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

arXiv:quant-ph/0502168 · Physical Review Letters

Geometric Phase in Eigenspace Evolution of Invariant and Adiabatic Action Operators

Jeffrey C. Y. Teo, Z. D. Wang

Published Jul 29, 2005• 9 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The theory of geometric phase is generalized to a cyclic evolution of the eigenspace of an invariant operator with N-fold degeneracy. The corresponding geometric phase is interpreted as a holonomy inherited from the universal Stiefel U(N) bundle over a Grassmann manifold. Most significantly, for an arbitrary initial state, this holonomy captures the inherent geometric feature of the state evolution that may not be cyclic. Moreover, a rigorous theory of geometric phase in the evolution of the eigenspace of an adiabatic action operator is also formulated, with the corresponding holonomy being elaborated by a pullback U(N) bundle.

DOI
10.1103/physrevlett.95.050406

Related papers

A Unified View on Geometric Phases and Exceptional Points in Adiabatic Quantum Mechanics

Eric J. Pap, Daniël Boer, Holger Waalkens

We present a formal geometric framework for the study of adiabatic quantum mechanics for arbitrary finite-dimensional non-degenerate Hamiltonians. This framework generalizes earlier holonomy interpretations of the geometric phase to non-cyclic states appearing for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians. We start with an investigation of the space of non-degenerate operators on a finite-dimensional state space. We then show how the energy bands of a Hamiltonian family form a covering space. Likewise, we show that the eigenrays form a bundle, a generalization of a principal bundle, which admits a natural connection yielding the (generalized) geometric phase. This bundle provides in addition a natural generalization of the quantum geometric tensor and derived tensors, and we show how it can incorporate the non-geometric dynamical phase as well. We finish by demonstrating how the bundle can be recast as a principal bundle, so that both the geometric phases and the permutations of eigenstates can be expressed simultaneously by means of standard holonomy theory.

arXiv:2107.02497•Symmetry Integrability and Geometry Methods and Applications•Jan 13, 2022•5 citations

Evolution Operator Can Always Be Separated into the Product of Holonomy and Dynamic Operators

Xiao‐Dong Yu, D. M. Tong

The geometric phase is a fundamental quantity characterizing the holonomic feature of quantum systems. It is well known that the evolution operator of a quantum system undergoing a cyclic evolution can be simply written as the product of holonomic and dynamical components for the three special cases concerning the Berry phase, adiabatic non-Abelian geometric phase, and nonadiabatic Abelian geometric phase. However, for the most general case concerning the nonadiabatic non-Abelian geometric phase, how to separate the evolution operator into holonomic and dynamical components is a long-standing open problem. In this Letter, we solve this open problem. We show that the evolution operator of a quantum system can always be separated into the product of holonomy and dynamic operators. Based on it, we further derive a matrix representation of this separation formula for cyclic evolution, and give a necessary and sufficient condition for a general evolution being purely holonomic. Our finding is not only of theoretical interest itself, but also of vital importance for the application of quantum holonomy. It unifies the representations of all four types of evolution concerning the adiabatic/nonadiabatic Abelian/non-Abelian geometric phase, and provides a general approach to realizing purely holonomic evolution.

arXiv:2311.09597•Physical Review Letters•Nov 15, 2023•11 citations

Geometric phase for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians and its holonomy interpretation

Hossein Mehri‐Dehnavi, Alí Mostafazadeh

For an arbitrary possibly non-Hermitian matrix Hamiltonian H that might involve exceptional points, we construct an appropriate parameter space M and line bundle Ln over M such that the adiabatic geometric phases associated with the eigenstates of the initial Hamiltonian coincide with the holonomies of Ln. We examine the case of 2×2 matrix Hamiltonians in detail and show that, contrary to claims made in some recent publications, geometric phases arising from encircling exceptional points are generally geometrical and not topological in nature.

arXiv:0807.3405•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Aug 1, 2008•83 citations

