Competition of long-range interactions and noise at ramped quench dynamical quantum phase transition: The case of the long-range pairing Kitaev chain

R. Baghran Department of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences (IASBS), Zanjan 45137-66731, Iran    R. Jafari [email protected], [email protected] Department of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences (IASBS), Zanjan 45137-66731, Iran School of Nano Science, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), 19395-5531, Tehran, Iran Department of Physics, University of Gothenburg, SE 412 96 Gothenburg, Sweden    A. Langari [email protected] Department of Physics, Sharif University of Technology, P.O.Box 11155-9161, Tehran, Iran
Abstract

The nonequilibrium dynamics of long-range pairing Kitaev model with noiseless/noisy linear time dependent chemical potential, is investigated in the frame work of dynamical quantum phase transitions (DQPTs). We have shown for the ramp crosses a single quantum critical point, while the short-range pairing Kitaev model displays a single critical time scale, the long-range pairing induces a region with three DQPTs time scales. We have found that the region with three DQPTs time scales shrinks in the presence of the noise. In addition, we have uncovered for a quench crossess two critical points, the critical sweep velocity above which the DQPTs disappear, enhances by the long-range pairing exponent while decreases in the presence of the noise. On the basis of numerical simulations, we have shown that noise diminishes the long-range pairing inductions.

I Introduction

Long-range interactions has been attracting great interest due to revealing surprising features [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14]. Long-range systems are often fascinating approach to analyze the validity of the hypotheses that are otherwise clearly perceived for prototypical short-range systems. The remarkable experimental advancement in ultracold atomic platforms has triggered a plethora of theoretical studies and opened up the possibility of engineering and fine-tuning long-range systems with great accuracy [15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20].

Moreover, the unprecedented advancement in recent years is impeccable enough to study the none-equilibrium dynamics of long-range systems in a controled manner [21, 22, 23, 24]. Consequently, over the latest decades, theoretical and experimental research has raised a great deal of interest in non-equilibrium quantum phenomena [25], which has led to the discovery of some intriguing physics, including the observation of Kibble-Zurek phenomena [26, 27], discrete time-crystals [28], many-body localization [29] and the breaking of ergodicity [30, 31, 32].

In recent years, the concept of dynamical quantum phase transitions (DQPTs) have been introduced as nonequilibrium counterparts of thermal phase transitions [33, 34]. Within DQPTs real time plays the role of control parameter analogous to temperature in equilibrium phase transitions [35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44]. While the conventional equilibrium phase transition is characterized by nonanalyticities in the thermal free energy, the DQPT is represented by the nonanalytical behavior of dynamical free energy [45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61]. DQPT displays a phase transition between dynamically emerging quantum phases, that takes place during the nonequilibrium coherent quantum time evolution under sudden/ramped quench [62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80] or time-periodic modulation of Hamiltonian [81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88]. Furthermore, analogous to order parameters at equilibrium quantum phase transition, a dynamical topological order parameter is proposed to capture DQPTs [89, 90].

DQPT was observed experimentally in several studies [91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97] to confirm theoretical anticipation. Most of these researches associated with deterministic quantum evolution generated by ramping or a sudden quench of the Hamiltonian. However, relatively little attention has been devoted to the stochastic driving of thermally isolated systems with noisy Hamiltonian. In any real experiment, the simulation of the desired time dependent Hamiltonian is imperfect and noisy fluctuations are inevitable [98, 99, 100, 101]. Therefore, understanding the effects of noise in such systems is of utmost importance both in designing experiments and comprehend the results [102, 103, 104, 105, 106].

Despite numerous studies of DQPTs in a wide variety of long-range quantum systems [107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113], comparatively little attention has been paid to the noise effects [114] on long-range interaction properties. In the present work, we contribute to develop the systematic understanding of the competition between noise and long-range interaction at noisy ramped quench DQPT. For this purpose, we investigate the ramped quench DQPT of long-range pairing Kitaev model [13] in the presence of the white noise with Gaussian distribution [104]. We solve an exact master equation for the quench dynamics averaged over the noise distribution. This allows us to study the competition between the near-adiabatic quench dynamics of the gapped modes of the long-range pairing system and the accumulation of noise induced excitations.

We show that, for the quench across a single critical point, while the long-range pairing induces a region with three DQPTs time scales (three critical modes), this region shrinks in the presence of the noise. In addition, for a quench that crosses two critical points, the critical sweep velocity above which the DQPTs disappear, enhances by the long-range pairing while decreases in the presence of the noise. In other words, the noise has destructive effects on long-range pairing features.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, the dynamical free energy and DTOP of the two band Hamiltonians are discussed. In Sec. III, we present the model and review its exact solution and equilibrium phase transition. Section IV is dedicated to the numerical simulation of the noiseless case based on the analytical result. The effects of noise on the system is numerically studied in Section V. Section VI contains some concluding remarks.

II Quench of an integrable model and dynamical phase transition

II.1 Dynamical free energy

Refer to caption

Figure 1: (Color online) Illustration of a linear ramped quench (red color). Here, λ(t)𝜆𝑡\lambda(t)italic_λ ( italic_t ) is the time-dependent parameter in Hamiltonian, λisubscript𝜆𝑖\lambda_{i}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and λfsubscript𝜆𝑓\lambda_{f}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT its initial and final values, and tisubscript𝑡𝑖t_{i}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and tf=0subscript𝑡𝑓0t_{f}=0italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 the corresponding times. The wavy gray oscillations exhibit the presence of noise.

To study the ramped quench DQPTs, we follow the method used in Refs. [115, 116] in the subsequent discussions. Let us consider an integrable model reducible to a two level Hamiltonian Hk(λ)subscript𝐻𝑘𝜆H_{k}(\lambda)italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ ) for each momentum mode and the system is initially (tisubscript𝑡𝑖t_{i}\to-\inftyitalic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → - ∞) prepared in the ground state |gkiketsubscriptsuperscript𝑔𝑖𝑘|g^{i}_{k}\rangle| italic_g start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ of the pre-quench Hamiltonian Hk(λi)subscript𝐻𝑘subscript𝜆𝑖H_{k}(\lambda_{i})italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) for each mode. Thereupon the parameter λ𝜆\lambdaitalic_λ is quenched from an initial value λisubscript𝜆𝑖\lambda_{i}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at tisubscript𝑡𝑖t_{i}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to the final value λfsubscript𝜆𝑓\lambda_{f}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at tfsubscript𝑡𝑓t_{f}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, following the linear quenching protocol λ(t)=vt𝜆𝑡𝑣𝑡\lambda(t)=vtitalic_λ ( italic_t ) = italic_v italic_t, in such a way that the system crosses the quantum critical point (QCP) at λ=λc𝜆subscript𝜆𝑐\lambda=\lambda_{c}italic_λ = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Since the adiabatic dynamics breaks in the vicinity of the QCP, the final state |ψkfketsubscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘|\psi^{f}_{k}\rangle| italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ (for the k𝑘kitalic_k-th mode) may not be the ground state of the post-quench Hamiltonian Hk(λf)=Hkfsubscript𝐻𝑘subscript𝜆𝑓subscriptsuperscript𝐻𝑓𝑘H_{k}(\lambda_{f})=H^{f}_{k}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The post-quench state can be written in the form of |ψkf=vk|gkf+uk|ekfketsubscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘subscript𝑣𝑘ketsuperscriptsubscript𝑔𝑘𝑓subscript𝑢𝑘ketsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑘𝑓|\psi^{f}_{k}\rangle=v_{k}|g_{k}^{f}\rangle+u_{k}|e_{k}^{f}\rangle| italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ + italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩, (|uk|2+|vk|2=1superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘2superscriptsubscript𝑣𝑘21|u_{k}|^{2}+|v_{k}|^{2}=1| italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + | italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1) where, |gkfketsuperscriptsubscript𝑔𝑘𝑓|g_{k}^{f}\rangle| italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ and |ekfketsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑘𝑓|e_{k}^{f}\rangle| italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ are the ground and the excited states of the post-quench Hamiltonian Hkfsubscriptsuperscript𝐻𝑓𝑘H^{f}_{k}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, respectively with the corresponding energy eigenvalues ϵk,1fsuperscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘1𝑓\epsilon_{k,1}^{f}italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and ϵk,2fsuperscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘2𝑓\epsilon_{k,2}^{f}italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. The non-adiabatic transition probability where the system ends up in the excited state at the end of quench is denoted by pk=|uk|2=|ekf|gki|2subscript𝑝𝑘superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘2superscriptinner-productsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑘𝑓subscriptsuperscript𝑔𝑖𝑘2p_{k}=|u_{k}|^{2}=|\langle e_{k}^{f}|g^{i}_{k}\rangle|^{2}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = | ⟨ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_g start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Therefore, the Loschmidt overlap and the corresponding dynamical free energy [33, 34], for the mode k𝑘kitalic_k for t>tf𝑡subscript𝑡𝑓t>t_{f}italic_t > italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are defined by [115, 116]

ksubscript𝑘\displaystyle{\cal L}_{k}caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== ψkf|exp(iHkft)|ψkfquantum-operator-productsubscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘𝑖subscriptsuperscript𝐻𝑓𝑘𝑡subscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘\displaystyle\langle\psi^{f}_{k}|\exp(-iH^{f}_{k}t)|\psi^{f}_{k}\rangle⟨ italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | roman_exp ( - italic_i italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t ) | italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩
=\displaystyle== |vk|2exp(iϵk,1ft)+|uk|2exp(iϵk,2ft),superscriptsubscript𝑣𝑘2𝑖superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘1𝑓𝑡superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘2𝑖superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘2𝑓𝑡\displaystyle|v_{k}|^{2}\exp(-i\epsilon_{k,1}^{f}t)+|u_{k}|^{2}\exp(-i\epsilon% _{k,2}^{f}t),| italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_exp ( - italic_i italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ) + | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_exp ( - italic_i italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ) ,
gk(t)subscript𝑔𝑘𝑡\displaystyle g_{k}(t)italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) =\displaystyle== 1Nlogψkf|exp(iHkft)ψkf1𝑁conditionalsubscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘𝑖subscriptsuperscript𝐻𝑓𝑘𝑡subscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘\displaystyle-\frac{1}{N}\log\langle\psi^{f}_{k}|\exp(-iH^{f}_{k}t)|\psi^{f}_{% k}\rangle- divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_N end_ARG roman_log ⟨ italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | roman_exp ( - italic_i italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t ) | italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ (2)

respectively, where N𝑁Nitalic_N is the size of the system.

