Geometric Instability and Self-Limitation in Driven Quantum Systems

A.M.Tishin

arxiv: 2606.00259 · v2 · pith:E4OGFQXXnew · submitted 2026-05-29 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.mes-hall

Geometric Instability and Self-Limitation in Driven Quantum Systems

A.M.Tishin This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 21:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords geometric instabilitynon-adiabaticityFubini-Study metricquantum metricdriven quantum systemsself-limitationKibble-Zurek mechanismopen quantum systems

0 comments

The pith

A dimensionless geometric parameter detects non-adiabatic instability by comparing quantum-state evolution speed to spectral-gap protection.

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

The paper introduces a universal dimensionless instability parameter that tracks the competition between how fast a quantum state evolves under driving and the protection offered by the energy gap. This quantity is local, gauge-invariant, and basis-independent, so it applies to arbitrary driven Hamiltonians without requiring a global picture. The work shows that the parameter diverges at quantum critical points, recovering the Kibble-Zurek condition from local data, and proves that certain nonlinear regulators compress the quantum metric to limit how far the state can travel. A reader would care because the same object supplies a lower bound on coherent control times and extends naturally to open systems through the Bures metric.

Core claim

We develop a unified geometric framework for local non-adiabaticity in driven quantum systems. The previously introduced AMT non-adiabaticity parameter arises as a special realization of a more general geometric instability criterion governed by the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed. We introduce a universal dimensionless instability parameter measuring the competition between quantum-state evolution speed and spectral-gap protection; this quantity provides a local, gauge-invariant, and basis-independent criterion for arbitrary driven Hamiltonians. Near quantum critical points the instability parameter diverges through inverse gap amplification, recovering the Kibble-Zurek fre

What carries the argument

the universal dimensionless instability parameter based on the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed, which measures the competition between evolution speed and spectral-gap protection

If this is right

Near quantum critical points the instability parameter diverges through inverse gap amplification, recovering the Kibble-Zurek freeze-out condition directly from local geometric data.
Monotonic occupation-dependent nonlinear regulators geometrically compress the quantum metric, confining the accessible region of projective Hilbert space under strong driving.
The multimode extension yields a matrix-valued instability criterion that identifies collective instability channels invisible to scalar descriptions.
The framework extends to open quantum systems through the Bures metric, where thermal mixing and Lindblad decay increase the instability threshold through geometric suppression of state distinguishability, implying a universal geometric lower bound on coherent control time and quantum gate duration.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The basis-independent form allows the same threshold to be computed and compared across different experimental platforms without re-deriving the Hamiltonian in a preferred basis.
The lower bound on gate duration supplies a geometric limit that could be checked against existing quantum speed-limit results in closed and open systems.
In open systems the raised instability threshold due to mixing suggests that moderate decoherence might extend the range of stable driving strengths before non-adiabatic effects dominate.

Load-bearing premise

The local geometric evolution speed identified via the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed is the physically relevant quantity controlling the onset of non-adiabatic instability.

What would settle it

An experiment on a driven two-level system in which excitations or transitions appear at driving strengths where the calculated instability parameter remains below threshold, or where monotonic nonlinear regulators fail to compress the accessible state space.

read the original abstract

We develop a unified geometric framework for local non-adiabaticity in driven quantum systems. We show that the previously introduced AMT non adiabaticity parameter arises as a special realization of a more general geometric instability criterion governed by the normalized Fubini Study distinguishability speed. The local geometric evolution speed is identified as the physically relevant quantity controlling the onset of non-adiabatic instability. We introduce a universal dimensionless instability parameter measuring the competition between quantum-state evolution speed and spectral-gap protection. This quantity provides a local, gauge-invariant, and basis-independent criterion for arbitrary driven Hamiltonians. Near quantum critical points, the instability parameter diverges through inverse gap amplification, recovering the Kibble Zurek freeze-out condition directly from local geometric data. We prove that monotonic occupation-dependent nonlinear regulators geometrically compress the quantum metric, establishing a self-limitation theorem in which nonlinear spectral deformation confines the accessible region of projective Hilbert space under strong driving. The multimode extension yields a matrix-valued instability criterion that identifies collective instability channels invisible to scalar descriptions. The framework naturally extends to open quantum systems through the Bures metric and quantum Fisher geometry, where thermal mixing and Lindblad decay increase the instability threshold through geometric suppression of state distinguishability. The instability threshold further implies a universal geometric lower bound on coherent control time and quantum gate duration.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper asserts a geometric instability parameter from Fubini-Study speed plus a self-limitation theorem, but the text gives no derivations, definitions, or checks to evaluate any of it.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work claims a universal dimensionless parameter for non-adiabatic instability in driven systems, built from normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed, that recovers Kibble-Zurek behavior locally and includes a self-limitation result from nonlinear metric compression. It also sketches a multimode matrix version and an open-system extension via Bures geometry.

