical phases are derived for the transformations produced by linear phase-converters. The problem of gauge invariance is treated along all the article.

Related papers

The pancharatnam and the berry phases in three-level photonic systems

Y. Ben-aryeh

A theoretical analysis of Pancharatnam and Berry phases is made for biphoton three-level systems, which are produced via frequency degenerate collinear spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The general theory of Pancharatnam phases is discussed with a special emphasis on geodesic ‘curves' in Hilbert space. Explicit expressions for Pancharatnam, dynamic and geometric phases are derived for the transformations produced by linear phase converters. The problem of gauge invariance is treated in this article.

arXiv:quant-ph/0301047•Journal of Modern Optics•Dec 1, 2003•4 citations

The Pancharatnam and the Berry phases in three-level photonic systems

Y. Ben-Aryeh

A theoretical analysis of Pancharatnam and Berry phases is made for biphoton three-level systems, which are produced via frequency degenerate collinear spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The general theory of Pancharatnam phases is discussed with a special emphasis on geodesic ‘curves' in Hilbert space. Explicit expressions for Pancharatnam, dynamic and geometric phases are derived for the transformations produced by linear phase converters. The problem of gauge invariance is treated in this article.

Journal of Modern Optics•Dec 1, 2003•0 citations

A generalized Pancharatnam geometric phase formula for three-level quantum systems

Arvind, K. S. Mallesh, Narasimhaiengar Mukunda

We describe a recently developed generalization of the Poincaré sphere method, to represent pure states of a three-level quantum system in a convenient geometrical manner. The construction depends on the properties of the group SU(3) and its generators in the defining representation, and uses geometrical objects and operations in an eight-dimensional real Euclidean space. This construction is then used to develop a generalization of the well known Pancharatnam geometric phase formula, for evolution of a three-level system along a geodesic triangle in state space.

arXiv:quant-ph/9605042•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Apr 7, 1997•103 citations

The Pancharatnam-Berry Phase: Theoretical and Experimental Aspects

Francisco De

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

InTech eBooks•Feb 24, 2012•16 citations

Change of the Pancharatnam phase under unitary transformation and application to a model three-level Γ-type system specified by a pair of dipole-coupled excited states

Istok P. Mendaš, Duska B Popovic

The interdependence of total, dynamic and geometric (Pancharatnam) phases of the state vector of a quantum system that are determined in different representations is considered. One finds that the phases calculated using two different bases of the Hilbert space, which are related by a time-dependent unitary transformation, are not invariant under this transformation; rather they are connected by non-trivial and well-defined relations. We determine the general relationships between the phases in different representations and then apply and verify these transformations in the case of the physically interesting model of the three-level Γ-type system specified by a pair of dipole-coupled excited states.

Physica Scripta•Dec 20, 2011•0 citations

Pancharatnam–Berry geometric phase memory based on spontaneous parametric down-conversion

Wen-Rong Qi, Rui Liu, Ling‐Jun Kong +5 more

Phase memory is an effect in which the interaction between a coherent pump beam and a nonlinear crystal generates photon pairs via the spontaneous parametric down-conversion process, then the down-converted photons (signal and idler) can carry the phase information of the pump beam. There has been much research on the memory of the dynamic phase so far; however, there is no report on the memory of non-dynamic phase, to the best of our knowledge. Here we acquire a Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) geometric phase in a physical system when light travels along a trajectory in polarization-state space. Induced coherence occurs in a cascaded scheme composed of two nonlinear crystals, when the idler photons in both crystals are aligned to be indistinguishable. A NOON ($N\; = \;{2}$N=2) state is established when blocking the two idler photons. We explore the PB geometric phase memory of the NOON state and induced coherence. We find that the first-order interference of the two-photon state or signal photons can be controlled by introducing the PB geometric phase to the pump light. This may facilitate precise control of the phase of the down-converted photons.

Optics Letters•Jan 3, 2020•4 citations
A theoretical analysis of Pancharatnam and Berry phases is made for biphoton three-level systems, which are produced via frequency degenerate co-linear spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The general theory of Pancharatnam phases is discussed with a special emphasis on geodesic 'curves'in Hilbert space. Explicit expressions for Pancharatnam, dynamical and geometrical phases are derived for the transformations produced by linear phase-converters. The problem of gauge invariance is treated along all the article.
A theoretical analysis of Pancharatnam and Berry phases is made for biphoton three-level systems, which are produced via frequency degenerate collinear spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The general theory of Pancharatnam phases is discussed with a special emphasis on geodesic ‘curves' in Hilbert space. Explicit expressions for Pancharatnam, dynamic and geometric phases are derived for the transformations produced by linear phase converters. The problem of gauge invariance is treated in this article.
A theoretical analysis of Pancharatnam and Berry phases is made for biphoton three-level systems, which are produced via frequency degenerate collinear spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC). The general theory of Pancharatnam phases is discussed with a special emphasis on geodesic ‘curves' in Hilbert space. Explicit expressions for Pancharatnam, dynamic and geometric phases are derived for the transformations produced by linear phase converters. The problem of gauge invariance is treated in this article.
We describe a recently developed generalization of the Poincaré sphere method, to represent pure states of a three-level quantum system in a convenient geometrical manner. The construction depends on the properties of the group SU(3) and its generators in the defining representation, and uses geometrical objects and operations in an eight-dimensional real Euclidean space. This construction is then used to develop a generalization of the well known Pancharatnam geometric phase formula, for evolution of a three-level system along a geodesic triangle in state space.
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 interdependence of total, dynamic and geometric (Pancharatnam) phases of the state vector of a quantum system that are determined in different representations is considered. One finds that the phases calculated using two different bases of the Hilbert space, which are related by a time-dependent unitary transformation, are not invariant under this transformation; rather they are connected by non-trivial and well-defined relations. We determine the general relationships between the phases in different representations and then apply and verify these transformations in the case of the physically interesting model of the three-level Γ-type system specified by a pair of dipole-coupled excited states.
Phase memory is an effect in which the interaction between a coherent pump beam and a nonlinear crystal generates photon pairs via the spontaneous parametric down-conversion process, then the down-converted photons (signal and idler) can carry the phase information of the pump beam. There has been much research on the memory of the dynamic phase so far; however, there is no report on the memory of non-dynamic phase, to the best of our knowledge. Here we acquire a Pancharatnam-Berry (PB) geometric phase in a physical system when light travels along a trajectory in polarization-state space. Induced coherence occurs in a cascaded scheme composed of two nonlinear crystals, when the idler photons in both crystals are aligned to be indistinguishable. A NOON (N  =  2N\; = \;{2}N=2N=2) state is established when blocking the two idler photons. We explore the PB geometric phase memory of the NOON state and induced coherence. We find that the first-order interference of the two-photon state or signal photons can be controlled by introducing the PB geometric phase to the pump light. This may facilitate precise control of the phase of the down-converted photons.