Summing over the contributions from all modes and replacing summation by the integral in the thermodynamic limit, one gets [115, 116, 117]

g(t)=12π0πln(1+4pk(pk1)sin2(ϵk,2fϵk,1f2)t)𝑑k,𝑔𝑡12𝜋superscriptsubscript0𝜋14subscript𝑝𝑘subscript𝑝𝑘1superscript2superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘2𝑓superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘1𝑓2𝑡differential-d𝑘\displaystyle g(t)=\frac{-1}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{\pi}\ln\Big{(}1+4p_{k}(p_{k}-1)% \sin^{2}(\frac{\epsilon_{k,2}^{f}-\epsilon_{k,1}^{f}}{2})t\Big{)}dk,italic_g ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG - 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π end_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_π end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ln ( 1 + 4 italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 ) roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) italic_t ) italic_d italic_k ,

where t𝑡titalic_t is measured from the instant the final state, |ψkfketsubscriptsuperscript𝜓𝑓𝑘|\psi^{f}_{k}\rangle| italic_ψ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩, is reached at the end of the ramped quench (Fig. 1). The non-analyticities in g(t)𝑔𝑡g(t)italic_g ( italic_t ) appear at the values of the real time tnsuperscriptsubscript𝑡𝑛t_{n}^{*}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPTs given by

tn=π(ϵk,2fϵk,1f)(2n+1).superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑛𝜋superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵsuperscript𝑘2𝑓superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵsuperscript𝑘1𝑓2𝑛1\displaystyle t_{n}^{\ast}=\frac{\pi}{(\epsilon_{k^{\ast},2}^{f}-\epsilon_{k^{% \ast},1}^{f})}\left(2n+1\right).italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_ARG ( 2 italic_n + 1 ) . (4)

These are the critical times for the DQPTs, with ksuperscript𝑘k^{\ast}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT the mode at which the argument of the logarithm in Eq. (II.1) vanishes for |uk|2=pk=1/2superscriptsubscript𝑢superscript𝑘2subscript𝑝superscript𝑘12|u_{k^{\ast}}|^{2}=p_{k^{\ast}}=1/2| italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 / 2.

For the case ϵk,2f=ϵk,1f=ϵkfsuperscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘2𝑓superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘1𝑓superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓\epsilon_{k,2}^{f}=-\epsilon_{k,1}^{f}=\epsilon_{k}^{f}italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, Eq. (4) is simplified to

tn=t(n+12),t=πϵkf.formulae-sequencesuperscriptsubscript𝑡𝑛superscript𝑡𝑛12superscript𝑡𝜋superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵsuperscript𝑘𝑓\displaystyle t_{n}^{\ast}=t^{\ast}\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right),~{}~{}~{}~{}t^{% \ast}=\frac{\pi}{\epsilon_{k^{\ast}}^{f}}.italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_n + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG . (5)

II.2 Dynamical Topological Order Parameter

The dynamical topological order parameter is introduced to represent the topological characteristic associated with DQPTs [89]. The DTOP displays integer (quantized) values as a function of time and its unit magnitude jumps at the time of DQPTs reveal the topological aspect of DQPT [89, 118, 119].

The dynamical topological order parameter is defined as [89]

Nw(t)=12π0πϕG(k,t)kdk,subscript𝑁𝑤𝑡12𝜋superscriptsubscript0𝜋superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐺𝑘𝑡𝑘differential-d𝑘\displaystyle N_{w}(t)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{\pi}\frac{\partial\phi^{G}(k,t)% }{\partial k}\mathrm{d}k,italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_π end_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_π end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_k end_ARG roman_d italic_k , (6)

where the geometric phase ϕG(k,t)superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐺𝑘𝑡\phi^{G}(k,t)italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) is extracted from the total phase ϕ(k,t)italic-ϕ𝑘𝑡\phi(k,t)italic_ϕ ( italic_k , italic_t ) by subtracting the dynamical phase ϕD(k,t)superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐷𝑘𝑡\phi^{D}(k,t)italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ): ϕG(k,t)=ϕ(k,t)ϕD(k,t)superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐺𝑘𝑡italic-ϕ𝑘𝑡superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐷𝑘𝑡\phi^{G}(k,t)=\phi(k,t)-\phi^{D}(k,t)italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) = italic_ϕ ( italic_k , italic_t ) - italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ). The total phase ϕ(k,t)italic-ϕ𝑘𝑡\phi(k,t)italic_ϕ ( italic_k , italic_t ) is the phase factor of Loschmidt amplitude in its polar coordinate representation, i.e., k(t)=|k(t)|eiϕ(k,t),subscript𝑘𝑡subscript𝑘𝑡superscript𝑒𝑖italic-ϕ𝑘𝑡{\cal L}_{k}(t)=|{\cal L}_{k}(t)|e^{i\phi(k,t)},caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = | caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) | italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_ϕ ( italic_k , italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , and ϕD(k,t)=0tψkf(t)|H(k,t)|ψkf(t)𝑑t,superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐷𝑘𝑡superscriptsubscript0𝑡quantum-operator-productsuperscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘𝑓superscript𝑡𝐻𝑘superscript𝑡superscriptsubscript𝜓𝑘𝑓superscript𝑡differential-dsuperscript𝑡\phi^{D}(k,t)=-\int_{0}^{t}\langle\psi_{k}^{f}(t^{\prime})|H(k,t^{\prime})|% \psi_{k}^{f}(t^{\prime})\rangle dt^{\prime},italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) = - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟨ italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) | italic_H ( italic_k , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) | italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ⟩ italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , in which ϕ(k,t)italic-ϕ𝑘𝑡\phi(k,t)italic_ϕ ( italic_k , italic_t ) and ϕD(k,t)superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐷𝑘𝑡\phi^{D}(k,t)italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ), for the two level system can be calculated as follows [115, 116]

ϕ(k,t)=tan1(|uk|2sin(2ϵkft)|vk|2+|uk|2cos(2ϵkft)),italic-ϕ𝑘𝑡superscript1superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘22superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓𝑡superscriptsubscript𝑣𝑘2superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘22superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓𝑡\displaystyle\phi(k,t)=\tan^{-1}\Big{(}\frac{-|u_{k}|^{2}\sin(2\epsilon_{k}^{f% }t)}{|v_{k}|^{2}+|u_{k}|^{2}\cos(2\epsilon_{k}^{f}t)}\Big{)},italic_ϕ ( italic_k , italic_t ) = roman_tan start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG - | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_sin ( 2 italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG | italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cos ( 2 italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ) end_ARG ) ,
ϕD(k,t)=2|uk|2ϵkft,superscriptitalic-ϕ𝐷𝑘𝑡2superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘2superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓𝑡\displaystyle\phi^{D}(k,t)=-2|u_{k}|^{2}\epsilon_{k}^{f}t,italic_ϕ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) = - 2 | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ,

so that [115, 116]

ϕkG=tan1(|uk|2sin(2ϵkft)|vk|2+|uk|2cos(2ϵkft))+2|uk|2ϵkft.superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϕ𝑘𝐺superscript1superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘22superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓𝑡superscriptsubscript𝑣𝑘2superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘22superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓𝑡2superscriptsubscript𝑢𝑘2superscriptsubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑘𝑓𝑡\displaystyle\phi_{k}^{G}=\tan^{-1}\Big{(}\frac{-|u_{k}|^{2}\sin(2\epsilon_{k}% ^{f}t)}{|v_{k}|^{2}+|u_{k}|^{2}\cos(2\epsilon_{k}^{f}t)}\Big{)}+2|u_{k}|^{2}% \epsilon_{k}^{f}t.italic_ϕ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_G end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = roman_tan start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG - | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_sin ( 2 italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG | italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cos ( 2 italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ) end_ARG ) + 2 | italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t . (7)

In the following we will study the DQPTs in the long-range pairing Kitaev model following the noiseless and noisy ramped quench and the corresponding topological properties (DTOP).

Refer to caption

Figure 2: (Color online) Phase diagram of the long-range pairing Kitaev chain in the αμ𝛼𝜇\alpha-\muitalic_α - italic_μ plane for α>1𝛼1\alpha>1italic_α > 1.

III Model and Exact Solution

Recently, an extension of the Kitaev model [120] which describes the algebraic decay of the tunneling and/or pairing terms has been intensively investigated [121, 13, 12, 122, 123]. This model describes experimental realizations of long-range topological superconductors [124, 125]. It has been shown that the phase diagram is modified in the presence of the long-range interactions [13, 122]. Moreover, this model exhibits algebraically localized edge states and an algebraic closing of the energy gap [13, 122]. However, when the pairing and tunneling terms are isotropic, exponential localization is recovered independent of the power-law exponent, as long as it is larger than unity [122, 12].

In this paper, we investigate how the noise affects features of the long-range interaction in the long-range pairing Kitaev model. Representing fermionic annihilation (creation) operators as cn(cn)subscript𝑐𝑛superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑛c_{n}(c_{n}^{\dagger})italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), the Hamiltonian of the long-range pairing Kitaev model with linear time dependent chemical potential is given as

H𝐻\displaystyle Hitalic_H =\displaystyle== wn=1N(cncn+1+h.c.)μ(t)n=1N(cncn12)\displaystyle-w\sum_{n=1}^{N}\left(c_{n}^{\dagger}c_{n+1}+h.c.\right)-\mu(t)% \sum_{n=1}^{N}\left(c_{n}^{\dagger}c_{n}-{{1}\over{2}}\right)- italic_w ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_h . italic_c . ) - italic_μ ( italic_t ) ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) (8)
+Δ2n,dα(cncn++cn+cn)Δ2subscript𝑛superscriptsubscript𝑑𝛼subscript𝑐𝑛subscript𝑐𝑛superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑛superscriptsubscript𝑐𝑛\displaystyle+{{\Delta}\over{2}}\sum_{n,\ell}d_{\ell}^{-\alpha}\left(c_{n}c_{n% +\ell}+c_{n+\ell}^{\dagger}c_{n}^{\dagger}\right)+ divide start_ARG roman_Δ end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_α end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT )

where w𝑤witalic_w denotes the hopping strength of the fermionic particles between adjacent lattice sites, ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Δ is the strength of the superconducting pairing term that decays with distance l𝑙litalic_l in a power law fashion characterized by exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α, and the onsite time dependent chemical potential μ(t)=μf+vt𝜇𝑡subscript𝜇𝑓𝑣𝑡\mu(t)=\mu_{f}+vtitalic_μ ( italic_t ) = italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v italic_t changes from the initial value μisubscript𝜇𝑖\mu_{i}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at time t=ti<0𝑡subscript𝑡𝑖0t=t_{i}<0italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 0 to the final values μfsubscript𝜇𝑓\mu_{f}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at t=tf=0𝑡subscript𝑡𝑓0t=t_{f}=0italic_t = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 with sweep velocity v𝑣vitalic_v. The effective distance dsubscript𝑑d_{\ell}italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, between two sites denoted by n𝑛nitalic_n and n+𝑛n+\ellitalic_n + roman_ℓ on the closed ring with N𝑁Nitalic_N sites, is given by the function d=min(,N)subscript𝑑𝑁d_{\ell}=\min(\ell,N-\ell)italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_min ( roman_ℓ , italic_N - roman_ℓ ).

