2
$\begingroup$

The spectral form factor is defined as (usually taken at $\beta = 0$ by definition along with disorder average)

\begin{equation}\label{eq:SFF1} g(\beta,t) = \left| \frac{Z(\beta,t)}{Z(\beta)}\right|^2 = \frac{1}{Z(\beta)^2} \sum_{m,n} e^{-\beta (E_m+E_n)}e^{i(E_m - E_n)t} \end{equation}

It is often used as a diagnosis of quantum chaos. The dip-ramp-plateau behavior is shown to be common in GOE, GUE random matrix and, therefore, a sign of quantum chaos [1]. There are only a few literature that discuss the SFF of integrable models and the universal nature of SFF in such models [2]. In ref. [2] For example, they didn't find such a behavior in the integrable model, but it did emerge when they took the disorder average. I want to ask if there's a universal behavior of SFF in the integrable systems or model that follows Poisson-level statistics distribution.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

The SFF's linear ramp regime is a fingerprint of chaos because it results from level repulsion. The eigenvalues of the Hamiltonian (or unitary evolution operator) in a chaotic (quantum) system repel one another due to interactions.

This is also captured by the $r$ ratio for level statistics, which is the average ratio between consecutive energy differences $r = \min(\Delta_i,\Delta_{i+1})/\max(\Delta_i,\Delta_{i+1})$, where $\Delta_{i} = E_i - E_{i-1}$. We find $r \sim 0.38$ for Poisson-distributed eigenvalues and $r \sim 0.55$ or something for Gaussian-distributed eigenvalues.

As you say, integrable systems have Poisson statistics, since they have an extensive number of conserved quantities; as a result, the eigenvalues basically all belong to independent "charge" sectors, and thus do not repel one another. So, we should not expect to see $K(t) \sim t$ either!

So what does the SFF look like for a nonchaotic system? Well, there shouldn't be a linear ramp regime!

For small systems integrable systems, you might see only a dip and plateau, and no linear regime. This happens if you plot the SFF for a single qubit, which looks like $K(t) = 2 + e^{-t^2} (2 - 4t^2)$ when $H$ is drawn from the Gaussian unitary ensemble (after averaging). This doesn't really have a linear regime.

For perfectly uncorrelated systems, you will see $K(t) = \mathcal{D}$ for $t > 0$ where $\mathcal{D}$ is the Hilbert space dimension (note that $K(0) = \mathcal{D}^2$, by definition). On the other hand, for a chaotic system, we only have $K(t) = \mathcal{D}$ for $t > \mathcal{D}$, for reasons I explain in this answer on SFFs. In fact, if you consider a model of noninteracting qubits hopping on a lattice with random $Z$-field disorder, averaging the SFF over disorder gives exactly $K(t)= \mathcal{D}$ for $t >0$. This model is not integrable, of course, but an Anderson insulator.

More generally, as you note in your question and I also note in my previous answer, systems with conservation laws (or systems that are not maximally chaotic) only realize the linear ramp regime after some time $t \geq t^{\,}_{\rm th}$, which is the "Thouless time" (see this paper by John Chalker). This is the time at which chaos sets in, and it follows the "dip" regime you identified. In general, a system fails to be chaotic if $t^{\,}_{\rm th} > \mathcal{D}$.

So basically, any integrable system either (1) clearly doesn't have a linear ramp regime or (2) analytical calculations will predict the ramp regime starts after $t=\mathcal{D}$, so it does not actually exist. In practice, the prediction for integrable systems is roughly $K(0)=\mathcal{D}^2$ and $K(t>0) \sim \mathcal{D}$, with no significant functional dependence on $t$ (though some fluctuations and dip-like behavior may manifest).

$\endgroup$
10
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you for your reply. You said in your last paragraph that (2) the ramp regime starts after $t =\mathcal{D}$, so it doesn't actually exist. I don't follow that. Why did you say that it doesn't exist? $\endgroup$
    – Himanshu
    Commented Sep 16, 2023 at 13:43
  • $\begingroup$ Secondly, I'm studying a Transverse Field Ising Model (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transverse-field_Ising_model) with g = 1 & h = 0. The model is known to be integrable. However, when I did a numerical calculation of SFF for this model, I found the dip-ramp-plate behavior. The behavior may not be very evident, but when taking a sample average, the behavior is easily seen. Do you have any comments on this? (Note that while doing the calculation, I removed few symmetries such as parity & Z-reflection but the level statistics are not as chaotic (in fact due to free model,it's around 0.24). $\endgroup$
    – Himanshu
    Commented Sep 16, 2023 at 13:48
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think the case (2) I mentioned happens for integrable (or free) models, but I think I once encountered a constrained or localized model where doing some perturbation theory predicted that the ramp regime started after $t \sim \mathcal{D}$, and plots for actual systems show no ramp. I maybe should remove this comment, and included it just in case. $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 16, 2023 at 19:19
  • $\begingroup$ Regarding the TFIM, if you don't restrict to any sectors, then you should see a dip followed by noise with no ramp. If you restrict to enough symmetry sectors in some integral models, you may see repulsion. But from what I remember, anything below the Poisson value of r=0.38 is an artifact of degeneracies (not extensive conserved quantities). I think restricting to a sector with fixed $\mathbb{Z}_2$ "charge" and definite (total) momentum should be enough to fix this? I'd be surprised to see a ramp there without adding disorder, is that what you mean by sample average? $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 16, 2023 at 19:25
  • $\begingroup$ In the Integrable TFIM model, I'm taking parity & Z-reflection sector (I'm taking fixing momentum since I'm working with open boundary conditions). With this setting, I'm getting level statistics to be lower than 0.38 (around 0.24 if I remember correctly). I'm further taking disorder average over J (adding a small number of orders 10**-4). I should mention that the ramp is visible even without a disorder average, although it becomes more prominent with it. I can add a few plots if like. $\endgroup$
    – Himanshu
    Commented Sep 17, 2023 at 11:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.