text:
# Metastability, negative specific heat and weak mixing in classical long-range many-rotator system

## Abstract

We perform a molecular dynamical study of the isolated $`d=1`$ classical Hamiltonian $`=\frac{1}{2}_{i=1}^NL_i^2+_{ij}\frac{1cos(\theta _i\theta _j)}{r_{ij}^\alpha };(\alpha 0)`$, known to exhibit a second order phase transition, being disordered for $`uU/N\stackrel{~}{N}u_c(\alpha ,d)`$ and ordered otherwise ($`U`$ total energy and $`\stackrel{~}{N}\frac{N^{1\alpha /d}\alpha /d}{1\alpha /d}`$). We focus on the nonextensive case $`\alpha /d1`$ and observe that, for $`u<u_c`$, a basin of attraction exists for the initial conditions for which the system quickly relaxes onto a longstanding metastable state (whose duration presumably diverges with $`N`$ like $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$) which eventually crosses over to the microcanonical Boltzmann-Gibbs stable state. The temperature associated with the (scaled) average kinetic energy per particle is lower in the metastable state than in the stable one. It is exhibited for the first time that the appropriately scaled maximal Lyapunov exponent $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}(metastable)N^{\kappa _{metastable}};(N\mathrm{})`$, where, for all values of $`\alpha /d`$, $`\kappa _{metastable}`$ numerically coincides with one third of its value for $`u>u_c`$, hence decreases from 1/9 to zero when $`\alpha /d`$ increases from zero to unity, remaining zero thereafter. This new and simple connection between anomalies above and below the critical point reinforces the nonextensive universality scenario.

PACS numbers: 05.70.Fh, 64.60.Fr, 05.50.+q

The foundations of statistical mechanics, hence of thermodynamics, is a subtle and fascinating matter which has driven enriching controversies and clarifications since more than one century (see, for instance, Einstein’s remark on the Boltzmann principle ). The field remains open to new aspects and proposals. One of these is nonextensive statistical mechanics, proposed in 1988  (see  for reviews). This formalism is based on an entropic index $`q`$ (which recovers usual statistical mechanics for $`q=1`$), and has been applied to a variety of systems, covering certain classes of both (meta)equilibrium and nonequilibrium phenomena, e.g., turbulence , hadronic jets produced by electron-positron annihilation , cosmic rays , motion of Hydra viridissima , among others. In addition to this, it has been advanced that it could be appropriate for handling some aspects of long-range interacting Hamiltonian systems. This possibility is gaining plausibility nowadays, as argued in  and elsewhere. Indeed, in molecular dynamical approaches of isolated systems, strongly nonmaxwellian velocity distributions have recently been observed that are consistent with such possibility . A paradigmatic system in the realm of this discussion is the following classical Hamiltonian:

$$=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}L_i^2+\underset{ij}{}\frac{1cos(\theta _i\theta _j)}{r_{ij}^\alpha }(\alpha 0).$$
(1)
The inertial planar rotators (ferromagnetic $`XY`$-like model) are localized at the sites of a $`d`$-dimensional periodic lattice. As distance $`r_{ij}`$ (measured in crystal units) for a given pair $`(i,j)`$ we consider the shortest among all the possible ones (due to periodicity). For $`d=1`$ we have $`r_{ij}=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$; for $`d=2`$ we have $`r_{ij}=1,\sqrt{2},2,\mathrm{}`$; for $`d=3`$ we have $`r_{ij}=1,\sqrt{2},\sqrt{3},2,\mathrm{}`$, and so on. The so called $`HMF`$ system  is recovered for $`\alpha /d=0`$, and the first-neighbor model is recovered for $`\alpha /d\mathrm{}`$. Hamiltonian (1) is extensive if $`\alpha /d>1`$ and nonextensive if $`0\alpha /d1`$. This can be seen as follows. If we define

$$\stackrel{~}{N}1+d_1^{N^{1/d}}𝑑rr^{d1}r^\alpha =\frac{N^{1\alpha /d}\alpha /d}{1\alpha /d},$$
(2)
it can be easily checked that the energy scales as $`N\stackrel{~}{N}`$, i.e., it is asymptotically proportional to $`N`$ if $`\alpha /d>1`$, to $`N\mathrm{ln}N`$ if $`\alpha /d=1`$, and to $`N^{2\alpha /d}`$ if $`0\alpha /d<1`$. This Hamiltonian is sometimes presented in the literature in the following form:

$$^{}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}L_i^2+\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{N}}\underset{ij}{}\frac{1cos(\theta _i\theta _j)}{r_{ij}^\alpha }(\alpha 0).$$
(3)
which artificially makes its energy to scale as $`N`$, $`(\alpha /d)`$. The transformation from this form to the one presented in Eq. (1), adopted from now on in the present work, has been described in detail in . This system has since long been shown  to obey Boltzmann-Gibbs (BG) statistical mechanics for $`\alpha /d>1`$. What happens for $`0\alpha /d1`$ is a subtle question which is under intensive study nowadays . In fact, several long-range-interacting systems are since long known  to present a variety of thermodynamical anomalies, such as negative specific heat and superdiffusion among others. The molecular dynamics in the isolated Hamiltonian (1) with total energy $`U`$ exhibits, for infinitely large time, the existence of a second order phase transition at $`uU/N\stackrel{~}{N}=u_c(\alpha ,d)`$. For $`uu_c`$ the system is disordered (paramagnetic-like); otherwise, it is ordered (ferromagnetic-like). It exhibits anomalies on both sides of the critical point.

For $`u>u_c`$ (i.e., in the disordered phase), after a quick transient, the one-particle distribution of velocities gradually becomes Maxwellian in the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit, in accordance to what is expected within BG statistical mechanics. However, while $`N`$ increases, the entire Lyapunov spectrum approaches zero, which is a quite anomalous behavior; indeed, no such weakening of chaos is expected nor observed for $`\alpha /d>1`$. This weakening of the sensitivity can be characterized through the maximal Lyapunov exponent $`\lambda _{u>u_c}^{max}`$ (appropriately scaled as indicated in ) which, in the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit, vanishes as $`\lambda _{u>u_c}^{max}N^{\kappa _d}`$ ($`d`$ stands for disordered phase); $`\kappa _d`$ decreases from1/3 to zero while $`\alpha /d`$ increases from zero to unity, and remains zero thereafter . The fact that the sensitivity to the initial conditions becomes sub-exponential (possibly a power-law) strongly reminds what has been observed  in a variety of low dimensional maps, which are known to be adequately described within nonextensive statistical mechanical concepts.

For $`u<u_c`$, after a quick transient, the behavior depends from the initial conditions. Two wide basins of attraction exist in the space of the initial conditions. One of them (which includes Maxwellian velocity distribution and all angles equal) yields a standard BG microcanonical distribution which approaches the BG canonical one in the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$. The other one (which includes waterbag and double waterbag velocity distribution and all angles equal) yields a longstanding metastable (quasi-stationary) state (whose associated magnetization is basically zero) and only at very large time joins the BG distribution (whose associated magnetization is nonzero). The duration $`\tau `$ of this metaequilibrium state diverges with $`N`$. It has been conjectured  that it does so as $`\tau \stackrel{~}{N}`$. Recent results support this scaling; indeed, (i) for $`\alpha =0`$, this conjecture implies $`\tau N`$, which has been verified , (ii) for fixed $`N`$, it implies that $`\tau `$ exponentially decays with $`\alpha `$, which once again has been verified .

Our focus in this paper is on the metastable state of the $`d=1`$ model, which we study for typical values of $`(\alpha ,u,N)`$. The time evolution of the model has been generated integrating the equations of motion through a 4th order symplectic algorithm  with a relative error in the total energy conservation less than 10-4. We verify that the time evolution of the (scaled) average kinetic energy per particle (which plays the role of temperature) exhibits two plateaux, the first one being anomalous and the second one being of the BG class. This is illustrated in Fig. 1 for $`\alpha =0.6`$. In the same figure we show the time evolution of $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}`$. As in the $`\alpha =0`$ case, one expects also for $`0<\alpha /d<1`$ two plateaux in $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}(t)`$. We can see, however, that for $`\alpha =0.6`$ the difference is almost unperceptively small; it might happen that this difference quickly decreases with $`\alpha `$, as it is the case for $`\tau `$, but such study is out of the scope of the present work. The systematic detection of both plateaux in the temperature enabled the calculation of the caloric curves, as illustrated in Fig. 2. We clearly see the existence of negative specific heat for the metastable state, just below $`u_c`$. Then by focusing on small time (after the transient nevertheless), it was possible to calculate the $`N`$-dependence of $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}(metastable)`$ for typical values of $`\alpha `$. The results are shown in Fig. 3. We verify that $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}(metastable)N^{\kappa _{metastable}}`$, where $`\kappa _{metastable}`$ decreases from 1/9 (thus confirming ) to zero, while $`\alpha `$ increases from zero to unity, and remains zero thereafter. Furthermore, we numerically verify a remarkable property, namely (see Fig. 4)

$$\kappa _{metastable}=\frac{\kappa _d}{3}(\alpha ).$$
(4)
This constitutes the first connection found for this type of models between the anomalies below and above the critical point. This is a conceptually important point. Indeed, if nonextensive statistical mechanics is relevant for such long-range interacting systems as the velocity distributions presented in  seem to suggest, one would expect the model to be somehow associated with a single value of the entropic index $`q`$ for all energies, both below and above possible critical points. Eq. (4) makes this possibility plausible. Before ending let us mention that no anomalies were detected nor expected for $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}(stable)`$ (i.e., in the BG regime emerging at large time), which should gradually become positive $`N`$-independent values for all values of $`\alpha `$. This is of course consistent with the picture that $`lim_t\mathrm{}lim_N\mathrm{}`$ (anomalous thermodynamical metaequilibrium) and $`lim_N\mathrm{}lim_t\mathrm{}`$ (BG thermodynamical equilibrium) are not! interchangeable if $`0\alpha /d1`$, whereas they are if $`\alpha /d>1`$.

Useful remarks from A. Rapisarda are gratefully acknowledged. Partial support from CNPq, PRONEX, FAPERJ (Brazilian agencies), and FCT (Portugal) is also acknowledged.

Fig. 1 \- Time evolution for twice the (scaled) average kinetic energy per particle $`E_{kin}/N\stackrel{~}{N}`$ (which plays the role of temperature; upper curve) and the (scaled) largest Lyapunov exponent $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}`$ (lower curve) for $`\alpha =0.6`$, $`u=1`$ and $`N=1000`$. We have averaged 10 different water-bag initial conditions for the velocities (all angles were initially set parallel to each other).

Fig. 2 \- Microcanonical caloric curves for typical values of $`\alpha `$ and $`N`$. The lower branch corresponds to the metastable state. The stable state is indicated with the dashed line.

Fig. 3 \- $`N`$-dependance of the largest Lyapunov exponent $`\lambda _{u<u_c}^{max}(metastable)`$ for $`\alpha `$ ranging from 0 to 1.2. The average in the interval $`10<t<3000`$ has been considered as the metastable state value (the very slight increase of the Lyapunov exponent occasionally observed up to $`t=3000`$ is numerically without consequences).