What is actually new is the embedding of the author's earlier AMT parameter into this broader geometric language, along with the explicit self-limitation theorem and the collective instability channels from the matrix criterion. Those constructions are presented as extensions rather than re-statements of prior results.

The soft spot is that none of the claims are supported by equations, explicit definitions of the parameter, or any verification steps. The abstract states that proofs exist and that the local speed controls instability, but supplies no derivations or counterexample checks. Without those, it is impossible to tell whether the central assumption holds or whether the recovery of Kibble-Zurek is more than a re-labeling. The circularity risk is present because the parameter is defined directly from the metric objects with no independent benchmarks shown.

This is aimed at researchers already working on geometric approaches to quantum control or critical dynamics who might want to test whether the constructions add operational value. A reader looking for concrete criteria or testable predictions will not find them here.

I would not send this to peer review in its current form. The authors need to include the actual math and at least basic checks before it can be evaluated properly.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a unified geometric framework for local non-adiabaticity in driven quantum systems. It positions the AMT non-adiabaticity parameter as a special case of a general geometric instability criterion based on the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed. A universal dimensionless instability parameter is introduced to quantify the competition between quantum-state evolution speed and spectral-gap protection; this quantity is claimed to be local, gauge-invariant, and basis-independent for arbitrary driven Hamiltonians. Near quantum critical points the parameter diverges via inverse-gap amplification, recovering the Kibble-Zurek freeze-out condition from local geometric data. The central result is a self-limitation theorem asserting that monotonic occupation-dependent nonlinear regulators geometrically compress the quantum metric and thereby confine the accessible region of projective Hilbert space under strong driving. The framework is extended to a multimode matrix-valued criterion and to open systems via the Bures metric and quantum Fisher geometry, where thermal mixing and Lindblad decay raise the instability threshold; a universal geometric lower bound on coherent control time and gate duration is also claimed.

Significance. If the derivations hold, the work supplies a local, gauge-invariant geometric diagnostic for the onset of non-adiabatic instability that could unify several previously separate notions in driven quantum dynamics. The self-limitation theorem offers a geometric mechanism that might explain why strong driving does not explore the full Hilbert space, while the recovery of Kibble-Zurek scaling directly from local Fubini-Study data would be a notable result. The open-system extension via the Bures metric and the implied bound on control times add breadth. These features, if rigorously established, would be of interest to researchers in quantum control, non-equilibrium dynamics, and geometric quantum mechanics.

major comments (2)

[Abstract (paragraph 2)] Abstract (paragraph 2): the universal dimensionless instability parameter is asserted to arise from the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed and to furnish a gauge-invariant criterion, yet no explicit definition or derivation relating the parameter to the speed and the spectral gap is supplied. This definition is load-bearing for every subsequent claim (divergence at critical points, recovery of Kibble-Zurek scaling, and the multimode matrix extension).
[Abstract (paragraph 3)] Abstract (paragraph 3): the self-limitation theorem is stated as a proof that monotonic occupation-dependent nonlinear regulators compress the quantum metric, but neither the functional form of the regulators nor the steps establishing metric compression are given. Without these elements the theorem cannot be verified and remains central to the paper's novelty.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: the acronym 'AMT' is introduced without expansion or citation; a reference to the prior work should be supplied on first use.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and for highlighting the potential unifying value of the geometric framework. We address the two major comments point by point below. The abstract is necessarily concise; the explicit constructions and proofs reside in the body of the manuscript. Where the abstract can be clarified without altering its summary character, we will revise accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract (paragraph 2)] Abstract (paragraph 2): the universal dimensionless instability parameter is asserted to arise from the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed and to furnish a gauge-invariant criterion, yet no explicit definition or derivation relating the parameter to the speed and the spectral gap is supplied. This definition is load-bearing for every subsequent claim (divergence at critical points, recovery of Kibble-Zurek scaling, and the multimode matrix extension).

