Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 54 references

Equivalent Hamiltonian approach to quantum cosmology of integrable models

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Using a cyclic coordinate as a clock, the paper replaces constrained quantum cosmology with an equivalent first-order Hamiltonian whose quantization is a Schrödinger equation.

desk verdict A clean classical reduction of two minisuperspace models, but the quantization of the reduced Hamiltonian is a heuristic leap that is not justified. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09286 v6 pith:7WC2R6IV submitted 2019-08-25 gr-qc

Nahomi Kan , Masashi Kuniyasu , Kiyoshi Shiraishi , Kohjiroh Takimoto This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qc PACS 02.30.Ik03.65.Sq04.20.Fy04.20.Jb04.60.Kz45.20.Jj98.80.Qc98.80.Jk
keywords quantumcosmologyminisuperspaceFaddeev–JackiwmethodequivalentHamiltonianLiouvillescalarmodelconformalWignerfunctionproblemoftime
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper proposes that for integrable cosmological models with two dynamical variables and a cyclic coordinate, the constrained Wheeler–DeWitt system can be replaced by an equivalent first-order Hamiltonian on a reduced phase space via the Faddeev–Jackiw method. The cyclic coordinate is identified with the conjugate momentum of the remaining variable, so it plays the role of a clock and the quantum equation becomes a Schrödinger equation. Two models are treated: the Liouville scalar model, where quantum corrections are studied through cumulant dynamics, and the conformal scalar model, which reduces to a harmonic oscillator for spatial curvature $k=+1$ and to an $xp$-type inverted oscillator for $k=-1$. For the conformal model the paper constructs explicit Gaussian wave packets and Wigner functions, showing oscillatory dynamics in one case and decoherence in the other. This matters because it offers a concrete way to extract probabilities and semiclassical behavior from otherwise constrained quantum cosmologies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Faddeev–Jackiw equivalent Hamiltonian built from a first-order Lagrangian of the form $\bar L=(y-y_0)\dot x-\bar H(x,p)$. The combination $y-y_0$, the cyclic coordinate offset, is treated as the momentum $p$ conjugate to $x$, which turns the cyclic coordinate into a clock. For the conformal scalar model the canonical transformation to $Q=\sqrt{2q}\cosh p$, $P=\sqrt{2q}\sinh p$ is the step that maps the model onto a harmonic oscillator or an $xp$-model. The paper then applies two quantum techniques: quantal cumulant dynamics, which gives Ehrenfest-type equations for expectation values and second-order cumulants, and explicit construction of Gaussian wave packets and Wigner functions.

What would settle it

Solve the original Wheeler–DeWitt wave equation for one of the two models directly, say the conformal scalar model with $k=-1$, for the same coherent initial state used in the paper, and compare the resulting probability density or Wigner function with the paper's prediction; any disagreement in the peak trajectories or spreading rate at order $\hbar$ would show the reduction changes the quantum system.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a cosmological model with a cyclic minisuperspace coordinate admits an equivalent Hamiltonian $\bar H$ obtained from a first-order Lagrangian à la Faddeev–Jackiw, and that quantizing this reduced Hamiltonian describes the same quantum physics as quantizing the original constrained system. In the Liouville scalar model the equivalent Hamiltonians are $\bar H=\lambda^{-1}\sqrt{U}\,e^{\lambda x}\sinh(\lambda p)$ for $U>0$ and the $\cosh$ version for $U<0$, with $p\approx y-y_0$. In the conformal scalar model a further canonical transformation turns the equivalent Hamiltonian into $\frac12(P^2+Q^2)$ for $k=+1$ and into $QP$, equivalently an inverted oscillator, for $k=-1$. Classically these Hamiltonians reproduce the original equations of motion and the Hamiltonian constraint. Quantizing them, the conformal model yields exact Gaussian wave packets and positive Wigner functions, while the Liouville model is analyzed at second-order cumulant order, where quantum corrections shift the classical evolution and the $U>0$ case shows the truncation breaking down.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that quantizing the reduced Faddeev–Jackiw Hamiltonian, with the cyclic coordinate identified as the conjugate momentum, describes the same physics as quantizing the original constrained system; if reduction does not commute with quantization, the computed wave functions and Wigner functions belong to a different model.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the equivalence holds, the conformal scalar model with $k=+1$ is a harmonic oscillator in disguise, so coherent and squeezed states of the universe can be constructed and their evolution read off from standard oscillator results.
  • For $k=-1$, the conformal model reduces to the $xp$/inverted-oscillator system, and the paper's Wigner functions show initially localized packets spreading and decohering, giving a concrete toy setting for the emergence of classicality.
  • The Liouville scalar model can be studied with cumulant dynamics; quantum corrections shift $x$ relative to the classical solution, and the $U>0$ case identifies where second-order truncation fails and higher cumulants are needed.
  • Because the cyclic coordinate becomes the conjugate momentum, the construction supplies a natural clock variable, offering a route around the problem of time for this class of integrable minisuperspace models.
  • The method generalizes to other integrable models with a cyclic minisuperspace coordinate, potentially those with shift symmetries, converting second-order Wheeler–DeWitt constraints into Schrödinger-type evolution.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the reduction is quantum-exact, the original Wheeler–DeWitt constraint would contain a hidden gauge freedom: different choices of cyclic coordinate would give different but unitarily related quantum descriptions, realizing the relational-time idea in integrable minisuperspace models.
  • The positivity of the Wigner function in the conformal $k=+1$ model is strong enough to be checked directly: a numerical solution of the original Wheeler–DeWitt wave equation in the $(a,\chi)$ variables should reproduce the Gaussian packet for all times if the equivalence is right.
  • The $U<0$ Liouville case, whose equivalent Hamiltonian is a cosh-type operator, may be stable under quantum evolution, which could carry over to exponential-potential cosmologies used in dark-energy models, although the paper does not make that connection.
  • A testable extension would be to apply the same reduction to a minisuperspace model with three variables and two cyclic coordinates; if the procedure survives, the clock idea would generalize beyond two-dimensional phase space.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Faddeev–Jackiw reduction for two integrable minisuperspace models with a cyclic coordinate: the Liouville scalar model and the conformal scalar model. For each model it constructs a first-order Lagrangian on a reduced phase space in which the cyclic coordinate becomes the momentum conjugate to the remaining configuration variable, and it derives an equivalent Hamiltonian. It then treats these reduced Hamiltonians as quantum Hamiltonians: for the Liouville model it computes semiclassical cumulant dynamics, and for the conformal model it constructs exact Gaussian wave packets and Wigner functions, mapping the results back to the original minisuperspace variables. The paper is explicitly heuristic and lists several open issues, but its central claim is that the equivalent Hamiltonians allow the quantum dynamics of the original cosmological models to be studied.

Significance. The classical part of the paper is coherent and checkable: the first-order systems reproduce the equations of motion and the Hamiltonian constraint, and the conformal model reduction to a harmonic oscillator (k=1) and an inverted harmonic oscillator (k=-1) is elegant. The Wigner-function calculations for the conformal model are explicit and reproducible, and the authors are transparent about the breakdown of the M=2 cumulant approximation in the Liouville case. However, the significance of the paper hinges on a quantum equivalence that is not established. If that equivalence held, the paper would offer a practical deparametrization of two toy quantum cosmologies; without it, the computed wave functions and Wigner functions describe a reduced model whose relation to the original Wheeler–DeWitt theory is open.