In the presence of the long-range pairing, the Hamiltonian Eq. (8) is exactly solvable in the momentum space [13]. Introducing the Nambu spinor Γkm=(ckm,ckm)subscriptsuperscriptΓsubscript𝑘𝑚superscriptsubscript𝑐subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑐subscript𝑘𝑚\Gamma^{\dagger}_{k_{m}}=(c_{k_{m}}^{\dagger},~{}c_{-k_{m}})roman_Γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), the Fourier transformed Hamiltonian can be expressed as the sum of independent terms acting in the two-dimensional Hilbert space generated by k𝑘kitalic_k

(t)=12m=1N/2ΓkmHkm(0)(t)Γkm,𝑡12superscriptsubscript𝑚1𝑁2superscriptsubscriptΓsubscript𝑘𝑚subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡subscriptΓsubscript𝑘𝑚\displaystyle{\cal H}(t)=\frac{1}{2}\sum_{m=1}^{N/2}\Gamma_{k_{m}}^{\dagger}H^% {(0)}_{k_{m}}(t)\Gamma_{k_{m}},caligraphic_H ( italic_t ) = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT † end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) roman_Γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (9)

where Hkm(0)(t)subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡H^{(0)}_{k_{m}}(t)italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) (the superscript in Hkm(0)(t)subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡H^{(0)}_{k_{m}}(t)italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) is introduced to denote noise-free driving) is given by

Hkm(0)(t)subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\displaystyle H^{(0)}_{k_{m}}(t)italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) =((2wcoskm+μ(t))iΔfα(km)iΔfα(km)(2wcoskm+μ(t))),absentmatrix2𝑤subscript𝑘𝑚𝜇𝑡𝑖Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚𝑖Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚2𝑤subscript𝑘𝑚𝜇𝑡\displaystyle=\begin{pmatrix}-(2w\cos k_{m}+\mu(t))&i\Delta f_{\alpha}(k_{m})% \\ -i\Delta f_{\alpha}(k_{m})&(2w\cos k_{m}+\mu(t))\end{pmatrix},= ( start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL - ( 2 italic_w roman_cos italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_μ ( italic_t ) ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_i roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - italic_i roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL start_CELL ( 2 italic_w roman_cos italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_μ ( italic_t ) ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG ) , (10)

where fα(km)==1N1sin(km)/dαsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚superscriptsubscript1𝑁1subscript𝑘𝑚superscriptsubscript𝑑𝛼f_{\alpha}(k_{m})=\sum_{\ell=1}^{N-1}{{\sin(k_{m}\ell)}/{d_{\ell}^{\alpha}}}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_sin ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ ) / italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the Fourier transform of the superconducting gap term and km=(2m1)π/N,m=1,2,N/2formulae-sequencesubscript𝑘𝑚2𝑚1𝜋𝑁𝑚12𝑁2k_{m}=(2m-1)\pi/N,~{}~{}m=1,2,\cdots N/2italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( 2 italic_m - 1 ) italic_π / italic_N , italic_m = 1 , 2 , ⋯ italic_N / 2. In the thermodynamic limit N𝑁N\rightarrow\inftyitalic_N → ∞, when kmsubscript𝑘𝑚k_{m}italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT gets continuous values, the function fα(km)subscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚f_{\alpha}(k_{m})italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), is described as fα(k)=i2(𝐋𝐢α(eik)𝐋𝐢α(eik))subscriptsuperscript𝑓𝛼𝑘𝑖2subscript𝐋𝐢𝛼superscript𝑒𝑖𝑘subscript𝐋𝐢𝛼superscript𝑒𝑖𝑘f^{\infty}_{\alpha}(k)=-\frac{i}{2}\left(\mathbf{Li}_{\alpha}(e^{ik})-\mathbf{% Li}_{\alpha}(e^{-ik})\right)italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k ) = - divide start_ARG italic_i end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( bold_Li start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) - bold_Li start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ) with 𝐋𝐢α(z)==1z/αsubscript𝐋𝐢𝛼𝑧superscriptsubscript1superscript𝑧superscript𝛼\mathbf{Li}_{\alpha}(z)=\sum_{\ell=1}^{\infty}{{z^{\ell}}/{\ell^{\alpha}}}bold_Li start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_z ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_ℓ = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_ℓ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / roman_ℓ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT being the polylogarithmic function of z𝑧zitalic_z that vanishes in the limit k0𝑘0k\to 0italic_k → 0 and kπ𝑘𝜋k\to\piitalic_k → italic_π for α>1𝛼1\alpha>1italic_α > 1. When α<1𝛼1\alpha<1italic_α < 1 the polylogarithmic function only vanishes in the limit kπ𝑘𝜋k\to\piitalic_k → italic_π.

In the limit of α𝛼\alpha\rightarrow\inftyitalic_α → ∞, the model reduces to that of the short-range Kitaev chain with only nearest-neighbor pairing which is exactly solvable and its topological properties were unravelled by Kitaev [120]. In this limit, for time-independent chemical potential μ(t)=μ𝜇𝑡𝜇\mu(t)=\muitalic_μ ( italic_t ) = italic_μ and w=1𝑤1w=1italic_w = 1, the time-independent Hamiltonian undergoes topological quantum phase transitions at μc=±2subscript𝜇𝑐plus-or-minus2\mu_{c}=\pm 2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ± 2, where the energy gap closes at k=0,π𝑘0𝜋k=0,\piitalic_k = 0 , italic_π [120]. For α>1𝛼1\alpha>1italic_α > 1 the phase diagram and the topological properties of the long-range pairing Kitaev chain are identical to that of a short-range Kitaev chain (Fig. (2)). However, as α𝛼\alphaitalic_α approaches 1111, the bulk gradually starts becoming gapped near μ=2𝜇2\mu=-2italic_μ = - 2 and for α<1𝛼1\alpha<1italic_α < 1, μ=2𝜇2\mu=-2italic_μ = - 2 no longer remains a critical point [13].

In the time dependent case μ(t)=μf+vt𝜇𝑡subscript𝜇𝑓𝑣𝑡\mu(t)=\mu_{f}+vtitalic_μ ( italic_t ) = italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v italic_t, the instantaneous eigenvalues and eigenvectors of time dependent Hamiltonian Eq.(8), are given by

εkm±subscriptsuperscript𝜀plus-or-minussubscript𝑘𝑚\displaystyle\varepsilon^{\pm}_{k_{m}}italic_ε start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =\displaystyle== ±εkm=±hz2(km,t)+hxy2(km),plus-or-minussubscript𝜀subscript𝑘𝑚plus-or-minussubscriptsuperscript2𝑧subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡subscriptsuperscript2𝑥𝑦subscript𝑘𝑚\displaystyle\pm\varepsilon_{k_{m}}=\pm\sqrt{h^{2}_{z}(k_{m},t)+h^{2}_{xy}(k_{% m})},± italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ± square-root start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t ) + italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG , (11)
|χkm(t)ketsubscriptsuperscript𝜒subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\displaystyle|\chi^{-}_{k_{m}}(t)\rangle| italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ⟩ =\displaystyle== cos(θkm(t)2)|isin(θkm(t)2)|,subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2ket𝑖subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2ket\displaystyle\cos(\frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2})|\uparrow\rangle-{\it i}\sin(% \frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2})|\downarrow\rangle,roman_cos ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) | ↑ ⟩ - italic_i roman_sin ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) | ↓ ⟩ ,
|χkm+(t)ketsubscriptsuperscript𝜒subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\displaystyle|\chi^{+}_{k_{m}}(t)\rangle| italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ⟩ =\displaystyle== isin(θkm(t)2)|+cos(θkm(t)2)|,𝑖subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2ketsubscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2ket\displaystyle-{\it i}\sin(\frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2})|\uparrow\rangle+\cos(% \frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2})|\downarrow\rangle,- italic_i roman_sin ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) | ↑ ⟩ + roman_cos ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) | ↓ ⟩ ,

where,

cos(θkm(t)2)=εkmhz(km,t)2εkm(εkmhz(km,t)),subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2subscript𝜀subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑧subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2subscript𝜀subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝜀subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑧subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\cos(\frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2})=\frac{\varepsilon_{k_{m}}-h_{z}({k_{m}},t)}{% \sqrt{2\varepsilon_{k_{m}}(\varepsilon_{{k_{m}}}-h_{z}({k_{m}},t))}},roman_cos ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) = divide start_ARG italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t ) ) end_ARG end_ARG ,
sin(θkm(t)2)=hxy(km)2εkm(εkmhz(km,t)),subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2subscript𝑥𝑦subscript𝑘𝑚2subscript𝜀subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝜀subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑧subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\sin(\frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2})=\frac{h_{xy}(k_{m})}{\sqrt{2\varepsilon_{{k_% {m}}}(\varepsilon_{{k_{m}}}-h_{z}({k_{m}},t))}},roman_sin ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) = divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ε start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t ) ) end_ARG end_ARG ,

with hxy(km)=Δfα(km)subscript𝑥𝑦subscript𝑘𝑚Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚h_{xy}({k_{m}})=\Delta f_{\alpha}(k_{m})italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), and hz(km,t)=2wcos(km)+μ(t)subscript𝑧subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2𝑤subscript𝑘𝑚𝜇𝑡h_{z}({k_{m}},t)=2w\cos({k_{m}})+\mu(t)italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t ) = 2 italic_w roman_cos ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) + italic_μ ( italic_t ), and |χkm,t±ketsubscriptsuperscript𝜒plus-or-minussubscript𝑘𝑚𝑡|\chi^{\pm}_{k_{m},t}\rangle| italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ± end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ are the adiabatic basis of the system.

In such a case, if the system is prepared in its ground state at tisubscript𝑡𝑖t_{i}\rightarrow-\inftyitalic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → - ∞ (μiμc=2much-less-thansubscript𝜇𝑖subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{i}\ll\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≪ italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2), the probability that the k𝑘kitalic_k:th mode is found in the upper level at t𝑡titalic_t is given as (see Appendix A)

pk=eπγ2/4|U22cos(θkm(t)2)γeiπ/42U12sin(θkm(t)2)|2,subscript𝑝𝑘superscript𝑒𝜋superscript𝛾24superscriptsubscript𝑈22subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡2𝛾superscript𝑒𝑖𝜋42subscript𝑈12subscript𝜃subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡22\displaystyle p_{k}=e^{-\pi\gamma^{2}/4}|U_{22}\cos(\frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)}{2% })-\frac{\gamma e^{-{\it i}\pi/4}}{\sqrt{2}}U_{12}\sin(\frac{\theta_{k_{m}}(t)% }{2})|^{2},italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_π italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 22 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_cos ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) - divide start_ARG italic_γ italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_i italic_π / 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_ARG italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 12 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sin ( divide start_ARG italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
(12)

with U22=Dν(x),U12=Dν1(x),formulae-sequencesubscript𝑈22subscript𝐷𝜈𝑥subscript𝑈12subscript𝐷𝜈1𝑥U_{22}=D_{\nu}(x),~{}~{}U_{12}=D_{\nu-1}(x),italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 22 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ν end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 12 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ν - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) , where, Dν(x)subscript𝐷𝜈𝑥D_{\nu}(x)italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ν end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) is the parabolic cylinder function [126, 127], γ=Δfα(km)/2v𝛾Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚2𝑣\gamma=\Delta f_{\alpha}(k_{m})/\sqrt{2v}italic_γ = roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / square-root start_ARG 2 italic_v end_ARG, ν=iγ2/2𝜈𝑖superscript𝛾22\nu={\it i}\gamma^{2}/2italic_ν = italic_i italic_γ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / 2, x=2ei3π/4vτk𝑥2superscript𝑒𝑖3𝜋4𝑣subscript𝜏𝑘x=2e^{{\it i}3\pi/4}\sqrt{v}\tau_{k}italic_x = 2 italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i 3 italic_π / 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT square-root start_ARG italic_v end_ARG italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and τk=((μf+vt)/2+wcos(k))/vsubscript𝜏𝑘subscript𝜇𝑓𝑣𝑡2𝑤𝑘𝑣\tau_{k}=((\mu_{f}+vt)/2+w\cos(k))/vitalic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( ( italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v italic_t ) / 2 + italic_w roman_cos ( italic_k ) ) / italic_v.

