Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication Related

Topics

Open Quantum Systems Decoherence

Validity of the Adiabatic Approximation

arXiv

Authors: R. MacKenzie, A. Morin-Duchesne, H. Paquette, J. Pinel

Year

2007

Paper ID

50051

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We analyze the validity of the adiabatic approximation, and in particular the reliability of what has been called the "standard criterion" for validity of this approximation. Recently, this criterion has been found to be insufficient. We will argue that the criterion is sufficient only when it agrees with the intuitive notion of slowness of evolution of the Hamiltonian. However, it can be insufficient in cases where the Hamiltonian varies rapidly but only by a small amount. We also emphasize the distinction between the adiabatic {\em theorem} and the adiabatic {\em approximation}, two quite different although closely related ideas.

Why This Paper Matters

This paper contributes to the Open Quantum Systems & Decoherence research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
It adds a 2007 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
We analyze the validity of the adiabatic approximation, and in particular the reliability of what has been called the "standard criterion" for validity of this approximation.

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.

Become a member Sign in

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

References & Citation Signals

[1] DOI https://doi.org/arXiv:0706.0885 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.0885 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.0885

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0

Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.