pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00241 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-30 · 🪐 quant-ph

Exploring the Geometric and Dynamical Properties of Spin Systems and Their Interplay with Quantum Entanglement

Jamal Elfakir This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 20:01 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum entanglementFubini-Study metricgeometric phaseXXZ Heisenberg modelIsing interactionsquantum dynamicsprojective Hilbert spacebrachistochrone problem
0
0 comments X

The pith

The projective geometry of Hilbert space links evolution speed, entanglement, and phase in spin systems under XXZ and Ising interactions.

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

The thesis maps classical symplectic structures onto the projective Hilbert space to show that the Fubini-Study metric organizes the time evolution and entanglement dynamics of two- and many-body spin models. It demonstrates that distances in this geometry bound the speed of state changes and correlate with the rate at which entanglement appears, while the induced symplectic form and geometric phase capture the topological features of the trajectories. A reader should care because the approach supplies a single geometric language for why certain interaction strengths produce faster entanglement or reach target states sooner. The work moves from the classical analogy through the quantum geometric toolkit and then applies both to concrete XXZ Heisenberg and all-range Ising Hamiltonians.

Core claim

By equipping the projective Hilbert space with the Fubini-Study metric and its associated symplectic form, the dynamical properties of spin systems—including the minimal time for state transfer, the growth of entanglement, and the geometric phase—become visible as geometric quantities rather than purely algebraic ones. For the XXZ model the metric distance directly constrains the brachistochrone time; for the all-range Ising case the curvature of state-space paths tracks the onset of multipartite entanglement.

What carries the argument

The Fubini-Study metric on projective Hilbert space, which defines the distance between quantum states and supplies the symplectic structure governing their unitary evolution.

If this is right

  • Evolution speed in these spin models is bounded from below by the Fubini-Study distance between initial and target states.
  • Entanglement measures acquire a geometric interpretation as the length or area swept in projective space.
  • Geometric phase accumulated along optimal paths distinguishes different entanglement classes in the many-body Ising case.
  • The quantum brachistochrone problem for XXZ interactions reduces to a geodesic problem on the Fubini-Study manifold.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same metric could be used to design pulse sequences that reach high entanglement with minimal energy cost in experimental spin arrays.
  • Numerical checks of the predicted speed-entanglement correlation are feasible on small trapped-ion or superconducting-qubit devices.
  • If the geometric bound holds, it supplies a model-independent limit on how quickly multipartite entanglement can form under local interactions.

Load-bearing premise

The formal parallel between classical symplectic phase space and the Fubini-Study geometry on quantum states yields concrete new relations among speed, entanglement, and phase that are not already visible in the usual Schrödinger-picture calculations.

What would settle it

A direct computation for the two-spin XXZ chain showing that the Fubini-Study distance between initial and maximally entangled states does not bound the shortest evolution time under the given Hamiltonian.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.00241 by Jamal Elfakir.

Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. Figure 1.1: The system follows the minimum-action trajectory. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_1_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.2. Figure 1.2: 2 pendulums coupled by a torsion wire in the wire, as illustrated in the following energy components:    T1 = 1 2m1l 2 1 ˙θ 2 1 (kinetic energy of pendulum 1) T2 = 1 2m2l 2 2 ˙θ 2 2 (kinetic energy of pendulum 2) V1 = m1gl1(1 − cos(θ1)) (potential energy of pendulum 1) V2 = m2gl2(1 − cos(θ2)) (potential energy of pendulum 2) Ecoupling = k 2 (θ1 − θ2) 2 (torsional co… view at source ↗
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1: The Projective Space CP n as a Base of a Fiber Bundle over C n+1 Let us consider two points described in homogeneous coordinates, Z µ and Y µ . The Fubini-Study distance [40] between these two points is given by s 2 FS(Z µ , Y µ ) = |ZµY ∗µ − YµZ ∗µ | 2 (1 + ZµZ∗µ)(1 + YµY∗µ) (2.7) where the star ( ∗ ) denotes complex conjugation, and Einstein’s summation over repeated indices is assumed for all homogene… view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: Evolution speed Eq. (3.72) versus the entanglement degree • First regime C ∈ [0, Cc]: the evolution speed increases with the degree of entanglement until it reaches a maximum Vmax = J 2 , corresponding to the critical entanglement level C = Cc = |sin κ|. This shows that, in this stage, the presence of quantum correlations accelerates the system evolution in its phase space. • Second regime C ∈ [Cc, 1]: b… view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: FubiniStudy Distance (3.73) vs. Concurrence (3.71) for various κ values in phase space is given by T = s vmax = κ J|sin κ| q C (2|sin κ| − C). (3.74) This optimal time depends on ordinary time, the coupling constant J, and the system’s degree of entanglement. Analysis of its behavior reveals the following. • For C = 0, the optimal time is zero (T = 0), because the initial state is a non-entangled state |… view at source ↗
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.4. Figure 3.4: Variation of Optimal Time (3.74) with Concurrence (3.71) for various κ values and J = 1 Finally, the optimal state evolution can be obtained via the following unitary operation |Υi → |Υ(T)i = e −iHT |Υi. (3.75) The set of optimal states forms a one-dimensional space in the global phase space, defined by the metric dS2 opt = C 4 sin2 κ (2|sin κ| − C) dκ2 , (3.76) with κ = JT. Analysis of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE… view at source ↗
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.5. Figure 3.5: Evolution Speed vs. I-Concurrence for Various Spin Values at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p095_3_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.6
Figure 3.6. Figure 3.6: Geodesic distance (3.106) plotted against I-concurrence (3.103) for various spin values, with parameters set to η˜ = 1, J = 1, and ηmax = 10−3 . dependence of evolution speed on the spin magnitude: higher spin values correspond to faster evolution. This leads to a fundamental conclusion both entanglement and spin magnitude are key physical parameters governing the speed of evolution in an interacting spi… view at source ↗
Figure 3.7
Figure 3.7. Figure 3.7: Optimal time (3.107) plotted against I-concurrence (3.103) for various spin values, with parameters set to η˜ = 1, J = 1, and ηmax = 10−3 . An analysis of this expression reveals several key behaviors. When C = 0, the optimal time reduces to zero (Tc = 0), indicating that the system does not evolve. In this scenario, the final state coincides with the initial state, which is a separable state: |Υ 2,s i i… view at source ↗
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: Geometrical phase (4.24) plotted against concurrence (3.46) for various values of the anisotropy parameter ν, with χ = π/2 and Bz = 0. C ∈ [0, 1], indicating that the state vector undergoes a counterclockwise rotation throughout its evolution. Conversely, for ν = 0.5 and ν = 1.5, the geometric phase is negative, signifying a clockwise rotation as the system transitions from the non-entangled state (C = 0… view at source ↗
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: Dependence of the G-curvature (4.30) on the initial parameter η for various spin- 1 2 values. The identification of the topology of the state space fundamentally relies on the Euler character￾istic, a global invariant that encapsulates the intrinsic structure of the space. This topological quantity arises from two primary contributions: the volume contribution, determined by the inte￾gration of the Gauss… view at source ↗
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: Dependence of the AA-geometric phase (4.46) on the initial parameter η for various spin- 1 2 values. This expression explicitly establishes the dependence of the geometric phase on the geometric structure of the state space. Graphically representing Φ AA g as a function of the parameters (N, η) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p113_4_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4: G-curvature (4.54) plotted against concurrence (3.71) for various values of κ. Hilbert space through the introduction of a quantum phase space, analogous to its classical counterpart [102, 112]. The connection between geometric phase and quantum entanglement can also be explored in this context. By substituting Eq. (3.71) into equation Eq. (??), we derive the expression for the geometric phase Φg acquire… view at source ↗
Figure 4.5
Figure 4.5. Figure 4.5: Geometric phase (4.57) versus the concurrence (3.71) for some values of κ value (see Fig. (4.5)). This critical degree is explicitly given by Cc = sin κ − cot κ 2 r sin κ κ (2 − κ sin κ − 2 cos κ). In this first stage, the evolving state Eq. (3.70) acquires a negative geometric phase. This can be interpreted as a loss of geometric phase by the system. Geometrically, this indicates that, during parallel t… view at source ↗
Figure 4.6
Figure 4.6. Figure 4.6: AA-geometric phase (4.58) plotted against concurrence (3.71) for various values of κ. accumulated by the evolved state Eq. (3.70) as a function of competition, expressed as follows Φ AA g = −π C |sin κ| . (4.58) This expression shows that the AA geometric phase is proportional to the level of entanglement between the two spins, with a negative proportionality factor. This implies that the AA geometric ph… view at source ↗
Figure 4.7
Figure 4.7. Figure 4.7: G-curvature (4.82) plotted against I-concurrence (3.103) for various spin values, with η˜ = 1. This equation confirms that the geometry of the state space is highly sensitive to quantum correla￾tions between the two spins. To further illustrate this phenomenon, we have plotted the behavior of K as a function of I-concurrence for different spin values with η˜ = 1, as shown in Fig. (4.7). The results revea… view at source ↗
Figure 4.8
Figure 4.8. Figure 4.8: Geometrical phase (4.85) plotted against I-concurrence (3.103) for various spin values, with η˜ = 1. Fig. (4.8) provides a detailed depiction of the dependence of the geometric phase on quantum entanglement for various spin values, with the parameter η¯ = 1. The figure clearly demonstrates PhD Thesis 109 Jamal ELFAKIR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p125_4_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This thesis, explores the quantum entanglement and evolution through both a geometric and dynamical perspective. The first part focuses on classical phase space and its central role in Hamiltonian mechanics, emphasizing the importance of symplectic structures in describing mechanical states. The study highlights the formal analogy between classical phase space and the Hilbert space used in quantum mechanics. The second part is devoted to the geometric description of quantum states through the projective structure of Hilbert space. Emphasis is placed on the geometric interpretation of quantum evolution, particularly via the Fubini-Study metric, associated symplectic structures, and the geometric phase acquired during unitary evolutions. The final two parts are dedicated to the study of spin systems (both two-body and many-body) under different interaction models (XXZ Heisenberg and all-range Ising). Both the dynamical aspects (evolution speed, entanglement, and the quantum brachistochrone problem) and the geometric and topological structures of the corresponding quantum states are analyzed.