major comments (3)
  1. [Secs. II.B and IV; Eqs. (2.21)–(2.24), (4.1)] The leap from classical equivalence to a quantum description is assumed rather than derived. In the original minisuperspace, x and y are both configuration variables and {x,y}=0; after the Faddeev–Jackiw reduction, p≈y−y0 is the momentum conjugate to x, so the quantized model has [x̂,p̂]=iℏ. The paper does not show that this reduced quantum theory is equivalent to the quantization of the original Hamiltonian constraint, for example by solving the Wheeler–DeWitt equation, by deriving a physical inner product from Dirac quantization, or by exhibiting a unitary map between the Hilbert spaces. Consequently the wave functions and Wigner functions in Secs. IV and V are computed for the reduced model, and the claim that they describe the original quantum cosmology is not established. The authors' own remark in Sec. IV that the original constraint is satisfied only for expectation values, with cumulants causing deviations, underlines that this is a nontrivial gap.
  2. [Sec. II.B; Eqs. (2.15)–(2.16) and (2.13)–(2.14)] The displayed general solutions of the first-order systems do not cover the full classical solution space. For U>0, Eq. (2.15) solves (2.13) only on the side of the singularity where π_{y0}(t−t0) has sign opposite to π_{y0}; for U<0, Eq. (2.16) requires π_{y0}<0, i.e., \dot{y}<0. The original equations of motion are time-reversal invariant and admit either sign of \dot{y}, whereas the equivalent Hamiltonian \bar{H} generates only one orientation; the time-reversed system would require \bar{H}→−\bar{H}. The same branch issue appears for the conformal model with k=1, where (3.8) forces \dot{\phi}<0. The text should state this branch structure, since the claimed classical equivalence to the full original system is part of the motivation for the quantum construction.
  3. [Sec. IV; Eqs. (4.10)–(4.11), Fig. 1] The M=2 cumulant truncation is not a controlled approximation for the Liouville model. The authors report that for U>0, κ0,2 becomes negative and κ2,0 grows without bound near p≈−1, which they identify as the limit of the approximation scheme. Thus the quantum-corrected trajectory in Fig. 1 is meaningful only in a limited interval, and the numerical results do not by themselves demonstrate that the equivalent Hamiltonian permits reliable computation of quantum dynamics for this model. The conclusion that higher-order cumulants are required is appropriate, but the abstract's general promise that 'quantum dynamics of the models can be studied' is only weakly supported for the Liouville model.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV, Eq. (4.1)] The operator ordering of \hat{H} is not specified; for the Liouville model with \bar{H}∝e^{λx}sinh λp, the most naive ordering is not self-adjoint. Please specify the ordering (for example Weyl ordering) and discuss unitarity, especially because the paper motivates the approach by the need for a conserved probability current.
  2. [Sec. II.A] The statement that overall normalizations of the Lagrangians and Hamiltonians are irrelevant for physics of cosmology is too quick; it is true for the classical constraint and equations of motion, but not automatically for the quantum Hamiltonian, the inner product, or the interpretation of the wave function.
  3. [Sec. V.B and V.C; Figs. 4–5, 7–8] The dependence of the Wigner functions on ϕ0 (peak splitting for ϕ0≠0) is a notable physical feature, but the text does not explain the classical meaning of ϕ0 in terms of initial conditions or the relation to the bouncing solution mentioned in Sec. V.C; a sentence or two would help the reader interpret the plots.
