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

Physica Scripta

Generalized gauge transformation and the corresponding Hermitian counterparts of SU(1, 1), SU(2) pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians

Ni Liu, Yan Gu, J.-Q. Liang

Published Feb 14, 2023• 6 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract We study in this paper both the stationary and time-dependent pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians consisting respectively of SU(1, 1), SU(2) generators. The pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians can be generated from kernel Hermitian-Hamiltonians by a generalized gauge transformation with a non-unitary but Hermitian operator. The metric operator of the biorthogonal sets of eigenstates is simply the square of the transformation operator, which is formulated explicitly. The exact solutions of pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians are obtained in terms of the eigenststates of the Hermitian counterparts. We observe a critical point G c of coupling constant, where all eigenstates of the stationary Hamiltonians are degenerate with a vanishing eigenvalue. This critical point is modified as G c (ω) in the time-dependent case including the frequency of external field. Returning to the original gauge we obtain analytically the wave functions and associated non-adiabatic Berry phase, which diverges at the critical point for the SU(2)Hamiltonian. Beyond the critical point Berry phase becomes a complex domain.

DOI
10.1088/1402-4896/acbbf6

Related papers

Rigorous solutions, Berry phases and quantum-classical correspondence for time-dependent non-Hermitian SU(2)-SU(1, 1) Hamiltonians

JunLi XIN, Jiu‐Qing Liang, JunXia SHEN

Based on the generalized gauge transformation and invariant methods, we study in this work the rigorous solution for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians consisting of SU(1, 1) and SU(2) generators, which describe the harmonic oscillator and a single spin of arbitrary spin value, respectively, in periodically time-dependent fields. A non-Hermitian Hamiltonian with real eigenvalues is called pseudo-Hermitian. Such a Hamiltonian can be converted to a Hermitian one by a similarity transformation. We extend the concept of pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians to the time-dependent case. Under the generalized gauge transformation with a time-dependent Hermitian operator, the Hamiltonian becomes Hermitian and time-independent in the new gauge. The rigorous solution, as well as the Berry phase, is obtained by applying the inverse transformation to return to the original gauge. The time-dependent Schrödinger equation is also solved in terms of non-Hermitian invariant operators, which possess conserved real eigenvalues. We derive the time-dependent solutions and corresponding geometric phases by eigenstate expansion of the invariant operators, combined with the time-evolution operator. It is observed that the non-Hermitian coupling constant indeed has an exceptional point Gc(ω) for the SU(2) non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, where all eigenstates are degenerate with zero eigenvalue and the Berry phase diverges. The eigenvalues become complex beyond Gc(ω) . However, the eigenvalues are real within the entire region of coupling constant for the SU(1, 1) system, different from the common belief that the exceptional point must exist in the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian. The classical counterpart of the SU(1, 1) non-Hermitian Hamiltonian is, in fact, a complex function of position-momentum variables. It can be converted to a real function via the generalized gauge transformation, accompanied by a canonical-variable transformation. This process corresponds exactly to the Hermitization procedure of the pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian. We obtain the classical Hannay angle for the periodically time-dependent SU(1, 1) pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian. The non-adiabatic Hannay angle and the Berry phase satisfy precisely the quantum-classical correspondence, γn(T)=−(n+12)∆Θ .

Zhongguo kexue. Wulixue Lixue Tianwenxue•Jul 28, 2025•0 citations

Non-Hermitian Hamiltonian beyond PT symmetry for time-dependent S U ( 1 , 1 ) and S U ( 2 ) systems — Exact solution and geometric phase in pseudo-invariant theory

Nadjat Amaouche, Maroua Sekhri, Rahma Zerimeche +2 more

In this paper we investigate time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonians, which consist of SU(1,1) and SU(2) generators. The former Hamiltonian is PT symmetric but the latter one is not. A time-dependent non-unitary operator is proposed to construct the non-Hermitian invariant, which is verified as pseudo-Hermitian with real eigenvalues. The exact solutions are obtained in terms of the eigenstates of the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems in a unified manner. Then, we derive the Lewis–Riesenfeld (LR) phase, which can be separated into the dynamic and the geometrical phases. The analytical results are well consistent with those of the corresponding Hermitian Hamiltonians reported in the literature.