Authors: The abstract summarizes the result. The universal dimensionless instability parameter is explicitly defined in Section II as the ratio of the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed to the instantaneous spectral gap; its gauge invariance, basis independence, and local character are derived there from the quantum geometric tensor. The divergence at critical points via inverse-gap amplification and the direct recovery of Kibble-Zurek freeze-out are shown in Section III from the same local geometric data. The multimode matrix extension follows in Section V. We will add a short parenthetical definition to the abstract for improved readability. revision: partial
Referee: [Abstract (paragraph 3)] Abstract (paragraph 3): the self-limitation theorem is stated as a proof that monotonic occupation-dependent nonlinear regulators compress the quantum metric, but neither the functional form of the regulators nor the steps establishing metric compression are given. Without these elements the theorem cannot be verified and remains central to the paper's novelty.

Authors: The functional form of the monotonic occupation-dependent nonlinear regulators (monotonic functions of the instantaneous occupation numbers) and the proof that they induce a contraction of the quantum metric are given in Section IV, with the explicit steps and inequalities in Appendix B. The self-limitation theorem then follows directly from the resulting confinement of the accessible region in projective Hilbert space. We will revise the abstract to indicate the regulator class in one additional clause. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses standard geometric objects without reduction to inputs by construction

full rationale

The abstract defines the instability parameter directly from the normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed and spectral gap, both standard in quantum geometry, and states a self-limitation theorem via metric compression under nonlinear regulators. No equations are supplied that would allow exhibiting any step where a claimed prediction or theorem reduces to its own definition or to a self-citation by construction. The reference to the prior AMT parameter is presented as a special case within the new general criterion rather than as the sole justification for the central result. Because no load-bearing equation or self-citation chain can be quoted that forces the outcome, the framework remains self-contained against external benchmarks of Fubini-Study and Bures geometry.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 2 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities beyond the newly introduced instability parameter can be extracted or verified.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Normalized Fubini-Study distinguishability speed is the physically relevant quantity for non-adiabatic instability
Stated as the identification of local geometric evolution speed controlling instability onset.

invented entities (2)

universal dimensionless instability parameter no independent evidence
purpose: Measures competition between state evolution speed and spectral-gap protection
Newly introduced as the central criterion
self-limitation theorem via nonlinear spectral deformation no independent evidence
purpose: Shows confinement of accessible projective Hilbert space under strong driving
Claimed as proved in the paper

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5762 in / 1293 out tokens · 38604 ms · 2026-06-28T21:53:51.777255+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

26 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Aharonov, J

Y. Aharonov, J. Anandan, Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution. Physical Review Letters, 58(16), 1593 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.58.1593

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.58.1593 1987
[2]

Mandelstam and I

L. Mandelstam and I. Tamm, J. Phys. USSR 9, 249-254 (1945)

1945
[3]

Anandan, Y

J. Anandan, Y. Aharonov, Geometry of quantum evolution. Physical Review Letters, 65(14), 1697 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.1697

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.65.1697 1990
[4]

Quantum limits to dynamical evolution

Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S., & Maccone, L). Quantum limits to dynamical evolution. Physical Review A, 67(5), 052109 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.67.052109

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.67.052109 2003
[5]

Deffner and S

S. Deffner and S. Campbell, Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg's uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 453001 (2017). DOI: 10.1088/1751-8121/aa86c6

work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa86c6 2017
[6]

Tishin, Quantum Geometric Origin of Non-Adiabatic Instability in Driven Bosonic Systems arXiv:2605.22796 (2026)

A.M. Tishin, Quantum Geometric Origin of Non-Adiabatic Instability in Driven Bosonic Systems arXiv:2605.22796 (2026)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[7]

Tishin, Ultra-Fast Quantum Control via Non-Adiabatic Resonance Windows: A 9x Speed-up on 127-Qubit IBM Processors

A.M. Tishin, Ultra-Fast Quantum Control via Non-Adiabatic Resonance Windows: A 9x Speed-up on 127-Qubit IBM Processors. arXiv:2605.10578 (2026)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[8]

Provost and G

J.P. Provost and G. Vallée, Riemannian structure on manifolds of quantum states Commun. Math. Phys. 76, 289-301 (1980). DOI: 10.1007/BF02193559

work page doi:10.1007/bf02193559 1980
[9]

Physics Reports 697:1--87, ://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.001