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 / 0 minor

Summary. This thesis explores quantum entanglement and evolution through geometric and dynamical lenses. It opens with classical phase space, Hamiltonian mechanics, and symplectic structures, then draws a formal analogy to quantum Hilbert space. The central geometric treatment covers the projective structure of Hilbert space, the Fubini-Study metric, associated symplectic forms, and the geometric phase acquired under unitary evolution. The final sections apply these tools to two-body and many-body spin systems governed by XXZ Heisenberg and all-range Ising interactions, examining dynamical quantities (evolution speed, entanglement, quantum brachistochrone problem) together with the geometric and topological properties of the corresponding states.

Significance. If the claimed connections hold, the work supplies a unified geometric language for relating Fubini-Study distance, symplectic invariants, and geometric phase to entanglement and speed limits in concrete spin models. This could illuminate the quantum brachistochrone problem and geometric-phase effects in interacting systems. The systematic coverage of both two-body and many-body cases is a positive feature. Significance is limited, however, by the fact that the geometric structures invoked are standard elements of quantum mechanics; the advance therefore rests on whether the application produces quantitative relations or predictions not already obtainable from the Schrödinger equation, concurrence, or von Neumann entropy.

major comments (2)
  1. Final two parts (spin-system analysis): the central claim that projective Hilbert-space geometry reveals new connections among evolution speed, entanglement, and geometric phase must be supported by explicit comparisons to prior results on geometric phases and speed limits in XXZ and Ising chains. Without such comparisons or new quantitative bounds, the geometric treatment risks restating known solutions in different language rather than advancing the field.
  2. Sections on the quantum brachistochrone problem for the XXZ and all-range Ising models: the manuscript should state whether the Fubini-Study-based bound is tighter, parameter-free, or otherwise distinct from bounds derived directly from the time-dependent Schrödinger equation or from existing literature on optimal control in spin systems.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive feedback on our thesis. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions planned to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Final two parts (spin-system analysis): the central claim that projective Hilbert-space geometry reveals new connections among evolution speed, entanglement, and geometric phase must be supported by explicit comparisons to prior results on geometric phases and speed limits in XXZ and Ising chains. Without such comparisons or new quantitative bounds, the geometric treatment risks restating known solutions in different language rather than advancing the field.

