APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

29
APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems

Transcript of APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

Page 1: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

APRIL 2010

AARHUSUNIVERSITY

Simulation of probed quantum many body systems

Page 2: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Why probe quantum many body systems?

• Interactions gives rise to complex phenomena• Phase-transitions• Collective effects• Topological states of matter

• Measurements can produce interesting quantum states• Squeezed spins• Heralded single photon sources• Light squeezing

• Measurements and feedback• High-precision measurements, atomic clocks, gravitational wave detectors

• Combining measurements and interactions• Can we get the best of both worlds?• Can measurements help/stabilize complex phenomena?• Can interacting quantum systems give better/more precise measurements?

Page 3: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Breakdown of ingredients

• Quantum many body systems• Vast Hilbert space• Strongly correlated• Just plain difficult

• Probed quantum systems• Stochastic• Non-linear

Page 4: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Measuring quantum systemsTextbook description

Projector Update wave function

In “practice”

More complicated update

+ normalization

Page 5: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Measuring quantum systems

Page 6: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Measuring quantum systems

Page 7: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Time evolution of probed systemMeasurement rate

Page 8: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The diffusion limit

Many weak interactions

Accumulated effect

Page 9: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

ExampleSpin ½ driven by a classical field

Page 10: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Quantum many body systems

• One-dimensional systems

• Spin-chains, e.g.

• Bosons in an optical lattice

• Fermions in an optical lattice

Page 11: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Matrix product states

• Numerical method• States with limited entanglement between sites

(D dimensional)

matrices

f040805
Længde af kæde, L
Page 12: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Features of matrix product states

• Efficient calculation of operator-averages

• Low Schmidt-number of any bipartite cut

• Ground states of nearest neighbor Hamiltonians

• Low-energy excited states

• Thermal states

• Unitary time-evolution (Schrödinger’s equation)

• Markovian evolution (master equations)

Page 13: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Calculation of operator-averages

Notation

A matrix product state

1 2 3 4 5 i L

Page 14: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Calculation of operator-averages(single site)

Required time:

A

f040805
Længde af kæde
Page 15: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Features of matrix product states

• Efficient calculation of operator-averages

• Low Schmidt-number of any bipartite cut

• Ground states of nearest neighbor Hamiltonians

• Low-energy excited states

• Thermal states

• Unitary time-evolution (Schrödinger’s equation)

• Markovian evolution (master equations)

Page 16: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Time evolution for MPSTime-evolution as a variational problem:

Minimize

Quadratic form in the matrices

Minimize with respect to each matrix iteratively(alternating least squares)

Local optimization problem

Page 17: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Time evolution for MPSTime-evolution as a variational problem:

Minimize

We only need to calculate

efficiently

U

Page 18: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Stochastic evolution of MPSMeasurement as a variational problem

Minimize

Exactly the same

Provided can be calculated efficiently

Page 19: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Stochastic evolution of MPSFor our measurement model

is a sum of two overlaps.

If A is a sum of local operators:

Easy

Page 20: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Stochastic evolution of MPS

Page 21: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The Heisenberg Spin ½-chain

f040805
Længde af kæde
Page 22: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The Heisenberg Spin ½-chain

f040805
Længde af kæde
Page 23: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The Heisenberg Spin ½-chain

Page 24: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The Heisenberg Spin ½-chain

Weak measurements

L=60

Page 25: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The Heisenberg Spin ½-chain

Measuring the end-points

L=60

Page 26: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

The Heisenberg Spin ½-chain

Non-local measurement

Non-local measurement long-range entanglement

L=30

Page 27: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Alternative MPS (tensor network) topology due to measurements

Page 28: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Other systems of interest

• Single-site addressed optical lattice• Optical (Greiner et al. Nature 462, 74)• Electron microscope (Gericke et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 080404)

• Interacting atoms in a cavity• Mekhov et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 020403• Karski et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 053001

What is the effect of the measurement?The null-result?

Page 29: APRIL 2010 AARHUS UNIVERSITY Simulation of probed quantum many body systems.

SØREN [email protected]

APRIL 2010DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY

Summary

• Measurements and stochastic evolution can be simulated using

matrix product states

• Local and non-local measurements on quantum many-body

systems can lead to interesting dynamics

• Measurements can change the topology of the matrix product state

(or peps) tensor graph