Refer to caption Refer to caption Refer to caption

Refer to caption Refer to caption Refer to caption

Figure 3: (Color online) Probability pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for finding the system with momentum k𝑘kitalic_k in the upper level for the noiseless ramped across the single critical point μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2, for different sweep velocities, (a) for α=1.2𝛼1.2\alpha=1.2italic_α = 1.2 and μf=1subscript𝜇𝑓1\mu_{f}=1italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1, (b) for α=1.5𝛼1.5\alpha=1.5italic_α = 1.5 and μf=1.95subscript𝜇𝑓1.95\mu_{f}=1.95italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.95. (c) The phase diagram of the model in αv𝛼𝑣\alpha-vitalic_α - italic_v plane for a noiseless quench that crosses the single critical point μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2 for μf=1subscript𝜇𝑓1\mu_{f}=1italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 (solid line) and μf=1.95subscript𝜇𝑓1.95\mu_{f}=1.95italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.95 (dashed-dotted line). The dynamical free energy g(t)𝑔𝑡g(t)italic_g ( italic_t ) and its associated dynamical topological order parameter Nw(t)subscript𝑁𝑤𝑡N_{w}(t)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) for a noiseless quench across the single critical point corresponding to Fig. 3(b) for (d) v=2.5𝑣2.5v=2.5italic_v = 2.5, (e) v=6𝑣6v=6italic_v = 6 and (f) v=9𝑣9v=9italic_v = 9.

IV Noiseless numerical results

In this section, we report the results of our numerical simulations, based on an analytical approach, to investigate the dynamics of the model using the notion of DQPTs. To this end, we consider the linear quenching of the chemical potential μ(t)=μf+vt𝜇𝑡subscript𝜇𝑓𝑣𝑡\mu(t)=\mu_{f}+vtitalic_μ ( italic_t ) = italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v italic_t, changes from initial value μisubscript𝜇𝑖\mu_{i}\rightarrow-\inftyitalic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → - ∞, where the system is prepared in its ground state, to various final values μf=1,1.95,4subscript𝜇𝑓11.954\mu_{f}=1,1.95,4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , 1.95 , 4 at tf=0subscript𝑡𝑓0t_{f}=0italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. In addition, to better understand the effect of long-range pairing on the dynamics of system after the ramp quench, we will focus only on the case α>1𝛼1\alpha>1italic_α > 1 where the location of the critical points in the parameter space is not altered by varying α𝛼\alphaitalic_α.

IV.0.1 Quench across a single critical point

For the ramped quench, which crosses the single critical point μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2 at k=0𝑘0k=0italic_k = 0, the excitation probability after quench is k𝑘kitalic_k dependent. As expected, when the system is driven across the critical point, the system undergoes nonadiabatic evolution due to the gap closing and thus the transition probability is maximum at the gap closing mode k=0𝑘0k=0italic_k = 0. However, away from the gap closing mode the system evolves adiabatically due to the non-zero energy gap and can be shown that pkπ0subscript𝑝𝑘𝜋0p_{k\rightarrow\pi}\rightarrow 0italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k → italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0. Considering these two limiting cases, and also continuity of the transition probability as a function of k𝑘kitalic_k in the thermodynamic limit, imply that there should exist a critical mode ksuperscript𝑘k^{\ast}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT at which pk=1/2subscript𝑝superscript𝑘12p_{k^{\ast}}=1/2italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 / 2 and consequently DQPTs occur. The transition probability has been plotted versus k𝑘kitalic_k in Fig. 3(a), (b) for μf=1,1.95subscript𝜇𝑓11.95\mu_{f}=1,1.95italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 , 1.95 for different sweep velocities as the ramped quench crosses the single critical point μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2. Since the quench crosses the critical point, the excitation probability takes its maximum value pk=1subscript𝑝𝑘1p_{k}=1italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 at k=0𝑘0k=0italic_k = 0, while it is negligible away from the gap closing mode (kπ𝑘𝜋k\rightarrow\piitalic_k → italic_π). From these observations, it is straightforward to conclude that there is always a critical momentum ksuperscript𝑘k^{\ast}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and hence those of tnsuperscriptsubscript𝑡𝑛t_{n}^{*}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, related through Eq. (6). Interestingly, we observed that there exists a region in the parameter space vα𝑣𝛼v-\alphaitalic_v - italic_α where the system encompasses three distinct critical modes ksuperscript𝑘k^{\ast}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for which pk=1/2subscript𝑝superscript𝑘12p_{k^{\ast}}=1/2italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 / 2, even though the system is quenched across a single QCP. In such a case, the system displays three different critical time scales tsuperscript𝑡t^{\ast}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT as obtained from Eq. (6). While in the short-range case [79, 116] the system contains only a single critical mode following a quench across a single QCP. In Fig. 3(c), we have plotted a phase diagram in vα𝑣𝛼v-\alphaitalic_v - italic_α plane for μf=1subscript𝜇𝑓1\mu_{f}=1italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1, and μf=1.95subscript𝜇𝑓1.95\mu_{f}=1.95italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.95 in which region with three critical modes (TCMs) separated from the regions with single critical mode (SCM). On the phase boundary separating these two regions, there are two values of ksuperscript𝑘k^{\ast}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT with pk=1/2subscript𝑝superscript𝑘12p_{k^{\ast}}=1/2italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 / 2. As seen, the width of TCMs region shrinks and vanishes as α𝛼\alphaitalic_α increases and also as μfsubscript𝜇𝑓\mu_{f}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT decreases. The numerical results show that, the threshold values of μfsubscript𝜇𝑓\mu_{f}italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT above which TCMs region appears is μf0.1subscript𝜇𝑓0.1\mu_{f}\geq-0.1italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ - 0.1. In other words, the exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α has a critical value αc(v,μf)subscript𝛼𝑐𝑣subscript𝜇𝑓\alpha_{c}(v,\mu_{f})italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v , italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) above which the dynamical behavior of the system is similar to that of the short-range system. Consequently, our findings confirm that the appearance of TCMs region is indeed an artifact of the long-range pairing nature of the Hamiltonian.

The dynamical free energy g(t)𝑔𝑡g(t)italic_g ( italic_t ) and DTOP (Nwsubscript𝑁𝑤N_{w}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) of the model have been depicted in Fig. 3(d)-(f) for the quench across a single critical point (corresponding to Fig. 3(b)), for different sweep velocities v=2.5,9𝑣2.59v=2.5,9italic_v = 2.5 , 9 and v=6𝑣6v=6italic_v = 6, respectively. In Fig. 3(d) and (f) the system is in SCM region, where it encompasses a single critical time scale tsuperscript𝑡t^{\ast}italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Although the cusps in g(t)𝑔𝑡g(t)italic_g ( italic_t ) are not discernible but the quantization and jumps in the associated DTOP are clearly visible as an indicator of DQPTs. The observed oscillation in the dynamical free energy seems to be the natural behavior, which results from the unitary time evolution of the post-quench ground state in terms of the Hamiltonian’s eigenstates. The behaviour of DTOP, i.e, whether Nw(t)subscript𝑁𝑤𝑡N_{w}(t)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) would jump or drop, can be predicted by the slope of pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at the critical momentum ksuperscript𝑘k^{\ast}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (positive (negative) slop results jump (drop)) [116, 107]. Appearing successive jumps or drops in Nw(t)subscript𝑁𝑤𝑡N_{w}(t)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) indicate that the system has only a single critical mode, while the presence of both jump and drop in DTOP curve implies that the system has at least two critical modes as seen in Fig. 3(e). As seen, uninterrupted jumps in Fig. 3(d), (f) reveal that the system is in SCM region while two successive jumps and then drop of Nwsubscript𝑁𝑤N_{w}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT(t) in Fig. 3(e) points the existence of three different critical modes in accordance with pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (Fig. 3(b)), which shows that the system is in TCMs region.

Refer to caption Refer to caption Refer to caption


Figure 4: (Color online) (a) Probability of the excitation for noiseless ramped quench which crosses two critical points μc=±2subscript𝜇𝑐plus-or-minus2\mu_{c}=\pm 2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ± 2, for different sweep velocities, α=1.5𝛼1.5\alpha=1.5italic_α = 1.5 and μf=4subscript𝜇𝑓4\mu_{f}=4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4. (b) The phase diagram of the model in αv𝛼𝑣\alpha-vitalic_α - italic_v plane for a noiseless quench that crosses two critical points μc=±2subscript𝜇𝑐plus-or-minus2\mu_{c}=\pm 2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ± 2 for μf=2.05subscript𝜇𝑓2.05\mu_{f}=2.05italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2.05 (dashed-dotted line), μf=4subscript𝜇𝑓4\mu_{f}=4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 (dashed-dotted-dotted line) and μf=4subscript𝜇𝑓4\mu_{f}=4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4 (dashed line). (c) The dynamical free energy g(t)𝑔𝑡g(t)italic_g ( italic_t ) and the associated dynamical topological order parameter Nw(t)subscript𝑁𝑤𝑡N_{w}(t)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) for a noiseless quench crosses two critical points corresponding to Fig. 4(a) for v=9𝑣9v=9italic_v = 9.

IV.0.2 Quench across two critical points

Performing a quench across both equilibrium critical points μc=±2subscript𝜇𝑐plus-or-minus2\mu_{c}=\pm 2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ± 2 shows new features. In these cases, the chemical potential is swept from one trivial (non-topological) phase to another one, and it is not expected to result in DQPTs when the quench is sudden [48, 116, 117]. For a quench crossing both critical points, as expected, the nonadiabatic evolution of the system at gap closing modes k=0,π𝑘0𝜋k=0,\piitalic_k = 0 , italic_π, leads to maximum transition probability, i.e., pk=0,π=1subscript𝑝𝑘0𝜋1p_{k=0,\pi}=1italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 , italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.