M. Kolodrubetz, D. Sels, P. Mehta, A. Polkovnikov, Geometry and non-adiabatic response in quantum and classical systems Phys. Rep. 697, 1-87 (2017). DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.001 2017
[10]

Chen, Speeding up quantum adiabatic processes with a dynamical quantum geometric tensor Phys

J.-F. Chen, Speeding up quantum adiabatic processes with a dynamical quantum geometric tensor Phys. Rev. Research 4, 023252 (2022). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.023252

work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.4.023252 2022
[11]

Y.-Q. Ma, S. Chen, H. Fang, W.-M. Liu Abelian and non-Abelian quantum geometric tensor Phys. Rev. B 81, 245129 (2010). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.81.245129

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.81.245129 2010
[12]

Landau and E.M

L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed. (Pergamon, 1977)

1977
[13]

T. W. B. Kibble, Topology of cosmic domains and strings, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 9, 1387– 1398 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/9/8/029

work page doi:10.1088/0305-4470/9/8/029 1976
[14]

Geometric Instability and Self-Limitation in Driven Quantum Systems

W.H. Zurek, U. Dorner, P. Zoller, Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 105701 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.105701 49 2026 Reprint available at arXiv:2606.00259 [quant-ph] https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.00259

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.105701 2005
[15]

Törmä, S

T. Törmä, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, Superfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems, Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 528–542 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-022- 00466-y

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-022- 2022
[16]

Zanardi, P

P. Zanardi, P. Giorda, and M. Cozzini, Information-theoretic differential geometry of quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 100603 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.100603

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99.100603 2007
[17]

Campos Venuti and P

L. Campos Venuti and P. Zanardi, Quantum Critical Scaling of the Geometric Tensors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 095701 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.095701

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99.095701 2007
[18]

Ashtekar and T

A. Ashtekar and T. A. Schilling, Geometrical formulation of quantum mechanics, in On Einstein’s Path (Springer, 1999), pp. 23–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1422-9_3

work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1422-9_3 1999
[19]

V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics (Springer, 1989)

1989
[20]

Vinjanampathy and J

S. Vinjanampathy and J. Anders, Quantum thermodynamics, Contemp. Phys. 57, 545–579 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/00107514.2016.1201896

work page doi:10.1080/00107514.2016.1201896 2016
[21]

Goold, M

J. Goold, M. Huber, A. Riera, L. del Rio, and P. Skrzypczyk, The role of quantum information in thermodynamics — a topical review, J. Phys. A 49, 143001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/49/14/143001

work page doi:10.1088/1751-8113/49/14/143001 2016
[22]

Anza and J

F. Anza and J. P. Crutchfield, Geometric Quantum Thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. E 106, 054102 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.106.054102

work page doi:10.1103/physreve.106.054102 2022
[23]

Törmä, Where Can Quantum Geometry Lead Us?, Phys

P. Törmä, Where Can Quantum Geometry Lead Us?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 240001 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.240001

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.240001 2023
[24]

Vanderbilt, Berry Phases in Electronic Structure Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2018)

D. Vanderbilt, Berry Phases in Electronic Structure Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2018)

2018
[25]

W. G. Unruh, Notes on black-hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870–892 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.14.870

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.14.870 1976
[26]

N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space (Cambridge University Press, 1984)

1984

[1] [1]

Aharonov, J

Y. Aharonov, J. Anandan, Phase change during a cyclic quantum evolution. Physical Review Letters, 58(16), 1593 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.58.1593

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.58.1593 1987

[2] [2]

Mandelstam and I

L. Mandelstam and I. Tamm, J. Phys. USSR 9, 249-254 (1945)

1945

[3] [3]

Anandan, Y

J. Anandan, Y. Aharonov, Geometry of quantum evolution. Physical Review Letters, 65(14), 1697 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.1697

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.65.1697 1990

[4] [4]

Quantum limits to dynamical evolution

Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S., & Maccone, L). Quantum limits to dynamical evolution. Physical Review A, 67(5), 052109 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.67.052109

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.67.052109 2003

[5] [5]

Deffner and S

S. Deffner and S. Campbell, Quantum speed limits: from Heisenberg's uncertainty principle to optimal quantum control, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 453001 (2017). DOI: 10.1088/1751-8121/aa86c6

work page doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa86c6 2017

[6] [6]

Tishin, Quantum Geometric Origin of Non-Adiabatic Instability in Driven Bosonic Systems arXiv:2605.22796 (2026)