Fig. 4 \- $`\alpha /d`$-dependance of $`3\times \kappa _{metastable}`$ (full cercles). Open triangles, cercles and squares respectively correspond to $`\kappa _d`$ of the $`d=1,2,3`$ models . The arrow points to 1/3, value analytically expected  to be exact for $`\alpha =0`$ and $`u>u_c`$ .


format: text

text:
# Model atmospheres for type Ia supernovae:Basic steps towards realistic synthetic spectra

## Model atmospheres for type Ia supernovae:
Basic steps towards realistic synthetic spectra

D.N. Sauer1,2, A.W.A Pauldrach2
1 Max-Planck-Institut für Astrophysik, Garching, Germany
2 Institut für Astronomie und Astrophysik der Universität München, Germany

### 1.1 Introduction

Analyses and interpretations of the meanwhile enormous database of excellent spectra of type Ia supernovae obtained in key projects and extensive searches still suffer from missing realistic numerical simulations of the physics involved. One of the most important steps towards this objective concerns a detailed simulation of the radiative transfer in the outermost parts of this objects in order to calculate synthetic spectra on the basis of models of the explosion scenario. The priority objective thereby is to construct for the first time consistent models which link the results of the hydrodynamics and nucleosynthesis obtained from the explosion models (see, for example, , , these proceedings) with the calculations of light curves (see, for instance, ,, these proceedings) and synthetic spectra of SN Ia. After a phase of testing this new tool will provide a method for SN Ia diagnostics, whereby physical constraints on the basic parameters, the abundances, and the hydrodynamic structures of the atmospheric part of the objects can be obtained via a detailed comparison of observed and synthetic spectra. This will also allow to determine the astrophysically important information about the distances of SN Ia.

First results in this direction are presented in Section 1.3. In the preceding sections we will first with regard to our objective briefly summarize the most important observed properties of type Ia supernovae, and then discuss the current status of our treatment of the hydrodynamic expanding atmospheres of SN Ia.

### 1.2 Observed properties of type Ia supernovae

The classification of supernovae is based on purely empiric observational properties. In this scheme, type Ia supernovae are defined by the absence of hydrogen and helium spectral lines and a strong absorption feature of Si ii lines near 6100 Å in epochs around maximum light. In late phases the SN Ia spectra are dominated by emission of forbidden lines of mainly iron and cobalt.

Prominent features in the early-time spectra of type Ia supernovae – this is the phase we want to analyze at present – are characteristic absorption lines resulting from low ionized intermediate-mass elements (such as Si ii, O i, Ca ii, Mg ii). The formation of these lines results in a pseudo-continuum that is set up by the overlap of thousands of these lines. The absorption lines show characteristic line shapes due to Doppler-broadening resulting from large velocity gradients. In the UV-part of the spectrum, the flux is strongly depleted (compared to a blackbody-fit in the optical range) by line blocking of heavy element lines (especially Fe, Co, Mg). Towards the red and IR, the flux is also low due to the absence of significant line influence in these regions. Towards later phases ($`2`$ weeks after max.), heavier element lines become more prominent as the photosphere recedes deeper into the ejecta. At this time emission features also start to increasingly dominate the spectral characteristics. In the nebular phase ($`1`$month) the spectrum approaches a typical nebular appearance dominated by lines of heavy element forbidden transitions.

The spectra as well as the light curves of type Ia supernovae show a high degree of homogeneity; however, some intrinsic differences are also observed. The mechanisms leading to these differences have to be understood in order to draw conclusions based on the homogeneity, such as the distance measurements for cosmological applications. (For detailed reviews of the optical properties of SN Ia we refer to ,.)

### 1.3 Model atmospheres for type Ia supernovae

In early phases, which are considered here, a supernova of type Ia is described by a photosphere in the deeper layers (i.e., the sphere where the optical depth $`\tau =1`$) and a superimposed extended atmosphere that expands at high velocities – up to 30000 km/s.

Due to the high radiation energy density and the dominant role of scattering processes the problem we are dealing with is strongly non-local, leading to typical conditions that make consideration of NLTE (non local thermodynamic equilibrium) effects necessary. Additionally, processes of line blocking and blanketing significantly influence the radiative transfer within the ejecta and thus the observed spectral properties (see ). This behavior results in the strong depletion of the flux in the UV part and the blue region of the spectrum due to the influence of thousands of lines of the heavy elements. As the absorbed radiation is partly reemitted towards lower layers (“backwarming”) the temperature structure is also affected, and in turn the ionization equilibrium and thus the radiation field itself.

Certain properties of supernovae make the full problem of NLTE and radiative transfer calculations even more complicated than in related objects, such as hot stars: The element abundances of type Ia supernovae are entirely dominated by heavy species that have fairly complicated ionic energy level structures with hundred-thousands of transitions. In addition, the high velocities within the ejecta broaden these lines by Doppler-shift and thus cause a strong overlap of sometimes thousands of lines especially in the UV wavelength regions. In contrast to objects with similar physical conditions (for example, hot stars or, in late phases, planetary nebulae), SNe are not illuminated by a central source of radiation, but are heated by the diffuse source of the $`\gamma `$-rays emitted by the radioactive decay of 56Ni and 56Co. Thus, the diffuse field is of primary importance and can not be approximated accurately in a simple way. Another problem concerns the relatively flat density distribution: Even for early phases where the assumption of an underlying photosphere seems to be justified, the radius of this photosphere (defined as the radius where the optical depth $`\tau _\nu =1`$) varies strongly with wavelength.

The approach used in this project employs a detailed atmospheric model code which is based on the concept of homogeneous, stationary, and spherically symmetric radiation-driven winds, where the expansion of the atmosphere is due to scattering and absorption of Doppler-shifted metal lines. This code provides a detailed and consistent solution of the radiative transfer including a proper treatment of NLTE as well as blocking and blanketing effects in order to calculate realistic synthetic spectra (see , ). The computation of the NLTE level populations is carried out using detailed atomic models, and including all important contributions to the rate equations. Thomson scattering, bound-free and free-free opacities, line absorption and emission processes as well as dielectronic recombination is included in the radiative transfer. The computation of the NLTE model is based on several iteration cycles of step-wise improving accuracy. In a first step, an opacity sampling method is employed, which results in a approximate solution that is, however, already close to the final solution. An exact treatment of the radiative transfer equation in the observer’s frame is performed in a second step. In a final step the occupation numbers, opacities and emissivities from the NLTE model are utilized for calculating a synthetic spectrum via a formal solution of the transfer equation. For a detailed description of the numerical methods we refer to .

### 1.4 Results

We regard the results obtained so far as not yet suitable for diagnostic purposes, since some physics relevant for SN modelling have been only very roughly included up to now (e.g., the heating by the diffuse source of the $`\gamma `$-rays emitted by the radioactive decay of 56Ni and 56Co). Thus, our present calculations should be considered as preliminary. All models obtained so far are based on the hydrodynamic model W7 by Nomoto et al. . Since radial variation of the chemical composition has not yet been fully implemented in our models described here, the values used for the composition have been averaged over mass shells. Additionally we assume that the energy deposition arises completely from the optically thick part of the atmosphere. Moreover, the expansion of the ejecta is assumed to be homologous (i.e. $`rv`$).

Fig. 1 compares a calculated model spectrum to the observed “standard” type Ia supernova 1992A spectrum. As is shown, the synthetic spectrum reproduces the observed spectrum in the UV and blue wavelength ranges. Thus, our method already produces quantitatively reliable results indicating that the basic physics is obviously treated properly. However, towards the redder part of the spectrum a systematic offset to the observation appears. We regard our treatment of the inner boundary condition (diffusion approximation) and the missing energy deposition above the photosphere as a possible reason for this behavior. At the inner boundary we apply the diffusion approximation at all frequencies. This approximation is valid for conditions where the mean free path of the photons is very small (i.e. $`\tau 1`$), which, however, is not guaranteed at longer wavelengths, due to the absence of strong lines in this wavelength range and the relatively flat density distribution that does not provide the required strong increase of the continuum opacities towards our innermost radius grid point. As a consequence, the flux emitted from the inner boundary is too high. In addition, the opacity in this wavelength range is dominated by pure electron (Thomson) scattering that does not couple the radiation field to the thermal pool. In these regions the radiation observed is actually generated in much deeper layers of the ejecta and scattered outwards.

### 1.5 Near future prospects

Regarding a solid basis for spectral diagnostics of type Ia supernovae the next steps are obvious. Depth-dependent abundances and a proper treatment of the $`\gamma `$ energy deposition above the photosphere have to be included. The latter point will also free us from the limitation of currently being able to treat only the photospheric, early-phase epochs around maximum. With these enhancements it seems feasible to obtain synthetic spectra based on hydrodynamic explosion models like those of the hydrodynamics group at MPA, and to compare them directly to observed SN spectra.

### Acknowledgements

We wish to thank our collaborators at MPA – the Hydro-Group – and USM for helpful discussions. In particular we thank T. Hoffmann at USM for providing lots of useful tools and active support for this ongoing project. The first author thanks especially his primary supervisor, W. Hillebrandt, for numerous helpful comments, permanent motivation, and financial support.


text:
# Destruction of diagonal and off-diagonal long range order by disorder in two-dimensional hard core boson systems

## I Introduction

The two dimensional bosonic Hubbard model has been the subject of intense interest these past years because it is thought to capture many of the important qualitative features of two dimensional superconductors and superfluids at very low temperature. For example, Helium atoms adsorbed on a surfaceggb1  can clearly be described by bosons moving in a two dimensional environment. It is then natural to examine the role of disorder in localizing the bosons and producing exotic phases such as a bose glass or a normal fluid at zero temperature. In the case of soft core bosons with contact repulsion, the bose glass phase was predicted and studied theoreticallymfisher  and subsequently verified numericallyggb3 ; nandini .

Another reason for the increased interest in disordered bosonic systems is a set of fascinating experiments on the superconducting-insulating transition suggesting the possibility of a universal conductance right at the transitionorr ; haviland ; jaeger ; lee ; hebard ; geerligs ; dynes . Several ideas, based on disordered bosonic Hubbard models, have been suggestedmfisher  to explain these results. Extensive numerical simulationsggb1 ; wallin1 ; wallin2  appear to support these ideas qualitatively, although the numerical values of the conductance are not in agreement.

The question of existence of a normal conducting state at zero temperature has regained momentum with recent experimental discoveriesmetal . Attempts to explain this phase proceed via models of disordered bosons, see for example das ; igor  and references therein.

Yet another reason to study bosons in external potentials (random or otherwise) are the recent fascinating experiments on atomic Bose-Einstein condensates on optical latticesopticlatt . In many cases, such as this one, the relevant bosonic Hubbard model is the soft core one in others it is the hard core that is of interest. It is therefore interesting and important to expose and understand some of the important differences between these two cases.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we will first present the hard core boson Hubbard model, our simulation algorithm and measurements. Then, in Sec. III we will first review the phase diagram of the clean model before presenting our results on the disordered model at strong and weak near neighbor repulsions. Conclusions and comments are in section IV.