However, the minimum of pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, occurs at the maximum energy gap mode at k=π/2𝑘𝜋2k=\pi/2italic_k = italic_π / 2, which is the farthest mode from the gap closing mode. Since, the maximum value of transition probability pk=0,π=1subscript𝑝𝑘0𝜋1p_{k=0,\pi}=1italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 , italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 is greater than 1/2121/21 / 2, the appearance of DQPTs requires the condition that the minimum value of transition probability becomes less than 1/2121/21 / 2. As the system changes adiabatically at the gapped mode for small sweep velocity, making the quench sufficiently slow (v<vc𝑣subscript𝑣𝑐v<v_{c}italic_v < italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) ensures that the minimum excitation probability is smaller than 1/2121/21 / 2, which sets a succession of DQPTs. In Fig. 4(a) the transition probability has been shown versus k𝑘kitalic_k for a quench that crosses two critical points (i.e. μf=4subscript𝜇𝑓4\mu_{f}=4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4) for the exponent α=1.5𝛼1.5\alpha=1.5italic_α = 1.5. As predicted, pk=0,π=1subscript𝑝𝑘0𝜋1p_{k=0,\pi}=1italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 0 , italic_π end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 and the minimum of pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT away from the critical modes is less than 1/2121/21 / 2 for the small sweep velocity (v<vc=9.566𝑣subscript𝑣𝑐9.566v<v_{c}=9.566italic_v < italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 9.566). In such a case, there is two critical modes kβsubscriptsuperscript𝑘𝛽k^{\ast}_{\beta}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_β end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and kγsubscriptsuperscript𝑘𝛾k^{\ast}_{\gamma}italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at which pkβ,γ=1/2subscript𝑝subscriptsuperscript𝑘𝛽𝛾12p_{k^{\ast}_{\beta,\gamma}}=1/2italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_β , italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 / 2 yields a sequence of DQPTs at the corresponding critical times tn=tn,β,tn,γ,n=0,1,formulae-sequencesubscriptsuperscript𝑡𝑛subscriptsuperscript𝑡𝑛𝛽subscriptsuperscript𝑡𝑛𝛾𝑛01t^{\ast}_{n}=t^{\ast}_{n,\beta},t^{\ast}_{n,\gamma},n=0,1,\ldotsitalic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_β end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_γ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n = 0 , 1 , …. Furthermore, the minimum of pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT becomes greater than 1/2121/21 / 2 for a sweep velocity greater than the critical sweep velocity v=10>vc=9.566𝑣10subscript𝑣𝑐9.566v=10>v_{c}=9.566italic_v = 10 > italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 9.566, thus blocking the appearance of DQPTs.

The phase diagram of the model for a quench crossing two critical points, has been illustrated in Fig. 4(b) for different values of μf=2.05,4subscript𝜇𝑓2.054\mu_{f}=2.05,4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2.05 , 4 and μf=100subscript𝜇𝑓100\mu_{f}=100italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 100 where the region marked ”DQPTs” support aperiodic sequences of DQPTs. As seen, the critical sweep velocity vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT decreases by increasing the exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α and vcsubscript𝑣𝑐v_{c}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is equivalent to the that of short-range pairing system for α>2𝛼2\alpha>2italic_α > 2.

Fig. 4(c) shows the dynamical free energy and DTOP for a quench crossing two critical points μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2 and μf=2subscript𝜇𝑓2\mu_{f}=2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2. Cusps in g(t)𝑔𝑡g(t)italic_g ( italic_t ) and quantizations in the associated DTOP are clearly visible as an indicator of DQPTs. As observed, DTOP oscillates between 00 and 1111, which indicates that the corresponding pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT contains two critical modes with different slopes (Fig. 4(a)).

V Noisy ramp quench

As mentioned the noises are ubiquitous and indispensable in any physical system. Specifically, when energy is transferred into or out of an otherwise isolated system via a quench in the laboratory, there will inevitably be time dependent fluctuations (”noise”) in this transfer. In this section we investigate the effects of noise on the dynamical phase diagram of the long-range pairing Kitaev model. For this purpose, we add a noise to the time dependent chemical potential μ(t)=μf+vt+R(t)𝜇𝑡subscript𝜇𝑓𝑣𝑡𝑅𝑡\mu(t)=\mu_{f}+vt+R(t)italic_μ ( italic_t ) = italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v italic_t + italic_R ( italic_t ), where R(t)𝑅𝑡R(t)italic_R ( italic_t ) is a random fluctuation confined to the ramp interval [ti,tf=0[[t_{i},t_{f}=0[[ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 [, with vanishing mean, R(t)=0delimited-⟨⟩𝑅𝑡0\langle R({t})\rangle=0⟨ italic_R ( italic_t ) ⟩ = 0. We use white noise with Gaussian two-point correlations R(t)R(t)=ξ2δ(tt)delimited-⟨⟩𝑅𝑡𝑅superscript𝑡superscript𝜉2𝛿𝑡superscript𝑡\langle R(t)R(t^{\prime})\rangle=\xi^{2}\delta(t-t^{\prime})⟨ italic_R ( italic_t ) italic_R ( italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ⟩ = italic_ξ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_δ ( italic_t - italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) where ξ𝜉\xiitalic_ξ characterizes the strength of the noise (ξ2superscript𝜉2\xi^{2}italic_ξ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT has units of time). White noise is approximately equivalent to fast colored noise with exponentially decaying two-point correlations (Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process) [114]. In the presence of noise the transition probability is obtained by numerically solving the exact master equation [128, 129, 130, 131] for the averaged density matrix ρkm(t)subscript𝜌subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\rho_{k_{m}}(t)italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) of the noisy system

ddtρkm(t)=i[Hkm(0)(t),ρkm(t)]ξ22[H1,[H1,ρkm(t)]],𝑑𝑑𝑡subscript𝜌subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡𝑖subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡subscript𝜌subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡superscript𝜉22subscript𝐻1subscript𝐻1subscript𝜌subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡\displaystyle{d\over dt}\rho_{k_{m}}(t)=-i[H^{(0)}_{k_{m}}(t),\rho_{k_{m}}(t)]% -\frac{\xi^{2}}{2}[H_{1},[H_{1},\rho_{k_{m}}(t)]],divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = - italic_i [ italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) , italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ] - divide start_ARG italic_ξ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG [ italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , [ italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) ] ] ,
(13)

where Hkm(0)(t)subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡H^{(0)}_{k_{m}}(t)italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) is the noise-free Hamiltonian while R(t)H1=R(t)σz𝑅𝑡subscript𝐻1𝑅𝑡superscript𝜎𝑧R(t)H_{1}=-R(t)\sigma^{z}italic_R ( italic_t ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - italic_R ( italic_t ) italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT expresses the “noisy” part for the full Hamiltonian Hkm(ξ)(t)=Hkm(0)(t)+R(t)H1subscriptsuperscript𝐻𝜉subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡subscriptsuperscript𝐻0subscript𝑘𝑚𝑡𝑅𝑡subscript𝐻1H^{(\xi)}_{k_{m}}(t)=H^{(0)}_{k_{m}}(t)+R(t)H_{1}italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_ξ ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) = italic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) + italic_R ( italic_t ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. The master equation, Eq.(13), is solved within the quench interval t[ti,0[t\in\,[t_{i},0[italic_t ∈ [ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 0 [.

The transition probability pksubscript𝑝𝑘p_{k}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the presence of the noise is given by

pkm=χkm+(tf)|ρkm(tf)|χkm+(tf).subscript𝑝subscript𝑘𝑚quantum-operator-productsubscriptsuperscript𝜒subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑡𝑓subscript𝜌subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑡𝑓subscriptsuperscript𝜒subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑡𝑓p_{k_{m}}=\langle\chi^{+}_{k_{m}}(t_{f})|\rho_{k_{m}}(t_{f})|\chi^{+}_{k_{m}}(% t_{f})\rangle.italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟩ .

As a result, the dynamical phase diagram of the model is characterized by the interplay of two competing effects: (i) The non-trivial excitation resulting from the long-range pairing and (ii) the accumulation of noise-induced excitations during the evolution. Moreover, we expect that the non-adiabaticity by large values of the sweep velocity gives less time for the noise to become effective. Our numerical simulation, which is based on the exact master equation reveals that the main effect of noise is to shift the critical mode yielding the succession of DQPTs and a shift on the phase boundaries. In addition, the numerical results uncover that the noise contributions diminish the long-range pairing dynamics.

The phase diagram of the model in the absence and presence of the noise (ξ=0,1𝜉01\xi=0,1italic_ξ = 0 , 1) has been plotted in Fig. 5 for a quench across the single critical point for μf=1.95subscript𝜇𝑓1.95\mu_{f}=1.95italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.95. As seen, the TCMs boundaries change in the presence of the noise. Moreover, the width of TCMs region shrinks rapidly as exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α increases. In addition, the borders between TCMs and SCM regions change less for large values of sweep velocity which corresponds to our anticipation. In other words, the noise weakens the effect of long-range pairing on the dynamical phase diagram.

Refer to caption

Figure 5: (Color online) The phase diagram of the underlying model in αv𝛼𝑣\alpha-vitalic_α - italic_v plane for a noiseless and noisy quench that crosses a single critical point μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=\-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 for μf=1.95subscript𝜇𝑓1.95\mu_{f}=1.95italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.95. The dashed-dotted line represents the boundary between TCMs and SCM region for the noiseless case and solid line displays the boundaries for the noise intensity ξ=1𝜉1\xi=1italic_ξ = 1.

Fig. 6 depicts the border between DQPTs and no-DQPTs regions for both noiseless ξ=0𝜉0\xi=0italic_ξ = 0 and noisy ξ=1𝜉1\xi=1italic_ξ = 1 cases, for a ramped quench that crosses two critical points for μf=4subscript𝜇𝑓4\mu_{f}=4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4. As indicated, the critical sweep velocity above which the DQPT is wiped out, decreases in the presence of the noise even for large values of α𝛼\alphaitalic_α, where the critical values of the sweep velocity is the same as that of short range pairing case. Moreover, the border undergoes more changes for the smaller sweep velocities than the larger sweep velocities. However, the changes is constant for α>2𝛼2\alpha>2italic_α > 2, where the dynamics is the same as that of the short-range pairing case. The numerical results show that the changes in the border of different regions in the phase diagram of both ramped quench cases (Figs. 5 and 6) decreases by decreasing the noise strength, as anticipated.

Refer to caption

Figure 6: (Color online) The αv𝛼𝑣\alpha-vitalic_α - italic_v phase diagram of the model for a noiseless and noisy quench which crosses two critical points μc=±2subscript𝜇𝑐plus-or-minus2\mu_{c}=\pm 2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ± 2 for μf=4subscript𝜇𝑓4\mu_{f}=4italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 4. The dashed-dotted-dotted line shows the boundary between DQPTs and no-DQPTs regions for the noiseless case and solid line represent the corresponding border for the noise intensity ξ=1𝜉1\xi=1italic_ξ = 1.