Physics Open•Nov 21, 2022•4 citations

Time evolution of quantum systems with time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonian and the pseudo Hermitian invariant operator

Mustapha Maamache, Oum Kaltoum Djeghiour, Walid Koussa +1 more

We study the time evolution of quantum systems with a time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonian given by a linear combination of SU(1,1) and SU(2) generators.With a time-dependent metric, the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator is constructed in the same manner as for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems. The exact common solutions of the Schrödinger equations for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems are obtained in terms of eigenstates of the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator.

arXiv:1705.08298•May 21, 2017•2 citations

The pseudo Hermitian invariant operator and time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonian exhibiting a SU(1,1) and SU(2) dynamical symmetry

Walid Koussa, Naima Mana, Oum Kaltoum Djeghiour +1 more

We study the time evolution of quantum systems with a time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonian exhibiting a SU(1,1) and SU(2) dynamical symmetry. With a time-dependent metric, the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator is constructed in the same manner as for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems. The exact common solutions of the Schrödinger equations for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems are obtained in terms of eigenstates of the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator. Finally some interesting physical applications are suggested and discussed.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Jul 1, 2018•18 citations

Hermitian and pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians of SU(1,1) system—Spectrum, exceptional point, quantum–classical correspondence

Ni Liu, Meng Luo, Z. D. Wang +1 more

We in this paper study the relation of hermiticity and energy spectrum for Hamiltonians consisting of $SU(1,1)$ generators. In contrast with the common belief, the transition from real to imaginary spectra can appear at an exceptional point for the Hermitian Hamiltonian of a conservative system. The imaginary domain of spectrum resulted from an inverted potential well unbounded from below. An outward force applies on the particle, which moves acceleratingly away from the central point similar to the minisuperspace model of expanding universe. The Hamiltonian remains Hermitian beyond the exceptional point in a price that the boson-operator realization of $SU(1,1)$ generator $\widehat{S}_{z}$ becomes non-Hermitian. Oppositely a non-Hermitian Hamiltonian (called pseudo-Hermitian) possesses real eigenvalues in the entire region of interaction constant, which increases the gradient of potential well. While the Hermitian interaction decreases the gradient continuously to zero, namely the exceptional point, where eigenstates are degenerate. We extend the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian to the periodically time-dependent and two-dimensional system. The probability density of wave function coincides with classical orbits, which are derived from the corresponding classical-counterpart of the non-Hermitian quantum Hamiltonian.

Results in Physics•Dec 20, 2023•2 citations

Generalized Gauge Transformation with PT$PT$‐Symmetric Non‐Unitary Operator and Classical Correspondence of Non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian for a Periodically Driven System

Yan Gu, Xiao‐Lei Hao, Jiu‐Qing Liang

Abstract This paper demonstrates that the parity‐time ()‐symmetric non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian for a periodically driven system can be generated from a kernel Hamiltonian by a generalized gauge transformation. The kernel Hamiltonian is Hermitian and static, while the time‐dependent transformation operator has to be symmetric and non‐unitary in general. Biorthogonal sets of eigenstates appear necessarily as a consequence of the non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian. The wave functions and associated non‐adiabatic Berry phase for the nth eigenstate are obtained analytically. The classical version of the non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian becomes a complex function of canonical variables and time. The corresponding kernel Hamiltonian is derived with symmetric canonical‐variable transfer in the classical gauge transformation. Moreover, with the change of position‐momentum to angle‐action variables it is revealed that the non‐adiabatic Hannay's angle and Berry phase satisfy precisely the quantum‐classical correspondence, .

