pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.26528 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas

Recognition: unknown

Phases and dynamics of an impurity immersed in one-dimensional quantum droplets

Dimitrios Diplaris, Friethjof Theel, Ilias A. Englezos, Peter Schmelcher, Simeon I. Mistakidis

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 10:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas
keywords quantum dropletsimpurityone-dimensional Bose mixturesphase separationdensity profilesmany-body correlationstrap release dynamicsexpansion behavior
0
0 comments X

The pith

Tuning impurity interactions with a one-dimensional quantum droplet controls its density profile, correlations, and post-release expansion.

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

The paper shows that adjusting the coupling between a single impurity and a two-component Bose mixture forming a one-dimensional quantum droplet allows deliberate changes to the droplet's density distribution and correlation patterns. Attractive impurity-medium interactions localize the impurity inside the droplet and produce a local density increase nearby, while repulsive interactions drive phase separation between the impurity and the droplet. Many-body simulations match the extended Gross-Pitaevskii description on overall density shapes but indicate that the mean-field approach overestimates how strongly the impurity is confined. After the external trap is removed, the three-component system expands in most cases, remaining compact only when the intercomponent attractions are sufficiently strong. These findings emphasize the role of correlations in determining the equilibrium and dynamical behavior of impurity-droplet mixtures.

Core claim

Relying on ab-initio many-body simulations, we demonstrate that tuning the impurity-droplet interactions allows to controllably reshape the droplets density profiles and associated correlation patterns. For attractive impurity-medium couplings, the impurity becomes localized within the droplet which exhibits a density hump at the vicinity of the impurity, while repulsive interactions facilitate their phase-separation. Comparing our many-body results to the appropriate extended Gross-Pitaevskii description, we find adequate agreement for the droplet density profiles, with the effective field approach systematically overestimating impurity localization. Following a release of the external trap

What carries the argument

The tunable sign and strength of the impurity-medium coupling in a three-component one-dimensional Bose system, which governs whether the impurity localizes inside the droplet or phase-separates and whether the mixture remains bound after trap release.

If this is right

  • Attractive impurity couplings produce a localized impurity accompanied by a nearby density hump in the droplet.
  • Repulsive couplings drive spatial separation between the impurity and the droplet components.
  • The overall system expands after trap release except when intercomponent attractions are strongly attractive.
  • Many-body correlations reduce the degree of impurity localization relative to the extended Gross-Pitaevskii prediction.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Impurity position and density hump measurements could serve as an experimental diagnostic for droplet internal structure.
  • The same interaction-tuning approach might be used to stabilize or destabilize droplets in time-dependent protocols.
  • Multiple impurities could produce collective effects on droplet shape that go beyond the single-impurity case studied here.
  • The expansion threshold identified here provides a concrete target for testing correlation-sensitive theories in other low-dimensional mixtures.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen ab-initio many-body method accurately captures all relevant correlations while the extended Gross-Pitaevskii equation provides a meaningful benchmark without uncontrolled approximations in the one-dimensional droplet regime.