VI Summary and discussion

In this paper, we have studied the non-equilibrium dynamics of the long-range pairing Kitaev model (α>1𝛼1\alpha>1italic_α > 1) with noiseless and noisy linear time dependent chemical potential. For a noiseless quench across one of the equilibrium quantum critical points (μc=2subscript𝜇𝑐2\mu_{c}=-2italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 2), we find that the dynamical phase diagram in αv𝛼𝑣\alpha-vitalic_α - italic_v plane is classified into two regions, the three critical modes and the single critical mode regions. The three critical modes region is the result of the long-range pairing, in contrast to the short-range Kitaev model which shows a single critical mode for a noiseless quench across a single critical point. The three critical modes region shrinks and disappears as the exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α increases. In addition, the numerical results show that appearance of the three critical modes region depends on the final values of the chemical potential. The lower bond of the chemical potential above which three critical modes region emerges is μf=0.1subscript𝜇𝑓0.1\mu_{f}=-0.1italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 0.1 and the upper bound is the next critical point, i.e, 0.1μf<20.1subscript𝜇𝑓2-0.1\leq\mu_{f}<2- 0.1 ≤ italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 2. Moreover, the exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α has a critical value αc(v,μf)subscript𝛼𝑐𝑣subscript𝜇𝑓\alpha_{c}(v,\mu_{f})italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v , italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) above which the dynamical behavior of the long-range pairing system is similar to that of the short-range system. Consequently, our finding confirms that the appearance of TCMs region is indeed an outcome of the long-range pairing nature of the Hamiltonian.

Further, for a noiseless ramped quench that crosses two critical points, the critical sweep velocity above which the dynamical quantum phase transition is wiped out for long-range pairing, is larger than that of the short-range pairing case. The critical sweep velocity decreases by increasing the exponent α𝛼\alphaitalic_α of long-range pairing and saturates to the critical sweep velocity of the short-range pairing case beyond α=2𝛼2\alpha=2italic_α = 2.

The boundaries between different regions in both cases of the ramped quench, are changed in the presence of the Guassian white noise. The three critical modes region for the quench that crosses the single critical point, shrinks faster in the presence of noise by increasing α𝛼\alphaitalic_α. Moreover, for the ramped quench which crosses two critical points, the critical sweep velocity above which the dynamical quantum phase transition disappears, reduces by adding noise. The numerical results exhibit that the system is affected less at the large sweep velocities. In summary, the noise has destructive effects on the long-range pairing features.

The case of α<1𝛼1\alpha<1italic_α < 1 hosts massive edge modes for the open boundary condition, which is not our case. However, the study of a system with massive edge modes could be an interesting issue for further investigations.

Appendix A Time-dependent Schrödinger equation in the diabatic basis

The time-dependent Schrödinger equation of Hamiltonian in Eq. (8) is given by

iddt(a1(t)a2(t))=(hz(k,t)ihx,yihx,yhz(k,t))(a1(t)a2(t)),𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑡subscript𝑎1𝑡subscript𝑎2𝑡subscript𝑧𝑘𝑡𝑖subscript𝑥𝑦𝑖subscript𝑥𝑦subscript𝑧𝑘𝑡subscript𝑎1𝑡subscript𝑎2𝑡\displaystyle{\it i}\frac{d}{dt}\left(\begin{array}[]{c}a_{1}(t)\\ a_{2}(t)\\ \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}-h_{z}(k,t)&ih_{x,y}\\ -ih_{x,y}&h_{z}(k,t)\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}[]{c}a_{1}(t)\\ a_{2}(t)\\ \end{array}\right),italic_i divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - italic_i italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) , (20)
(21)

where hz(k,t)=(2wcoskm+μ(t))subscript𝑧𝑘𝑡2𝑤subscript𝑘𝑚𝜇𝑡h_{z}(k,t)=(2w\cos k_{m}+\mu(t))italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k , italic_t ) = ( 2 italic_w roman_cos italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_μ ( italic_t ) ), hx,y=iΔfα(km)subscript𝑥𝑦𝑖Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚h_{x,y}=i\Delta f_{\alpha}(k_{m})italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_i roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and a1(t)subscript𝑎1𝑡a_{1}(t)italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ), a2(t)subscript𝑎2𝑡a_{2}(t)italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_t ) are the coefficients which define the quantum state in the diabatic bases. The time-dependent Schrödinger equation (21) is mapped to the time-dependent Schrödinger equation of Landau-Zener problem [132, 133] by performing π/2𝜋2\pi/2italic_π / 2 rotation around the z𝑧zitalic_z axes and defining the new time scale τk=(μf+vt+2wcos(k))/2vsubscript𝜏𝑘subscript𝜇𝑓𝑣𝑡2𝑤𝑘2𝑣\tau_{k}=(\mu_{f}+vt+2w\cos(k))/2vitalic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_v italic_t + 2 italic_w roman_cos ( italic_k ) ) / 2 italic_v,

iddτkm(a1(τkm)a2(τkm))=(2vτkmΔfα(km)Δfα(km)2vτkm)(a1(τkm)a2(τkm)).𝑖𝑑𝑑subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑎1subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑎2subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚2𝑣subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚Δsubscript𝑓𝛼subscript𝑘𝑚2𝑣subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑎1subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚subscript𝑎2subscript𝜏subscript𝑘𝑚\displaystyle{\it i}\frac{d}{d\tau_{k_{m}}}\left(\begin{array}[]{c}a_{1}(\tau_% {k_{m}})\\ a_{2}(\tau_{k_{m}})\\ \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}-2v\tau_{k_{m}}&\Delta f_{\alpha}(% k_{m})\\ \Delta f_{\alpha}(k_{m})&2v\tau_{k_{m}}\\ \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}[]{c}a_{1}(\tau_{k_{m}})\\ a_{2}(\tau_{k_{m}})\\ \end{array}\right).italic_i divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL - 2 italic_v italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_Δ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_α end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL start_CELL 2 italic_v italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) . (28)
(29)

The Landau-Zener problem is exactly solvable as explained in Refs. [133, 132] and the transition probability is given by Eq. (12).

