Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Simulation

Comment on "Systematic Construction of Counterexamples to the Eigenstate Thermalization Hypothesis"

arXiv
Authors: Rubem Mondaini, Krishnanand Mallayya, Lea F. Santos, Marcos Rigol

Year

2017

Paper ID

25043

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

77

Citations

N/A

Abstract

In a recent Letter [PhysRevLett.119.030601 (2017), arXiv:1702.08227], Shiraishi and Mori claim to provide a general method for constructing local Hamiltonians that do not exhibit eigenstate thermalization. We argue that the claim is based on a misunderstanding of the eigenstate thermalization hypothesis (ETH). More specifically, on the assumption that ETH is valid for the entire Hamiltonian matrix instead of each symmetry sector independently. We discuss what happens if one mixes symmetry sectors in the two-dimensional transverse field Ising model.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2017 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • In a recent Letter [PhysRevLett.119.030601 (2017), arXiv:1702.08227], Shiraishi and Mori claim to provide a general method for constructing local Hamiltonians that do not...

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #25043 #78846 Analog quantum simulation of Sh... #78810 Secure Quantum Handshakes: Quan... #78802 Quantum Co-Design of Inhomogene... #78801 Constructing Large and Structur...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.