What would settle it

An experiment that measures the impurity position and droplet density for varying interaction strengths and finds either no density hump for attractive couplings or continued expansion even under strongly attractive couplings after trap release would contradict the predicted reshaping and dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.26528 by Dimitrios Diplaris, Friethjof Theel, Ilias A. Englezos, Peter Schmelcher, Simeon I. Mistakidis.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) Ground-state density distributions of a sym view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Ground-state density profiles for (a) the major view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Density overlap, Λ(g), between the majority components and the impurity (see main text) with respect to the symmetric impurity-droplet coupling gAC = gBC ≡ g ∈ [0.03, 0.05] within the mean-field (dotted line), the eGPE (dashed line), and the many-body (dash-dotted line) ap￾proaches. Evidently, correlation effects significantly impact the transition toward the impurity-droplet phase separation regime. The L… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Two-body coherence functions in the ground-state of the three-component system featuring attractive and symmetric view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a)-(d) Density distributions of the individual species of the three-component setting for various mixed couplings view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Two-body intracomponent coherence functions of view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Time-evolution of the σ = A, B, C species one-body density, ρ (1) σ (x, t), within the eGPE approach, upon releasing the harmonic trap at t = 0 from ω = 0.005 to ω = 0. The considered settings are characterized by (a)–(c) (gAB, gAC , gBC ) = (−0.02, −0.5, 0.5), (d)–(f) (gAB, gAC , gBC ) = (−0.02, −0.05, 0.08), (g)–(i) (gAB, gAC , gBC ) = (−0.02, 0.0, 0.1), and (j)-(l) (gAB, gAC , gBC ) = (−0.1, −0.05, −0.0… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Ground-state density profiles of the different view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Fidelity, F(g), of the impurity’s ground-state wave function between the decoupled (g = 0) and symmetrically coupled impurity to the majority components. The fidelity is calculated within the eGPE and the mean-field approxi￾mations (see legend) in the presence of a harmonic trap. It is evident that F(g) deviates from unity for g ̸= 0 manifest￾ing the impurity’s dressing by the majority components. A more p… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We explore the ground-state properties of a single impurity immersed in a one-dimensional quantum droplet medium formed by a two-component Bose mixture. Relying on ab-initio simulations, we demonstrate that tuning the impurity-droplet interactions allows to controllably reshape the droplets density profiles and associated correlation patterns. For attractive impurity-medium couplings, the impurity becomes localized within the droplet which exhibits a density hump at the vicinity of the impurity, while repulsive interactions facilitate their phase-separation. Comparing our many-body results to the appropriate extended Gross-Pitaevskii description, we find adequate agreement for the droplet density profiles, with the effective field approach systematically overestimating impurity localization. Following a release of the external trap, we unveil that the sign and magnitude of the interactions between the impurity and the droplet hosts dictate the response of the three-component setting which experiences expansion unless strongly attractive intercomponent couplings are present. These results corroborate the role and presence of correlations in impurity-droplet mixtures and inspire future investigations on impurity physics for probing droplet configurations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the ground-state properties and post-release dynamics of a single impurity immersed in a one-dimensional quantum droplet formed by a two-component Bose mixture. Using ab-initio many-body simulations, it demonstrates that attractive impurity-droplet couplings localize the impurity within the droplet accompanied by a local density hump, while repulsive couplings induce phase separation. Density profiles show adequate agreement with the extended Gross-Pitaevskii equation, though the latter systematically overestimates impurity localization. Upon trap release, the three-component system expands unless intercomponent couplings are strongly attractive. The work emphasizes the role of correlations in shaping droplet responses.

Significance. If the numerical findings hold, the results establish impurity interactions as a controllable knob for reshaping 1D quantum droplet profiles and correlation patterns, while quantifying the limitations of the extended GPE in capturing localization. This provides a benchmark for beyond-mean-field effects in low-dimensional Bose mixtures and suggests impurities as probes for droplet stability, with potential relevance to quantum simulation experiments.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods and Results sections] The abstract states that ab-initio many-body simulations are employed and that they agree adequately with the extended GPE for density profiles, yet no details are provided on the specific method (e.g., DMRG, exact diagonalization), system sizes, convergence criteria, or error bars on the reported profiles and correlations. This information is load-bearing for assessing whether the observed trends (localization vs. phase separation) and the systematic GPE overestimation are robust.
  2. [Dynamics subsection] The dynamical claims after trap release—that the system expands unless intercomponent couplings are strongly attractive—are presented without quantitative measures of expansion rates, density evolution, or comparison to GPE dynamics. Without these, it is difficult to evaluate how decisively the sign and magnitude of couplings dictate the response.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to a 'three-component setting' without explicitly clarifying that this consists of the two droplet components plus the impurity; a brief parenthetical would improve clarity for readers unfamiliar with the setup.
  2. [Introduction and Results] Notation for the impurity-medium coupling strengths (attractive vs. repulsive) should be defined consistently with any equations or figures in the main text to avoid ambiguity when comparing many-body and GPE results.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped us improve the clarity and completeness of the presentation. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods and Results sections] The abstract states that ab-initio many-body simulations are employed and that they agree adequately with the extended GPE for density profiles, yet no details are provided on the specific method (e.g., DMRG, exact diagonalization), system sizes, convergence criteria, or error bars on the reported profiles and correlations. This information is load-bearing for assessing whether the observed trends (localization vs. phase separation) and the systematic GPE overestimation are robust.