References

  • Thouless [1969] D. J. Thouless, Long-range order in one-dimensional ising systems, Phys. Rev. 187, 732 (1969).
  • Fisher et al. [1972] M. E. Fisher, S.-k. Ma, and B. G. Nickel, Critical exponents for long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 29, 917 (1972).
  • Dutta and Bhattacharjee [2001] A. Dutta and J. K. Bhattacharjee, Phase transitions in the quantum ising and rotor models with a long-range interaction, Phys. Rev. B 64, 184106 (2001).
  • Luijten and Meßingfeld [2001] E. Luijten and H. Meßingfeld, Criticality in one dimension with inverse square-law potentials, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5305 (2001).
  • Van Regemortel et al. [2016] M. Van Regemortel, D. Sels, and M. Wouters, Information propagation and equilibration in long-range kitaev chains, Phys. Rev. A 93, 032311 (2016).
  • Giuliano et al. [2018] D. Giuliano, S. Paganelli, and L. Lepori, Current transport properties and phase diagram of a kitaev chain with long-range pairing, Phys. Rev. B 97, 155113 (2018).
  • Ares et al. [2018] F. Ares, J. G. Esteve, F. Falceto, and A. R. de Queiroz, Entanglement entropy in the long-range kitaev chain, Phys. Rev. A 97, 062301 (2018).
  • Benito et al. [2014] M. Benito, A. Gómez-León, V. M. Bastidas, T. Brandes, and G. Platero, Floquet engineering of long-range p𝑝pitalic_p-wave superconductivity, Phys. Rev. B 90, 205127 (2014).
  • Francica and Dell’Anna [2022] G. Francica and L. Dell’Anna, Correlations, long-range entanglement, and dynamics in long-range kitaev chains, Phys. Rev. B 106, 155126 (2022).
  • Mondal et al. [2022] S. Mondal, S. Bandyopadhyay, S. Bhattacharjee, and A. Dutta, Detecting topological phase transitions through entanglement between disconnected partitions in a kitaev chain with long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. B 105, 085106 (2022).
  • Dias and Marques [2022] R. G. Dias and A. M. Marques, Long-range hopping and indexing assumption in one-dimensional topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 105, 035102 (2022).
  • Jäger et al. [2020] S. B. Jäger, L. Dell’Anna, and G. Morigi, Edge states of the long-range kitaev chain: An analytical study, Phys. Rev. B 102, 035152 (2020).
  • Vodola et al. [2014] D. Vodola, L. Lepori, E. Ercolessi, A. V. Gorshkov, and G. Pupillo, Kitaev chains with long-range pairing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 156402 (2014).
  • Bhattacharya and Dutta [2018] U. Bhattacharya and A. Dutta, Topological footprints of the kitaev chain with long-range superconducting pairings at a finite temperature, Phys. Rev. B 97, 214505 (2018).
  • Schauß et al. [2012] P. Schauß, M. Cheneau, M. Endres, T. Fukuhara, S. Hild, A. Omran, T. Pohl, C. Gross, S. Kuhr, and I. Bloch, Observation of spatially ordered structures in a two-dimensional rydberg gas, Nature 491, 87 (2012).
  • Britton et al. [2012] J. W. Britton, B. C. Sawyer, A. C. Keith, C.-C. J. Wang, J. K. Freericks, H. Uys, M. J. Biercuk, and J. J. Bollinger, Engineered two-dimensional ising interactions in a trapped-ion quantum simulator with hundreds of spins, Nature 484, 489 (2012).
  • Islam et al. [2013] R. Islam, C. Senko, W. C. Campbell, S. Korenblit, J. Smith, A. Lee, E. E. Edwards, C.-C. J. Wang, J. K. Freericks, and C. Monroe, Emergence and frustration of magnetism with variable-range interactions in a quantum simulator, Science 340, 583 (2013).
  • Richerme et al. [2014] P. Richerme, Z.-X. Gong, A. Lee, C. Senko, J. Smith, M. Foss-Feig, S. Michalakis, A. V. Gorshkov, and C. Monroe, Non-local propagation of correlations in quantum systems with long-range interactions, Nature 511, 198 (2014).
  • Monroe et al. [2021] C. Monroe, W. C. Campbell, L.-M. Duan, Z.-X. Gong, A. V. Gorshkov, P. W. Hess, R. Islam, K. Kim, N. M. Linke, G. Pagano, P. Richerme, C. Senko, and N. Y. Yao, Programmable quantum simulations of spin systems with trapped ions, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 025001 (2021).
  • Bloch et al. [2012] I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and S. Nascimbene, Quantum simulations with ultracold quantum gases, Nature Physics 8, 267 (2012).
  • Dupont and Moore [2022] M. Dupont and J. E. Moore, Quantum criticality using a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. B 106, L041109 (2022).
  • Langen et al. [2015] T. Langen, R. Geiger, and J. Schmiedmayer, Ultracold atoms out of equilibrium, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 201 (2015).
  • King et al. [2022] A. D. King, S. Suzuki, J. Raymond, A. Zucca, T. Lanting, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, S. Ejtemaee, E. Hoskinson, S. Huang, et al., Coherent quantum annealing in a programmable 2,000 qubit ising chain, Nature Physics 18, 1324 (2022).
  • Keesling et al. [2019] A. Keesling, A. Omran, H. Levine, H. Bernien, H. Pichler, S. Choi, R. Samajdar, S. Schwartz, P. Silvi, S. Sachdev, et al., Quantum kibble–zurek mechanism and critical dynamics on a programmable rydberg simulator, Nature 568, 207 (2019).
  • Polkovnikov et al. [2011] A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Vengalattore, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interacting quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 863 (2011).
  • Dziarmaga [2005] J. Dziarmaga, Dynamics of a quantum phase transition: Exact solution of the quantum ising model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 245701 (2005).
  • Francuz et al. [2016] A. Francuz, J. Dziarmaga, B. Gardas, and W. H. Zurek, Space and time renormalization in phase transition dynamics, Phys. Rev. B 93, 075134 (2016).
  • Yang and Cai [2021] X. Yang and Z. Cai, Dynamical transitions and critical behavior between discrete time crystal phases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 020602 (2021).
  • Abanin et al. [2019] D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Colloquium: Many-body localization, thermalization, and entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 021001 (2019).
  • Mishra et al. [2013] U. Mishra, R. Prabhu, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Tuning interaction strength leads to an ergodic-nonergodic transition of quantum correlations in the anisotropic heisenberg spin model, Phys. Rev. A 87, 052318 (2013).
  • Chanda et al. [2016] T. Chanda, T. Das, D. Sadhukhan, A. K. Pal, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Static and dynamical quantum correlations in phases of an alternating-field xy𝑥𝑦xyitalic_x italic_y model, Phys. Rev. A 94, 042310 (2016).
  • Awasthi et al. [2018] N. Awasthi, S. Bhattacharya, A. Sen(De), and U. Sen, Universal quantum uncertainty relations between nonergodicity and loss of information, Phys. Rev. A 97, 032103 (2018).
  • Heyl et al. [2013] M. Heyl, A. Polkovnikov, and S. Kehrein, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in the transverse-field ising model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 135704 (2013).
  • Heyl [2018] M. Heyl, Dynamical quantum phase transitions: a review, Reports on Progress in Physics 81, 054001 (2018).
  • Jafari et al. [2019] R. Jafari, H. Johannesson, A. Langari, and M. A. Martin-Delgado, Quench dynamics and zero-energy modes: The case of the creutz model, Phys. Rev. B 99, 054302 (2019).
  • Jafari and Johannesson [2017] R. Jafari and H. Johannesson, Loschmidt echo revivals: Critical and noncritical, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 015701 (2017).
  • Najafi et al. [2019] K. Najafi, M. A. Rajabpour, and J. Viti, Return amplitude after a quantum quench in the XY chain, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2019, 083102 (2019).
  • Mukherjee and Nag [2019] S. Mukherjee and T. Nag, Dynamics of decoherence of an entangled pair of qubits locally connected to a one-dimensional disordered spin chain, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2019, 043108 (2019).
  • Zhang and Yang [2016] J. M. Zhang and H.-T. Yang, Cusps in the quench dynamics of a bloch state, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 114, 60001 (2016).
  • Serbyn and Abanin [2017] M. Serbyn and D. A. Abanin, Loschmidt echo in many-body localized phases, Phys. Rev. B 96, 014202 (2017).
  • Sadrzadeh et al. [2021] M. Sadrzadeh, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Dynamical topological quantum phase transitions at criticality, Phys. Rev. B 103, 144305 (2021).
  • Wong and Yu [2022] C. Y. Wong and W. C. Yu, Loschmidt amplitude spectrum in dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 105, 174307 (2022).
  • Rylands et al. [2021] C. Rylands, E. A. Yuzbashyan, V. Gurarie, A. Zabalo, and V. Galitski, Loschmidt echo of far-from-equilibrium fermionic superfluids, Annals of Physics 435, 168554 (2021), special issue on Philip W. Anderson.
  • Abdi [2019] M. Abdi, Dynamical quantum phase transition in bose-einstein condensates, Phys. Rev. B 100, 184310 (2019).
  • Andraschko and Sirker [2014] F. Andraschko and J. Sirker, Dynamical quantum phase transitions and the loschmidt echo: A transfer matrix approach, Phys. Rev. B 89, 125120 (2014).
  • Vajna and Dóra [2015] S. Vajna and B. Dóra, Topological classification of dynamical phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 91, 155127 (2015).
  • Karrasch and Schuricht [2013] C. Karrasch and D. Schuricht, Dynamical phase transitions after quenches in nonintegrable models, Phys. Rev. B 87, 195104 (2013).
  • Vajna and Dóra [2014] S. Vajna and B. Dóra, Disentangling dynamical phase transitions from equilibrium phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 89, 161105 (2014).
  • Jafari [2019] R. Jafari, Dynamical quantum phase transition and quasi particle excitation, Scientific reports 9, 2871 (2019).
  • Mondal and Nag [2022] D. Mondal and T. Nag, Anomaly in the dynamical quantum phase transition in a non-hermitian system with extended gapless phases, Phys. Rev. B 106, 054308 (2022).
  • Mendoza-Arenas [2022] J. J. Mendoza-Arenas, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in the one-dimensional extended fermi–hubbard model, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2022, 043101 (2022).
  • Sedlmayr et al. [2018a] N. Sedlmayr, P. Jaeger, M. Maiti, and J. Sirker, Bulk-boundary correspondence for dynamical phase transitions in one-dimensional topological insulators and superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 97, 064304 (2018a).
  • Sedlmayr et al. [2018b] N. Sedlmayr, M. Fleischhauer, and J. Sirker, Fate of dynamical phase transitions at finite temperatures and in open systems, Phys. Rev. B 97, 045147 (2018b).
  • Khatun and Bhattacharjee [2019] A. Khatun and S. M. Bhattacharjee, Boundaries and unphysical fixed points in dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 160603 (2019).
  • Ding [2020] C. Ding, Dynamical quantum phase transition from critical quantum quench, arXiv , 2005.08660 (2020).
  • Corps and Relaño [2023] A. L. Corps and A. Relaño, Theory of dynamical phase transitions in quantum systems with symmetry-breaking eigenstates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 100402 (2023).
  • De Nicola et al. [2021] S. De Nicola, A. A. Michailidis, and M. Serbyn, Entanglement view of dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 040602 (2021).
  • Verga [2023] A. D. Verga, Entanglement dynamics and phase transitions of the floquet cluster spin chain, Phys. Rev. B 107, 085116 (2023).
  • Rossi and Dolcini [2022] L. Rossi and F. Dolcini, Nonlinear current and dynamical quantum phase transitions in the flux-quenched su-schrieffer-heeger model, Phys. Rev. B 106, 045410 (2022).
  • Khan et al. [2023a] N. A. Khan, P. Wang, M. Jan, and G. Xianlong, Anomalous correlation-induced dynamical phase transitions, Scientific Reports 13, 9470 (2023a).
  • Khan et al. [2023b] N. A. Khan, X. Wei, S. Cheng, M. Jan, and G. Xianlong, Dynamical phase transitions in dimerized lattices, Physics Letters A 475, 128880 (2023b).
  • Zhou and Du [2021] L. Zhou and Q. Du, Non-hermitian topological phases and dynamical quantum phase transitions: a generic connection, New Journal of Physics 23, 063041 (2021).
  • Vanhala and Ojanen [2023] T. I. Vanhala and T. Ojanen, Theory of the loschmidt echo and dynamical quantum phase transitions in disordered fermi systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033178 (2023).
  • Mondal and Nag [2023] D. Mondal and T. Nag, Finite-temperature dynamical quantum phase transition in a non-hermitian system, Phys. Rev. B 107, 184311 (2023).
  • Cao et al. [2020] K. Cao, W. Li, M. Zhong, and P. Tong, Influence of weak disorder on the dynamical quantum phase transitions in the anisotropic xy chain, Phys. Rev. B 102, 014207 (2020).
  • Masłowski and Sedlmayr [2023] T. Masłowski and N. Sedlmayr, Dynamical bulk-boundary correspondence and dynamical quantum phase transitions in higher-order topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 108, 094306 (2023).
  • Wrześniewski et al. [2022] K. Wrześniewski, I. Weymann, N. Sedlmayr, and T. Domański, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in a mesoscopic superconducting system, Phys. Rev. B 105, 094514 (2022).
  • Corps and Relaño [2022] A. L. Corps and A. Relaño, Dynamical and excited-state quantum phase transitions in collective systems, Phys. Rev. B 106, 024311 (2022).