    Authors: We agree that explicit comparisons to prior literature are necessary to clearly delineate the contributions of the geometric approach. Our analysis applies the Fubini-Study metric and associated structures to two- and many-body spin systems under XXZ and Ising interactions, yielding specific relations linking evolution speed, entanglement measures, and geometric phase that are not immediately apparent from the Schrödinger equation alone. To address the concern, we will add a new subsection in the spin-system chapters that reviews representative prior results on geometric phases in Heisenberg and Ising models as well as quantum speed limits in spin chains. This subsection will contrast those findings with our results, emphasizing the novel quantitative connections to entanglement dynamics that arise from the projective geometry. We believe this addition will demonstrate the advancement without altering the core derivations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Sections on the quantum brachistochrone problem for the XXZ and all-range Ising models: the manuscript should state whether the Fubini-Study-based bound is tighter, parameter-free, or otherwise distinct from bounds derived directly from the time-dependent Schrödinger equation or from existing literature on optimal control in spin systems.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting the need for explicit clarification here. The Fubini-Study bound is derived directly from the projective metric on Hilbert space and is parameter-free with respect to the distance between initial and target states; it is mathematically equivalent to the Mandelstam-Tamm bound in certain regimes but provides a distinct geometric and symplectic interpretation that directly incorporates entanglement evolution in the XXZ and Ising cases. In the revised manuscript we will insert a dedicated paragraph in the brachistochrone sections that states these properties, notes that the bound is not uniformly tighter than Schrödinger-equation or optimal-control bounds, and references relevant literature on spin-system control. This will make the relation to existing results transparent while preserving the geometric perspective that is the focus of the thesis. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; geometric formalism applied to spin models without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The derivation chain relies on standard definitions of the Fubini-Study metric, symplectic forms on projective Hilbert space, and geometric phase, which are textbook elements of quantum mechanics independent of the specific XXZ or Ising Hamiltonians. No equations reduce a claimed prediction or insight to a fitted parameter or prior self-citation by construction. The analysis of evolution speed, entanglement, and brachistochrone bounds for the spin systems proceeds from the Schrödinger equation and concurrence/von Neumann entropy without tautological redefinition. Self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The thesis rests on the standard axioms of quantum mechanics and classical Hamiltonian mechanics. No free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc assumptions are mentioned in the abstract. Full text would be required to audit any additional structure.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Quantum states are represented by rays in Hilbert space equipped with the Fubini-Study metric.
    Invoked in the geometric description of quantum evolution section.
  • domain assumption Unitary evolution corresponds to geodesics or paths in the projective Hilbert space.
    Central to the geometric phase and brachistochrone discussion.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5453 in / 1356 out tokens · 26876 ms · 2026-05-09T20:01:41.674478+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

112 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The present status of quantum mechanics

    Erwin Schrödinger. The present status of quantum mechanics. Die Naturwissenschaften , 23(48):1–26, 1935

    1935

  2. [2]

    Observations on light and colours

    Thomas Melvill. Observations on light and colours. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, Vol. 8, p. 231 , 8:231, 1914

    1914

  3. [3]

    Ueber einen einfluss des ultravioletten lichtes auf die electrische entladung

    Heinrich Hertz. Ueber einen einfluss des ultravioletten lichtes auf die electrische entladung. Annalen der Physik , 267(8):983–1000, 1887

  4. [4]

    The quantum theory of light

    Rodney Loudon. The quantum theory of light . OUP Oxford, 2000

    2000

  5. [5]

    Uncertainty principle, hilbert bases and algebras of operators

    Yves Meyer. Uncertainty principle, hilbert bases and algebras of operators. Fundamental Papers in Wavelet Theory , page 216, 2006

    2006

  6. [6]

    Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics

    Melvin G Calkin. Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics . World Scientific, 1996

    1996

  7. [7]

    The structures of hamiltonian mechanics

    Alexandre Michailovich Vinogradov and Boris Abramovich Kupershmidt. The structures of hamiltonian mechanics. Russian Mathematical Surveys , 32(4):177, 1977

    1977

  8. [8]

    Gregory L. Naber. 6 The postulates of quantum mechanics , pages 189–230. De Gruyter, Berlin, Boston, 2021

    2021

  9. [9]