  4. [Sec. II.B, after Eq. (2.15)] The phrase 'If we regard y0 as another integration constant' is confusing because y0 already appears in the solution; presumably the intended statement is that π_{y0}, t0, and y0 are the three independent constants, but the text should say so explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the equivalent Hamiltonians are constructed and verified against the original classical equations by direct calculation, and the paper's own caveats concern an unproven quantization-reduction step rather than a circular one.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The paper begins with a known constrained Lagrangian and then proposes first-order equations (2.13)/(2.14) and (3.8)/(3.9), verifying by direct algebra that they imply the constraint (2.7)/(3.6) and equations of motion (2.9)/(3.7). The first-order Lagrangians (2.19)/(2.20) and (3.12)/(3.13) are introduced as equivalent systems, and the Faddeev-Jackiw Hamiltonians (2.21)/(2.22) and (3.14)/(3.15) follow from those Lagrangians by the standard prescription. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction; the initial cumulant values in Sec. IV are chosen illustrative initial conditions, not fitted inputs. The only self-citations (Ref. [14] for exponential potentials and Ref. [31] for noncommutative minisuperspace) are contextual and not load-bearing. The paper explicitly labels the approach heuristic ('We adopt a heuristic approach to obtain an equivalent Hamiltonian') and flags the real open issue that is not circularity: quantizing the reduced Hamiltonian is assumed, not derived, to reproduce the original quantum cosmology. This is acknowledged in Sec. IV ('the constraint is satisfied semiclassically in the sense of the Ehrenfest’s theorem, but the quantum fluctuations (cumulants) may cause deviations') and in Sec. VI ('The most questionable feature of the present approach would be the use of the Hamiltonian not being bounded below in the equivalent system...'). The identification p≈y-y0 is a stated convention of the reduction, not a hidden reuse of the target result. Therefore no circular step warranting a nonzero score is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data. The numerical examples use sample values of the model constants U and lambda, plus chosen initial conditions and state widths, but these do not enter the formal construction. The axioms are mostly standard reduction assumptions; the critical unproven premise is that quantization commutes with the Faddeev-Jackiw reduction.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Minisuperspace reduction: the homogeneous and isotropic metric ansatze (2.2) and (3.2) faithfully capture the dynamics of the full gravitational-scalar system relevant to quantum cosmology.
    The paper starts from these ansatze without analyzing neglected inhomogeneous modes.
  • domain assumption The model is integrable and possesses a cyclic coordinate in minisuperspace, namely y in the Liouville model and phi in the conformal scalar model.
    Section II.B states that the necessary condition for the equivalent first-order construction is the existence of a cyclic coordinate.
  • standard math Faddeev-Jackiw reduction of the first-order Lagrangians (2.19)-(2.20) and (3.12)-(3.13) yields valid Hamiltonian descriptions of the reduced phase space.
    The Faddeev-Jackiw method is standard and the paper cites Refs. [15,16] for its validity.
  • standard math The canonical transformations used in Appendix A, Eq. (3.16), and Eq. (3.26) are valid and cover the relevant phase space.
    The transformations are standard and the Poisson bracket {Q,P}=1 is checked explicitly in the text.
  • ad hoc to paper Quantizing the reduced equivalent Hamiltonian gives the quantum theory of the original constrained cosmological model; in other words, reduction commutes with quantization.
    This is never proven. The paper assumes p approximately equals y-y0 becomes a momentum and uses the reduced Hamiltonian in a Schrödinger equation at Eq. (4.1). This is the main unverified premise.
  • ad hoc to paper Truncating the cumulant expansion at M=2 gives a valid approximation for the quantum dynamics.
    The authors themselves note the approximation breaks down near p=-1 for U>0, where kappa_{0,2} becomes negative and kappa_{2,0} grows without bound.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Equivalent Hamiltonian approach to quantum cosmology of integrable models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7WC2R6IV