  • Masłowski and Sedlmayr [2020] T. Masłowski and N. Sedlmayr, Quasiperiodic dynamical quantum phase transitions in multiband topological insulators and connections with entanglement entropy and fidelity susceptibility, Phys. Rev. B 101, 014301 (2020).
  • Zeng et al. [2023] Y. Zeng, B. Zhou, and S. Chen, Dynamical singularity of the rate function for quench dynamics in finite-size quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B 107, 134302 (2023).
  • Stumper et al. [2022] S. Stumper, M. Thoss, and J. Okamoto, Interaction-driven dynamical quantum phase transitions in a strongly correlated bosonic system, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013002 (2022).
  • Yu et al. [2021] W. C. Yu, P. D. Sacramento, Y. C. Li, and H.-Q. Lin, Correlations and dynamical quantum phase transitions in an interacting topological insulator, Phys. Rev. B 104, 085104 (2021).
  • Vijayan et al. [2023] V. Vijayan, L. Chotorlishvili, A. Ernst, S. S. P. Parkin, M. I. Katsnelson, and S. K. Mishra, Topological dynamical quantum phase transition in a quantum skyrmion phase, Phys. Rev. B 107, L100419 (2023).
  • Zheng-Rong Zhu [2023] J. Z. L.-A. W. Zheng-Rong Zhu, Bin Shao, Orthogonality catastrophe and quantum speed limit for dynamical quantum phase transition, arXiv , arXiv:2308.04686 (2023).
  • Yu [2023] X.-J. Yu, Dynamical phase transition and scaling in the chiral clock potts chain, Phys. Rev. A 108, 062215 (2023).
  • Bhattacharjee [2024] S. M. Bhattacharjee, Complex dynamics approach to dynamical quantum phase transitions: The potts model, Phys. Rev. B 109, 035130 (2024).
  • Lakkaraju et al. [2024] L. G. C. Lakkaraju, S. K. Haldar, and A. Sen(De), Predicting a topological quantum phase transition from dynamics via multisite entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 109, 022436 (2024).
  • Puskarov and Schuricht [2016] T. Puskarov and D. Schuricht, Time evolution during and after finite-time quantum quenches in the transverse-field Ising chain, SciPost Phys. 1, 003 (2016).
  • Zamani et al. [2023] S. Zamani, J. Naji, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Scaling and universality at ramped quench dynamical quantum phase transition, arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15101 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1101.2354 (2023).
  • Delfino and Sorba [2022] G. Delfino and M. Sorba, Persistent oscillations after quantum quenches in d dimensions, Nuclear Physics B 974, 115643 (2022).
  • Yang et al. [2019] K. Yang, L. Zhou, W. Ma, X. Kong, P. Wang, X. Qin, X. Rong, Y. Wang, F. Shi, J. Gong, and J. Du, Floquet dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 100, 085308 (2019).
  • Zamani et al. [2020] S. Zamani, R. Jafari, and A. Langari, Floquet dynamical quantum phase transition in the extended xy model: Nonadiabatic to adiabatic topological transition, Phys. Rev. B 102, 144306 (2020).
  • Kosior and Sacha [2018] A. Kosior and K. Sacha, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in discrete time crystals, Phys. Rev. A 97, 053621 (2018).
  • Jafari and Akbari [2021] R. Jafari and A. Akbari, Floquet dynamical phase transition and entanglement spectrum, Phys. Rev. A 103, 012204 (2021).
  • Kosior et al. [2018] A. Kosior, A. Syrwid, and K. Sacha, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in systems with broken continuous time and space translation symmetries, Phys. Rev. A 98, 023612 (2018).
  • Naji et al. [2022] J. Naji, M. Jafari, R. Jafari, and A. Akbari, Dissipative floquet dynamical quantum phase transition, Phys. Rev. A 105, 022220 (2022).
  • Jafari et al. [2022] R. Jafari, A. Akbari, U. Mishra, and H. Johannesson, Floquet dynamical quantum phase transitions under synchronized periodic driving, Phys. Rev. B 105, 094311 (2022).
  •   et al. [2022] J.  , R. Jafari, L. Zhou, and A. Langari, Engineering floquet dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 106, 094314 (2022).
  • Budich and Heyl [2016] J. C. Budich and M. Heyl, Dynamical topological order parameters far from equilibrium, Phys. Rev. B 93, 085416 (2016).
  • Bhattacharya et al. [2017] U. Bhattacharya, S. Bandyopadhyay, and A. Dutta, Mixed state dynamical quantum phase transitions, Phys. Rev. B 96, 180303 (2017).
  • Fläschner et al. [2017] N. Fläschner, D. Vogel, M. Tarnowski, B. S. Rem, D.-S. Lühmann, M. Heyl, J. C. Budich, L. Mathey, K. Sengstock, and C. Weitenberg, Observation of dynamical vortices after quenches in a system with topology, Nature Physics 14, 265 (2017).
  • Jurcevic et al. [2017] P. Jurcevic, H. Shen, P. Hauke, C. Maier, T. Brydges, C. Hempel, B. P. Lanyon, M. Heyl and, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Direct observation of dynamical quantum phase transitions in an interacting many-body system, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 080501 (2017).
  • Martinez et al. [2016] E. A. Martinez, C. A. Muschik, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, A. Erhard, M. Heyl, P. Hauke, M. Dalmonte, T. Monz, P. Zoller, et al., Real-time dynamics of lattice gauge theories with a few-qubit quantum computer, Nature 534, 516 (2016).
  • Guo et al. [2019] X.-Y. Guo, C. Yang, Y. Zeng, Y. Peng, H.-K. Li, H. Deng, Y.-R. Jin, S. Chen, D. Zheng, and H. Fan, Observation of a dynamical quantum phase transition by a superconducting qubit simulation, Phys. Rev. Applied 11, 044080 (2019).
  • Wang et al. [2019] K. Wang, X. Qiu, L. Xiao, X. Zhan, Z. Bian, W. Yi, and P. Xue, Simulating dynamic quantum phase transitions in photonic quantum walks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 020501 (2019).
  • Nie et al. [2020] X. Nie, B.-B. Wei, X. Chen, Z. Zhang, X. Zhao, C. Qiu, Y. Tian, Y. Ji, T. Xin, D. Lu, and J. Li, Experimental observation of equilibrium and dynamical quantum phase transitions via out-of-time-ordered correlators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 250601 (2020).
  • González et al. [2022] F. J. González, A. Norambuena, and R. Coto, Dynamical quantum phase transition in diamond: Applications in quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. B 106, 014313 (2022).
  • Pichler et al. [2012] H. Pichler, J. Schachenmayer, J. Simon, P. Zoller, and A. J. Daley, Noise- and disorder-resilient optical lattices, Phys. Rev. A 86, 051605 (2012).
  • Zoller et al. [1981] P. Zoller, G. Alber, and R. Salvador, ac stark splitting in intense stochastic driving fields with gaussian statistics and non-lorentzian line shape, Phys. Rev. A 24, 398 (1981).
  • Chen et al. [2010] X. Chen, A. Ruschhaupt, S. Schmidt, A. del Campo, D. Guéry-Odelin, and J. G. Muga, Fast optimal frictionless atom cooling in harmonic traps: Shortcut to adiabaticity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 063002 (2010).
  • Doria et al. [2011] P. Doria, T. Calarco, and S. Montangero, Optimal control technique for many-body quantum dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 190501 (2011).
  • Marino and Silva [2012] J. Marino and A. Silva, Relaxation, prethermalization, and diffusion in a noisy quantum ising chain, Phys. Rev. B 86, 060408 (2012).
  • Marino and Silva [2014] J. Marino and A. Silva, Nonequilibrium dynamics of a noisy quantum ising chain: Statistics of work and prethermalization after a sudden quench of the transverse field, Phys. Rev. B 89, 024303 (2014).
  • Dutta et al. [2016] A. Dutta, A. Rahmani, and A. del Campo, Anti-kibble-zurek behavior in crossing the quantum critical point of a thermally isolated system driven by a noisy control field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 080402 (2016).
  • Bando et al. [2020] Y. Bando, Y. Susa, H. Oshiyama, N. Shibata, M. Ohzeki, F. J. Gómez-Ruiz, D. A. Lidar, S. Suzuki, A. del Campo, and H. Nishimori, Probing the universality of topological defect formation in a quantum annealer: Kibble-zurek mechanism and beyond, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033369 (2020).
  • Chenu et al. [2017] A. Chenu, M. Beau, J. Cao, and A. del Campo, Quantum simulation of generic many-body open system dynamics using classical noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 140403 (2017).
  • Dutta and Dutta [2017] A. Dutta and A. Dutta, Probing the role of long-range interactions in the dynamics of a long-range kitaev chain, Phys. Rev. B 96, 125113 (2017).
  • Uhrich et al. [2020] P. Uhrich, N. Defenu, R. Jafari, and J. C. Halimeh, Out-of-equilibrium phase diagram of long-range superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 101, 245148 (2020).
  • Xavier and Hoyos [2023] J. C. Xavier and J. A. Hoyos, Effect of long-range hopping on dynamic quantum phase transitions of an exactly solvable free-fermion model: Nonanalyticities at almost all times, Phys. Rev. B 108, 214303 (2023).
  • Syed et al. [2021] M. Syed, T. Enss, and N. Defenu, Dynamical quantum phase transition in a bosonic system with long-range interactions, Phys. Rev. B 103, 064306 (2021).
  • Žunkovič et al. [2018] B. Žunkovič, M. Heyl, M. Knap, and A. Silva, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in spin chains with long-range interactions: Merging different concepts of nonequilibrium criticality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 130601 (2018).
  • Mishra et al. [2020] U. Mishra, R. Jafari, and A. Akbari, Disordered kitaev chain with long-range pairing: Loschmidt echo revivals and dynamical phase transitions, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53, 375301 (2020).
  • Lakkaraju et al. [2023] L. G. C. Lakkaraju, S. Ghosh, D. Sadhukhan, and A. S. De, Framework of dynamical transitions from long-range to short-range quantum systems, arXiv , 2305.02945 (2023).
  • Jafari et al. [2023] R. Jafari, A. Langari, S. Eggert, and H. Johannesson, Dynamical quantum phase transitions following a noisy quench, preprint arXiv:2310.13337 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.13337 (2023).
  • Divakaran et al. [2016] U. Divakaran, S. Sharma, and A. Dutta, Tuning the presence of dynamical phase transitions in a generalized xy𝑥𝑦xyitalic_x italic_y spin chain, Phys. Rev. E 93, 052133 (2016).
  • Sharma et al. [2016] S. Sharma, U. Divakaran, A. Polkovnikov, and A. Dutta, Slow quenches in a quantum ising chain: Dynamical phase transitions and topology, Phys. Rev. B 93, 144306 (2016).
  • Dóra et al. [2013] B. Dóra, F. Pollmann, J. Fortágh, and G. Zaránd, Loschmidt echo and the many-body orthogonality catastrophe in a qubit-coupled luttinger liquid, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 046402 (2013).
  • Bhattacharjee and Dutta [2018] S. Bhattacharjee and A. Dutta, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in extended transverse ising models, Phys. Rev. B 97, 134306 (2018).
  • Sharma et al. [2014] S. Sharma, A. Russomanno, G. E. Santoro, and A. Dutta, Loschmidt echo and dynamical fidelity in periodically driven quantum systems, Europhysics Letters 106, 67003 (2014).
  • Kitaev [2001] A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired majorana fermions in quantum wires, Physics-Uspekhi 44, 131 (2001).
  • Ryu and Hatsugai [2002] S. Ryu and Y. Hatsugai, Topological origin of zero-energy edge states in particle-hole symmetric systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 077002 (2002).
  • Alecce and Dell’Anna [2017] A. Alecce and L. Dell’Anna, Extended kitaev chain with longer-range hopping and pairing, Phys. Rev. B 95, 195160 (2017).
  • Solfanelli et al. [2023] A. Solfanelli, S. Ruffo, S. Succi, and N. Defenu, Logarithmic, fractal and volume-law entanglement in a kitaev chain with long-range hopping and pairing, Journal of High Energy Physics 2023, 1 (2023).
  • Nadj-Perge et al. [2014] S. Nadj-Perge, I. K. Drozdov, J. Li, H. Chen, S. Jeon, J. Seo, A. H. MacDonald, B. A. Bernevig, and A. Yazdani, Observation of majorana fermions in ferromagnetic atomic chains on a superconductor, Science 346, 602 (2014).
  • Ruby et al. [2017] M. Ruby, B. W. Heinrich, Y. Peng, F. von Oppen, and K. J. Franke, Exploring a proximity-coupled co chain on pb (110) as a possible majorana platform, Nano letters 17, 4473 (2017).
  • Szegö [1954] G. Szegö, A. erdélyi, w. magnus, f. oberhettinger and fg tricomi, higher transcendental functions, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society 60, 405 (1954).
  • Abramowitz et al. [1988] M. Abramowitz, I. A. Stegun, and R. H. Romer, Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables (1988).
  • Łuczka [1991] J. Łuczka, Quantum open systems in a two-state stochastic reservoir, Czechoslov. J. Phys. 41, 289 (1991).
  • Budini [2000] A. A. Budini, Non-markovian gaussian dissipative stochastic wave vector, Phys. Rev. A 63, 012106 (2000).
  • Costa-Filho et al. [2017] J. I. Costa-Filho, R. B. B. Lima, R. R. Paiva, P. M. Soares, W. A. M. Morgado, R. L. Franco, and D. O. Soares-Pinto, Enabling quantum non-markovian dynamics by injection of classical colored noise, Phys. Rev. A 95, 052126 (2017).
  • Kiely [2021] A. Kiely, Exact classical noise master equations: Applications and connections, EPL 134, 10001 (2021).
  • Vitanov and Garraway [1996] N. V. Vitanov and B. M. Garraway, Landau-zener model: Effects of finite coupling duration, Phys. Rev. A 53, 4288 (1996).
  • Vitanov [1999] N. V. Vitanov, Transition times in the landau-zener model, Phys. Rev. A 59, 988 (1999).