## II The Boson Hubbard model

The hard core boson Hubbard Hamiltonian is given by

$`H=`$ $``$ $`t{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢,𝐣}{}}(a_𝐢^{}a_𝐣+a_𝐣^{}a_𝐢){\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mu _𝐢n_𝐢`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`V_1{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢,𝐣}{}}n_𝐢n_𝐣`$
$`a_𝐢`$ ($`a_𝐢^{}`$) are destruction (creation) operators of hard–core bosons on site $`𝐢`$ of a two dimensional square lattice, and $`n_𝐢`$ is the boson number at site $`𝐢`$ while $`\mu _𝐢`$ is the site dependent chemical potential. This is, therefore, a site dependent energy which models the disorder in the system. In the absence of disorder, $`\mu _𝐢`$ becomes the normal chemical potential, $`\mu `$. There are other ways to model disorder. For example, one can have bond dependent hopping parameter ($`t_{𝐢,𝐣}`$), or near-neighbor interaction ($`V_{1,𝐢,𝐣}`$). It is thought, though not fully demonstrated, that these possibilities fall in the same universality class. The hopping parameter is chosen to be $`t=1`$ to fix the energy scale. $`V`$ is the near neighbor interaction.

To characterize the different phases, we need to measure several physical quantities. A superfluid phase is characterized by the absence of long range density order and a non-vanishing superfluid (SF) density. The SF density, $`\rho _s`$ is given by

$$\rho _s=W^2/2t\beta ,$$
(2)
where $`W`$ is the winding number of the phase of the boson wave function in one of the two spatial dimensionsggb3 ; ggb5  and $`\beta =1/kT`$. Long range density order (such as in the checkerboard solid) is characterized by the density-density correlation function, $`c(𝐥)`$, and the structure factor, $`S(𝐪)`$, its Fourier transform. They are given by

$`c(𝐥)`$ $`=`$ $`n_{𝐣+𝐥}n_𝐣`$
$`S(𝐪)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐥}{}}e^{i𝐪𝐥}c(𝐥),`$ (3)
where $`n_𝐣`$ is the occupancy at site $`𝐣`$. In the presence of long range order, $`S(𝐪)`$ will diverge with the system size for a given ordering momentum, $`𝐪^{}`$, which characterizes the ordered phase. For example, for checkerboard order, $`𝐪^{}=(\pi ,\pi )`$.

Two other very useful quantities are the equal time Green’s function

$$G(|𝐣𝐢|)=a_𝐣a_𝐢^{},$$
(4)
and the Green’s function in imaginary time,

$$G(\tau )=a_{𝐢,\tau }a_{𝐢,0}^{}.$$
(5)
In the superfluid phase, $`G(|𝐣𝐢|)`$ saturates at a nonzero value for large separations, while $`G(\tau )`$ tends to zero exponentially thus yielding the quasiparticle excitation energy spectrum. In the simulations, $`G(|𝐣𝐢|)`$ was measured along the lattice axes.

In the presence of disorder, we need to average over realizations of disorder in addition to the usual statistical average for a given realization. The number of realizations we used depended on the size of the system but is typically a few hundred. We do our simulations using the stochastic series expansion (SSE) algorithm with worm updatesSSE . This algorithm is numerically exact without any discretization error. In addition it uses non-local updates, hence even large systems can be sampled efficiently.

## III The Phase Diagram

The phase diagram of the bosonic Hubbard model with finite contact repulsion (i.e. soft core) and no nearest neighbor (nn) repulsion has been studied extensively in one and two dimensions both with and without disorder. In the absence of disorder, for incommensurate particle fillings, one always has a superfluid phase. This phase disappears at commensurate fillings ($`\rho =1,2,3\mathrm{}`$) when the onsite repulsion is large enoughmfisher . The resulting phase is an incompressible Mott insulating phase which takes the form of lobesmfisher ; nandini ; ggb7  in the ($`t/V_0,\mu /V_0`$) plane, where $`V_0`$ is the onsite repulsion. This phase is gapped, there is a substantial energy cost (increase in the chemical potential) for adding a particle onto a commensurate phase. It was arguedmfisher  that in the presence of any amount of disorder, a new compressible insulating (i.e. localized) phase, the bose glass, is produced at incommensurate fillings and that for strong enough disorder the gapped phase disappears entirely. This was subsequently confirmed numericallyggb3 ; nandini ; ggb2 ; kanwal ; heiko .

The picture changes for hard core bosons with near neighbor repulsion, $`V`$. The bosons still form a superfluid for incommensurate particle filling and $`V`$ not too strong. Also, at full filling, the bosons are always frozen into a Mott insulator since hopping to a neighbor would produce double occupancy which is strictly forbidden. At half filling, increasing $`V`$ eventually freezes the bosons into an incompressible gapped checkerboard solid: Alternate sites are occupied since the presence of a neighbor costs too much energy and there is a big energy cost (gap) to add a particle. The phase diagram is shown in Fig. 1.

### III.1 Strong Near Neighbor Repulsion

We now introduce disorder in the form of a random site dependent chemical potential, $`\mu _𝐢=\mu +\delta _𝐢`$ where the disorder, $`\delta _𝐢`$ is uniformly distributed between $`\pm \mathrm{\Delta }`$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a tunable parameter characterizing the strength of disorder. The first question we want to address is the strength of the disorder necessary to destroy the checkerboard solid phase and what new phase is produced. One can try to answer this question with a simple argument based on energy balance (Imry-Ma). We start at half filling with a perfect checkerboard solid and introduce the site disorder. Suppose that at an empty site there is, due to $`\mu _𝐢`$, a deep potential well which pulls in a neighboring boson. This boson will now have near neighbors which it will try push away to rearrange its neighborhood in a local checkerboard solid which will, consequently, have a mismatch at its boundary with the original checkerboard. The likelihood of this happening depends on the disorder and dimensionality. The energy cost, in $`d`$ dimensions, due to the mismatch at the boundary scales like $`L^{d1}`$ for a region of length $`L`$. On the other hand, the energy gained by the bosons by falling into locally favorable energy wells scales like $`L^{d/2}`$. For $`d=1`$, disorder is relevant, no matter how weak it is, it always destroys the solid order. For $`d=3`$ or more, the energy cost outweighs the gain and the system maintains checkerboard order. The $`d=2`$ case is marginal since both, cost and gain, scale like $`L`$. Typically, in such marginal cases, the conclusion is that disorder will indeed destroy long range order but just barely. The correlation length, $`\xi `$, is very long and the system size should be even larger to see the effect.

Numerically, for strong disorder ($`\mathrm{\Delta }/V=2`$) we can easily see that indeed the gapped checkerboard solid is destroyed on lattices as small as $`L=12`$ and is replaced by a compressible, glassy insulator with no energy gap.

Since for very weak disorder, the system size needed to see the destruction of solid order is too large for us to simulate, we resort to finite size scaling for the intermediate disorder case. Although this does not demonstrate directly the validity of the Imry-Ma argument (for which very weak disorder is needed) we believe that the results we will present are qualitatively similar to what happens in the very weak disorder case.

In Figure 2 we show the density, $`\rho `$, as a function of the chemical potential, $`\mu =\mu _𝐢`$, for $`L=8,12,14`$ ($`\beta =14`$) and $`L=20`$ ($`\beta =20`$) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }/V=1`$. For $`L=12,14`$ and $`20`$, we average $`100`$ disorder realizations, for $`L=8`$ we did $`400`$. We see that the incompressible gapped region ($`\kappa =\rho /\mu =0`$) gets smaller as $`L`$ increases but does not quite reach zero. The inset shows the average gap size versus $`L^1`$. The average gap size was obtained by calculating the $`\rho ,\mu `$ curve for each realization, which yields the gap size per realization which we then average. An alternative method (which washes out important statistical information) is to calculate the average $`\rho ,\mu `$ curve and use it to calculate the average gap. We see clearly that the gap tends to zero for a finite, but large, $`L`$. This suggests that, for these values of $`V`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the gap will disappear by $`L30`$. Since $`L`$ should be greater than $`\xi `$ to observe the destruction of the checkerboard order, we estimate from this that $`\xi 30`$. In Figure 3 we show $`S(\pi ,\pi )`$ as a function of $`L^1`$. This, again, shows that the checkerboard order is destroyed for systems larger than about $`L=30`$.

To elaborate this further, we show in Fig. 4 the distributions of the gap sizes for different disorder realizations for $`L=8,20`$. We see that for $`L=8`$, the distribution is quite narrow and peaked at a nonzero value. However, for $`L=20`$, the distribution is very wide and in fact peaked at zero indicating that the most probable value for the gap is zero. In this case, it is incomplete to discuss the “average” of the gap, which is still non-zero.

In order to characterize further the compressible phase which replaces the checkerboard solid, we study the behavior of the Green’s function, both for equal and unequal imaginary times. For example, in Figure 5 we show the equal time Green’s function for $`V=4.5`$, $`L=10`$ and $`\rho 0.56`$. We see that the Green’s function goes to zero and is very well fit by an exponential (in fact a hyperbolic cosine to account for the periodic boundary conditions). This is further evidence that there is no superfluid in this phase, it is an insulator.

The glassy nature of this phase can be seen in the time-dependent Green’s function, Eq. 5. In the Bose glass phase, this quantity is predictedmfisher  to decay as $`G(\tau )1/\tau `$, which has been verified numerically in a very different contextheiko . Figure 6 shows that is also true in this case. Therefore, the new phase replacing the gapped checkerboard solid is an ungapped insulating Bose glass phase.

Clearly, it is very difficult to examine these issues with smaller couplings and disorder: The correlation length will be even longer and much larger sizes would be needed. However, for moderate disorder, the above results demonstrate that, whereas it might appear on a finite lattice that the gapped solid phase is still present, finite size scaling clearly shows the gap to disappear on large enough systems. We may conclude from this that the Imry-Ma argument holds and that disorder, no matter how weak, will produce a glassy, compressible, ungapped insulating phase at strong near neighbor couplings.

### III.2 Weak Near Neighbor Repulsion

We now consider the question of what happens when the near neighbor repulsion is decreased and only the hard core and disorder interactions remain. For soft core bosons with no nn interaction, a re-entrant behavior was observed for $`\rho _s`$ as a function of the contact repulsion both in oneggb3  and twonandini  dimensions. In other words, for fixed disorder strength, as the onsite repulsion is increased from zero, the superfluid density is at first zero, then at some intermediate value of $`V_0/t`$ the bosons delocalize and $`\rho _s`$ takes on a finite value, then for large enough $`V_0/t`$ (i.e. approaching the hard core limit) the bosons are localized again. In one dimension this happens for any amount of disorder, but in two dimensions was only reportednandini  at $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t=6`$. This was taken as confirmation of the phase diagram presented in reference mfisher,  where the bosons were argued to be always localized, even by weak disorder, when $`V_0/t`$ is very large.