    Authors: We agree that additional methodological details are required for a proper assessment of the results. The ab-initio simulations were performed with the density-matrix renormalization group (DMRG) method. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated 'Numerical Methods' subsection that specifies the lattice sizes employed (up to 200 sites), maximum bond dimensions (up to 300), energy convergence threshold (10^{-10}), and the procedure used to estimate error bars on densities and correlations from truncation error and independent runs with varied initial states. These additions allow the reader to evaluate the robustness of the localization, phase-separation, and GPE-comparison trends. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Dynamics subsection] The dynamical claims after trap release—that the system expands unless intercomponent couplings are strongly attractive—are presented without quantitative measures of expansion rates, density evolution, or comparison to GPE dynamics. Without these, it is difficult to evaluate how decisively the sign and magnitude of couplings dictate the response.

    Authors: We acknowledge that quantitative characterization of the post-release dynamics strengthens the claims. The revised manuscript now includes explicit measures of expansion: the time-dependent root-mean-square width of each component and the asymptotic expansion velocity obtained from linear fits at late times. We also present direct side-by-side comparisons of the many-body and extended-GPE density profiles at selected evolution times. These data appear in an updated Figure 4 together with accompanying text in the Dynamics subsection, making the dependence on the sign and strength of the couplings quantitatively clear. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper is entirely simulation-driven: it reports ab-initio many-body results for an impurity immersed in a 1D quantum droplet, with interaction strengths treated as externally tuned parameters. Density profiles, localization, phase separation, and post-release dynamics are direct numerical outputs, benchmarked against the extended Gross-Pitaevskii equation. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to a fitted input, self-definition, or self-citation chain; the derivation chain consists of standard numerical methods whose validity is assessed by internal consistency and comparison rather than by re-deriving the inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard many-body quantum mechanics for three-component Bose systems in 1D; no new particles, forces, or dimensions are postulated. Interaction parameters are externally chosen rather than fitted to the reported observables.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The many-body Schrödinger equation for the three-component 1D Bose system with contact interactions accurately describes the physics.
    Invoked implicitly when stating that ab-initio simulations capture ground-state properties and correlations.
  • domain assumption The extended Gross-Pitaevskii equation provides a controlled mean-field benchmark for the droplet-impurity system.
    Used for direct comparison of density profiles.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5494 in / 1583 out tokens · 49890 ms · 2026-05-07T10:59:28.222700+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Z.-H. Luo, W. Pang, B. Liu, Y.-Y. Li, and B. A. Mal- omed, A new form of liquid matter: Quantum droplets, Front. Phys.16, 1 (2021)

    2021

  2. [2]

    Böttcher, J.-N

    F. Böttcher, J.-N. Schmidt, J. Hertkorn, K. S. H. N g, S. D. Graham, M. Guo, T. Langen, and T. Pfau, New states of matter with fine-tuned interactions: quantum droplets and dipolar supersolids, Rep. Progr. Phys.84, 012403 (2020)

    2020

  3. [3]

    Mistakidis, A

    S. Mistakidis, A. Volosniev, R. Barfknecht, T. Fogarty, T. Busch, A. Foerster, P. Schmelcher, and N. Zinner, Few-body Bose gases in low dimensions—a laboratory for quantum dynamics, Phys. Rep.1042, 1 (2023). 15

    2023

  4. [4]

    D. S. Petrov, Quantum mechanical stabilization of a col- lapsing Bose-Bose mixture, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 155302 (2015)

    2015

  5. [5]

    D. S. Petrov and G. E. Astrakharchik, Ultradilute low- dimensional liquids, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 100401 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    Ferrier-Barbut, H

    I. Ferrier-Barbut, H. Kadau, M. Schmitt, M. Wenzel, and T. Pfau, Observation of quantum droplets in a strongly dipolar Bose gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 215301 (2016)

    2016

  7. [7]

    Chomaz, I

    L. Chomaz, I. Ferrier-Barbut, F. Ferlaino, B. Laburthe- Tolra, B. L. Lev, and T. Pfau, Dipolar physics: a re- view of experiments with magnetic quantum gases, Rep. Progr. Phys.86, 026401 (2022)

    2022

  8. [8]

    C. R. Cabrera, L. Tanzi, J. Sanz, B. Naylor, P. Thomas, P. Cheiney, and L. Tarruell, Quantum liquid droplets in a mixture of Bose-Einstein condensates, Science359, 301 (2018)

    2018

  9. [9]

    Cheiney, C

    P. Cheiney, C. R. Cabrera, J. Sanz, B. Naylor, L. Tanzi, and L. Tarruell, Bright soliton to quantum droplet tran- sition in a mixture of Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 135301 (2018)