Geometric phases and hidden local gauge symmetry

Kazuo Fujikawa

The analysis of geometric phases associated with level crossing is reduced to the familiar diagonalization of the Hamiltonian in the second quantized formulation. A hidden local gauge symmetry, which is associated with the arbitrariness of the phase choice of a complete orthonormal basis set, becomes explicit in this formulation (in particular, in the adiabatic approximation) and specifies physical observables. The choice of a basis set which specifies the coordinate in the functional space is arbitrary in the second quantization, and a subclass of coordinate transformations, which keeps the form of the action invariant, is recognized as the gauge symmetry. We discuss the implications of this hidden local gauge symmetry in detail by analyzing geometric phases for cyclic and noncyclic evolutions. It is shown that the hidden local symmetry provides a basic concept alternative to the notion of holonomy to analyze geometric phases and that the analysis based on the hidden local gauge symmetry leads to results consistent with the general prescription of Pancharatnam. We however note an important difference between the geometric phases for cyclic and noncyclic evolutions. We also explain a basic difference between our hidden local gauge symmetry and a gauge symmetry (or equivalence class) used by Aharonov and Anandan in their definition of generalized geometric phases.

arXiv:hep-th/0505087•Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields•Jul 21, 2005•24 citations

A general treatment of geometric phases and dynamical invariants

Eduardo I. Duzzioni, R. M. Serra, M. H. Y. Moussa

Based only on the parallel-transport condition, we present a general method to compute Abelian or non-Abelian geometric phases acquired by the basis states of pure or mixed density operators, which also holds for nonadiabatic and noncyclic evolution. Two interesting features of the non-Abelian geometric phase obtained by our method stand out: i) it is a generalization of Wilczek and Zee's non-Abelian holonomy, in that it describes nonadiabatic evolution where the basis states are parallelly transported between distinct degenerate subspaces, and ii) the non-Abelian character of our geometric phase relies on the transitional evolution of the basis states, even in the nondegenerate case. We apply our formalism to a two-level system evolving nonadiabatically under spontaneous decay to emphasize the non-Abelian nature of the geometric phase induced by the reservoir. We also show, through the generalized invariant theory, that our general approach encompasses previous results in the literature.

arXiv:0706.2448•Europhysics Letters (EPL)•Apr 1, 2008•12 citations

Geometric phase, bundle classification, and group representation

Ali Mostafazadeh

The line bundles that arise in the holonomy interpretations of the geometric phase display curious similarities to those encountered in the statement of the Borel–Weil–Bott theorem of the representation theory. The remarkable relationship between the mathematical structure of the geometric phase and the classification theorem for complex line bundles provides the necessary tools for establishing the relevance of the Borel–Weil–Bott theorem to Berry’s adiabatic phase. This enables one to define a set of topological charges for arbitrary compact connected semisimple dynamical Lie groups. These charges signify the topological content of the phase. They can be explicitly computed. In this paper, the problem of the determination of the parameter space of the Hamiltonian is also addressed. It is shown that, in general, the parameter space is either a flag manifold or one of its submanifolds. A simple topological argument is presented to indicate the relation between the Riemannian structure on the parameter space and Berry’s connection. The results about the fiber bundles and group theory are used to introduce a procedure to reduce the problem of the nonadiabatic (geometric) phase to Berry’s adiabatic phase for cranked Hamiltonians. Finally, the possible relevance of the topological charges of the geometric phase to those of the non-Abelian monopoles is pointed out.