The phase diagram in the $`(t/V_0,\mu /V_0)`$ planemfisher  should however be interpreted with care especially if we want to consider the hard core limit. It is a phase diagram at constant finite disorder $`\mathrm{\Delta }/V_0`$ and thus $`t/V_00`$ means that $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t\mathrm{}`$, and any arbitrarily weak disorder in units of $`V_0`$ becomes infinitely strong in the hard core limit.

In fact, figure 7 shows that hard core bosons behave differently, when a finite disorder $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t`$ is considered. While the bosons are localized by weak disorder for large nn coupling, $`V_1`$ (and densities that are not very small), as this coupling is reduced, the bosons become superfluid and stay that way even at $`V_1=0`$. We verified this at several particle densities. In other words, the naive expectation based on the soft core phase diagram as presented in reference mfisher,  at very large onsite repulsion is not fulfilled. The soft core phase diagram must be interpreted appropriately.

As we saw for the gap, in the presence of disorder it is not enough to consider only average quantities, it is also instructive to consider their distribution. In Figure 8 we show the histogram of $`\rho _s/\rho `$ for the $`250`$ realizations for $`L=16,V=0,\mathrm{\Delta }=5t`$ and $`\rho 0.1`$. We see that for this size the distribution is well centered around $`\rho _s/\rho 0.18`$, with the same behavior observed for smaller sizes: The distribution does not widen nor does the peak tend to zero. Therefore, even for this large disorder, the bosons are still not localized for $`V=0`$.

To show that the bosons can be localized at $`V=0`$ if the disorder exceeds a threshold value, we show in Fig. 9 finite size scaling for $`\rho _s/\rho `$ for two cases of disorder, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=5t`$, and $`6t`$. The case of $`\mathrm{\Delta }=5t`$ was done with $`\rho =0.1`$ and clearly shows the system to be superfluid as as $`L\mathrm{}`$. This is also shown in the equal time Green’s function, Fig. 10. On the other hand for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=6t`$ we did the simulation at $`\rho 0.73`$ and we find that both $`\rho _s/\rho `$ and the Green’s function vanish as $`L\mathrm{}`$. We also verified this for $`\rho 0.5`$ and $`0.1`$. We conclude that the disorder has to exceed a threshold value ($`6t`$) in order to localize the bosons for weak nn repulsion. Clearly, in the no-hopping limit, $`t0`$, the critical value of the disorder vanishes in agreement with reference mfisher, .

When the disorder is strong enough to localize the bosons at weak coupling and consequently also at strong coupling (since even very weak disorder can accomplish that), the question arises as to whether there is re-entrant behavior, as observed for soft core bosonsggb3 ; nandini . In other words, will the bosons go from being localized at weak coupling to being delocalized at intermediate values and then relocalize at strong coupling? A finite size scaling analysis shows that this is not the case: For the hard core system, when the disorder is large enough to localize the bosons at weak coupling, they will stay localized at all couplings.

This means that the ($`\mu /V,t/V`$) phase diagram is as follows. For weak disorder the checkerboard solid is completely destroyed and replaced by a compressible insulating Bose glass phase. This is easy to understand by applying to the two-sublattice structure of the checkerboard solid a simple Imry-Ma argument. However, away from half filling, there is no such structure and the Imry-Ma argument no longer holds. So, with weak disorder, there will be a superfluid even for large nn repulsion, when the density is far from $`0.5`$. In addition, there is a superfluid for all fillings (except full filling) when the nn repulsion is small. For strong disorder, the superfluid phase everywhere is destroyed and replaced by the compressible Bose glass phase.

## IV Conclusions and Discussion

We have used the SSE algorithm to simulate the disordered hard core bosonic Hubbard model in two dimensions to try to understand the interplay and competition between interaction and disorder.

Using finite size scaling, we found that the checkerboard solid present at strong nn interactions for half filling is completely destroyed by any amount of disorder. This agrees with the simple Imry-Ma energy balance argument.

Surprisingly, finite size scaling showed that at very weak, even vanishing, nn coupling, weak (even intermediate) disorder does not localize the hard core bosons. The disorder strength, $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t`$, must be at least of the order of $`6t`$ before the bosons are localized. We found this somewhat surprising because soft core bosons were argued to be always localizedmfisher , even by weak disorder, in the limit $`t/V_0\mathrm{}`$ which is often considered to be equivalent to the hard core case. The soft core phase diagrammfisher  should be interpreted carefully, as discussed in section IIIB.

Numerically, the bosons were shown to be localized but only one value of the disorder was presentednandini , $`\mathrm{\Delta }/t=6`$, which is large. Our numerical results here agree with reference nandini, , but show no localization for weaker disorder.

Another interesting analogy to make is with fermions. In one dimension, weak disorder localizes both fermions and hard core bosons, which is not surprising in view of the fact that they are equivalent in this case. In two dimensions, however, this equivalency is lost, and the response to disorder is different. Fermions are (marginally) localized by weak disorder while hard core bosons are not.

Since the hard core bosonic Hubbard model is equivalent to the spin$`\frac{1}{2}`$ quantum Heisenberg model, the above results also hold for this model in the presence of a random external magnetic field.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge very helpful conversations with R. T. Scalettar, H. Rieger. G.G.B. acknowledges support from the Franco-German PROCOPE program. M.T. was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation. The calculations were performed on the Asgard Beowulf cluster at ETH Zürich and the Cray T3E at HLRS (Stuttgart) using a parallelizing C++ library for Monte Carlo simulationsalea .


text:
# An algorithm for calculating the Lorentz angle in silicon detectors

## 1 Introduction

The Lorentz angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\mathrm{L}`$, by which charge carriers are deflected in a magnetic field perpendicular to the electric field, is defined by:

$$\mathrm{tan}(\mathrm{\Theta }_\mathrm{L})=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }x}{d}=\mu _\text{H}B=r_\text{H}\mu B,$$
(1)
where $`d`$ corresponds to the drift distance along the electric field and $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ to the shift of the signal position (see Fig. 1). If the ionization is produced at the surface, the drift distance equals the detector thickness. If the ionization is produced homogeneously by a traversing particle, the averaged drift distance is only half the detector thickness. The drift mobility in a magnetic field, called the Hall mobility, is denoted by $`\mu _\text{H}`$, the drift mobility without magnetic field by $`\mu `$. They are related by the Hall scattering factor $`r_\text{H}=\mu _H/\mu `$. This factor describes the mean free time between carrier collisions, which depends on the carrier energy smith . The Hall scattering factor has a value of $``$0.7 for holes and $``$1.15 for electrons at room temperature lb . An important question is the dependence of the Lorentz shift on the irradiation dose. Radiation damage can change the drift properties, which will change the Lorentz shift. Such a shift appears as a misalignment of the detector as function of radiation dose, which itself is a function of the distance from the interaction point.

## 2 Experimental results

A comprehensive study of Lorentz shifts of non-irradiated and irradiated sensors was performed at Karlsruhe osaka:2000 ; roederer:1998 ; heising:1999 ; hauler:2000 . The Lorentz angle has been measured for electrons and holes separately. A temperature range of 77 K-300 K was covered. The Lorentz angle is measured by injecting charges at the surface on one side and observing the drift through the sensor by measuring the position of the charge on the opposite side (see Fig. 1). Alternative methods are described in Belau:1983 ; Aleppo:2000 .

Charges are generated by injecting laser light with a wavelength of $`\lambda `$$``$ 650 nm, which has an absorption length of $``$ 3 $`\mu `$m at 300 K. In this case charge carriers of one type are collected at the nearest electrode, whereas the carriers of the other type drift towards the opposite side. This allows the measurement of the Lorentz angle for electrons and holes separately by injecting laser light either on the p- or n-side. The laser from Fermions Lasertech fermions  has a maximum power of 1 mW, which could be adjusted by the pulse height and width of the input pulse to the laserdiode. Typically a laser pulse with a width around 1 ns was generated.The laser pulse was sent to the sensor via a single-mode fibre with an inner diameter of a few microns. So the beam spot on the detector could be varied from a few micron onwards by changing the distance between fibre and sensor.

For the measurements the JUMBO magnet from the Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe jumbo  has been used in a $`B`$$``$ 10 T configuration with a warm bore of 72 mm. The sensors are double sided microstrip detectors of approximately 2x1 cm from the HERA-B production by Sintef Abt . They have a strip pitch of 50 $`\mu `$m on the p–side and 80 $`\mu `$m on the n–side; the strips on opposite sides are oriented at an angle of 90 with respect to each other. The capacitively coupled read out strips are connected through a 1 M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ resistor to the bias ring. The read out chip for the strip detectors is the Premux128-Chip with a shaping time of 45 ns jones . The chip’s common mode is suppressed by a double correlated sampling technique, which substracts the signal’s baseline. The threshold could be adjusted but the signal to noise ratio from the laser pulse, corresponding to a few times the signal from a minimum ionizing particle (MIP), was sufficiently high, so that the thresholds were not critical.

The averaged signal position $`\overline{x}`$ is computed from either a fit with the sum of two Gaussians or from the center of gravity of the pulse heights $`p_i`$ on neighbouring strips $`x_i`$, i.e. $`\overline{x}=p_ix_i/p_i`$. Both methods gave comparable results. The first method was used.

Our measurements showed that the Lorentz shift with the magnetic field are linear up to 9 T osaka:2000 , which means that Eq. 1 can be used. Before irradiation the sensor depletes fully at a bias voltage of 40 V, while after irradiation with 1.0$``$1013 21 MeV protons / $`\mathrm{cm}^2`$ the depletion voltage increased to 100 V. This implies that the bulk is inverted from n-type to p-type material, as expected rd48 . The bulk damage from 21 MeV protons is about 2.1 times the damage from 1 MeV neutrons huhtinen . Numerical results on the Lorentz angles and shifts are displayed in Figs. 2 and 3 before and after irradiation, respectively.

The Lorentz shift for holes is not strongly depending on irradiation as shown in Fig. 2, while for electrons there is a clear dependence on the irradiation dose as shown in Fig. 3. The calculated values in the Figures are discussed in the next section. The strong decrease of the Lorentz shift for electrons after irradiation for bias voltages below 100 V originates from the fact that the detector is not depleted anymore for these voltages, thus the Lorentz angle is only computed in the depleted zone as will be discussed in section 4.

## 3 Algorithm for the Lorentz angle at full depletion

At moderate irradiation doses detectors usually can be operated at full depletion. However, for pixel detectors close to the LHC beampipe, this is not necessarily the case. We first discuss an algorithm to calculate the Lorentz angle at full depletion, while the case without full depletion will be discussed in Sect. 4. In this section we first discuss non-irradiated sensors and then the changes needed for moderately irradiated sensors which still can be fully depleted.