A.M. Tishin, Quantum Geometric Origin of Non-Adiabatic Instability in Driven Bosonic Systems arXiv:2605.22796 (2026)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

[7] [7]

Tishin, Ultra-Fast Quantum Control via Non-Adiabatic Resonance Windows: A 9x Speed-up on 127-Qubit IBM Processors

A.M. Tishin, Ultra-Fast Quantum Control via Non-Adiabatic Resonance Windows: A 9x Speed-up on 127-Qubit IBM Processors. arXiv:2605.10578 (2026)

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

[8] [8]

Provost and G

J.P. Provost and G. Vallée, Riemannian structure on manifolds of quantum states Commun. Math. Phys. 76, 289-301 (1980). DOI: 10.1007/BF02193559

work page doi:10.1007/bf02193559 1980

[9] [9]

Physics Reports 697:1--87, ://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.001

M. Kolodrubetz, D. Sels, P. Mehta, A. Polkovnikov, Geometry and non-adiabatic response in quantum and classical systems Phys. Rep. 697, 1-87 (2017). DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.001

work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.07.001 2017

[10] [10]

Chen, Speeding up quantum adiabatic processes with a dynamical quantum geometric tensor Phys

J.-F. Chen, Speeding up quantum adiabatic processes with a dynamical quantum geometric tensor Phys. Rev. Research 4, 023252 (2022). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.023252

work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.4.023252 2022

[11] [11]

Y.-Q. Ma, S. Chen, H. Fang, W.-M. Liu Abelian and non-Abelian quantum geometric tensor Phys. Rev. B 81, 245129 (2010). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.81.245129

work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.81.245129 2010

[12] [12]

Landau and E.M

L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed. (Pergamon, 1977)

1977

[13] [13]

T. W. B. Kibble, Topology of cosmic domains and strings, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 9, 1387– 1398 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/9/8/029

work page doi:10.1088/0305-4470/9/8/029 1976

[14] [14]

Geometric Instability and Self-Limitation in Driven Quantum Systems

W.H. Zurek, U. Dorner, P. Zoller, Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 105701 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.105701 49 2026 Reprint available at arXiv:2606.00259 [quant-ph] https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.00259

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.95.105701 2005

[15] [15]

Törmä, S

T. Törmä, S. Peotta, and B. A. Bernevig, Superfluidity and quantum geometry in twisted multilayer systems, Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 528–542 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-022- 00466-y

work page doi:10.1038/s42254-022- 2022

[16] [16]

Zanardi, P

P. Zanardi, P. Giorda, and M. Cozzini, Information-theoretic differential geometry of quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 100603 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.100603

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99.100603 2007

[17] [17]

Campos Venuti and P

L. Campos Venuti and P. Zanardi, Quantum Critical Scaling of the Geometric Tensors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 095701 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.095701

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.99.095701 2007

[18] [18]

Ashtekar and T

A. Ashtekar and T. A. Schilling, Geometrical formulation of quantum mechanics, in On Einstein’s Path (Springer, 1999), pp. 23–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1422-9_3

work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1422-9_3 1999

[19] [19]

V. I. Arnold, Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics (Springer, 1989)

1989

[20] [20]

Vinjanampathy and J

S. Vinjanampathy and J. Anders, Quantum thermodynamics, Contemp. Phys. 57, 545–579 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/00107514.2016.1201896

work page doi:10.1080/00107514.2016.1201896 2016

[21] [21]

Goold, M

J. Goold, M. Huber, A. Riera, L. del Rio, and P. Skrzypczyk, The role of quantum information in thermodynamics — a topical review, J. Phys. A 49, 143001 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/49/14/143001

work page doi:10.1088/1751-8113/49/14/143001 2016

[22] [22]

Anza and J

F. Anza and J. P. Crutchfield, Geometric Quantum Thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. E 106, 054102 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.106.054102

work page doi:10.1103/physreve.106.054102 2022

[23] [23]

Törmä, Where Can Quantum Geometry Lead Us?, Phys

P. Törmä, Where Can Quantum Geometry Lead Us?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 240001 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.240001

work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.240001 2023

[24] [24]

Vanderbilt, Berry Phases in Electronic Structure Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2018)

D. Vanderbilt, Berry Phases in Electronic Structure Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2018)

2018

[25] [25]

W. G. Unruh, Notes on black-hole evaporation, Phys. Rev. D 14, 870–892 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.14.870

work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.14.870 1976

[26] [26]

N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space (Cambridge University Press, 1984)

1984