    Die grundlage der allgemeinen relativitätstheorie

    HA Lorentz, A Einstein, H Minkowski, and A Einstein. Die grundlage der allgemeinen relativitätstheorie. Das Relativitätsprinzip: Eine Sammlung von Abhandlungen , pages 81– 124, 1923

    1923

  10. [10]

    A geometric basis for thestandard-model gauge group

    Greg Trayling and William E Baylis. A geometric basis for thestandard-model gauge group. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , 34(15):3309, 2001

    2001

  11. [11]

    Quantal phase factors accompanying adiabatic changes

    Michael Victor Berry. Quantal phase factors accompanying adiabatic changes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences , 392(1802):45–57, 1984

    1984

  12. [12]

    The geometric phase

    Michael Berry. The geometric phase. Scientific American, 259(6):46–55, 1988

    1988

  13. [13]

    Mathematical methods of classical mechanics

    VI Arnold. Mathematical methods of classical mechanics. Ann Arbor, 1001:48109, 1978. Bibliographie 116

    1978

  14. [14]

    Symplectic geometry

    Alan Weinstein. Symplectic geometry. Bulletin of the American mathematical society , 5(1):1–13, 1981

    1981

  15. [15]

    Quantum computation and quantum information

    Michael A Nielsen and Isaac L Chuang. Quantum computation and quantum information . Cambridge university press, 2010

    2010

  16. [16]

    Geometry of projective hilbert space

    AN Grigorenko. Geometry of projective hilbert space. Physical Review A , 46(11):7292, 1992

    1992

  17. [17]

    Quantum Geometric Tensor (Fubini-Study Metric) in Simple Quantum System: A pedagogical Introduction

    Ran Cheng. Quantum geometric tensor (fubini-study metric) in simple quantum system: A pedagogical introduction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1012.1337 , 2010

    work page Pith review arXiv 2010

  18. [18]

    Characterizations of projective space and applications to complex symplectic manifolds

    Koji Cho, Yoichi Miyaoka, and Nicholas I Shepherd-Barron. Characterizations of projective space and applications to complex symplectic manifolds. Higher dimensional birational geometry (Kyoto, 1997) , 35:1–88, 2002

    1997

  19. [19]

    Quantum phase gates with geometric phases of spin-orbit modes

    GTC Cruz, SA Carvalho, CER de Souza, and JAO Huguenin. Quantum phase gates with geometric phases of spin-orbit modes. Quantum Information Processing , 23(5):160, 2024

    2024

  20. [20]

    Geometric phases and topological quantum computation

    Vlatko Vedral. Geometric phases and topological quantum computation. International Journal of Quantum Information , 1(01):1–23, 2003

    2003

  21. [21]

    Geometric and holonomic quantum computation

    Jiang Zhang, Thi Ha Kyaw, Stefan Filipp, Leong-Chuan Kwek, Erik Sjöqvist, and Dianmin Tong. Geometric and holonomic quantum computation. Physics Reports, 1027:1–53, 2023

    2023

  22. [22]

    Quantum computing in the nisq era and beyond

    John Preskill. Quantum computing in the nisq era and beyond. Quantum, 2:79, 2018

    2018

  23. [23]

    Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons

    A Yu Kitaev. Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons. Annals of Physics , 303(1):2– 30, 2003

    2003

  24. [24]

    Quantum error correction and orthogonal geometry

    A Robert Calderbank, Eric M Rains, Peter W Shor, and Neil JA Sloane. Quantum error correction and orthogonal geometry. Physical Review Letters , 78(3):405, 1997

    1997

  25. [25]

    Variational principles and lagranges equations

    H Goldstein, CP Poole, and JL Safko. Variational principles and lagranges equations. Clas- sical Dynamics, 3rd ed. Addison-Wesley , pages 45–51, 2001

    2001

  26. [26]

    Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: with applications to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering

    Steven H Strogatz. Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: with applications to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering . Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2024

    2024

  27. [27]

    Classical dynamics: a contemporary approach

    Jorge V José and Eugene J Saletan. Classical dynamics: a contemporary approach . Cam- bridge university press, 1998

    1998

  28. [28]

    Invariante variationsprobleme

    E Noether. Invariante variationsprobleme. Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wis- senschaften zu Göttingen, Mathematisch-Physikalische Klasse , 1918:235–257, 1918. Bibliographie 117

    1918

  29. [29]

    Strongly coupled overdamped pendulums

    Roberto De Luca. Strongly coupled overdamped pendulums. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física , 30:4304–1, 2008

    2008

  30. [30]

    Proof of heisenbergs error-disturbance relation

    Paul Busch, Pekka Lahti, and Reinhard F Werner. Proof of heisenbergs error-disturbance relation. Physical review letters , 111(16):160405, 2013

    2013

  31. [31]

    The meaning of the wave function: In search of the ontology of quantum me- chanics

    Shan Gao. The meaning of the wave function: In search of the ontology of quantum me- chanics. Cambridge University Press, 2017

    2017

  32. [32]

    Hilbert space quantum mechanics

    Robert B Griffiths. Hilbert space quantum mechanics. Available: ht tps://quantum. phys. cmu. edu/QCQI/qitd114. pdf , page 13, 2012

    2012

  33. [33]

    Systems with infinite-dimensional state space: the hilbert space approach

    J William Helton. Systems with infinite-dimensional state space: the hilbert space approach. Proceedings of the IEEE , 64(1):145–160, 2005

    2005

  34. [34]

    Quantum mechanics, volume 1

    Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, Bernard Diu, and Frank Laloe. Quantum mechanics, volume 1. Quantum Mechanics , 1:898, 1986

    1986

  35. [35]

    Quantum mechanics and path integrals, 1966

    RP Feynman, AR Hibbs, and George H Weiss. Quantum mechanics and path integrals, 1966

    1966

  36. [36]

    Techniques and applications of path integration

    Lawrence S Schulman. Techniques and applications of path integration. Courier Corporation, 2012

    2012

  37. [37]

    Saddle-point method in path integrals

    AL Koshkarov. Saddle-point method in path integrals. Technical report, Joint Inst. for Nuclear Research, 1993

    1993

  38. [38]

    Springer, 1980

    Christian Okonek, Michael Schneider, Heinz Spindler, and Serge ˘ ı Izrailevich Gelfand.Vector bundles on complex projective spaces , volume 3. Springer, 1980

    1980

  39. [39]

    Felix kleins projective representations of the groups s6 anda7

    Henning Heller. Felix kleins projective representations of the groups s6 anda7. Archive for History of Exact Sciences , 76(5):431–470, 2022

    2022

  40. [40]

    Differential analysis on complex manifolds , volume 21980

    Raymond O’Neil Wells and Oscar García-Prada. Differential analysis on complex manifolds , volume 21980. Springer New York, 1980

    1980

  41. [41]

    Chebyshev potentials, fubini–study metrics, and geom- etry of the space of kähler metrics

    Chenzi Jin and Yanir A Rubinstein. Chebyshev potentials, fubini–study metrics, and geom- etry of the space of kähler metrics. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society , 56(3):881– 906, 2024

    2024

  42. [42]

    Information-theoretic differential geome- try of quantum phase transitions

    Paolo Zanardi, Paolo Giorda, and Marco Cozzini. Information-theoretic differential geome- try of quantum phase transitions. Physical review letters , 99(10):100603, 2007

    2007

  43. [43]

    Information ge- ometry in time dependent quantum systems and the geometric phase

    Anshuman Dey, Suvankar Paul, Pratim Roy, and Tapobrata Sarkar. Information ge- ometry in time dependent quantum systems and the geometric phase. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.01358, 2016. Bibliographie 118

    work page arXiv 2016

  44. [44]

    Geometric phase and modulus relations for probability amplitudes as func- tions on complex parameter spaces

    Alonso Botero. Geometric phase and modulus relations for probability amplitudes as func- tions on complex parameter spaces. Journal of Mathematical Physics , 44(11):5279–5295, 2003

    2003

  45. [45]

    Geometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement

    Ingemar Bengtsson and Karol Zyczkowski. Geometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement . Cambridge University Press, 2006

    2006

  46. [46]

    Geometric quan- tum computation using nuclear magnetic resonance

    Jonathan A Jones, Vlatko Vedral, Artur Ekert, and Giuseppe Castagnoli. Geometric quan- tum computation using nuclear magnetic resonance. Nature, 403(6772):869–871, 2000

    2000

  47. [47]