@misc{pith2026190809286,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Equivalent Hamiltonian approach to quantum cosmology of integrable models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7WC2R6IV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09286}
}
read the original abstract

We propose an approach to quantum cosmology of integrable models. To analyze the models with two dynamical variables, we introduce equivalent Hamiltonians in reduced phase spaces, which are obtained with the aid of the Faddeev--Jackiw method. Quantum dynamics of the models can be studied by using the equivalent Hamiltonians with various techniques.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09286 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) The quantum corrected solution (black curve) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) The quantum corrected solution (black curve) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Plots of the Wigner functions of (a) a coherent state, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Plots of the Wigner functions of (a) a coherent state, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Plots of the Wigner functions of (a) a coherent state, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Plots of the Wigner functions of (a) a coherent state, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Plots of the Wigner functions of (a) a coherent state, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Plots of the Wigner functions of (a) a coherent state, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The probability density is given by |Ψ(Q,t )|2 = 1√π|A(t)| exp [ −(Q −Q0 cost −P0 sint)2 |A(t)|2 ]

    cost − 2Q0Q} 2ℏ sint ] × exp [ − iβ 2ℏ sint (Q −Q0 cost −P0 sint)2 A(t) ] , (5.3) where A(t) ≡β cost +i ℏ β sint, (5.4) and Q0, P0, and β are constants. The probability density is given by |Ψ(Q,t )|2 = 1√π|A(t)| exp [ −(Q −Q0 cost −P0 sint)2 |A(t)|2 ] . (5.5) The initial wave packet gives ⟨Q⟩ =Q0 fort = 0. Note that the second order cumulant κ2,0 is given...

    work page

  2. [2]

    The probability density is given by |Ψ(Q′,t )|2 = 1 √π|A(t)| exp [ −(Q′ −Q′ 0 cosht −P ′ 0 sinht)2 |A(t)|2 ]

    cosht − 2Q′ 0Q′} 2ℏ sinht ] × exp [ − iβ 2ℏ sinht (Q′ −Q′ 0 cosht −P ′ 0 sinht)2 A(t) ] , (5.9) where A(t) ≡β cosht +i ℏ β sinht, (5.10) and Q′ 0, P ′ 0, and β are constants. The probability density is given by |Ψ(Q′,t )|2 = 1 √π|A(t)| exp [ −(Q′ −Q′ 0 cosht −P ′ 0 sinht)2 |A(t)|2 ] . (5.11) The initial wave packet gives ⟨Q′⟩ =Q′ 0 att = 0. Note that the ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Wave function of the unive rse

    J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, “Wave function of the unive rse”, Phys. Rev. D28 (1983)

    work page 1983

  4. [4]

    Conceptual problems on quantum gravity and q uantum cosmology

    C. Kiefer, “Conceptual problems on quantum gravity and q uantum cosmology”, ISRN Math- ematical Physics 2013 (2013) 509316. DOI: 10.1155/2013/509316. arXiv:1401.357 8 [gr-qc]

    work page doi:10.1155/2013/509316 2013

  5. [5]

    The quantum state of the universe

    S. W. Hawking, “The quantum state of the universe”, Nucl. Phys. B239 (1984) 257. DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(84)90093-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90093-2 1984

  6. [6]

    Introductory lectures on quantum cosm ology

    J. J. Halliwell, “Introductory lectures on quantum cosm ology”, in Proceedings of the Jerusalem Winter School on Quantum Cosmology and Baby Universe (edite d by T. Piran, World Scien- tific, Singapore, 1991), DOI: 10.1142/9789814503501 0003. arXiv:0909.2566 [gr-qc]. 22

    arXiv 1991

  7. [7]

    Quantization of the Taub model with extrinsic time

    G. Catren and R. Ferraro, “Quantization of the Taub model with extrinsic time”, Phys. Rev. D63 (2000) 023502. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.63.023502. gr-qc/0 006027

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.63.023502 2000

  8. [8]

    Origin of nonunitarity in quantum gravity

    P. Hajicek, “Origin of nonunitarity in quantum gravity” , Phys. Rev. D34 (1986) 1040. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.34.1040

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.34.1040 1986

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Quantization of minisuperspaces as ordina ry gauge systems

    C. Simeone, “Quantization of minisuperspaces as ordina ry gauge systems”, J. Math. Phys. 39 (1998) 3131. DOI: 10.1063/1.532243

    1998 doi

  2. [10]

    Supersymmetric Majorana quantum cosmologies

    S. A. Hojman and F. A. Asenjo, “Supersymmetric Majorana quantum cosmologies”, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 083518. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.92.083518. arXiv:1 506.02939 [gr-qc]

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    The big bang quantum cosmology: The matter- energy production epoch