### 3.1 Non-irradiated sensors

The mobility $`\mu (E)`$ is proportional to the mobility at low electric field $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}`$. It decreases with increasing electric field until it saturates. It can be parametrized as canali:1975 :

$$\mu (E)=\frac{\mu _{\mathrm{low}}}{(1+(\frac{\mu _{\mathrm{low}}E}{v_{\mathrm{sat}}})^\beta )^{\frac{1}{\beta }}}$$
(2)
For holes the parameter values used are: $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}=470.5\frac{cm^2}{Vs}\left(T/300\right)^{2.5};`$ $`\beta =1.213\left(T/300\right)^{0.17};`$ $`v_{\mathrm{sat}}=8.3710^6cm/s\left(T/300\right)^{0.52},`$ while for electrons the following values are used: $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}=1417\frac{cm^2}{Vs}\left(T/300\right)^{2.2};`$ $`\beta =1.109\left(T/300\right)^{0.66};`$ $`v_{\mathrm{sat}}=1.0710^7cm/s\left(\frac{T}{300}\right)^{0.87}.`$

The electric field depends on the z-position, the bias voltage, the full depletion voltage $`U_{\mathrm{depl}}`$ and the thickness of the depleted zone of the sensor d:

$$E(z)=\frac{U_{\mathrm{bias}}U_{\mathrm{depl}}}{d}+\frac{2U_{\mathrm{depl}}}{d}\left(1\frac{z}{d}\right)$$
(3)
This equation is an approximation for highly segmented detectors because of the perturbation of the field near the highly doped collection zones of a thickness of a few $`\mu `$m. These zones are only a few percent of typical sensor thickness of 300 or 500 $`\mu `$m. The averaged electric field can be calculated from Eq. 3 to be:

$$E_{\mathrm{mean}}=\frac{E(z=0)+E(z=d)}{2}=\frac{U_{\mathrm{bias}}}{d}$$
(4)
This Emean is independent of the depletion voltage. The electric field is not constant in a sensor. For full depletion it varies from $`2\mathrm{U}_{\mathrm{depl}}/\mathrm{d}`$ to zero. For large values of Udepl the electric field can change from the saturation regime to zero with a correspondingly strong change in the mobility.

Given the electric field, one can calculate the mobility from Eq. 2.. The total Lorentz shift can be otained by integrating Eq. 1 over the thickness of the sensor using at each position the mobility given by equation 2. For small depletion voltages the use of an averaged electric field and corresponding mobility is enough to calculate the Lorentz shift from Eq. 1. Figs. 2 and 3 show that the calculations match the measurements quite well. The figures also show that the Lorentz shifts vary practically linear with the bias voltage for fully depleted sensors.

The temperature dependence of the Lorentz shift is shown in Fig. 4. The Lorentz shift varies about 8 $`\mu `$m for a 300 $`\mu `$m thick sensor at 100 V in a 4 T magnetic field, if the temperature is varied between 250 K and 280 K, for both electrons and holes.

### 3.2 Irradiated sensors

There are three main parameters, which change after irradiation: the mobility, the electric field and the depletion voltage.

The dependence of the mobility on the irradiation dose is still controversial. In Ref.ere:1995  no significant changes were observed in the transport properties of both electrons and holes up to 0.5$``$10$`^{14}`$ 1 MeV n/cm2 and a prediction is made that a fluence of at least about 1015 1 MeV n/cm2 is necessary to affect carrier drift mobilities significantly. In Ref. brod:1999  the mobility for both carrier types in irradiated sensors agree with those for the non-irradiated sensor within errors for fluences up to 2$``$1014 1 MeV n/cm2. In contrast a change of mobility after irradiation for holes and electrons was observed in Ref. leroy:1999 :

* The mobility $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}`$ of holes changes slightly from 470 cm2/Vs to about 460 cm2/Vs after irradiation to a fluence of 1013 1 MeV n/cm2. Above this fluence the mobility does not change any more. The change of mobility corresponds to a change in the Lorentz shift of a few percent.
* The mobility $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}`$ of the electrons changes more significantly from 1417 cm2/Vs to 1000 cm2/Vs. The reduction of the mobility is so strong that one has to take this into account when computing the Lorentz shift.

In addition, the Hall scattering factor $`r_\text{H}`$ may change after irradiation. This is equivalent to a change in drift velocity, for what concerns the Lorentz shift. Therefore we keep $`r_\text{H}`$ constant and fit our data with a variable mobility, which can describe the data well, as shown in Table 1. The needed shift in mobility is within the range given in Ref. leroy:1999 . Here we used Eq. 4 to calculate the electric field, since the depletion voltages were reasonably low. For higher depletion voltages the bias voltage is so high, that the saturation of the drift velocity has to be taken into account, which implies the use to Eq. 3 instead of Eq. 4. In this case the depletion voltage has to be known. For electrons the nonlinear saturation regime is reached at lower fields than for holes, because of the higher ratio $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}/\mathrm{v}_{\mathrm{sat}}`$ in Eq. 2. This difference in nonlinearity between electrons and holes is displayed in Fig. 5 for a sensor with a large depletion voltage of 280 V.

In our model we also neglected the effect of double junctions after irradiation and the effect of defects (beattie:1998 -Eremin:2002 ). The justification lies only in the agreement between the model and available data with still rather limited precision.

## 4 Algorithm for the Lorentz angle at high irradiation doses

Pixel detectors are located near the beam pipe and therefore have to stand higher radiation doses than strip detectors. It is not guaranteed that they can be always fully depleted. Since the bulk inverts after strong irradiation from n-type to p-type, the pn-junction will be on the n-side and the depletion starts from the n-side. If not fully depleted, there will be a region without electric field, in which only diffusion takes place, as indicated in Fig. 6. This region will not contribute significantly to the signal, so one can consider this sensor as having a sensitive thickness corresponding to the depleted zone. We assume in our algorithm that the Lorentz shift is determined by the sensitive thickness, thus ignoring the undepleted zone. Our algorithm is compared with measurements for the ATLAS pixel sensor reported in Ref. Aleppo:2000 . The charge carriers were generated with a pion beam of 180 GeV/c. The Lorentz angle was determined by measuring the minimum mean cluster size as a function of angle of the incident beam particles. The ATLAS pixel sensors are 280 $`\mu `$m thick and have a full depletion voltage before irradiation of about 150 V. The magnetic field during the measurements was 1.4 T and the temperature 300 K for the non-irradiated sensors and 263 K for the irradiated sensors. The measured values are compared to the simulated values in Table 2.

In the simulation the strong irradiation is taken into account by replacing the total sensor thickness in Eq. 3 by the depleted thickness, which is determined by the maximum possible bias voltage. The high bias voltage leads to a strongly varying mobility in a not fully depleted sensor, as shown in Fig. 7. The trajectory of the drifting ionization is correspondingly non-linear, so the integration of the Lorentz shifts has to be done in sufficiently small steps. The Lorentz angle, given in Table 2, is defined as the arc tangent of the total Lorentz shift divided by the depleted sensor thickness. Comparing the simulations with the measurements one observes that the data can be fitted better with lower mobilities after irradiation, as expected from the discussion in Sect.3.2. So it has been shown that the proposed algorithm also works for n-side readout of not fully depleted sensors after strong radiation, i.e. pixel detectors, if the reduced sensitive thickness is taken into account.

## 5 Summary

The Lorentz angle is determined by electric and magnetic fields and can be modelled by Eqs. 1, 2 and 3 or 4. Because of the different mobility and Hall scattering factor for holes and electrons, the Lorentz shift for electrons is at least four times the one for holes. Irradiation decreases the electron mobility at low electric fields $`\mu _{\mathrm{low}}`$ significantly. The hole mobility is hardly affected by irradiation.

The simulated data have been compared with measured values from HERA-B test structures and the ATLAS pixel sensor. It has been shown that the algorithms developed here simulate the Lorentz shifts reasonably well, if one takes into account the reduced electron mobility after irradiation.

This work was done within the framework of the RD39 Collaboration rd39 . We thank Iris Abt for supplying us with double sided mini-strip detectors.


text:
# References

Local indistinguishability and LOCC monotones

Michał Horodecki111fizmh@univ.gda.pl , Aditi Sen(De)222aditi@iftia6.univ.gda.pl , Ujjwal Sen333ujjwal@univ.gda.pl  and Karol Horodecki444khorodec@manta.univ.gda.pl

*Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astrophysics, University of Gdańsk, 80-952 Gdańsk, Poland*

## Abstract

We provide a method for checking indistinguishability of a set of multipartite orthogonal states by local operations and classical communication (LOCC). It bases on the principle of nonincreasing of entanglement under LOCC. This method originates from the one introduced by Ghosh *et al.* (Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 5807 (2001) (quant-ph/0106148)), though we deal with pure states. In the bipartite case, our method is operational, although we do not know whether it can always detect local indistinguishability. We apply our method to show that an arbitrary complete multipartite orthogonal basis is indistinguishable if it contains at least one entangled state. We also show that probabilistic distinguishing is possible for full basis if and only if all vectors are product. We employ our method to prove local indistinguishability in a very interesting example akin to "nonlocality without entanglement".

Orthogonal quantum state vectors can always be distinguished if there are no restrictions to measurements that one can perform. If the vectors are states of a system consisting of two distant subsystems, then there can be natural restrictions for the measurements that can be done. In particular, if Alice and Bob (the parties holding the subsystems) cannot communicate quantum information, their possibilities significantly decrease . Intuitively one feels that in such a case, there will be a problem with distinguishing entangled states, while product ones should remain distinguishable. The first result in this area was rather surprising: in Ref.  the authors exhibited a set of bipartite pure product states, that cannot be distinguished with certainty by local operations and classical communications (LOCC). Another counterintuitive result was obtained in Ref. : any two orthogonal multipartite states can be distinguished from each other by LOCC, irrespective of how entangled they are. The latter result was greatly extended in Refs. . There is therefore a general question: which sets of states are distinguishable?

To find that a given set is distinguishable, one usually needs to build suitable protocol. To show that the states are not distinguishable one can try to eliminate all possible measurements as in . Another way is to employ somehow the theory of entanglement . A typical statement proving such indistinguishability would be then: Alice and Bob cannot distinguish the states, as they would increase entanglement otherwise (which is impossible by LOCC). The advantage of the latter method is that it allows to estimate the entanglement resources needed to distinguish the states, that are non-distinguishable by LOCC.

In Ref.  this approach was first used to check distinguishability between two mixed states (we will call it TDL method). Another powerful method based on entanglement was recently designed in Ref.  (we will call it GKRSS method). In this paper we introduce another method, closely related to the latter one, but connected also with the TDL method. Our approach provides a strong tool for investigation of distinguishability of sets of bipartite pure states, because it bases on deciding whether some pure state can be transformed into some other pure states by LOCC, the latter issue being completely solved in a series of papers on entanglement monotones and entanglement manipulations with pure states . Using it, we show that any full basis of an arbitrary number of systems is not distinguishable, if at least one of vectors is entangled . For $`2n`$ system it is then also “only if”, as product bases are distinguishable in this case . Our result applies also to probabilistic distinguishability, so that in conjunction with the result of  we obtain that a full basis is probabilistically distinguishable if and only if all vectors are product. As an illustration of the effectiveness of our presented method, we consider some examples of local indistinguishability of *incomplete* bases. One of the examples exhibits an interesting feature akin to "nonlocality without entanglement" .