arXiv:hep-th/9312173•Journal of Mathematical Physics•Mar 1, 1996•16 citations
The theory of geometric phase is generalized to a cyclic evolution of the eigenspace of an invariant operator with N-fold degeneracy. The corresponding geometric phase is interpreted as a holonomy inherited from the universal Stiefel U(N) bundle over a Grassmann manifold. Most significantly, for an arbitrary initial state, this holonomy captures the inherent geometric feature of the state evolution that may not be cyclic. Moreover, a rigorous theory of geometric phase in the evolution of the eigenspace of an adiabatic action operator is also formulated, with the corresponding holonomy being elaborated by a pullback U(N) bundle.
We present a formal geometric framework for the study of adiabatic quantum mechanics for arbitrary finite-dimensional non-degenerate Hamiltonians. This framework generalizes earlier holonomy interpretations of the geometric phase to non-cyclic states appearing for non-Hermitian Hamiltonians. We start with an investigation of the space of non-degenerate operators on a finite-dimensional state space. We then show how the energy bands of a Hamiltonian family form a covering space. Likewise, we show that the eigenrays form a bundle, a generalization of a principal bundle, which admits a natural connection yielding the (generalized) geometric phase. This bundle provides in addition a natural generalization of the quantum geometric tensor and derived tensors, and we show how it can incorporate the non-geometric dynamical phase as well. We finish by demonstrating how the bundle can be recast as a principal bundle, so that both the geometric phases and the permutations of eigenstates can be expressed simultaneously by means of standard holonomy theory.
The geometric phase is a fundamental quantity characterizing the holonomic feature of quantum systems. It is well known that the evolution operator of a quantum system undergoing a cyclic evolution can be simply written as the product of holonomic and dynamical components for the three special cases concerning the Berry phase, adiabatic non-Abelian geometric phase, and nonadiabatic Abelian geometric phase. However, for the most general case concerning the nonadiabatic non-Abelian geometric phase, how to separate the evolution operator into holonomic and dynamical components is a long-standing open problem. In this Letter, we solve this open problem. We show that the evolution operator of a quantum system can always be separated into the product of holonomy and dynamic operators. Based on it, we further derive a matrix representation of this separation formula for cyclic evolution, and give a necessary and sufficient condition for a general evolution being purely holonomic. Our finding is not only of theoretical interest itself, but also of vital importance for the application of quantum holonomy. It unifies the representations of all four types of evolution concerning the adiabatic/nonadiabatic Abelian/non-Abelian geometric phase, and provides a general approach to realizing purely holonomic evolution.
For an arbitrary possibly non-Hermitian matrix Hamiltonian H that might involve exceptional points, we construct an appropriate parameter space M and line bundle Ln over M such that the adiabatic geometric phases associated with the eigenstates of the initial Hamiltonian coincide with the holonomies of Ln. We examine the case of 2×2 matrix Hamiltonians in detail and show that, contrary to claims made in some recent publications, geometric phases arising from encircling exceptional points are generally geometrical and not topological in nature.
The analysis of geometric phases associated with level crossing is reduced to the familiar diagonalization of the Hamiltonian in the second quantized formulation. A hidden local gauge symmetry, which is associated with the arbitrariness of the phase choice of a complete orthonormal basis set, becomes explicit in this formulation (in particular, in the adiabatic approximation) and specifies physical observables. The choice of a basis set which specifies the coordinate in the functional space is arbitrary in the second quantization, and a subclass of coordinate transformations, which keeps the form of the action invariant, is recognized as the gauge symmetry. We discuss the implications of this hidden local gauge symmetry in detail by analyzing geometric phases for cyclic and noncyclic evolutions. It is shown that the hidden local symmetry provides a basic concept alternative to the notion of holonomy to analyze geometric phases and that the analysis based on the hidden local gauge symmetry leads to results consistent with the general prescription of Pancharatnam. We however note an important difference between the geometric phases for cyclic and noncyclic evolutions. We also explain a basic difference between our hidden local gauge symmetry and a gauge symmetry (or equivalence class) used by Aharonov and Anandan in their definition of generalized geometric phases.
Based only on the parallel-transport condition, we present a general method to compute Abelian or non-Abelian geometric phases acquired by the basis states of pure or mixed density operators, which also holds for nonadiabatic and noncyclic evolution. Two interesting features of the non-Abelian geometric phase obtained by our method stand out: i) it is a generalization of Wilczek and Zee's non-Abelian holonomy, in that it describes nonadiabatic evolution where the basis states are parallelly transported between distinct degenerate subspaces, and ii) the non-Abelian character of our geometric phase relies on the transitional evolution of the basis states, even in the nondegenerate case. We apply our formalism to a two-level system evolving nonadiabatically under spontaneous decay to emphasize the non-Abelian nature of the geometric phase induced by the reservoir. We also show, through the generalized invariant theory, that our general approach encompasses previous results in the literature.
The line bundles that arise in the holonomy interpretations of the geometric phase display curious similarities to those encountered in the statement of the Borel–Weil–Bott theorem of the representation theory. The remarkable relationship between the mathematical structure of the geometric phase and the classification theorem for complex line bundles provides the necessary tools for establishing the relevance of the Borel–Weil–Bott theorem to Berry’s adiabatic phase. This enables one to define a set of topological charges for arbitrary compact connected semisimple dynamical Lie groups. These charges signify the topological content of the phase. They can be explicitly computed. In this paper, the problem of the determination of the parameter space of the Hamiltonian is also addressed. It is shown that, in general, the parameter space is either a flag manifold or one of its submanifolds. A simple topological argument is presented to indicate the relation between the Riemannian structure on the parameter space and Berry’s connection. The results about the fiber bundles and group theory are used to introduce a procedure to reduce the problem of the nonadiabatic (geometric) phase to Berry’s adiabatic phase for cranked Hamiltonians. Finally, the possible relevance of the topological charges of the geometric phase to those of the non-Abelian monopoles is pointed out.