Quick Navigation
Topics
Open Quantum Systems Decoherence
Finite-size Effects on The Edge Loss Probability in Non-Hermitian Quantum Walks
arXiv
Authors: Shuaixian Liu, Yulan Dong, Bowen Zeng, Mengqiu Long
Year
2025
Paper ID
36343
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
102
Citations
N/A
Abstract
A dynamical bulk-edge relation in quantum walks has been theoretically proposed and experimentally observed, in which a power-law dependence of the bulk loss probability is associated with a pronounced peak of loss probability at the edge. This behavior has been proven to arise from imaginary gap closing and the non-Hermitian skin effect in the infinite limit without boundary effects. However, in a finite-size chain, we find that boundary scattering can suppress this edge burst. Meanwhile, imaginary gap opening together with the non-Hermitian skin effect, can also induce a large loss probability at the edge. Our results provide insights into finite-size quantum dynamics.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Open Quantum Systems & Decoherence research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- A dynamical bulk-edge relation in quantum walks has been theoretically proposed and experimentally observed, in which a power-law dependence of the bulk loss probability is...
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.