The importance of Ehrenfest’s “Adiabatic Hypothesis” for the present and future of the quantum theory makes very desirable an exact examination of its purely mechanical meaning. Some years ago one of the authors1 found a general method to look for the adiabatic invariants, whereas the other author2 investigated the case of a degenerated, conditionally periodic system which had not been considered in the first paper (see also the paper by Burgers3). An objection which can be attributed to this theory is that in the course of calculations at some point a simplifying assumption was made in the integrated differential equations, namely that its right-hand side is subject to an averaging process; to explain this approximation, arguments connected with the slowness of changes of the system parameters were used. This shortcoming makes it difficult to use the ordinary methods and to check the adiabatic invariance of several quantities. Therefore it seems reasonable to consider a very simple example which we can integrate without any additional assumptions and only then use the slowness of parameter changes.
The adiabatic theorem is a powerful result concerning the evolution of quantum mechanical systems. Intuitively, it states the following: suppose we want to study the evolution of a quantum mechanical system governed by a given Hamiltonian
H (Def. 6.1), and the initial state of the system is the eigenstate of
H corresponding to its lowest eigenvalue. The laws of quantum physics tell us that the evolution of the system over time follows the Schrüdinger equation, Eq. (6.1). Suppose now that the Hamiltonian is not fixed, but rather, it changes very slowly over time, so that the evolution of the system is described by the differential equation
idtd∣ψ(t)⟩=H(t)∣ψ(t)⟩, and
H(t) is slowly changing. If, for any value of the time parameter
t, there is always a gap between the lowest eigenvalue of
H(t) and all other eigenvalues, then the adiabatic theorem asserts that the state of the system always remains in an eigenstate with the lowest eigenvalue throughout the evolution. One specific case of interest in this chapter occurs when the time-dependent Hamiltonian
H(t) varies from an initial (time-independent) Hamiltonian
HI to a final Hamiltonian
HF. If the change happens slowly, and the initial state of the system is an eigenstate of
HI with minimum eigenvalue, the adiabatic theorem asserts that the evolution eventually leads to the eigenstate with minimum eigenvalue of the final Hamiltonian
HF. This result can be used for optimization: imagine that the initial Hamiltonian encodes an easy problem for which we can construct the eigenstate with minimum eigenvalue, and the final Hamiltonian encodes a difficult optimization problem whose solution is given by the eigenstate with minimum eigenvalue. By the adiabatic theorem, evolving the eigenstate of the initial Hamiltonian while slowly changing the Hamiltonian into the final one leads to the solution of the difficult optimization problem. Of course we need to know how slowly
HI should be changed into
HF. The adiabatic theorem is at the heart of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA), a framework that has been widely used to implement optimization algorithms on existing quantum hardware, because it has low requirements of quantum resources–although it does not guarantee improvements over classical algorithms in general. In this chapter we first discuss the adiabatic theorem, and then give an overview of QAOA.
In an adiabatic rapid passage experiment, the Bloch vector of a two-level system (qubit) is inverted by slowly inverting an external field to which it is coupled, and along which it is initially aligned. In twisted rapid passage, the external field is allowed to twist around its initial direction with azimuthal angle $\ensuremath{\varphi}(t)$ at the same time that it is inverted. For polynomial twist, $\ensuremath{\varphi}(t)\ensuremath{\sim}{\mathrm{Bt}}^{n}.$ We show that for
n> 3, multiple avoided crossings can occur during the inversion of the external field, and that these crossings give rise to strong interference effects in the qubit transition probability. The transition probability is found to be a function of the twist strength B, which can be used to control the time separation of the avoided crossings, and hence the character of the interference. Constructive and destructive interference are possible. The interference effects are a consequence of the temporal phase coherence of the wave function. The ability to vary this coherence by varying the temporal separation of the avoided crossings renders twisted rapid passage with adjustable twist strength into a temporal interferometer through which qubit transitions can be greatly enhanced or suppressed. Possible application of this interference mechanism to construction of fast fault-tolerant quantum controlled-NOT and NOT gates is discussed.
Adiabatic passage employs a slowly varying time-dependent Hamiltonian to control the evolution of a quantum system along the Hamiltonian eigenstates. For processes of finite duration, the exact time-evolving state may deviate from the adiabatic eigenstate at intermediate times, but in numerous applications it is observed that this deviation reaches a maximum and then decreases significantly towards the end of the process. We provide a straightforward theoretical explanation for this welcome but often unappreciated fact. Our analysis emphasizes a separate adiabaticity criterion for high-fidelity state-to-state transfer and it points to new effective shortcut strategies for near-adiabatic dynamics.
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.
An analytical study of the dissipative Landau-Zener model is presented. The model where two energy levels at constant speed are brought to cross is a standard model used to describe a large variety of phenomena. In many cases of interest the presence of coupling of the two-state system to an environment is of importance, the accounting for which shall be done here from first principles. Analytical results for the excitation transition from the ground state of the two-state system at large negative times to the excited state at large positive times (as well as the opposite, decay, transition) are obtained in terms of the speed by which the two levels approach each other, the energy gap between the adiabatic energies, the coupling strength to the environment, and its temperature. For the excitation transition we find the following results: In the slow-passage limit of small sweeping speed it is shown that adiabaticity is limited to low temperatures and the quantitative adiabatic criterion is established. Particularly, at zero temperature there is no influence of the environment on the transition probability as a consequence of a compensation property shown to be peculiar to the linear-sweep model. The transition is at low temperatures due to quantum tunneling and, with an increase in temperature, an intermediate region appears where the transition is dominated by thermally assisted transitions across the energy gap before finally at high temperatures a saturated regime is reached with equal population of the levels. In contrast to the dependence on the temperature the dependence of the transition probability as a function of coupling strength is nonmonotonic with maximum influence at intermediate strength. In the fast-passage limit with rapid sweep speed there is no influence of the environment on the transition probability. For the decay transition the adiabatic limit does not exist for the linear-sweep model for physically relevant spectra of the environment and the decay transition is dominated by spontaneous emission, except in the fast-passage limit and the high-temperature limit where the decay transition probability equals the excitation probability.