    V. E. Kuzmichev and V. V. Kuzmichev, “The big bang quantum cosmology: The matter- energy production epoch”, Acta Phys. Pol. 39 (2008) 979. arXiv:0712.0464 [gr-qc]

    2008 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Two-component formulation of the Whe eler–DeWitt equation

    A. Mostafazadeh, “Two-component formulation of the Whe eler–DeWitt equation”, J. Math. Phys. 39 (1998) 4499. DOI: 10.1063/1.532522. gr-qc/9610012

    1998 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Late-time co smology in (phantom) scalar-tensor theory: dark energy and the cosmic speed-up

    E. Elizalde, S. Nojiri and S. D. Odintsov, “Late-time co smology in (phantom) scalar-tensor theory: dark energy and the cosmic speed-up”, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 043539. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.70.043539. hep-th/0405034

    2004 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Exact solution of scalar tensor cosmology with exponential potentials and tran- sient acceleration

    J. G. Russo, “Exact solution of scalar tensor cosmology with exponential potentials and tran- sient acceleration”, Phys. Lett. B600 (2004) 185. DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2004.09.007. hep- th/0403010

    2004

  7. [15]

    Accelerating cosmologies from exponen tial potentials

    I. P. Neupane, “Accelerating cosmologies from exponen tial potentials”, Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) 4387. DOI: 10.1088/0264-9381/21/18/007. hep-th/0 311071

    2004 doi

  8. [16]

    (Constrained) Quantization Without Tears

    R. Jackiw, “(Constrained) Quantization Without Tears ”, in “Diverse topics in theoretical and mathematical physics” (World Scientific, Singapore 1995), pp. 367–381. hep-th/9306075

    1995 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Inte grable higher-dimensional cosmol- ogy with separable variables in an Einstein-dilaton-antis ymmetric field theory

    N. Kan, M. Kuniyasu, K. Shiraishi and K. Takimoto, “Inte grable higher-dimensional cosmol- ogy with separable variables in an Einstein-dilaton-antis ymmetric field theory”, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 044054. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.044054. arXiv:1 806.10263 [hep-th]

    2018 doi

  10. [18]

    Hamiltonian reduction of unc onstrained and constrained systems

    L. Faddeev and R. Jackiw, “Hamiltonian reduction of unc onstrained and constrained systems”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 1692. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1692

    1988 doi

  11. [19]

    H = xp and the Riemann zeros

    M. V. Berry and J. P. Keating, “ H = xp and the Riemann zeros”, Supersymmetry and Trace Formulae: chaos and disorder , I. V. Lerner and J. P. Keating, eds., New York, Plenum (1999) pp. 355–367

    1999

  12. [20]

    Effective generating functions for quan tum canonical transformations

    G. I. Ghandour, “Effective generating functions for quan tum canonical transformations”, Phys. Rev. D35 (1987) 1289. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.35.1289. 23

    1987 doi

  13. [21]

    Wave packets in quantum cosmology and the co smological constant

    C. Kiefer, “Wave packets in quantum cosmology and the co smological constant”, Nucl. Phys. B341 (1990) 273. DOI: 10.1016/0550-3213(90)90271-E

    1990 doi

  14. [22]

    H = xp with interaction and the Riemann zeros

    G. Sierra, “ H = xp with interaction and the Riemann zeros”, Nucl. Phys. B776[PM] (2007)

    2007

  15. [23]

    The Riemann zeros and eige nvalue asymptotics

    M. V. Berry and J. P. Keating, “The Riemann zeros and eige nvalue asymptotics”, SIAM Rev. 41 (1999) 236. DOI: 10.1137/S0036144598347497

    1999 doi

  16. [24]

    Trace Formula in noncommutative geometry an d the zero of the Riemann zeta function

    A. Conne, “Trace Formula in noncommutative geometry an d the zero of the Riemann zeta function”, Sel. math., New ser. 5 (1999) 29. DOI: 10.1007/s000290050042. math/9811068 [math.NT]

    1999 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Large scale effective theory for cosmologi cal bounces

    M. Bojowald, “Large scale effective theory for cosmologi cal bounces”, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 081301(R). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.75.081301. gr-qc/0608 100

    2007 doi

  18. [26]

    Properties of fluctuating states in loop q uantum cosmology

    M. Bojowald, “Properties of fluctuating states in loop q uantum cosmology”, Mathematics 7 (2019) 645. DOI: 10.3390/math7070645. arXiv:1906.03146 [ gr-qc]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Landau levels and Riemann zeros

    G. Sierra and P. K. Townsend, “Landau levels and Riemann zeros”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 (2008) 110201. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.110201. arX iv:0805.4079 [math-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Hamiltonian for the zeros of the Riemann zeta function

    C. M. Bender, D. C. Brody and M. P. M¨ uller, “Hamiltonian for the zeros of the Riemann zeta function”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 130201. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.130201. arXiv:1608.03679 [quant-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  21. [29]

    The phase of the Riemann zeta function

    A. Khare, “The phase of the Riemann zeta function”, Pram ana 48 (1997) 537. DOI: 10.1007/BF02845661. chao-dyn/9406006

    1997 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Noncommutative quantum cosmology

    H. Garc ´ ıa-Compe´ an, O. Obreg´ on and C. Ram ´ ırez, “Noncommutative quantum cosmology”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 161301. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.161301, hep- th/0107250

    2002

  23. [31]

    Phase of the Riemann ζ function and the inverted harmonic oscillator

    R. K. Bhaduri, A. Khare and J. Law, “Phase of the Riemann ζ function and the inverted harmonic oscillator”, Phys. Rev. E52 (1995) 486. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.52.486. chao- dyn/9406006

    1995

  24. [32]

    The Riemann zeta function and the inverted harmonic oscillator

    R. K. Bhaduri, A. Khare, S. M. Reimann and E. L. Tomusiak, “The Riemann zeta function and the inverted harmonic oscillator”, Ann. Phys. 254 (1997) 25. DOI: 10.1006/aphy.1996.5636

    1997

  25. [33]

    Quantal cumulant mechanics as extended Eh renfest theorem

    Y. Shigeta, “Quantal cumulant mechanics as extended Eh renfest theorem”, in Advances in Quantum Mechanics (Edited by P. Bracken, InTech, Croatia, 2 013, ISBN:978-953-51-1089-7), Chapter 13, pp. 293–316. DOI: 10.5772/53703

    doi

  26. [34]

    The spectral theory o f a functional-difference operator in conformal field theory

    L. D. Faddeev and L. A. Takhtajan, “The spectral theory o f a functional-difference operator in conformal field theory”, Izvestiya: Mathematic s 79 (2015) 388. DOI: 10.1070/IM2015v079n02ABEH002747. arXiv:1408.0307 [mat h.SP]

    2015 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Acce rating cosmologies in an integrable 24 model with noncommutative minisuperspace variables

    N. Kan, M. Kuniyasu, K. Shiraishi and K. Takimoto, “Acce rating cosmologies in an integrable 24 model with noncommutative minisuperspace variables”, arX iv:1903.07895 [gr-qc]

    1903 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Quantal cumulant d ynamics: general theory

    Y. Shigeta, H. Miyachi and K. Hirao, “Quantal cumulant d ynamics: general theory”, J. Chem. Phys. 125 (2006) 244102. DOI: 10.1063/1.2404677

    2006 doi

  29. [37]

    Non-perturba tive quantum mechanics from non- perturbative strings

    S. Codesido, M. Mari˜ no and R. Schiappa, “Non-perturba tive quantum mechanics from non- perturbative strings”, Annales Henri Poincar´ e20 (2016) 543. DOI: 10.1007/s00023-018-0751- x. arXiv:1712.02603 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Quantum curves as quantum dis tributions

    M. Mari˜ no and S. Zakany, “Quantum curves as quantum dis tributions”, JHEP 1902 (2019)106. DOI: 10.1007/JHEP02(2019)106. arXiv:1804.05 574 [hep-th]

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    Topological stri ngs from quantum mechanics

    A. Grassi, Y. Hatsuda and M. Mari˜ no, “Topological stri ngs from quantum mechanics”, An- nales Henri Poincar´ e17 (2016) 3177. DOI: 10.1007/s00023-016-0479-4. arXiv:1410 .3382 [hep- th]

    2016 doi

  32. [40]

    Weyl type as ymptotics and bounds for the eigenvalues of functional-difference operators for mirror c urves

    A. Laptev, L. Schimmer and L. A. Takhtajan, “Weyl type as ymptotics and bounds for the eigenvalues of functional-difference operators for mirror c urves”, Geom. Funct. Anal. 26 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    On the quantum correction for thermodynami c equilibrium

    E. Wigner, “On the quantum correction for thermodynami c equilibrium”, Phys. Rev. 40 (1932) 749. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.40.749

    1932 doi

  34. [42]

    Wigner functions and Weyl transforms for pe destrians

    W. B. Case, “Wigner functions and Weyl transforms for pe destrians”, Am. J. Phys. 76 (2008)

    2008

  35. [43]

    Recent advances in Wigner fu nction approaches

    J. Weinbub and D. K. Ferry, “Recent advances in Wigner fu nction approaches”, App. Phys. Rev. 5 (2018) 041104. DOI: 10.1063/1.5046663. 25

    2018 doi

  36. [44]

    A solvable deformations of quantum mechanics

    A. Grassi and M. Mari˜ no, “A solvable deformations of quantum mechanics”, SIGMA 15 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    arXiv:1806.01407 [hep -th]

    DOI: 10.3842/SIGMA.2019.025. arXiv:1806.01407 [hep -th]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [46]

    analytic results for G aussian wave packets in four model systems: I. visualization of the kinetic energy

    R. W. Robinett and L. C. Bassett, “analytic results for G aussian wave packets in four model systems: I. visualization of the kinetic energy”, Found. Ph ys. Lett. 17 (2004) 607. quant- ph/0408050

    2004

  39. [47]

    Quantum cosmology — the supersymmetric pe rspective

    P. V. Moniz, “Quantum cosmology — the supersymmetric pe rspective”, vols. 1 and 2, Lect. Notes Phys. 803 and 804 (Springer, Berlin Heidelberg 2010). DOI: 10.1007/978-3-6 42-11575-2 and 10.1007/978-3-642-11570-7

    2010 doi

  40. [51]

    Quantum mechanics of the inverted oscillat or potential

    G. Barton, “Quantum mechanics of the inverted oscillat or potential”, Ann. Phys. (NY) 166 (1986) 322

    1986

  41. [52]

    Quantum B¨ acklu nd transformation for the Liouville theory

    E. Braaten, T. Curtright and C. Thorn, “Quantum B¨ acklu nd transformation for the Liouville theory”, Phys. Lett. B118 (1982) 115. DOI: 10.1016/0370-2693(82)90612-8

    1982 doi

  42. [53]

    Hamilto nian analysis of general relativity and extended gravity from the iterative Faddeev–Jackiw sym plectic approach

    D. C. Rodrigues, M. Galv˜ ao and N. Pinto-Neto, “Hamilto nian analysis of general relativity and extended gravity from the iterative Faddeev–Jackiw sym plectic approach”, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 104019. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.98.104019. arXiv:18 08.06751 [gr-qc]

    2018 doi

  43. [288]

    arXiv:1510.00045 [ math.SP]

    DOI: 10.1007/s00039-016-0357-8. arXiv:1510.00045 [ math.SP]

    arXiv

  44. [327]

    math-ph/070 2034

    DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2007.03.049. math-ph/070 2034

    2007 doi

  45. [937]

    DOI: 10.1119/1.2957889

    doi

  46. [2960]

    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.28.2960

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.