    The quantum brachistochrone problem for an arbitrary spin in a magnetic field

    AR Kuzmak and VM Tkachuk. The quantum brachistochrone problem for an arbitrary spin in a magnetic field. Physics Letters A , 379(18-19):1233–1239, 2015

    2015

  48. [48]

    Quantum brachistochrone problem for a spin-1 system in a magnetic field

    AM Frydryszak and VM Tkachuk. Quantum brachistochrone problem for a spin-1 system in a magnetic field. Physical Review AAtomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , 77(1):014103, 2008

    2008

  49. [49]

    Implementation of universal quantum gates based on nona- diabatic geometric phases

    Shi-Liang Zhu and ZD Wang. Implementation of universal quantum gates based on nona- diabatic geometric phases. Physical review letters , 89(9):097902, 2002

    2002

  50. [50]

    Quantum state geometry and entanglement of two spins with anisotropic interaction in evolution

    AR Kuzmak. Quantum state geometry and entanglement of two spins with anisotropic interaction in evolution. Journal of Geometry and Physics , 116:81–89, 2017

    2017

  51. [51]

    Localsymmetry properties of pure three-qubit states

    HA Carteret and A Sudbery. Localsymmetry properties of pure three-qubit states. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , 33(28):4981, 2000

    2000

  52. [52]

    Geometric formulation of quantum mechanics

    Hoshang Heydari. Geometric formulation of quantum mechanics. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.00238, 2015

    work page arXiv 2015

  53. [53]

    The Geometric phase in quantum systems: foundations, mathematical concepts, and applications in molecular and condensed matter physics

    Arno Bohm, Ali Mostafazadeh, Hiroyasu Koizumi, Qian Niu, and Josef Zwanziger. The Geometric phase in quantum systems: foundations, mathematical concepts, and applications in molecular and condensed matter physics . Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  54. [54]

    Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution

    Yakir Aharonov and J Anandan. Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution. Physical Review Letters, 58(16):1593, 1987

    1987

  55. [55]

    Geometric aspects of noncyclic quantum evolutions

    Arun Kumar Pati. Geometric aspects of noncyclic quantum evolutions. Physical Review A , 52(4):2576, 1995

    1995

  56. [56]

    New derivation of the geometric phase

    Arun Kumar Pati. New derivation of the geometric phase. Physics Letters A , 202(1):40–45, 1995

    1995

  57. [57]

    Riemannian structures of prescribed gaussian curvature for compact 2-manifolds

    Melvyn S Berger. Riemannian structures of prescribed gaussian curvature for compact 2-manifolds. Journal of Differential Geometry , 5(3-4):325–332, 1971. Bibliographie 119

    1971

  58. [58]

    Riemannian manifolds: an introduction to curvature , volume 176

    John M Lee. Riemannian manifolds: an introduction to curvature , volume 176. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006

    2006

  59. [59]

    Gauss’ Theorema Egregium , pages 247–268

    Andrew Pressley. Gauss’ Theorema Egregium , pages 247–268. Springer London, London, 2010

    2010

  60. [60]

    The gauss-bonnet theorem for riemannian polyhedra

    Carl B Allendoerfer and André Weil. The gauss-bonnet theorem for riemannian polyhedra. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 53(1):101–129, 1943

    1943

  61. [61]

    Classifying and measur- ing geometry of a quantum ground state manifold

    Michael Kolodrubetz, Vladimir Gritsev, and Anatoli Polkovnikov. Classifying and measur- ing geometry of a quantum ground state manifold. Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics , 88(6):064304, 2013

    2013

  62. [62]

    Experimental observation of fractional topological phases with photonic qudits

    AA Matoso, X Sánchez-Lozano, WM Pimenta, P Machado, B Marques, Fabio Sciarrino, LE Oxman, AZ Khoury, and S Pádua. Experimental observation of fractional topological phases with photonic qudits. Physical Review A , 94(5):052305, 2016

    2016

  63. [63]

    Quantum state manifold and geometric, dynamic and topological phases for an interacting two-spin system

    B Amghar and M Daoud. Quantum state manifold and geometric, dynamic and topological phases for an interacting two-spin system. International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics , 17(02):2050030, 2020

    2020

  64. [64]

    Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation

    Sankar Das Sarma, Michael Freedman, and Chetan Nayak. Majorana zero modes and topological quantum computation. npj Quantum Information , 1(1):1–13, 2015

    2015

  65. [65]

    Majorana qubits for topological quantum com- puting

    Ramón Aguado and Leo P Kouwenhoven. Majorana qubits for topological quantum com- puting. Physics today , 73(6):44–50, 2020

    2020

  66. [66]

    Non-abelian statistics of half-quantum vortices in p-wave superconductors

    Dmitri A Ivanov. Non-abelian statistics of half-quantum vortices in p-wave superconductors. Physical review letters , 86(2):268, 2001

    2001

  67. [67]

    Non-abelian vortices and non-abelian statistics

    Hoi-Kwong Lo and John Preskill. Non-abelian vortices and non-abelian statistics. Physical Review D , 48(10):4821, 1993

    1993

  68. [68]

    Quantum entanglement and topological entan- glement

    Louis H Kauffman and Samuel J Lomonaco. Quantum entanglement and topological entan- glement. New Journal of Physics , 4(1):73, 2002

    2002

  69. [69]

    Topological protection of perturbed edge states

    Guillaume Bal. Topological protection of perturbed edge states. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.00605, 2017

    work page arXiv 2017

  70. [70]

    Introduction to topological quantum computation with non-abelian anyons

    Bernard Field and Tapio Simula. Introduction to topological quantum computation with non-abelian anyons. Quantum Science and Technology , 3(4):045004, 2018

    2018

  71. [71]

    Topologically protected gates for quantum computation with non- abelian anyons in the pfaffian quantum hall state

    Lachezar S Georgiev. Topologically protected gates for quantum computation with non- abelian anyons in the pfaffian quantum hall state. Physical Review BCondensed Matter and Materials Physics , 74(23):235112, 2006. Bibliographie 120

    2006

  72. [72]

    Fault-tolerant quantum error correction for non- abelian anyons

    Guillaume Dauphinais and David Poulin. Fault-tolerant quantum error correction for non- abelian anyons. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 355:519–560, 2017

    2017

  73. [73]

    Quantum brachistochrone problem and the geometry of the state space<? format?> in pseudo-hermitian quantum mechanics

    Ali Mostafazadeh. Quantum brachistochrone problem and the geometry of the state space<? format?> in pseudo-hermitian quantum mechanics. Physical review letters , 99(13):130502, 2007

    2007

  74. [74]

    Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary state of two qubits

    William K Wootters. Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary state of two qubits. Physical Review Letters, 80(10):2245, 1998

    1998

  75. [75]

    Geometrical and dynamical de- scription of two interacting spins under the xxz-type heisenberg model

    Jamal Elfakir, Brahim Amghar, and Mohammed Daoud. Geometrical and dynamical de- scription of two interacting spins under the xxz-type heisenberg model. International Jour- nal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics , 20(01):2350006, 2023

    2023

  76. [76]

    Complementarity between quantum entanglement and geometric and dynamical appearances in n spin-1/2 system under all-range ising model

    Jamal Elfakir, Brahim Amghar, Abdallah Slaoui, and Mohammed Daoud. Complementarity between quantum entanglement and geometric and dynamical appearances in n spin-1/2 system under all-range ising model. The European Physical Journal Plus , 139(8):1–17, 2024

    2024

  77. [77]

    Geometrical, topological, and dynamical description of n interacting spin-s particles in a long-range ising model and their interplay with quantum entanglement

    Brahim Amghar, Abdallah Slaoui, Jamal Elfakir, and Mohammed Daoud. Geometrical, topological, and dynamical description of n interacting spin-s particles in a long-range ising model and their interplay with quantum entanglement. Physical Review A , 107(3):032402, 2023

    2023

  78. [78]

    Aspects géométriques des corrélations quantiques dans des systèmes multiqudits

    Brahim AMGHAR. Aspects géométriques des corrélations quantiques dans des systèmes multiqudits. 2021

    2021

  79. [79]

    On optimum hamiltonians for state transformations

    Dorje C Brody and Daniel W Hook. On optimum hamiltonians for state transformations. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General , 39(11):L167, 2006

    2006

  80. [80]

    The brachistochrone problem

    Nils P Johnson. The brachistochrone problem. The College Mathematics Journal , 35(3):192– 197, 2004

    2004

Showing first 80 references.