Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication Related

Topics

Quantum Simulation

FewBodyToolkit.jl: a Julia package for solving quantum few-body problems

arXiv

Authors: Lucas Happ

Year

2025

Paper ID

51830

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Few-body physics explores quantum systems of a small number of particles, bridging the gap between single-particle and many-body regimes. To provide an accessible tool for such studies, we present FewBodyToolkit.jl, a Julia package for quantum few-body simulations. The package supports general two- and three-body systems in various spatial dimensions with arbitrary pair-interactions, and allows to calculate bound and resonant states. The implementation is based on the well-established Gaussian expansion method and we illustrate the package's capabilities through benchmarks and research examples. The package comes with documentation and examples, making it useful for research, teaching, benchmarking, and method development.

Why This Paper Matters

This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
Few-body physics explores quantum systems of a small number of particles, bridging the gap between single-particle and many-body regimes.

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:2510.04447 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.04447 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.04447

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.