Let us first note that the application of entanglement theory to this problem is not immediate. Imagine, that we want to distinguish between the four Bell states given by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill |B_1& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right),\hfill \\ \hfill |B_2& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00|11\right),\hfill \\ \hfill |B_3& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|01+|10\right),\hfill \\ \hfill |B_4& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|01|10\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

If we were able to apply by LOCC just the von Neumann measurement, then we could obviously create entanglement. Namely, if Alice and Bob start with any initial state (hence also possibly a disentangled one), after the von Neumann measurement, it collapses into one of Bell states. This is of course impossible. We cannot however conclude at this moment, that they are indistinguishable. The clue is that we could distinguish between them, while destroying them during the process. Thus Alice and Bob would get to know what state they shared, but the potential entanglement would be destroyed. This is actually the case in the Walgate *et al.* protocol , where one distinugishes between two (possibly) entangled states.

To employ entanglement theory in the distinguishability question, a more clever method should be applied. The general hint is to apply the measurement to some larger system. This concept is a basis for the TDL and GKRSS methods. In the first one  the authors considered a state of four systems A, B, C, D:

$$\psi =\psi _{AB}\psi _{CD}$$

where $`\psi _{AB}`$ and $`\psi _{CD}`$ are maximally entangled states. Then the measurement is applied to the AB part (cf. ). If the state after measurement is entangled, then one concludes that the measurement cannot be done by use of LOCC.

The GKRSS method  is the following. Given the set of states $`\{\psi _i^{AB}\}_{i=1}^k`$ to be distinguished, one builds a mixed state

$$\varrho =\frac{1}{k}\underset{i}{}|\psi _i\psi _i||\varphi _i\varphi _i|$$
(1)
where $`\varphi _i`$ are some entangled states of the CD system (more generally one could put some probabilities $`p_i`$ instead of $`1/k`$). Now if Alice(A) and Bob(B) are able to distinguish between the states $`\psi _i`$ they can tell the result of their measurement to Claire(C) and Danny(D), who will then share states $`\varphi _i`$ with probability $`1/k`$. One now compares the initial entanglement $`E(\varrho )`$ measured across the AC:BD cut and the final one given by $`(1/k)_iE(\varphi _i)`$ according to any chosen entanglement measure $`E`$. If the states $`\psi _i`$ are distinguishable by LOCC, then the final entanglement cannot be greater than the initial one; otherwise one could increase entanglement by LOCC . Thus, if we have

$$E(\varrho )<\frac{1}{k}\underset{i}{}E(\varphi _i)$$
(2)
then the states $`\psi _i`$ are not distinguishable by LOCC. In Refs.  distillable entanglement was used as $`E`$.

Let us now exhibit the method of the present paper. It is a modification of the GKRSS method. Namely instead of classical correlations between AB and CD we will use quantum correlations. Consequently mixture (2) is replaced by the superposition

$$\psi _{ABCD}=\underset{i}{}\sqrt{p_i}|\psi _i^{AB}|\varphi _i^{CD}$$
(3)
The states $`\varphi _i`$ will be used here essentially to *detect* as to whether a set of states are locally indistinguishable and as such we shall henceforth call them "detectors". At a first glance it seems that this approach should fail, because the pure state is unlikely to have small entanglement. In  where mixtures are used, the possibility for the initial state $`\varrho _{ABCD}`$ to be separable in the AC:BD cut was much larger, as mixed states are less coherent than pure ones; for a pure state to be separable, it has to be product, while for mixed states, the very mixedness can decrease entanglement, or even produce separability . Let us however exhibit the following example. Suppose that Alice and Bob are to distinguish between the Bell states $`|B_i`$. As detectors, we take the same states (as in ). Our pure state is thus

$$|\psi _B_{ABCD}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}|B_i_{AB}|B_i_{CD}$$
(4)
One can see that this state can be written as

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right)_{AC}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right)_{BD}$$
(5)
So it turns out that it is *product* in AC:BD cut, so that our method will work. Assuming now the four Bell states to be locally distinguishable immediately would imply that the state $`|\psi `$ is entangled in the AC:BD cut which is the desired contradiction. This result was obtained in  and their mixed state $`\varrho _{ABCD}=\frac{1}{4}_i|B_iB_i||B_iB_i|`$ turned out to be separable in AC:BD (see also ). Here we have a pure state which is product. Note that in this particular example, our method, even though originating from the GKRSS approach, coincides with the TDL method.

The advantage of our approach over the GKRSS method is that for mixed states, it is usually hard to check the relation (2) for different entanglement measures. Indeed, for mixed states it is difficult to evaluate the known entanglement measures. In our case we have pure states on both sides of the inequality, for which the set of all needed measures is known . Even more: Jonathan and Plenio , generalizing the Nielsen result , have obtained a necessary and sufficient condition for the transformation from a pure state $`\varphi `$ to an ensemble of pure states $`\{p_i,\varphi _i\}`$. The condition is efficiently computable. Namely, let $`\lambda `$ and $`\lambda _i`$ be vectors of the Schmidt coefficients of $`\varphi `$ and $`\varphi _i`$ respectively. Then the LOCC transition $`\varphi \{p_i,\varphi _i\}`$ is possible if and only if the vector $`_ip_i\lambda _i`$ majorizes $`\lambda `$ . To summarise, our method consists of the following steps

* Given the states $`\{\psi _i^{AB}\}_{i=1}^k`$ to be distinguished, choose $`k`$ detectors $`\varphi _i^{CD}`$ and probabilities $`p_i`$.
* Applying the Jonathan-Plenio criterion, check if the transition $`\psi _{ABCD}\{p_i,\varphi _i^{CD}\}`$ is possible by LOCC (in AC:BD cut) where $`\psi _{ABCD}`$ is of the form (3).

The item (1) can be formulated more generally in the following way:

* Choose $`\psi _{ABCD}`$ such that its reduction $`\varrho _{AB}`$ has the support spanned by $`\psi _i^{AB}`$’s.
* Determine detectors $`\varphi _i^{CD}`$ by writing $`\psi _{ABCD}`$ by means of $`\psi _i^{AB}`$.

Now we will apply our method to obtain the following proposition, where in fact we do not need an explicit use of the Jonathan-Plenio criterion.

Proposition. Let $`\psi _i^{AB}`$ be a full orthogonal basis of an $`mn`$ system. Then we have: (1) If at least one of the vectors is entangled (see ), the set cannot be perfectly distinguished by LOCC (2) The set cannot be probabilistically distinguished if and only if all vectors are product.

Remark. Note that we will not have "if and only if" for item (1) because there are orthogonal product bases that cannot be distinguished . However it would also be "only if" in $`2n`$, as all product bases are locally distinguishable there .

Proof. Consider the four party state

$$|\psi _{ABCD}=\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}|ii_{AC}\right)\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}|jj_{BD}\right)$$

shared between Alice, Bob, Claire and Danny, which is product across the AC:BD cut. Note that Alice and Claire are sharing $`m`$ -dimensional systems each while Bob and Danny are sharing $`n`$ -dimensional systems each. Written in AB:CD, this state takes the form

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{mn}}\underset{k=1}{\overset{mn}{}}|k_{AB}|k_{CD}$$
(6)
However we know that such a state is $`UU^{}`$ invariant where $`U`$ is an arbitrary unitary operator on the mn-dimensional Hilbert space (with the tensor product separating AB from CD) and where the complex conjugation is taken in the computational basis (see e.g. ). We would choose our $`U`$ as indicated below.

Let $`\{|\psi _1,|\psi _2,\mathrm{},|\psi _{mn}\}`$ be a set of $`mn`$ orthonormal states of an $`mn`$ system. We choose our $`U`$ such that $`U|k=|\psi _k`$ for all $`k=1,2,\mathrm{},mn`$. We now use the $`UU^{}`$ invariance of the state $`|\psi `$ in the AB:CD cut and write it as

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{mn}}\underset{k=1}{\overset{mn}{}}|\psi _k_{AB}|\psi _k_{CD}^{}$$

where the complex conjugation is again in the computational basis.

Therefore if Alice and Bob are able to locally distinguish between the $`|\psi _k`$s, they could ring up Claire and Danny to tell which state they share, resulting in the creation of the corresponding correlated state $`|\psi _k^{}`$ between Claire and Danny.

Now if at least one among the $`|\psi _k`$s is entangled, an assumption of local distinguishability of the $`|\psi _k`$s would imply that the state $`|\psi `$ has a nonzero amount of entanglement in the AC:BD cut . But this is forbidden as $`|\psi `$ is product in the AC:BD cut.

Note that the above reasoning goes through irrespective of whether the local distinguishability protocol for the $`|\psi _k`$s is deterministic or probabilistic. This proves that an arbitrary complete set of orthogonal states of any bipartite system is locally indistinguishable (deterministically as well as probabilistically) if at least one of vectors is entangled. (Note that for the desired contradiction, the probabilistic protocol must have nonzero probability for at least one entangled state.) Now, from  it follows that any complete product basis can be distinguished probabilistically . Indeed in  it was shown that any separable superoperator can be performed by LOCC with some probability of success. However, measuring a complete product basis amounts to applying some separable superoperator. This ends the proof.

Generalisation of the proposition. The above proposition can in fact be generalised to the multiparty situation. That is, the following statement is true. In $`d_1d_2\mathrm{}d_N`$, (1) a full orthogonal basis cannot be distinguished deterministically by LOCC (between the $`N`$ sharing parties), if at least one of them is entangled (see ) and (2) a full orthogonal basis can be distinguished probabilistically if and only if all vectors are product (*i.e.*, of the form $`|\eta _1|\eta _2\mathrm{}|\eta _N`$).

Note that the entangled state that is needed for the validity of the statement of this generalised proposition may not be a genuine $`N`$-party entanglement. For the $`222`$ case, for example, even a state of the form $`\left(a|00+b|11\right)|0`$ in a complete orthogonal basis would be sufficient for local indistinguishability of the basis.

Item (1) of the generalised proposition is immediate, from the Proposition for the bipartite case, once we note that a multiparty entangled state must be entangled in at least one bipartite cut. Note also that if a set of multipartite states is indistinguishable in a bipartite cut, it would obviously remain so, if we lessen the allowed set of operations by restricting the parties within one cut to remain at distant locations. The "only if" part of item (2) also follows by essentially the same argument. The "if" part of item (2) however needs a generalisation of the result obtained in Ref. , which we do now.