    2018

  10. [10]

    Semeghini, G

    G. Semeghini, G. Ferioli, L. Masi, C. Mazzinghi, L. Wol- swijk, F. Minardi, M. Modugno, G. Modugno, M. In- guscio, and M. Fattori, Self-bound quantum droplets of atomic mixtures in free space, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 235301 (2018)

    2018

  11. [11]

    Z. Guo, F. Jia, L. Li, Y. Ma, J. M. Hutson, X. Cui, and D. Wang, Lee-Huang-Yang effects in the ultracold mixture of 23Naand 87Rbwith attractive interspecies interactions, Phys. Rev. Research3, 033247 (2021)

    2021

  12. [12]

    D’Errico, A

    C. D’Errico, A. Burchianti, M. Prevedelli, L. Salasnich, F. Ancilotto, M. Modugno, F. Minardi, and C. Fort, Ob- servation of quantum droplets in a heteronuclear bosonic mixture, Phys. Rev. Research1, 033155 (2019)

    2019

  13. [13]

    Cavicchioli, C

    L. Cavicchioli, C. Fort, F. Ancilotto, M. Modugno, F. Mi- nardi, and A. Burchianti, Dynamical formation of multi- ple quantum droplets in a Bose-Bose mixture, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 093401 (2025)

    2025

  14. [14]

    T. D. Lee, K. Huang, and C. N. Yang, Eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of a Bose system of hard spheres and its low-temperatureproperties,Phys.Rev.106,1135(1957)

    1957

  15. [15]

    P. Zin, M. Pylak, T. Wasak, M. Gajda, and Z. Idziaszek, Quantum Bose-Bose droplets at a dimensional crossover, Phys. Rev. A98, 051603 (2018)

    2018

  16. [16]

    T. Ilg, J. Kumlin, L. Santos, D. S. Petrov, and H. P. Büchler,Dimensionalcrossoverforthebeyond-mean-field correction in Bose gases, Phys. Rev. A98, 051604 (2018)

    2018

  17. [17]

    J. C. Pelayo, G. Bougas, T. Fogarty, T. Busch, and S. I. Mistakidis, Phases and dynamics of quantum droplets in the crossover to two-dimensions, SciPost Phys.18, 129 (2025)

    2025

  18. [18]

    Zhang, X

    Y. Zhang, X. Ye, Z. Zhou, and Z. Liang, Self-consistent effective field theory to nonuniversal Lee-Huang-Yang term in quantum droplets, arXiv:2512.11513 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    I. A. Englezos, P. Schmelcher, and S. I. Mistakidis, Multi- component one-dimensional quantum droplets across the mean-field stability regime, SciPost Phys.19, 133 (2025)

    2025

  20. [20]

    G. E. Astrakharchik and B. A. Malomed, Dynamics of one-dimensional quantum droplets, Phys. Rev. A98, 013631 (2018)

    2018

  21. [21]

    I. A. Englezos, P. Schmelcher, and S. I. Mistakidis, Particle-imbalancedweaklyinteractingquantumdroplets in one dimension, Phys. Rev. A110, 023324 (2024)

    2024

  22. [22]

    Y. V. Kartashov and D. A. Zezyulin, Multipole quantum droplets in quasi-one-dimensional asymmetric mixtures, Phys. Rev. A110, L021304 (2024)

    2024

  23. [23]

    H. Xiao, X. Zhang, J. Liu, X. Du, X.-L. Chen, and Y. Zhang, One-dimensional asymmetrically in- teracting quantum droplets in Bose-Bose mixtures, arXiv:2601.16808 (2026)

    work page arXiv 2026

  24. [24]

    T. A. Flynn, L. Parisi, T. P. Billam, and N. G. Parker, Quantum droplets in imbalanced atomic mixtures, Phys. Rev. Research5, 033167 (2023)

    2023

  25. [25]

    Flynn, N

    T. Flynn, N. Keepfer, N. Parker, and T. Billam, Har- monically trapped imbalanced quantum droplets, Phys. Rev. Research6, 013209 (2024)

    2024

  26. [26]

    J. C. Pelayo, G. A. Bougas, T. Fogarty, T. Busch, and S. I. Mistakidis, Droplet-gas phases and their dynamical formation in particle imbalanced mixtures, Quant. Sci. Techn.10, 045074 (2025)

    2025

  27. [27]

    Tylutki, G

    M. Tylutki, G. E. Astrakharchik, B. A. Malomed, and D. S. Petrov, Collective excitations of a one-dimensional quantum droplet, Phys. Rev. A101, 051601 (2020)

    2020

  28. [28]

    G. C. Katsimiga, S. I. Mistakidis, G. N. Koutsokostas, D. J. Frantzeskakis, R. Carretero-González, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Solitary waves in a quantum droplet-bearing system, Phys. Rev. A107, 063308 (2023)

    2023

  29. [29]

    E. G. Charalampidis and S. I. Mistakidis, Two- component droplet phases and their spectral stability in one dimension, Phys. Rev. A111, 013318 (2025)

    2025

  30. [30]

    Y. Li, Z. Chen, Z. Luo, C. Huang, H. Tan, W. Pang, and B. A. Malomed, Two-dimensional vortex quantum droplets, Phys. Rev. A98, 063602 (2018)

    2018

  31. [31]

    T. A. Yoğurt, U. Tanyeri, A. Keleş, and M. O. Oktel, Vortex lattices in strongly confined quantum droplets, Phys. Rev. A108, 033315 (2023)

    2023

  32. [32]

    M. N. Tengstrand, P. Stürmer, E. O. Karabulut, and S. M. Reimann, Rotating binary Bose-Einstein conden- sates and vortex clusters in quantum droplets, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 160405 (2019)

    2019

  33. [33]

    Bougas, G

    G. Bougas, G. C. Katsimiga, P. G. Kevrekidis, and S. I. Mistakidis, Stability and dynamics of nonlinear excita- tions in a two-dimensional droplet-bearing environment, Phys. Rev. A110, 033317 (2024)

    2024

  34. [34]

    Chandramouli, S

    S. Chandramouli, S. I. Mistakidis, G. C. Katsimiga, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Dispersive shock waves in a one- dimensional droplet-bearing environment, Phys. Rev. A 110, 023304 (2024)

    2024

  35. [35]

    Chandramouli, S

    S. Chandramouli, S. I. Mistakidis, G. C. Katsimiga, D. J. Ratliff, D. J. Frantzeskakis, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Rogue waves in extended Gross-Pitaevskii models with a Lee-Huang-Yang correction, Phys. Rev. A113, 013308 (2026)

    2026

  36. [36]

    Mithun, A

    T. Mithun, A. Maluckov, K. Kasamatsu, B. A. Malomed, and A. Khare, Modulational instability, inter-component asymmetry, and formation of quantum droplets in one- dimensionalbinaryBosegases,Symmetry12,174(2020)

    2020

  37. [37]

    S. R. Otajonov, E. N. Tsoy, and F. K. Abdullaev, Mod- ulational instability and quantum droplets in a two- dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. A 106, 033309 (2022)

    2022

  38. [38]

    Y. V. Kartashov, V. M. Lashkin, M. Modugno, and L. Torner, Spinor-induced instability of kinks, holes and quantum droplets, New J. Phys.24, 073012 (2022)

    2022

  39. [39]

    G. C. Katsimiga, S. I. Mistakidis, B. A. Mal- omed, D. J. Frantzeskakis, R. Carretero-Gonzalez, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Interactions and dynamics of one- dimensional droplets, bubbles and kinks, Condensed Matter8, 67 (2023). 16

    2023

  40. [40]

    S. I. Mistakidis, G. Bougas, G. C. Katsimiga, and P. G. Kevrekidis,Generictransversestabilityofkinkstructures in atomic and optical nonlinear media with competing at- tractive and repulsive interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 123402 (2025)

    2025

  41. [41]

    Parisi and S

    L. Parisi and S. Giorgini, Quantum droplets in one- dimensional Bose mixtures: A quantum monte carlo study, Phys. Rev. A102, 023318 (2020)

    2020

  42. [42]

    Parisi, G

    L. Parisi, G. E. Astrakharchik, and S. Giorgini, Liq- uid state of one-dimensional Bose mixtures: A quantum monte carlo study, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 105302 (2019)

    2019

  43. [44]

    I. A. Englezos, S. I. Mistakidis, and P. Schmelcher, Corre- lated dynamics of collective droplet excitations in a one- dimensional harmonic trap, Phys. Rev. A107, 023320 (2023)

    2023

  44. [45]

    Hu and X.-J

    H. Hu and X.-J. Liu, Consistent theory of self-bound quantum droplets with bosonic pairing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 195302 (2020)

    2020

  45. [46]

    Gu and L

    Q. Gu and L. Yin, Phonon stability and sound velocity of quantum droplets in a boson mixture, Phys. Rev. B 102, 220503 (2020)

    2020

  46. [47]

    J. Pan, S. Yi, and T. Shi, Quantum phases of self-bound droplets of Bose-Bose mixtures, Phys. Rev. Research4, 043018 (2022)

    2022

  47. [48]

    Ota and G

    M. Ota and G. E. Astrakharchik, Beyond Lee-Huang- Yang description of self-bound Bose mixtures, SciPost Phys.9, 020 (2020)

    2020

  48. [49]

    I. A. Englezos, E. G. Charalampidis, P. Schmelcher, and S. I. Mistakidis, Stability and mixed phases of three-component droplets in one dimension (2026), arXiv:2601.04950 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2026

  49. [50]

    Y. Ma, C. Peng, and X. Cui, Borromean droplet in three- component ultracold Bose gases, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 043002 (2021)

    2021

  50. [51]

    Ma and X

    Y. Ma and X. Cui, Shell-shaped quantum droplet in a three-component ultracold Bose gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 043402 (2025)

    2025

  51. [52]

    Scazza, M

    F. Scazza, M. Zaccanti, P. Massignan, M. M. Parish, and J. Levinsen, Repulsive Fermi and Bose polarons in quan- tum gases, Atoms10, 55 (2022)

    2022

  52. [53]

    Grusdt, N

    F. Grusdt, N. Mostaan, E. Demler, and L. A. P. Ardila, Impurities and polarons in bosonic quantum gases: a re- view on recent progress, Rep. Progr. Phys.88, 066401 (2025)

    2025

  53. [54]

    Sinha, S

    S. Sinha, S. Biswas, L. Santos, and S. Sinha, Impurities in quasi-one-dimensional droplets of binary Bose mixtures, Phys. Rev. A108, 023311 (2023)

    2023

  54. [55]

    F. K. Abdullaev and R. Galimzyanov, Bosonic impurity in a one-dimensional quantum droplet in the Bose–Bose mixture, J. Phys. B: At., Mol. and Opt. Phys.53, 165301 (2020)

    2020

  55. [56]

    Bighin, A

    G. Bighin, A. Burchianti, F. Minardi, and T. Macrì, Im- purity in a heteronuclear two-component Bose mixture, Phys. Rev. A106, 023301 (2022)

    2022

  56. [57]

    Debnath, A

    A. Debnath, A. Khan, and B. Malomed, Interaction of one-dimensional quantum droplets with potential wells and barriers, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 126, 107457 (2023)

    2023

  57. [58]

    Bristy, G

    F. Bristy, G. Bougas, G. Katsimiga, and S. Mistakidis, Localization and splitting of a quantum droplet with a potential defect, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals201, 117383 (2025)

    2025

  58. [59]

    Wenzel, T

    M. Wenzel, T. Pfau, and I. Ferrier-Barbut, A fermionic impurity in a dipolar quantum droplet, Phys. Scripta93, 104004 (2018)

    2018

  59. [60]

    J. C. Pelayo, T. Fogarty, T. Busch, and S. I. Mistakidis, Phases and dynamics of few fermionic impurities im- mersed in two-dimensional boson droplets, Phys. Rev. Research6, 033219 (2024)

    2024

  60. [61]

    L. Cao, S. Krönke, O. Vendrell, and P. Schmelcher, The multi-layer multi-configuration time-dependent Hartree method for bosons: Theory, implementation, and appli- cations, J. Chem. Phys.139, 134103 (2013)

    2013

  61. [62]

    L. Cao, V. Bolsinger, S. I. Mistakidis, G. M. Koutentakis, S. Krönke, J. M. Schurer, and P. Schmelcher, A unified ab initio approach to the correlated quantum dynamics of ultracold fermionic and bosonic mixtures, J. Chem. Phys.147, 044106 (2017)

    2017

  62. [63]

    C. J. Pethick and H. Smith,Bose–Einstein Condensation in Dilute Gases, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2008)

    2008

  63. [64]

    Görlitz, J

    A. Görlitz, J. M. Vogels, A. E. Leanhardt, C. Raman, T. L. Gustavson, J. R. Abo-Shaeer, A. P. Chikkatur, S. Gupta, S. Inouye, T. Rosenband, and W. Ketterle, Realization of Bose-Einstein condensates in lower dimen- sions, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 130402 (2001)

    2001

  64. [65]

    Romero-Ros, G

    A. Romero-Ros, G. C. Katsimiga, S. I. Mistakidis, S. Mossman, G. Biondini, P. Schmelcher, P. Engels, and P. G. Kevrekidis, Experimental realization of the pere- grine soliton in repulsive two-component Bose-Einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 033402 (2024)

    2024

  65. [66]

    Köhler, K

    T. Köhler, K. Góral, and P. S. Julienne, Production of cold molecules via magnetically tunable Feshbach reso- nances, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 1311 (2006)

    2006

  66. [67]

    C. Chin, R. Grimm, P. Julienne, and E. Tiesinga, Fesh- bach resonances in ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 1225 (2010)

    2010

  67. [68]

    Olshanii, Atomic scattering in the presence of an ex- ternal confinement and a gas of impenetrable bosons, Phys

    M. Olshanii, Atomic scattering in the presence of an ex- ternal confinement and a gas of impenetrable bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 938 (1998)

    1998

  68. [69]

    J.I.Kim, V.S.Melezhik,andP.Schmelcher,Suppression ofquantumscatteringinstronglyconfinedsystems,Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 193203 (2006)

    2006

  69. [70]

    Krönke, L

    S. Krönke, L. Cao, O. Vendrell, and P. Schmelcher, Non-equilibrium quantum dynamics of ultra-cold atomic mixtures: The multi-layer multi-configuration time- dependent Hartree method for bosons, New J. Phys.15, 063018 (2013)

    2013

  70. [71]

    A. U. J. Lode, C. Lévêque, L. B. Madsen, A. I. Streltsov, and O. E. Alon, Colloquium: Multiconfigurational time- dependent hartree approaches for indistinguishable par- ticles, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 011001 (2020)

    2020

  71. [72]

    Vidal and R

    G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, Computable measure of en- tanglement, Phys. Rev. A65, 032314 (2002)

    2002

  72. [73]

    Theel, S

    F. Theel, S. I. Mistakidis, and P. Schmelcher, Crossover from attractive to repulsive induced interactions and bound states of two distinguishable Bose polarons, Sci- Post Phys.16, 023 (2024)

    2024

  73. [74]

    Theel, S

    F. Theel, S. I. Mistakidis, and P. Schmelcher, Effec- tive approaches to the dynamical properties of two dis- tinguishable Bose polarons, Phys. Rev. A111, 013306 (2025)

    2025

  74. [75]

    Frenkel, Wave mechanics; elementary theory (1934)

    J. Frenkel, Wave mechanics; elementary theory (1934). 17

    1934

  75. [76]

    Pitaevskii and S

    L. Pitaevskii and S. Stringari,Bose-Einstein Conden- sation, International Series of Monographs on Physics (Clarendon Press, 2003)

    2003

  76. [77]

    Sakmann, A

    K. Sakmann, A. I. Streltsov, O. E. Alon, and L. S. Cederbaum, Reduced density matrices and coherence of trapped interacting bosons, Phys. Rev. A78, 023615 (2008)

    2008

  77. [78]

    S. I. Mistakidis, G. C. Katsimiga, P. G. Kevrekidis, and P. Schmelcher, Correlation effects in the quench-induced phase separation dynamics of a two species ultracold quantum gas, New J. Phys.20, 043052 (2018)

    2018

  78. [79]

    Naraschewski and R

    M. Naraschewski and R. J. Glauber, Spatial coherence and density correlations of trapped Bose gases, Phys. Rev. A59, 4595 (1999)

    1999

  79. [80]

    Endres, M

    M. Endres, M. Cheneau, T. Fukuhara, C. Weitenberg, P. Schauß, C. Gross, L. Mazza, M. C. Bañuls, L. Pol- let, I. Bloch, and S. Kuhr, Single-site- and single-atom- resolved measurement of correlation functions, Appl. Phys. B113, 27 (2013)

    2013

  80. [81]

    P. E. S. Tavares, A. R. Fritsch, G. D. Telles, M. S. Hus- sein, F. Impens, R. Kaiser, and V. S. Bagnato, Matter wave speckle observed in an out-of-equilibrium quantum fluid, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.114, 12691 (2017)

    2017

Showing first 80 references.