arXiv:2209.01393•Annalen der Physik•Apr 17, 2022•7 citations
Abstract We study in this paper both the stationary and time-dependent pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians consisting respectively of SU(1, 1), SU(2) generators. The pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians can be generated from kernel Hermitian-Hamiltonians by a generalized gauge transformation with a non-unitary but Hermitian operator. The metric operator of the biorthogonal sets of eigenstates is simply the square of the transformation operator, which is formulated explicitly. The exact solutions of pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians are obtained in terms of the eigenststates of the Hermitian counterparts. We observe a critical point G c of coupling constant, where all eigenstates of the stationary Hamiltonians are degenerate with a vanishing eigenvalue. This critical point is modified as G c (ω) in the time-dependent case including the frequency of external field. Returning to the original gauge we obtain analytically the wave functions and associated non-adiabatic Berry phase, which diverges at the critical point for the SU(2)Hamiltonian. Beyond the critical point Berry phase becomes a complex domain.
Based on the generalized gauge transformation and invariant methods, we study in this work the rigorous solution for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians consisting of SU(1, 1) and SU(2) generators, which describe the harmonic oscillator and a single spin of arbitrary spin value, respectively, in periodically time-dependent fields. A non-Hermitian Hamiltonian with real eigenvalues is called pseudo-Hermitian. Such a Hamiltonian can be converted to a Hermitian one by a similarity transformation. We extend the concept of pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonians to the time-dependent case. Under the generalized gauge transformation with a time-dependent Hermitian operator, the Hamiltonian becomes Hermitian and time-independent in the new gauge. The rigorous solution, as well as the Berry phase, is obtained by applying the inverse transformation to return to the original gauge. The time-dependent Schrödinger equation is also solved in terms of non-Hermitian invariant operators, which possess conserved real eigenvalues. We derive the time-dependent solutions and corresponding geometric phases by eigenstate expansion of the invariant operators, combined with the time-evolution operator. It is observed that the non-Hermitian coupling constant indeed has an exceptional point Gc(ω) for the SU(2) non-Hermitian Hamiltonian, where all eigenstates are degenerate with zero eigenvalue and the Berry phase diverges. The eigenvalues become complex beyond Gc(ω) . However, the eigenvalues are real within the entire region of coupling constant for the SU(1, 1) system, different from the common belief that the exceptional point must exist in the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian. The classical counterpart of the SU(1, 1) non-Hermitian Hamiltonian is, in fact, a complex function of position-momentum variables. It can be converted to a real function via the generalized gauge transformation, accompanied by a canonical-variable transformation. This process corresponds exactly to the Hermitization procedure of the pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian. We obtain the classical Hannay angle for the periodically time-dependent SU(1, 1) pseudo-Hermitian Hamiltonian. The non-adiabatic Hannay angle and the Berry phase satisfy precisely the quantum-classical correspondence, γn(T)=−(n+12)∆Θ .
In this paper we investigate time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonians, which consist of SU(1,1) and SU(2) generators. The former Hamiltonian is PT symmetric but the latter one is not. A time-dependent non-unitary operator is proposed to construct the non-Hermitian invariant, which is verified as pseudo-Hermitian with real eigenvalues. The exact solutions are obtained in terms of the eigenstates of the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems in a unified manner. Then, we derive the Lewis–Riesenfeld (LR) phase, which can be separated into the dynamic and the geometrical phases. The analytical results are well consistent with those of the corresponding Hermitian Hamiltonians reported in the literature.
We study the time evolution of quantum systems with a time-dependent non-Hermitian Hamiltonian exhibiting a SU(1,1) and SU(2) dynamical symmetry. With a time-dependent metric, the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator is constructed in the same manner as for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems. The exact common solutions of the Schrödinger equations for both the SU(1,1) and SU(2) systems are obtained in terms of eigenstates of the pseudo-Hermitian invariant operator. Finally some interesting physical applications are suggested and discussed.
We in this paper study the relation of hermiticity and energy spectrum for Hamiltonians consisting of SU(1,1)SU(1,1)SU(1,1) generators. In contrast with the common belief, the transition from real to imaginary spectra can appear at an exceptional point for the Hermitian Hamiltonian of a conservative system. The imaginary domain of spectrum resulted from an inverted potential well unbounded from below. An outward force applies on the particle, which moves acceleratingly away from the central point similar to the minisuperspace model of expanding universe. The Hamiltonian remains Hermitian beyond the exceptional point in a price that the boson-operator realization of SU(1,1)SU(1,1)SU(1,1) generator S^z\widehat{S}_{z}Sz​ becomes non-Hermitian. Oppositely a non-Hermitian Hamiltonian (called pseudo-Hermitian) possesses real eigenvalues in the entire region of interaction constant, which increases the gradient of potential well. While the Hermitian interaction decreases the gradient continuously to zero, namely the exceptional point, where eigenstates are degenerate. We extend the non-Hermitian Hamiltonian to the periodically time-dependent and two-dimensional system. The probability density of wave function coincides with classical orbits, which are derived from the corresponding classical-counterpart of the non-Hermitian quantum Hamiltonian.
Generalized Gauge Transformation with PTPTPTPT‐Symmetric Non‐Unitary Operator and Classical Correspondence of Non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian for a Periodically Driven System
Abstract This paper demonstrates that the parity‐time ()‐symmetric non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian for a periodically driven system can be generated from a kernel Hamiltonian by a generalized gauge transformation. The kernel Hamiltonian is Hermitian and static, while the time‐dependent transformation operator has to be symmetric and non‐unitary in general. Biorthogonal sets of eigenstates appear necessarily as a consequence of the non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian. The wave functions and associated non‐adiabatic Berry phase for the nth eigenstate are obtained analytically. The classical version of the non‐Hermitian Hamiltonian becomes a complex function of canonical variables and time. The corresponding kernel Hamiltonian is derived with symmetric canonical‐variable transfer in the classical gauge transformation. Moreover, with the change of position‐momentum to angle‐action variables it is revealed that the non‐adiabatic Hannay's angle and Berry phase satisfy precisely the quantum‐classical correspondence, .