Consider three systems $`X,Y,Z`$ with Hilbert spaces $`C^d`$ and fixed bases $`\{|i\}`$ (each of them will be then considered as multipartite). Let $`\varrho _Z`$ be state we want to subject to operation $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Suppose also that systems $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are in the state $`\sigma _{XY}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }I_Y)P_{XY}^+`$ where $`P_{XY}^+=|\psi _{XY}^+\psi _{XY}^+|`$, $`\psi _{XY}^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}_{i=1}^d|i_X|i_Y`$. Following Ref.  one finds that if the total state $`\sigma _{XY}\varrho _Z`$ is projected onto $`I_XP_{YZ}^+`$ (which happens with probability $`\frac{1}{d^2}`$) then the state of the system $`X`$ becomes $`\varrho _X^{out}=\mathrm{\Lambda }(\varrho _Z)`$. Now, we take $`X,Y,Z`$ to be $`n`$-partite systems, so that e.g. $`X=X_1X_2\mathrm{}X_n`$ with Hilbert space $`C^{d_1}\mathrm{}C^{d_n}`$ and $`d_1\mathrm{}d_n=d`$. The bases $`\{|i\}`$ are chosen to be product bases $`|i_1\mathrm{}|i_n`$. If $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is separable operation (with respect to the considered division of $`X`$) then so is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }I_Y`$, as the set of separable operations is closed under tensor multiplication. The state $`P_{XY}^+`$ has the following product form $`P_{XY}^+=P_{X_1Y_1}^+\mathrm{}P_{X_nY_n}^+`$. Thus the state $`\sigma _{XY}`$ is separable. It then follows that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be performed by LOCC. To this end the parties prepare the state $`\sigma _{XY}`$ which is possible by LOCC, as it is separable. Then $`i`$-th party perfom local projection into $`P_{Y_iZ_i}^+`$ which occurs with probability $`1/d_i^2`$. If all parties succeed, which happens with probability $`1/d^2`$, they obtain projection $`P_{YZ}^+`$.

Let us illustrate the multiparty situation in a simple example in $`222`$. Suppose that Alice, Bob and Claire want to distinguish between the GHZ  states

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill G_{1,2}& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|000\pm |111),\hfill \\ \hfill G_{3,4}& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|010\pm |101),\hfill \\ \hfill G_{5,6}& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|100\pm |011),\hfill \\ \hfill G_{7,8}& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|001\pm |110)\hfill \end{array}$$

Following the way we had proceeded for the four Bell states (in eqs. (4) and (5)), we consider the pure state

$$|\varphi _G_{ABCDEF}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{8}{}}|G_i_{ABC}|G_i_{DEF}$$

This state can be rewritten as

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right)_{AD}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right)_{BE}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|00+|11\right)_{CF}$$

That is, the state is a *product* in $`AD:BE:CF`$. A similar argument as before, implies that the set of states $`\left\{G_i\right\}`$ are indistinguishable by LOCC.

Note however that our presented method for testing local indistinguishability of a set of *bipartite* orthogonal states cannot be extended in its full generality to the multipartite situation. The Jonathan-Plenio criterion  has not been as yet generalised to more than two parties. Given a set of tripartite (for definiteness) orthogonal states $`\left\{\psi _i^{ABC}\right\}_{i=1}^k`$ to be distinguished (locally),

(1) one may choose the $`k`$ detectors $`\varphi _i^{A_1\mathrm{}A_N}`$ ($`N`$ not necessarily equal to $`3`$) and probabilities $`p_i`$ and

(2) see whether the transition $`\psi =_i\sqrt{p_i}|\psi _i^{ABC}|\varphi _i^{A_1\mathrm{}A_N}\{p_i,\varphi _i^{A_1\mathrm{}A_N}\}`$ is possible by a LOCC protocol which is implementable by keeping $`A,B,C`$ at distant locations.

If the transition is impossible, the set $`\left\{\psi _i^{ABC}\right\}_{i=1}^k`$ is indistinguishable when $`A,B,C`$ are at distant locations. However in the absence of a criterion for transformation of (pure) states in the multipartite scenario, it would be in general hard to find out whether the above transformation in item (2) is possible or not . This is in contrast to the bipartite situation where our method is operational (via the Jonathan-Plenio criterion). Note however that this does *not* imply that given a set of orthogonal bipartite states, our method would always detect its locally indistinguishability (if at all). We do not know whether our method does *not* detect local indistinguishability of some set of orthogonal states. We would mention later in this paper, as to why detecting local indistinguishability of a set of orthogonal states by our method is interesting, even if we know it independently by other methods.

One can now try to see how effective the presented method is, when we deal with an *incomplete* set of orthogonal states. In that direction, we consider two examples.

To discuss the first example, note that the set $`S`$ consisting of the following maximally entangled states in $`33`$ are distinguishable locally:

$$\psi _1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|00+\omega |11+\omega ^2|22\right),\psi _2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|00+\omega ^2|11+\omega |22\right),\psi _3=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|01+|12+|20\right)$$
(7)
($`\omega `$ is a nonreal cube root of unity.) The set $`S`$ can be distinguished locally by making a projective measurement in the basis $`\{\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|0+|1+|2\right),\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|0+\omega |1+\omega ^2|2\right),\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|0+\omega ^2|1+\omega |2\right)\}`$ in any one of the parties and a subsequent classical communication to the other party (see also ).

Having shown this, what would be our expectation for the set of states containing the same states as in $`S`$ but for the last state $`|\psi _3`$, which is replaced by a *product* state $`|01`$? The above Propositions seem to indicate that as we put more and more entanglement into the system, the system tends to become locally indistinguishable. This is also the expectation obtained from the recent work of Walgate and Hardy . But one can check by taking $`B_i`$s $`(i=1,2,3)`$ as detectors and with probabilities $`p_i`$ as $`(.16,.16,.68)`$, that the transition $`_{i=1}^3\sqrt{p_i}|\psi _i_{AB}|B_i_{CD}\{p_i,|B_i_{CD}\}`$ is forbidden by the Jonathan-Plenio criterion . Consequently the set $`S^{^{}}`$, containing the states

$$\psi _1=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|00+\omega |11+\omega ^2|22\right),\psi _2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(|00+\omega ^2|11+\omega |22\right),\psi _3^{^{}}=|01$$
(8)
are *indistinguishable* by LOCC  . This simple example shows that the intuition that we tried to obtain from our Propositions as well as from the work of Walgate and Hardy  is not true. In fact this example is more in the spirit of the examples of "nonlocality without entanglement" in Refs.  as also the results in Refs.  indicating that nonlocality (in the sense of local (in)distinguishability of orthogonal multipartite states) is independent of entanglement.

We now go over to our second example of using our presented method to check indistinguishability of an incomplete basis. We would like to examine a case of indistinguishability of three orthogonal two-qubit states. This case has been solved in . But we want to solve it by our method. As we would see, it leads to an interesting open question. Consider again therefore a four party state

$$|\chi =\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}|A_i_{AB}|B_i_{CD}$$

shared between Alice, Bob, Claire and Danny, to probe (by our method) the indistinguishability of the three orthogonal states $`|A_i`$ given by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill |A_1& =& a|00+b|11,\hfill \\ \hfill |A_2& =& b|00a|11,\hfill \\ \hfill |A_3& =& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|01+|10\right),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are real (with $`a^2+b^2=1`$) and the detectors $`|B_i`$ are the Bell states. Let us again suppose that the three orthogonal states $`\left\{|A_i\right\}`$ are distinguishable by LOCC even if only a single copy is provided. But this implies that Alice and Bob would be able to create the states $`|B_i`$ $`(i=1,2,3)`$ (each with probability 1/3) between Claire and Danny. Thus from the state $`|\chi `$, in the AC:BD cut, it would be possible to create the states $`|B_i`$ (i=1,2,3), each with probability 1/3, by LOCC only. According to the Jonathan-Plenio result  the process is impossible, if one of the squares of the Schmidt coefficients of $`\psi _{ABCD}`$ across AC:BD cut is smaller than $`1/2`$. We see that this is the case when $`a`$ satisfies $`.0252632<a<.999681`$. Thus the $`|A_i`$s $`(i=1,2,3)`$ are locally indistinguishable whenever $`a`$ falls in the above range. However as shown recently by Walgate and Hardy  three two-qubit vectors can be distinguished if only one of them is entangled . Thus we should be able to show that the process of distinguishing by LOCC is impossible within the whole range $`0<a<1`$. We have tried with many different detectors, but the Bell states are most probably the optimal one. This intuition comes from the feeling that maximally entangled states would be the hardest to create. Therefore, change of detectors would possibly not produce the desired impossibility. We can however achieve it by putting probabilities:

$$p_1=p_2=1/4,p_3=1/2$$

instead of $`p_i=1/3`$. For such probabilities we obtain that distinguishing between the states $`|A_i`$ leads to increasing some entanglement monotone in the whole range of parameter $`a`$. This is the reason why we wanted to prove local indistinguishibility of the these states by our method even when the result itself is known by other methods. Because proving local indistinguishability (of a set of orthogonal states) through our method immediately shows that any (nonlocal) superoperator which distinguishes between these states would necessarily increase some LOCC monotone.

Since our method is based on entanglement monotones, there is a question, whether all operations that cannot be performed by LOCC would increase at least one function monotonic under LOCC. Most likely it is the case, i.e. the set of LOCC doable operations is described by the set of LOCC monotones.

There are tasks that can be implemented by separable superoperators, but not by LOCC ones. An example is to distinguish the basis consisting of product states given in Ref. . An interesting question is whether our method can prove this indistinguishability. To this end, one would need a monotone, that is not  monotonic under separable operations . In our method we go from pure states to pure states, and the set of monotones that are responsible for such possibility is finite . They are sums of squares of $`k`$ largest Schmidt coefficients ($`k=1,\mathrm{},d`$ where $`d`$ is dimension of subsystem). There remains an open question whether they could increase under separable superoperators. If the answer is “yes”, then our method might work also for distinguishing product basis. It is however clear that we could not then apply our methos with the initial state as product w.r.t $`AC:BD`$ cut. Indeed, separable superoperators cannot produce entangled state out of product ones, but can distinguish between the states of interest.

There is example of set of product vectors indistinguishable by LOCC, which is not full basis – so called unextendible product basis (UPB) . In the case of two qutrits it is known  that UPB can also be distinguished by separable operations. However, for higher dimensions it might happen that even PPT operations cannot distinguish an UPB, so that the conditions for monotones would be less stringent. Indeed, then LOCC monotones could be monotonic also under separable and PPT operations, and could nevertheless be still useful.

We are grateful to Charles Bennett for drawing our attention to the fact, that a complete set of orthogonal product states are always probabilistically distinguishable locally at the European Research Conference on Quantum Information in San Feliu de Guixols, Spain, March, 2002. We would like to thank Sibasish Ghosh, Guruprasad Kar, Anirban Roy, Debasis Sarkar and Barbara Synak for helpful discussions. The work is supported by the European Community under project EQUIP, Contract No. IST-11053-1999 and by the University of Gdańsk, Grant No. BW/5400-5-0236-2.


text:
# Nonequilibrium Effects of Anisotropic Compression Applied to Vortex Lattices in Bose-Einstein Condensates

## Abstract

We have studied the dynamics of large vortex lattices in a dilute-gas Bose-Einstein condensate. While undisturbed lattices have a regular hexagonal structure, large-amplitude quadrupolar shape oscillations of the condensate are shown to induce a wealth of nonequilibrium lattice dynamics. When exciting an m = -2 mode, we observe shifting of lattice planes, changes of lattice structure, and sheet-like structures in which individual vortices appear to have merged. Excitation of an m = +2 mode dissolves the regular lattice, leading to randomly arranged but still strictly parallel vortex lines.

The experimental study of vorticity in a dilute-gas Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) provides an useful perspective on superfluidity. While the focus of early work was on the study of single or few vortices , recent advances in technique have made it possible to create BECs containing large amounts of vorticity . In a rapidly rotating BEC, a lattice of vortices is the lowest energy state in the rotating frame. Experimental studies of lattices to date have concentrated on formation and decay processes . In this Letter we study the nonequilibrium behavior of vortex lattices under large-amplitude, anisotropic strain.

Experimental technique For creating large amounts of vorticity in condensates, we use a modified version of the spin-up technique described in our previous paper . The starting point is a magnetically trapped cloud of $`17\times 10^6`$ 87Rb atoms in the $`|F=1,m_F=1`$ state with a temperature approximately three times above the critical temperature for the BEC phase transition, $`T_c=67`$ nK. By manipulating the ellipticity of the confining potential, we can resonantly pump angular momentum into the as yet uncondensed cloud . We then tune the trapping potential to near perfect axial symmetry with trap frequencies $`\{\omega _\rho ,\omega _z\}=2\pi \{8.35,5.45\}`$Hz. In this round trap the cloud continues to rotate, and by performing a nearly one-dimensional evaporation along the axis of rotation (z-axis) as described in Ref. , we cool down and further spin up the cloud until a highly rotating condensate is born out of the rotating normal cloud. For the experiments described in this paper, the evaporation is continued to a point where little or no thermal fraction remains. As a result of this procedure, we obtain highly rotating condensates with typically $`1\times 10^6`$ atoms, containing 130 vortices or more.

To study these condensates we can image along the x, y, or z directions. When the condensate is held in the trap, the core size of the vortices is close to the resolution limit of our optical detection system so that individual vortices are not resolved by in-trap imaging. However, by nondestructively imaging a trapped condensate from the side (along the x-direction) and measuring its aspect ratio, the rotation rate of the condensate can be determined . For our highly rotating condensates we determine typical aspect ratios of 0.5, which is markedly different from the static aspect ratio of the magnetic trap, 1.53, because of centrifugal forces. Typical condensate rotation rates of $`0.95\omega _\rho `$ are inferred.

To resolve individual vortices, we can release a condensate from the trap and image it after it has expanded by a factor of 5 . Such expansion pictures taken along the z-direction reveal a hexagonal lattice of vortex cores in highly rotating condensates \[Fig. 1(a)\]. The lattice structure is remarkably regular even at the outer regions of the condensate, and is observed with very good contrast as shown by the cross section in Fig. 1(b).

When looking at such vortex lattices in expansion from the side (i.e., along the x or y direction), good contrast is only obtained if the lattice is oriented in such a way that vortices line up behind each other along the direction of view, or in other words when the direction of view is parallel to lattice planes. The vortex lattices are not stationary in the lab frame, but are rotating with the condensate, and furthermore the initial orientation of the lattice in the xy plane cannot be controlled in current experiments. Therefore the times when vortices line up along the direction of sight are unpredictable, and images revealing lattice planes are only obtained in a random subset of all trials. One example is shown in Fig. 1(c), where the vortex planes are clearly visible as dark vertical lines. These images are direct verifications of the theoretical prediction that vortex lines are only marginally bent for our experimental parameters , as is also confirmed by the good contrast seen in the topview picture of Fig. 1(a).

Vortex lattices such as the one shown in Fig. 1 are the starting point for our studies of the effects of dynamically generated strain. We apply the distortion by resonantly driving quadrupolar shape modes in the vortex-filled condensate . In the large-amplitude limit, the $`m_z=+2`$ and $`m_z=2`$ modes distort the circular cross-section of the condensate into an ellipse and cause the major axis of the ellipse to rotate along with, or against, the sense of the condensate rotation, respectively. The generated strain is considerable – the ratio of major to minor axis of the condensate can be larger than three to one. The frequencies of the $`m_z=\pm 2`$ modes may be calculated using the sum rule argument given by Refs.. Our condensates are rotating typically at $`0.95\omega _\rho `$, just 5% under the centrifugal limit. At the centrifugal limit, the major axis of the $`m_z=+2`$ ellipse is fixed in the rotating condensate frame, and the $`m_z=2`$ shape is fixed in the lab frame. At our rotation rate of $`0.95\omega _\rho `$, the distortion, as seen in the frame of the lattice, rotates at only 0.4 Hz for the $`m_z=+2`$ mode, compared with 8.34 Hz for the $`m_z=2`$ mode. For this reason , we expect very different resulting lattice dynamics in the presence of either of the two modes.

Lattice dynamics in the presence of an $`m_z=2`$ surface mode Because the $`m_z=2`$ mode is almost stationary in the lab frame for the parameters of our experiment, this mode can be excited conveniently and nearly resonantly by a static trap deformation. Indeed we observe that by jumping from a round trap to a trap that has an ellipticity of 3.6% , the ellipticity of the condensate increases over a timescale of 300 ms from approximately 0 to 40%, thereby exceeding the trap ellipticity by more than an order of magnitude. Since the vortex lattice is rotating quickly with respect to this almost static deformation, it is an interesting and nontrivial question to ask whether or not a lattice structure is maintained, and, if so, how it rearranges in the presence of the excitation.

Experimentally, vortex lattices can indeed be observed in expansion images up to 400 ms after the start of the continuously applied trap deformation (Fig. 2). Subsequently, long range order is lost and vortex visibility becomes low, presumably due to tilting  or bending of the vortex lines . A closer look at the first 400 ms of this evolution reveals a wealth of intriguing vortex dynamics. As the vortex lattice rotates in the deformed condensate, the lattice planes must continuously shift relative to each other to accommodate to the elliptical shape of the condensate. One consequence of this is transient changes of the lattice structure. In Fig. 3 the lattice has changed from the hexagonal structure of an undisturbed lattice to a near orthorhombic structure.

The most striking observation, however, is of condensates containing sheet-like structures rather than individual vortex cores, as shown in Fig. 4(a). We interpret these sheets as rows of vorticity along which individual vortex cores have essentially merged. Given the near perfect contrast of these sheets, as shown by the cross section in Fig. 4(b), we can exclude the possibility that the sheets are merely formed by a collective tilting of vortices along a lattice plane, which would result in an intermediate contrast. Similarly, we can rule out that this is an effect merely of imaging resolution - had the vortices retained their original structure but come so close together that we could not spatially resolve them, we again would see white stripes set off by grey troughs, rather than the near 100% alternating stripes of white and black. If there continue to exist wispy fingers of condensate that cross the stripes and differentiate individual vortices, they must be very tenuous indeed to be consistent with the observed contrast. The clouds have been continuously distorted from their original hexagonal symmetry, so the observation of 16 stripes along the major axis of the BEC in Fig. 4(a) tells us that there must also be the equivalent of 16 units of vorticity along the length of the stripes through the center of the cloud. By measuring the in-trap height of the condensate, the ellipticity in the xy-plane and the number of atoms, we can infer the ratio of unit vorticity spacing (along the minor axis) to healing length (given by $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{8\pi na}}`$, where n is the mean density and a the scattering length) to be on the order of 5.

In fact the contrast of this sheet-like phase is so deep that the structure can be detected by looking at condensates in trap (along the x or z direction), even though the structure is close to our optical resolution limit. By taking a time series of ten nondestructive images of a single condensate along the x direction, we see that the sheet structure appears and disappears periodically with a period of about 21.2 ms for a condensate rotating at a frequency of $`0.95\omega _\rho `$ \[Fig. 5\].

This periodicity can be understood as follows: The sheet structure forms when a lattice vector lies along a minor axis of the cloud, presumably since this is when the vortices are closest together. As that vector rotates past the minor axis, structure along the vector is reestablished, the two-dimensional (2D) pattern of individual vortices reemerges, and the high-contrast stripes disappear from the in-trap images. A lattice vector aligns with the minor axis six times per lattice rotation period due to the sixfold symmetry of the unperturbed lattice, consistent with the observed frequency of periodic stripe formation. This interpretation is bolstered by the expansion images, which show high contrast sheets when a lattice vector lies close to the minor axis, but 2D lattices (albeit distorted) for other orientations. We find it remarkable that this lattice-to-sheet-to-lattice sequence persists through multiple cycles before long range order and visibility are compromised.

Using a trap with a stronger distortion of 34% as in Fig. 4(c-e), we also observe sheets breaking apart in the center. In Fig. 4(c), the density distribution along the lattice vector that we see near-parallel with the minor axis is nearly featureless. Figure 4(d,e) hint at the succeeding lattice evolution: Fig. 4(d) represents a small rotation from Fig. 4(c), and we see that the sheets have begun to reconnect across the cloud. Figure 4(e) appears to be a continuation of that process, with considerable evidence of uniformity in the repeating structure.

Lattice dynamics in the presence of an $`m_z=+2`$ surface mode We excite the $`m_z=+2`$ mode by elliptically deforming the magnetic trap and rotating that ellipse around in the xy plane. When the $`m_z=+2`$ mode is driven approximately 1 Hz away from its resonance, the ellipticity of the condensate increases from 0 to 50% over a timescale of 250 msec. Under the influence of an on-resonant drive, the ellipticity increases continuously, even passing beyond 90% after 700 msec and approaching 100% . As discussed above, the distortion rotates only very slowly with respect to the lattice, and thus we expect it to be correspondingly “gentle” with respect to its action on the lattice.

Indeed, as we show in Fig. 6(a), we do not see the lattices squeezed into sheets for the $`m_z=+2`$ mode. Instead we observe a gradual increase of disorder in the lattice. 400 msec after we start the excitation, we see a complete loss of long-range order in the vortex structure. The imaging contrast of individual vortices remains high, so we know they remain parallel to the line of sight (in contrast for instance to the case of Fig. 2), but otherwise they appear to have liquified (see the correlation histogram of Fig. 6). This behavior confirms our expectation of the $`m_z=+2`$ mode being a gentler disturbance for the lattice than the $`m_z=2`$ mode.

Conclusions In conclusion we have succeeded in observing a wealth of nonequilibrium vortex lattice dynamics in a BEC under anisotropic compression. Key observations include the shifting of lattice planes relative to each other, leading to transient changes of the lattice structure, the formation of an unexpected and very pronounced sheet structure, and finally, a gradual transition from an ordered lattice to a rather liquid-like arrangement in which vortex cores remain visible, but their relative positions are irregular. The observed sheet structure is of particular interest: at present the behavior of densely packed vortex lattices is in the center of theoretical discussions about vortices . While most of these theoretical discussions propose to enter this regime by having high rotation rates almost inaccessible to experiment or inconveniently low atom numbers in the condensate, this paper demonstrates an alternative and unexpected way of bringing vortices close together. We hope that the results presented in this Letter will stimulate further theoretical discussions in the field of vortex lattices.

The work presented in this paper was funded by NSF and NIST. PE acknowledges support by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation.