- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Editors' Suggestion
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Harnessing nonadiabatic excitations promoted by a quantum critical point: Quantum battery and spin squeezing

Obinna Abah1,2, Gabriele De Chiara2, Mauro Paternostro2, and Ricardo Puebla3,2

  • 1School of Mathematics, Statistics, and Physics, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
  • 2Centre for Theoretical Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast BT7 1NN, United Kingdom
  • 3Instituto de Física Fundamental, IFF-CSIC, Calle Serrano 113b, 28006 Madrid, Spain

PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 4, L022017 – Published 22 April, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.L022017

Abstract

Crossing a quantum critical point in finite time challenges the adiabatic condition due to the closing of the energy gap, which ultimately results in the formation of excitations. Such nonadiabatic excitations are typically deemed detrimental in many scenarios, and consequently several strategies have been put forward to circumvent their formation. Here, however, we show how these nonadiabatic excitations—originated from the failure to meet the adiabatic condition due to the presence of a quantum critical point—can be controlled and thus harnessed to perform certain tasks advantageously. We focus on closed cycles reaching the quantum critical point of fully connected models analyzing two examples. First, a quantum battery that is loaded by approaching a quantum critical point, whose stored and extractable work increases exponentially via repeating cycles. Second, a scheme for the fast preparation of spin squeezed states containing multipartite entanglement that offer a metrological advantage, analogous to a two-axis twisting scheme. The corresponding figure of merit in both examples crucially depends on the universal critical exponents and the scaling of the protocol in the vicinity of the transition. Our results highlight the rich interplay between quantum thermodynamics and metrology with critical nonequilibrium dynamics.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (94)

  1. A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Vengalattore, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interacting quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 863 (2011).
  2. J. Eisert, M. Friesdorf, and C. Gogolin, Quantum many-body systems out of equilibrium, Nat. Phys. 11, 124 (2015).
  3. S. Sachdev, Quantum Phase Transitions, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2011).
  4. A. del Campo and W. H. Zurek, Universality of phase transition dynamics: Topological defects from symmetry breaking, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29, 1430018 (2014).
  5. I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008).
  6. C. N. Weiler, T. W. Neely, D. R. Scherer, A. S. Bradley, M. J. Davis, and B. P. Anderson, Spontaneous vortices in the formation of Bose-Einstein condensates, Nature (London) 455, 948 (2008).
  7. K. Kim, M.-S. Chang, S. Korenblit, R. Islam, E. E. Edwards, J. K. Freericks, G.-D. Lin, L.-M. Duan, and C. Monroe, Quantum simulation of frustrated Ising spins with trapped ions, Nature (London) 465, 590 (2010).
  8. R. Blatt and C. F. Roos, Quantum simulations with trapped ions, Nat. Phys. 8, 277 (2012).
  9. T. Langen, R. Geiger, and J. Schmiedmayer, Ultracold atoms out of equilibrium, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 6, 201 (2015).
  10. J. Zhang, G. Pagano, P. W. Hess, A. Kyprianidis, P. Becker, H. Kaplan, A. V. Gorshkov, Z.-X. Gong, and C. Monroe, Observation of a many-body dynamical phase transition with a 53-qubit quantum simulator, Nature (London) 551, 601 (2017).
  11. P. Jurcevic, H. Shen, P. Hauke, C. Maier, T. Brydges, C. Hempel, B. P. Lanyon, M. Heyl, 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).
  12. S. A. Wilkinson and M. J. Hartmann, Superconducting quantum many-body circuits for quantum simulation and computing, Appl. Phys. Lett. 116, 230501 (2020).
  13. J. P. Dowling and G. J. Milburn, Quantum technology: The second quantum revolution, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London Sect. A 361, 1655 (2003).
  14. I. H. Deutsch, Harnessing the power of the second quantum revolution, PRX Quantum 1, 020101 (2020).
  15. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2000).
  16. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  17. C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 035002 (2017).
  18. L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018).
  19. S. Deffner and S. Campbell, Quantum Thermodynamics—An Introduction to the Thermodynamics of Quantum Information (Morgan & Claypool, IOP Concise Physics, UK, 2019).
  20. F. Binder, L. A. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, and G. Adesso (eds.), Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime (Springer International, New York, 2019).
  21. B. Andresen, Current trends in finite-time thermodynamics, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 50, 2690 (2011).
  22. O. Abah and M. Paternostro, Shortcut-to-adiabaticity Otto engine: A twist to finite-time thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. E 99, 022110 (2019).
  23. A. Das and B. K. Chakrabarti, Colloquium: Quantum annealing and analog quantum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1061 (2008).
  24. J. Werschnik and E. K. U. Gross, Quantum optimal control theory, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 40, R175 (2007).
  25. D. Guéry-Odelin, A. Ruschhaupt, A. Kiely, E. Torrontegui, S. Martínez-Garaot, and J. G. Muga, Shortcuts to adiabaticity: Concepts, methods, and applications, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 045001 (2019).
  26. M. J. M. Power and G. De Chiara, Dynamical symmetry breaking with optimal control: Reducing the number of pieces, Phys. Rev. B 88, 214106 (2013).
  27. F. J. Gómez-Ruiz and A. del Campo, Universal Dynamics of Inhomogeneous Quantum Phase Transitions: Suppressing Defect Formation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 080604 (2019).
  28. N. Wu, A. Nanduri, and H. Rabitz, Optimal suppression of defect generation during a passage across a quantum critical point, Phys. Rev. B 91, 041115(R) (2015).
  29. A. Polkovnikov and V. Gritsev, Breakdown of the adiabatic limit in low-dimensional gapless systems, Nat. Phys. 4, 477 (2008).
  30. W. H. Zurek, U. Dorner, and P. Zoller, Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 105701 (2005).
  31. A. Polkovnikov, Universal adiabatic dynamics in the vicinity of a quantum critical point, Phys. Rev. B 72, 161201(R) (2005).
  32. J. Dziarmaga, Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition: Exact Solution of the Quantum Ising Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 245701 (2005).
  33. F. C. Binder, S. Vinjanampathy, K. M., and J. Goold, Quantacell: powerful charging of quantum batteries, New J. Phys. 17, 075015 (2015).
  34. M. Campisi and R. Fazio, The power of a critical heat engine, Nat. Commun. 7, 11895 (2016).
  35. Y.-H. Ma, S.-H. Su, and C.-P. Sun, Quantum thermodynamic cycle with quantum phase transition, Phys. Rev. E 96, 022143 (2017).
  36. T. P. Le, J. Levinsen, K. Modi, M. M. Parish, and F. A. Pollock, Spin-chain model of a many-body quantum battery, Phys. Rev. A 97, 022106 (2018).
  37. D. Ferraro, M. Campisi, G. M. Andolina, V. Pellegrini, and M. Polini, High-Power Collective Charging of a Solid-State Quantum Battery, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 117702 (2018).
  38. G. M. Andolina, M. Keck, A. Mari, V. Giovannetti, and M. Polini, Quantum versus classical many-body batteries, Phys. Rev. B 99, 205437 (2019).
  39. D. Farina, G. M. Andolina, A. Mari, M. Polini, and V. Giovannetti, Charger-mediated energy transfer for quantum batteries: An open-system approach, Phys. Rev. B 99, 035421 (2019).
  40. D. Rossini, G. M. Andolina, and M. Polini, Many-body localized quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. B 100, 115142 (2019).
  41. A. Crescente, M. Carrega, M. Sassetti, and D. Ferraro, Charging and energy fluctuations of a driven quantum battery, New J. Phys. 22, 063057 (2020).
  42. Revathy B. S., V. Mukherjee, U. Divakaran, and A. del Campo, Universal finite-time thermodynamics of many-body quantum machines from Kibble-Zurek scaling, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043247 (2020).
  43. J. Liu and D. Segal, Boosting quantum battery performance by structure engineering, arXiv:2104.06522.
  44. T. Fogarty and T. Busch, A many-body heat engine at criticality, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 015003 (2021).
  45. L. Amico, R. Fazio, A. Osterloh, and V. Vedral, Entanglement in many-body systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 517 (2008).
  46. X.-Y. Luo, Y.-Q. Zou, L.-N. Wu, Q. Liu, M.-F. Han, M. K. Tey, and L. You, Deterministic entanglement generation from driving through quantum phase transitions, Science 355, 620 (2017).
  47. G. De Chiara and A. Sanpera, Genuine quantum correlations in quantum many-body systems: A review of recent progress, Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 074002 (2018).
  48. P. Zanardi, M. G. A. Paris, and L. Campos Venuti, Quantum criticality as a resource for quantum estimation, Phys. Rev. A 78, 042105 (2008).
  49. L. Pezzé and A. Smerzi, Entanglement, Nonlinear Dynamics, and the Heisenberg Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 100401 (2009).
  50. M. M. Rams, P. Sierant, O. Dutta, P. Horodecki, and J. Zakrzewski, At the Limits of Criticality-Based Quantum Metrology: Apparent Super-Heisenberg Scaling Revisited, Phys. Rev. X 8, 021022 (2018).
  51. L. Garbe, M. Bina, A. Keller, M. G. A. Paris, and S. Felicetti, Critical Quantum Metrology with a Finite-Component Quantum Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 120504 (2020).
  52. Y. Chu, S. Zhang, B. Yu, and J. Cai, Dynamic Framework for Criticality-Enhanced Quantum Sensing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 010502 (2021).
  53. M. Mehboudi, A. Sanpera, and L. A. Correa, Thermometry in the quantum regime: Recent theoretical progress, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 52, 303001 (2019).
  54. The investigation of spatially extended systems such as interacting spin chains featuring a QPT is left for a future work.
  55. M.-J. Hwang, R. Puebla, and M. B. Plenio, Quantum Phase Transition and Universal Dynamics in the Rabi Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 180404 (2015).
  56. R. Puebla, M.-J. Hwang, and M. B. Plenio, Excited-state quantum phase transition in the Rabi model, Phys. Rev. A 94, 023835 (2016).
  57. R. Puebla, A. Smirne, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Universal Anti-Kibble-Zurek Scaling in Fully Connected Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 230602 (2020).
  58. H. J. Lipkin, N. Meshkov, and A.J. Glick, Validity of many-body approximation methods for a solvable model, Nucl. Phys. 62, 188 (1965).
  59. P. Ribeiro, J. Vidal, and R. Mosseri, Thermodynamical Limit of the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 050402 (2007).
  60. P. Ribeiro, J. Vidal, and R. Mosseri, Exact spectrum of the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model in the thermodynamic limit and finite-size corrections, Phys. Rev. E 78, 021106 (2008).
  61. R. H. Dicke, Coherence in spontaneous radiation processes, Phys. Rev. 93, 99 (1954).
  62. C. Emary and T. Brandes, Chaos and the quantum phase transition in the Dicke model, Phys. Rev. E 67, 066203 (2003).
  63. C. Emary and T. Brandes, Quantum Chaos Triggered by Precursors of a Quantum Phase Transition: The Dicke Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 044101 (2003).
  64. J. Peng, E. Rico, J. Zhong, E. Solano, and I. L. Egusquiza, Unified superradiant phase transitions, Phys. Rev. A 100, 063820 (2019).
  65. H.-J. Zhu, K. Xu, G.-F. Zhang, and W.-M. Liu, Finite-Component Multicriticality at the Superradiant Quantum Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 050402 (2020).
  66. M. Anquez, B. A. Robbins, H. M Bharath, M. Boguslawski, T. M. Hoang, and M. S. Chapman, Quantum Kibble-Zurek Mechanism in a Spin-1 Bose-Einstein Condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 155301 (2016).
  67. R. Mottl, F. Brennecke, K. Baumann, R. Landig, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Roton-type mode softening in a quantum gas with cavity-mediated long-range interactions, Science 336, 1570 (2012).
  68. F. Brennecke, R. Mottl, K. Baumann, R. Landig, T. Donner, and T. Esslinger, Real-time observation of fluctuations at the driven-dissipative Dicke phase transition, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 11763 (2013).
  69. T. Zibold, E. Nicklas, C. Gross, and M. K. Oberthaler, Classical Bifurcation at the Transition from Rabi to Josephson Dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 204101 (2010).
  70. M.-L. Cai, Z.-D. Liu, W.-D. Zhao, Y.-K. Wu, Q.-X. Mei, Y. Jiang, L. He, X. Zhang, Z.-C. Zhou, and L.-M. Duan, Observation of a quantum phase transition in the quantum Rabi model with a single trapped ion, Nat. Commun. 12, 1126 (2021).
  71. R. Barankov and A. Polkovnikov, Optimal Nonlinear Passage Through a Quantum Critical Point, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 076801 (2008).
  72. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.L022017 for further explanations and details of the calculations, which includes Refs. [92, 93, 94].
  73. R. A. Fisher, M. M. Nieto, and V. D. Sandberg, Impossibility of naively generalizing squeezed coherent states, Phys. Rev. D 29, 1107 (1984).
  74. D. R. Truax, Baker-Campbell-Hausdorff relations and unitarity of SU(2) and SU(1,1) squeeze operators, Phys. Rev. D 31, 1988 (1985).
  75. M. O. Scully and M. S. Zubairy, Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1997).
  76. N. Defenu, Quantum adiabatic cycles and their breakdown, Commun. Phys. 4, 150 (2021).
  77. Equivalent results can be obtained for different choices of g(t) provided |gc−g(t)|∝|τ−t|r for |(τ−t)/τ|≪1 [72]. See also [71].
  78. A. E Allahverdyan, R Balian, and Th. M Nieuwenhuizen, Maximal work extraction from finite quantum systems, Europhys. Lett. 67, 565 (2004).
  79. G. Francica, J. Goold, F. Plastina, and M. Paternostro, Daemonic ergotropy: Enhanced work extraction from quantum correlations, npj Quantum Inf. 3, 12 (2017).
  80. G. Manzano, F. Plastina, and R. Zambrini, Optimal Work Extraction and Thermodynamics of Quantum Measurements and Correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 120602 (2018).
  81. G. Francica, F. C. Binder, G. Guarnieri, M. T. Mitchison, J. Goold, and F. Plastina, Quantum Coherence and Ergotropy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 180603 (2020).
  82. G. Watanabe, B. P. Venkatesh, P. Talkner, and A. del Campo, Quantum Performance of Thermal Machines over Many Cycles, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 050601 (2017).
  83. B. Reid, S. Pigeon, M. Antezza, and G. De Chiara, A self-contained quantum harmonic engine, Europhys. Lett. 120, 60006 (2017).
  84. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2002).
  85. M. Kitagawa and M. Ueda, Squeezed spin states, Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138 (1993).
  86. J. Ma, X. Wang, C. P. Sun, and F. Nori, Quantum spin squeezing, Phys. Rep. 509, 89 (2011).
  87. S. Dusuel and J. Vidal, Finite-Size Scaling Exponents of the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 237204 (2004).
  88. S. Dusuel and J. Vidal, Continuous unitary transformations and finite-size scaling exponents in the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick model, Phys. Rev. B 71, 224420 (2005).
  89. R. Puebla, M.-J. Hwang, J. Casanova, and M. B. Plenio, Probing the Dynamics of a Superradiant Quantum Phase Transition with a Single Trapped Ion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 073001 (2017).
  90. N. Defenu, T. Enss, M. Kastner, and G. Morigi, Dynamical Critical Scaling of Long-Range Interacting Quantum Magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 240403 (2018).
  91. J. P. Dowling, G. S. Agarwal, and W. P. Schleich, Wigner distribution of a general angular-momentum state: Applications to a collection of two-level atoms, Phys. Rev. A 49, 4101 (1994).
  92. H. R. Lewis, Classical and Quantum Systems with Time-Dependent Harmonic-Oscillator-Type Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 510 (1967).
  93. H. R. Lewis, Class of exact invariants for classical and quantum time-dependent harmonic oscillators, J. Math. Phys. 9, 1976 (1968).
  94. H. R. Lewis and W. B. Riesenfeld, An exact quantum theory of the time-dependent harmonic oscillator and of a charged particle in a time-dependent electromagnetic field, J. Math. Phys. 10, 1458 (1969).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 4, L022017– Published 22 April, 2022
  • Received 11 May 2021
  • Accepted 11 March 2022
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation