text:
# Transition Temperature of Dilute, Weakly Repulsive Bose Gas

## I Introduction

Inter-particle correlations in the weakly repulsive dilute Bose gas have been studied for more than half a century. It is therefore quite remarkable that the dependence of the Bose-Einstein condensation temperature ($`T_\mathrm{c}`$) on the interaction strength has continued to generate controversy until this time. In this paper we present an analysis of the longstanding $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ problem starting from a quasiparticle picture of the system in the un-condensed (high-temperature) side.

The model is described by the Hamiltonian

$$\widehat{H}=\underset{𝐤}{}ϵ_𝐤\widehat{b}_𝐤^{}\widehat{b}_𝐤+\frac{1}{2V}\underset{𝐩,𝐪,𝐤}{}U(𝐤)\widehat{b}_{𝐩+𝐤}^{}\widehat{b}_{𝐪𝐤}^{}\widehat{b}_𝐩\widehat{b}_𝐪,$$

where $`ϵ_𝐤=k^2/2m`$ is the free-gas spectrum, and $`\widehat{b}`$, $`\widehat{b}^{}`$ are bosonic operators. In principle, one is interested in any possible interaction function $`U(𝐤)`$, but the simplest possible form is a delta function in real space, so that $`U(𝐤)=U`$ is momentum-independent. To first order $`U`$ is related to the $`s`$-wave scattering length $`a`$ by $`U=4\pi \mathrm{}^2a/m`$. A dimensionless measure of the interaction is the quantity $`an^{1/3}`$, where $`n=N/V`$ is the density. The program is to examine the shift in the critical temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, as compared to a noninteracting gas of the same density, as a function of $`an^{1/3}`$, for small $`an^{1/3}`$.

For several decades, the quasiparticle picture has been a central paradigm for studying correlated many-body systems. Even in a highly correlated Bose liquid like liquid helium, a quasiparticle description accounts for the transition temperature extremely well; e.g., the lambda point temperature can be obtained from the ideal gas expression $`T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}=\left(2\pi /m[\zeta (\frac{3}{2})]^{2/3}\right)n^{2/3}`$ by replacing the helium atomic mass $`m`$ by a quasiparticle effective mass, $`m`$\*. The effective mass in the liquid exceeds the bare mass, because of the inertia of the medium which has to make way for any atom to move. Correspondingly, the transition temperature is lower for liquid 4He than would be the case for an ideal bose gas with the same bare mass.

The question we would like to address is the following: how much information can one get about $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ from a quasiparticle description of the weakly interacting Bose gas? The simplest treatment, a Hartree correction, does not give any contribution to the transition temperature. The exchange contribution at mean field level (Fock), does not have any effect on $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ for a momentum-independent interaction, but gives a negative shift for a momentum-dependent interaction fetter . The Fock contribution to $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ depends on the details of the interaction, and for small interactions is weaker than the leading shift we are examining. The present understanding is that there is no mean field effect on the leading shift, and that higher-order correlations are required to calculate this leading shift in $`T_\mathrm{c}`$.

Interaction effects in the non-ideal Bose gas can be described in terms of the two-body $`t`$-matrix, i.e., the vacuum scattering amplitude. This quantity describes all possible collisions between *two* particles, without taking into account the fact that the surrounding medium has an effect on these collisions. Many-body corrections arising from the surrounding gas can be treated by using the many-body $`T`$-matrix, which is the sum of ladder diagrams.

In this paper, we approach the calculation of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ for a Bose gas using perturbation theory in the two-body $`t`$-matrix. This is to be regarded as a first step toward a calculation using the many-body $`T`$-matrix. The idea is that, if one can regard the system as a weakly interacting gas of quasiparticles, then perturbation theory in the quasiparticle interactions should give a reasonable starting point, and the effects of the surrounding medium can be treated as a correction to these results.

The work in this paper is not meant to be a definitive determination of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ for the weakly interacting bose gas, but instead pursues the more limited aim of calculating $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ within a quasiparticle framework. As is typical for descriptions of critical-point properties, our approach faces infrared divergences. We elaborate on two ways to regularize these divergences.

During the past several years, work by Baym, Laloë and collaborators baym\_prl ; baym\_N ; baym\_a2log ; mueller\_baym\_finite ; baym\_bigpaper ; baymfriends\_numerics , has predicted a positive shift in $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ which, to leading order, is *linear* in the scattering length; $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}=c_1an^{1/3}+𝒪(a^2n^{2/3})`$. Attempts to calculate the coefficient $`c_1`$, however, have continued to give fluctuating results. This has prompted the Baym group to predict baym\_a2log  a logarithmic contribution at the *next* order, i.e., a $`a^2\mathrm{ln}a`$ contribution. The presence of such a non-analyticity might explain the difficulty in any numerical estimate of $`c_1`$.

Stoof, from a renormalization-group analysis stoof2 ; stoof\_private , has predicted an increase of the transition temperature proportional to $`a|\mathrm{ln}a|`$, i.e., a non-analyticity at *leading* order. A leading non-analytic behavior would actually explain even better the widely varying results obtained in attempts to calculate the coefficient $`c_1`$ based on the assumption of linear shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}c_1an^{1/3}`$. One should also note that the work of Baym and collaborators relies heavily on power-counting and dimensional arguments. This kind of argument typically does not catch logarithmic corrections. The possibility of leading non-analytic dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$ on the interaction, therefore, needs to be further examined.

An older attack on the $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ problem is that of Kanno kanno12 ; kanno3 . Using a “quasi-linear” canonical transformation, Kanno calculated the free energy and hence $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ of the Bose gas. Other derivations of the transition temperature include the canonical-ensemble calculation wilkens  of Wilkens *et al* leading to a negative shift, Schakel’s effective-action theory schakel\_ijmp ; schakel\_boulevard  leading to a prediction for a positive linear shift, and Kleinert’s recent five-loop calculation kleinert . In addition, there have been spurious mean-field level predictions huang\_prl ; toyoda  for shifts in $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ proportional to the square root of the interaction.

One could think of studying the $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ problem experimentally, e.g., in the context of trapped atomic Bose gases. Unfortunately, trap effects dominate in the dependence of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ on the interaction for these systems. Size effects cause a decrease of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ at mean-field level, far larger than the intrinsic effect under study in this paper. The 4He-Vycor system reppy  might be more suitable for studying the $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ problem, but is yet to reach the accuracies necessary for identifying logarithm-like corrections.

## II The Quasiparticle Approach

The starting point of our analysis is the expansion of the single particle Green function to leading nontrivial order in quasiparticle interactions, namely:

$$\begin{array}{c}G(𝐤,z)=\frac{1}{z\left(ϵ_𝐤\mu +\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,E_𝐤)\right)\left(\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,z)\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,E_𝐤)\right)}\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{zE_𝐤}+\frac{[\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,z)\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,E_𝐤)]}{[zE_𝐤]^2}+\mathrm{}=\frac{1}{zE_𝐤}\left[1+\frac{d\omega }{\pi }\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}(𝐤,\omega )}{(\omega z)(\omega E_𝐤)}\right]+\mathrm{}.\end{array}$$
(1)
Here $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\mathrm{R},\mathrm{I}}(𝐤,\omega )=𝔢,𝔪\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,\omega +i0^+)`$ are the real and imaginary parts of the self energy, and $`E_𝐤=ϵ_𝐤\mu +\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,E_𝐤)`$ is the quasiparticle energy. This expression has a number of attractive properties which would not appear in simple perturbation theory in the inter-particle interactions.

In the quasi-particle approximation (1), the single-particle spectral function $`𝒜(𝐤,\omega )2𝔪G(𝐤,\omega +i0^+)`$ is given by:

$$𝒜(𝐤,\omega )2\pi \delta (\omega E_𝐤)\left[1+\frac{d\omega ^{}}{\pi }\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}(𝐤,\omega ^{})}{(\omega ^{}E_𝐤)^2}\right]2\frac{\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}(𝐤,\omega )}{(\omega ^{}E_𝐤)^2}.$$
(2)
Note that the form (2) automatically satisfies the spectral sum-rule, $`𝑑\omega 𝒜(𝐤,\omega )=1`$.

We proceed by writing the particle number $`N`$ as a momentum sum over the convolution of the spectral function and the Bose thermal distribution function, $`f(\omega )=1/(e^{\beta \omega }1)`$.

$$N=\underset{𝐤}{}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }𝒜(𝐤,\omega )f(\omega )=N_0+V\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}f(E_𝐤)+V\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{\pi }\frac{[f(E_𝐤)f(\omega )]}{(\omega E_𝐤)^2}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}(𝐤,\omega ).$$
(3)
To proceed further we must resort to an explicit expression for the self-energy. We make the assumption that our quasi-particles interact weakly, so that we can work perturbatively. We limit ourselves to terms up to second order in the interaction.

### II.1 Perturbation Theory

We first perform perturbation theory for the self-energy in the bare potential $`U(𝐤)`$, retaining explicit momentum-dependence. The diagrams that need to be calculated are shown in figure 1. After performing the Matsubara sums, we get:

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝐤,z)\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\left[U(𝐤𝐩)+U(0)\right]f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐩)\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\left[f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)+f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪})+f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤})f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪})f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤})\right]}{z\left(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪}+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤}\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪\right)}\times \\ \hfill U(𝐩)\left[U(𝐩)+U(𝐤𝐩𝐪)\right].\end{array}$$
(4)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐤=ϵ_𝐤\mu `$. For a momentum-independent $`U(𝐤)=U`$, the first-order Hartree and Fock terms give equal contributions, as do the two second-order diagrams. However, Using $`U(𝐤)=U`$ directly in (4) causes ultraviolet (UV) problems in the second-order self-energy, due to the term with a single Bose function. The prescription for removal of such divergences is to shift to a description in terms of the vacuum scattering amplitude $`t`$, which is a more physical quantity than the bare potential. The bare potential $`U(𝐤)`$ is related to the $`t`$-matrix by

$$U(𝐤)=𝔢𝐩𝐤,𝐪+𝐤\left|\widehat{t}\right|𝐩,𝐪\frac{d^3k^{}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{𝔢\left[𝐩𝐤,𝐪+𝐤\left|\widehat{t}\right|𝐩𝐤^{},𝐪+𝐤^{}𝐩𝐤^{},𝐪+𝐤^{}\left|\widehat{t}\right|𝐩,𝐪\right]}{ϵ_𝐩+ϵ_𝐪ϵ_{𝐩𝐤}ϵ_{𝐪+𝐤}}$$
(5)
When eq (5) is used to replace the bare potential by the $`t`$-matrix in eq (4), we get an $`𝒪(t^2)`$ term from the first-order self-energy that exactly cancels the UV-divergent term appearing at second order. There is now no problem in using a low-momentum limit in which the $`t`$-matrix reduces to a momentum-independent constant $`t=4\pi \mathrm{}^2a/m`$. The real (on-shell) and imaginary parts of the self-energy now reduce to:

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐤)2tn+2t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪})+f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤})f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪})f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤})}{\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐤\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪}\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤}},$$
(6)
and

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}(𝐤,\omega )2\pi t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\delta \left(\omega \left[\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪}+\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤}\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪\right]\right)\hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)+f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪})+f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤})f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩+𝐪})f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_{𝐩𝐤})\right].\end{array}$$
(7)
### II.2 Self-consistent Perturbation Theory

We will use (6) and (7) to define a self-consistent quasi-particle approximation, formally second order in the vacuum scattering amplitude. This is done by replacing the free-particle dispersion functions ($`ϵ_𝐪`$’s) on the right hand sides of (6),(7) by the quasiparticle dispersions, $`E_𝐪`$’s. The imaginary part now becomes

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}(𝐤,\omega )2\pi t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\delta \left(\omega \left[E_{𝐩+𝐪}+E_{𝐩𝐤}E_𝐪\right]\right)\hfill \\ \hfill \times \left[f(E_𝐪)+f(E_𝐪)f(E_{𝐩+𝐪})+f(E_𝐪)f(E_{𝐩𝐤})f(E_{𝐩+𝐪})f(E_{𝐩𝐤})\right].\end{array}$$
(8)
When this expression for the imaginary part is used in eq (3), the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}`$ contribution cancels out exactly, resulting in

$$n=\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}f\left(E_𝐤\right);$$
(9)
i.e., the number of quasiparticles is equal to the number of particles. Since we will be using these results above and at the transition, we have neglected the zero-momentum occupancy $`N_0`$ as compared to $`N`$. We note that the imaginary part of the self-energy, i.e., effects of quasiparticle broadening, has dropped out of the expression for particle number and hence does not play any role in our determination of the transition temperature.

Finally, making the real part of the self energy (eq 6) self-consistent, we get the following expression for the quasi-particle energy:

$$\begin{array}{c}E_𝐤=ϵ_𝐤\mu +\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,E_𝐤)\hfill \\ \hfill =ϵ_𝐤\left(\mu 2tn\right)+2t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{f(E_𝐪)f(E_{𝐩+𝐪})+f(E_𝐪)f(E_{𝐩𝐤})f(E_{𝐩+𝐪})f(E_{𝐩𝐤})}{E_𝐪+E_𝐤E_{𝐩+𝐪}E_{𝐩𝐤}}.\end{array}$$
(10)
## III Critical Temperature and Spectrum

To derive an expression for the change in the critical temperature due to quasi-particle interactions, we first consider the density of an ideal Bose gas, both at its transition temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}=\left(2\pi /m[\zeta (\frac{3}{2})]^{2/3}\right)n^{2/3}`$, and at temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ which is the transition point of the *interacting* Bose gas.

$$\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{e^{ϵ_𝐤/k_BT_\mathrm{c}}1}=n^{(0)}(T_\mathrm{c})\left(\frac{T_\mathrm{c}}{T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}}\right)^{3/2}n^{(0)}(T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)})\left(1+\frac{3}{2}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}}{T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}}\right)n^{(0)}(T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}).$$
(11)
Here $`T_\mathrm{c}=T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}+\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$. We are looking for the difference of transition temperatures of an interacting and a non-interacting gas at the *same density*, therefore $`n^{(0)}(T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)})=n(T_\mathrm{c})=n`$. Evaluating (9) at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ and subtracting equation (11) we obtain the leading correction to $`T_c`$ due to interactions:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}}{T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}}\frac{2}{3n}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\left[f_\mathrm{c}(\xi _𝐤)f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤)\right],$$
(12)
Here $`f_\mathrm{c}(x)=1/(e^{x/kT_\mathrm{c}}1)`$ is the Bose distribution function evaluated at the critical temperature; and $`\xi _𝐤=E_𝐤(T_\mathrm{c})=ϵ_𝐤\mu (T_\mathrm{c})+\mathrm{\Sigma }_𝐑(𝐤,\xi _𝐤)=ϵ_𝐤+\mathrm{\Sigma }_𝐑(𝐤,\xi _𝐤)\mathrm{\Sigma }_𝐑(0,0)`$ represents the single particle excitation spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. The problem of calculating the relative shift has thus been reduced to calculating the spectrum at the critical point, $`\xi _𝐤`$.

At this stage, we are able to present a simple argument for the *increase* of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ due to the addition of a repulsive interaction. This is important in light of the continuing appearance of negative-shift predictions in the literature toyoda ; wilkens . The major contribution to eq (12) comes from the infrared; therefore approximately

$$\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}_0^{\mathrm{cutoff}}𝑑kk^2[ϵ_𝐤^1\xi _𝐤^1].$$

If the quasiparticle spectrum $`\xi _𝐤`$ is “harder” than the bare spectrum $`ϵ_𝐤=k^2/2m`$, i.e., if $`\xi _𝐤`$ is sub-quadratic in $`k`$ or quadratic with an effective mass $`m^{}<m`$, then the $`ϵ_𝐤`$ integral dominates and the shift is positive. On the other hand if the spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ were “softened” by the interaction, one would have a decrease in the transition temperature. Since the spectrum $`\xi _𝐤`$ at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ is known to be intermediate between linear and quadratic, the weakly interacting Bose gas has a *positive* shift in the transition temperature with the introduction of a weak repulsive interaction.

### III.1 Spectrum from Perturbation Theory

It follows from (10) that $`\xi _𝐤`$ satisfies the nonlinear integral equation,

$$\begin{array}{c}\xi _𝐤=ϵ_𝐤+2t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{f(\xi _𝐩)f(\xi _𝐪)+f(\xi _𝐩)f(\xi _{𝐩+𝐤𝐪})f(\xi _𝐪)f(\xi _{𝐩+𝐤𝐪})}{\xi _𝐩+\xi _𝐤\xi _𝐪\xi _{𝐩+𝐤𝐪}}\hfill \\ \hfill 2t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{f(\xi _𝐩)f(\xi _𝐪)+f(\xi _𝐩)f(\xi _{𝐩𝐪})f(\xi _𝐪)f(\xi _{𝐩𝐪})}{\xi _𝐩\xi _𝐪\xi _{𝐩𝐪}}\end{array}$$
(13)
In the perturbative quasiparticle approach, equations (12) and (13) completely determine $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$.

If the quasiparticle dispersion $`\xi _𝐤`$ were quadratic at small momenta, the self-energy integral in eq (13) would be divergent in the infrared. A power-counting of this equation shows that, for self-consistency, the dispersion at small momenta should be sub-quadratic, $`\xi _𝐤k^{3/2}`$, modulo possible logarithmic factors which power-counting cannot predict. The power-counting arguments were first devised by Patashiskii and Pokrovskii pata+pokrov .

Unfortunately, this approach using second-order perturbation theory over-modifies the infrared spectrum. The long-wavelength spectrum at the transition point should be $`\xi _𝐤k^{2\eta }`$, where $`\eta `$ is the anomalous dimension. The present system falls in the same universality class as the $`N=2`$ quantum rotor model. For this universality class, a recent Monte Carlo calculation eta\_montecarlo  has produced the value $`\eta 0.038`$. In contrast, eq (13) gives $`\eta =0.5`$.

Acknowledging that the present framework over-modifies the spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, we proceed to analyze eqs (12) and (13) in order to extract the shift in the critical temperature due to interactions.

### III.2 Infrared Divergence

There are several ways of dealing with the infrared divergence. One is to treat equation (13) self-consistently and determine the self-consistent $`\xi (𝐤)`$ numerically; this procedure is outlined in section V. This approach has also been explored by Baym and collaborators.

In the next section, we take a different approach, motivated by the work of Kanno kanno3 . We make an expansion in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,\xi _𝐤)`$ that allows us to use the chemical potential at the critical point, $`\mu (T_\mathrm{c})=\mu _\mathrm{c}`$, as an infrared cutoff. This approach allows us to express the relative shift in the transition temperature as an expansion in $`\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}=\mu _\mathrm{c}/k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{c}`$, which itself can in turn be related to the scattering length. This leads to a transition temperature shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$ that is $`a\sqrt{𝒦(a)}`$ to leading order, where $`𝒦(x)`$ is a function approximately like $`|\mathrm{ln}(x)|`$, to be specified in the next section. The appropriateness of this procedure is difficult to gauge, but it provides strong support to the possibility of non-analytic corrections to the transition temperature at leading order.

Another infrared regularization procedure that has appeared in the literature is A.M.J. Schakel’s prescription of analytic continuation schakel\_boulevard . The connection between Schakel’s treatment and other calculations awaits further study.

## IV Non-SelfConsistent Calculation

We expand $`f_\mathrm{c}(\xi _𝐤)=f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c}+\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,\xi _𝐤))`$ around $`ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c}`$:

$$f_\mathrm{c}(\xi _𝐤)f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})+f_\mathrm{c}^{}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})).$$
(14)
This provides us with an infrared cutoff, $`\mu _\mathrm{c}`$, for our integrals. The approximation is non-selfconsistent in the sense that a modification of the spectrum to a non-quadratic form no longer plays any role. Using this expansion, the relative shift in $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ becomes

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}}{T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}}\frac{2}{3n}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\left[f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤)\right]\frac{2}{3n}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}f_\mathrm{c}^{}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})$$
(15)
Both integrals can be expanded in $`|\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}|`$, as detailed in appendix A, each integral being $`𝒪(\sqrt{|\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}|})`$ at leading order. The result is

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}}{T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}}+\frac{2}{3n}\left[\frac{\sqrt{\pi }}{\lambda _\mathrm{c}^3}\sqrt{\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}}\right]+𝒪(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})=\frac{2}{3}\left[\zeta (\frac{3}{2})\right]^1\sqrt{\pi |\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}|}+𝒪(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})$$
(16)
The infrared cutoff needs to be expressed in terms of the scattering length; this is achieved by using the condition for the transition, $`\mu _c=\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(0,0)`$. The relation is

$$\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}\frac{16\pi a^2}{\lambda _\mathrm{c}^2}\mathrm{ln}(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}),$$
(17)
also derived in appendix A. The functional dependence of $`|\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}|`$ on the scattering length is thus similar to $`(a/\lambda _\mathrm{c})^2|\mathrm{ln}(a/\lambda _\mathrm{c})|`$, and therefore we get a shift approximately of the form $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}a\sqrt{|\mathrm{ln}a|}`$.

The approximation of eq (17) by $`|\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}|16\pi (a/\lambda _\mathrm{c})^2|\mathrm{ln}(a/\lambda _\mathrm{c})|`$ is displayed in figure 2.

## V Self-Consistent Approach: Numerics

A self-consistent treatment of (13) involves a calculation of the (sub-quadratic) quasiparticle dispersion $`\xi (𝐤)`$. The principal values in (13) make it difficult to treat numerically. A “high-temperature” approximation, obtained by using $`f(\xi )1/\beta \xi `$, produces a simpler version without the zeroes of the principal value form:

$$\xi _𝐤=ϵ_𝐤2t^2\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\left(\frac{1}{\xi _𝐩\xi _𝐪\xi _{𝐩+𝐤𝐪}}\frac{1}{\xi _𝐩\xi _𝐪\xi _{𝐩𝐪}}\right).$$
(18)
While the same dimensional arguments apply to (18), it is likely to lose information about logarithm-like factors.

Since the self-consistent spectrum has infrared behavior $`\xi (𝐤)k^{3/2}`$, we look for solutions of the form $`\xi (𝐤)=k^{3/2}\sigma (k)+k^2`$ where $`\sigma (x)`$ is some smooth function that decays to zero for large $`x`$, and is constant or logarithm-like at small $`x`$. (Here the momenta and $`\xi `$ have been rescaled to be dimensionless, by factors $`\sqrt{\beta /2m}`$ and $`\beta `$ respectively).

Figure 3 shows a numerically determined spectrum $`\xi (𝐤)`$. Once $`\xi (𝐤)`$ has been computed for a particular $`a/\lambda `$, the relative shift in $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ can be computed using our basic eq (12). The $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}`$ vs. $`a`$ plot in the inset shows a definite linear-like increase, as opposed to, say, a $`\sqrt{a}`$ or $`a^{3/2}`$ dependence. However the existence, or lack thereof, of a logarithm-like factor is difficult to prove from numeric data.

## VI Concluding Remarks

To summarize, we have outlined the calculation of $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ from a perturbative expansion in the two-body $`t`$-matrix, or equivalently the scattering length $`a`$. The transition temperature is expressed in terms of the quasiparticle spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$, and hence the problem is transformed to one of calculating the critical-point spectrum $`\xi _𝐤=E_𝐤(T_\mathrm{c})`$.

In developing the formalism, we find that the use of the two-body $`t`$-matrix removes the ultraviolet divergences that appear in a perturbative calculation in terms of a momentum-independent bare potential $`U`$. We also find that the width of the quasiparticle peak ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{I}`$) does not affect $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. Whether this is true at all orders, or a peculiarity of second-order, and whether this is true for a more accurate treatment in terms of the many-body $`T`$-matrix, remain open questions.

The new feature of this work is an unusual approach to dealing with the infrared divergence that appears in treating the spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. This regularization scheme bypasses the issue of spectrum modification, and results in a non-analytic ($`\sqrt{\mathrm{ln}a}`$-like) correction factor to the linear shift of the transition temperature.

The major remaining issue in the $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ problem seems to be the possible existence of a logarithm-like factor in the leading $`a`$-dependence. The resolution of this problem should lie in a clear treatment of the spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. Of the two major approaches, the perturbative approach alters the quadratic spectrum too strongly, while the RG calculation stoof2  neglects spectrum alteration.

The reason for perturbation theory over-estimating the spectrum modification remains to be examined in detail. It has been suggested stoof\_private  that the reason is that perturbation in $`a`$ or $`t`$ does not take into account the fact that the effective interaction strength *flows to zero* under renormalization group flow, at the critical point. An alternate way to view this is to note that the many-body $`T`$-matrix (sum of ladder diagrams) vanishes stoof\_variational ; stoof2 ; shi+griffin  at the transition temperature. A perturbative calculation in terms of the many-body $`T`$-matrix, as opposed to one in terms of the two-body $`t`$-matrix that we have considered here, may therefore be expected to give a more realistic modification of the quasiparticle spectrum at $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. A calculation of $`\xi _𝐤`$ in terms of the many-body $`T`$-matrix has not yet appeared in the literature.

###### Acknowledgements.

The junior author (MH) would like to acknowledge informative discussions with Henk Stoof and Franck Laloë, made possible by the generosity of ECT\*, Trento (Italy). E-mail responses from M. Holzmann and Adriaan M.J. Schakel were very helpful.

## Appendix A Details for the Non-SelfConsistent Approach

In this appendix we evaluate the two contributions to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}/T_\mathrm{c}^{(0)}`$ in eq (15), and show how eq (17) follows from the criticality condition $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(0,0)=\mu `$.

The first integral in (15) is $`_𝐤\left[f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤)\right]=\lambda _\mathrm{c}^3g_{3/2}(e^{\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}})\lambda _\mathrm{c}^3\zeta (\frac{3}{2})`$. Here the $`g_{3/2}`$’s are the Bose-Einstein integral functions BE\_functions , $`g_n(x)=_i(x^i/i^n)`$, and $`\zeta (n)=g_n(1)`$. We are using the notation $`_𝐤(2\pi )^3d^3k`$. Using the Robinson expansion BE\_functions  for $`g_{3/2}`$, we get

$$_𝐤\left[f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤\mu _\mathrm{c})f_\mathrm{c}(ϵ_𝐤)\right]=\frac{1}{\lambda _\mathrm{c}^3}[2\sqrt{\pi (\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})}+𝒪(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})].$$

For the second integral in (17), using the second-order self-energy from eq (6), one obtains after some variable transformations

$$_𝐤f_\mathrm{c}^{}(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐤)\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,ϵ_𝐤)=2t^2\frac{}{\mu _\mathrm{c}}_𝐩_𝐪_𝐤\frac{f_\mathrm{c}(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐩)f_\mathrm{c}(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)f_\mathrm{c}(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐤)}{ϵ_𝐩+ϵ_𝐤ϵ_𝐪ϵ_{𝐩+𝐤𝐪}}\frac{1}{\lambda _\mathrm{c}^5}16\pi ^{3/2}a^2\frac{\mathrm{ln}(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})}{\sqrt{\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}}}.$$

Here $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐩=ϵ_𝐩\mu _\mathrm{c}`$. In combination with the criticality condition (17), this leads to

$$_𝐤f_\mathrm{c}^{}(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐤)\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(𝐤,ϵ_𝐤)\frac{1}{\lambda _\mathrm{c}^3}\left[\sqrt{\pi (\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})}+𝒪(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c})\right].$$

The condition (17) for the transition temperature is obtained from $`\mu _\mathrm{c}=\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{R}(0,0)`$ by using the second-order perturbative result for the self-energy (e.g., obtained from eq (6) by setting $`𝐤=0`$):

$$\mu _\mathrm{c}=4t^2_𝐩_𝐪\frac{f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐩)f(\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪)}{ϵ_𝐩ϵ_𝐪ϵ_{𝐩𝐪}\mu _\mathrm{c}}\frac{8ma^2}{\pi ^2\beta _\mathrm{c}^2}\mathrm{ln}(\beta _\mathrm{c}\mu _\mathrm{c}).$$


format: text

text:
# Fast noise in the Landau-Zener theory.

## I Introduction

Landau-Zener (LZ) formula for transition probabilities at avoided crossing of two levels is one of a few fundamental results of non-stationary quantum mechanics. Its rather general character and simplicity makes it extremely suitable for versatile applications. Traditionally it was applied in quantum chemistry chemistry  and in collision theory inc , nik . A recent treatment of the experiments on the quantum molecular hysteresis in nanomagnets by Wernsdorfer and Sessoli WS1 ; WS2 ; nm  was a real triumph of the LZ theory. A substantial contributions to the theory of spin tunnelling in these molecules was made by theorists Garg ; GC ; Prokofev . Landau-Zener formula and its generalizations were recently employed also for charge transport in nanostructures av1 ; av2 ; Gef ; Iliescu ; dot2 , Bose-Einstein condensates Y1  and quantum computing FG .

Extensions of the LZ theory to the case of multilevel crossing are less general. Nevertheless, some of them were realistic enough to justify remarkable efforts on the side of theorists for their analysis. Level correlations and localization in energy space were studied in Gef-loc . The pioneering work by Demkov and Osherov demkov  treated exactly the crossing of a single level with a band of parallel levels. In the work zeeman2  Hioe and Carrol solved a problem of transitions in a Zeeman multiplet of an arbitrary spin S in a magnetic field with a constant perpendicular component and a time-dependent parallel component passing through zero value. Numerous generalizations of these results were found brand ; deminf1 ; bow ; dem33 ; zeeman1 ; dem3 ; PS ; usuki . A general point of view on all these exactly solvable models proposed by one of authors sinitsyn  allowed to construct an algorithm for series of new solvable models. Another extensions include nonlinear LZ-model Liu ; Liu2 ; Zob  and LZ problem with nonlinear sweep Garanin . To apply the LZ formula and its multi-state extensions to real systems it is often necessary to take into account the interaction with environment. Such attempts were made in a series of works GC ; Sai ; kay4 ; Kay ; kay3 ; Nish ; SaiKay ; Ao ; Kob ; Shi ; Kay2 ; Loss ; Ben ; Usuki2 , however the problem was not solved completely. Kayanuma et al. Sai ; kay4 ; Kay  have obtained an elegant analytic result for the diagonal white noise. The non-diagonal colored noise was considered by Kayanuma kay3  for the two-level crossing without a constant coupling term. He has found the transition probability in the limit of infinitely short noise correlation time. His result was disputed by Nishino et al. Nish . On the basis of their numerical calculations these authors concluded that the transitions due to non-diagonal noise are weak in many realistic situations. The discrepancy is associated with different limiting procedures in calculations. In the limit of infinitely short correlations but finite amplitude of sweeping field the transition probability was found to be vanishingly small.

The influence of the noise onto the multilevel crossing was studied so far in only one work by Saito and Kayanuma SaiKay , who considered the 3-level crossing at a special relations between parameters in the limit of strong decoherence.

The purpose of this article is to present a systematic study of the influence of noise, including the colored noise, onto the LZ transitions and to generalize it to multistate LZ problems. We demonstrate that the LZ transitions are sensitive to the colored noise much weaker than usual $`\delta `$-like white noise. The latter can be considered as a limit of a noise whose correlation time goes to zero and simultaneously its square of amplitude goes to infinity, so that their product remains a constant. We prove that such a white non-diagonal noise always leads to equal population of the crossing levels. However, the noise, whose correlation time goes to zero, but its amplitude remains a constant, produces non-trivial transition probabilities as it was first found by Kayanuma kay3  for a special type of the noise correlation function. Another subtle problem is the order of limiting processes Nish . The resulting probabilities depend crucially on what happens first: time asymptotically goes to infinity or correlation time goes to zero. Analysis of these problems allowed us to reconcile works kay3  and Nish . In our work we first find simple analytical result for a transition produced by a most general short-time correlated noise in 2-level systems and the change of the LZ probabilities produced by such a noise. We check these analytical results by numerical calculations. We also study the influence of the noise on transitions at multilevel crossing.

The plan of the article is as follows. In section II we generalize the result of Kayanuma for transverse noise kay3  to the case of the arbitrary Gaussian noise in all three directions. Next we demonstrate its generalization to a three level system. In the section IV we study the time dependence of the density matrix with LZ transitions stimulated by fast noise. In the fifth section we propose a formula that incorporates constant transverse magnetic field and compare its predictions with numerical simulations. In section VI we consider the master equation for an arbitrary spin placed into a regular varying field and noisy magnetic field along the $`z`$-direction and a constant field along $`x`$-direction and find simple expressions for transition probabilities in the limit of a strong decoherence. In section VII we perform similar calculations for a charged particle on a periodic chain driven by a time-dependent electric field and compare our results with those for a completely coherent evolution.

## II Colored noise in two level LZ transitions.

LZ transitions in a two-level system with a non-diagonal noise were studied by Kayanuma in kay3 . The Hamiltonian of the problem was chosen to be

$$H=\beta t\sigma _z+\eta _x\sigma _x$$
(1)
where $`\eta _x`$ is the noise field with the correlation function $`\eta _x(t_1)\eta _x(t_2)=J_x^2e^{\lambda _x|t_1t_2|}`$ and $`\sigma _i`$ are Pauli matrices. In the limit of infinitely short correlation time $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$ Kayanuma has found a simple analytical result for the transition probability.

The choice of Kayanuma corresponds to the spin $`1/2`$ problem with noisy magnetic field along the $`x`$-axes only. We generalize the Kayanuma model introducing a more general Hamiltonian with all 3 components of random magnetic field being non-zero and with a most general form of the short-time correlation tensor:

$$H=\beta t\sigma _z+\underset{i}{}\eta _i(t)\sigma _i,i=x,y,z$$
(2)
$$\eta _i(t_1)\eta _j(t_2)=g_{ij}(\lambda |t_1t_2|)$$
(3)
We assume that though $`g_{ij}`$ can be different for different $`i,j`$, they are of the same order of magnitude. We consider the limit of fast noise with $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$, where $`\lambda `$ is the inverse characteristic decay time of the correlator $`g_{ij}`$.

The density matrix elements for the system with the Hamiltonian (1) obey the following system of ordinary differential equations:

$$\begin{array}{c}i\dot{\rho }=2(\rho _{12}(\eta _xi\eta _y)+\rho _{21}(\eta _x+i\eta _y))\hfill \\ i\dot{\rho }_{12}=2(\beta t+\eta _z)\rho _{12}\rho (\eta _x+i\eta _y)\hfill \\ i\dot{\rho }_{21}=2(\beta t+\eta _z)\rho _{21}+\rho (\eta _xi\eta _y)\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
where $`\rho =\rho _{11}\rho _{22}`$. By elimination of non-diagonal matrix elements equations (4) are transformed into one integral-differential equation for the occupation difference $`\rho `$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{d\rho (t)}{dt}=2e^{i\beta t^2}(\eta _x(t)i\eta _y(t))_{\mathrm{}}^t𝑑t_1e^{i\beta t_1^2i_{t_1}^t\eta _z(t_2)𝑑t_2}(\eta _x(t_1)+i\eta _y(t_1))\rho (t_1)\hfill \\ 2e^{i\beta t^2}(\eta _x(t)+i\eta _y(t))_{\mathrm{}}^t𝑑t_1e^{i\beta t_1^2+i_{t_1}^t\eta _z(t_2)𝑑t_2}(\eta _x(t_1)i\eta _y(t_1))\rho (t_1)\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
The solution of this equation can be formally found as an infinite series in powers of $`\eta _i`$ that must be averaged over noise realizations. A typical term contains the product $`\eta _{i_1}(t_1)\eta _{i_2}(t_2)\mathrm{}\eta _{i_n}(t_n)`$. Its average is equal to the sum of all possible products of pair correlators since we assume the noise to be Gaussian. Kayanuma kay3  has shown that in the limit of very fast noise only the term in which the pairing is ideally ordered in time, i.e. the pairs are (12)(34)…(2n-1,2n), contributes a finite value into the integral. Other pairings contribute terms, which are by a power of infinitely small parameter $`1/\lambda `$ smaller and can be neglected. This Kayanuma’s observation is completely analogues to the theorem proven by Abrikosov and Gor’kov in their theory of impurities in a metal AbrGor . Note that the diagonal component of noise is inessential in this approximation and can be omitted. These facts allow to write down the integral-differential equation for the average value of $`\rho `$ as follows:

$$\frac{d\rho (t)}{dt}=4_{\mathrm{}}^t\mathrm{cos}\left(\beta (t^2t_1^2)\right)F\left(\lambda |tt_1|\right)\rho (t_1)𝑑t_1$$
(6)
where $`F=g_{xx}+g_{yy}`$. Now we can employ the approximation of the fast noise assuming that the average $`\rho (t)`$ almost does not change in the interval of time $`1/\lambda `$ and that integral of correlation function is convergent. In this approximation we can extract $`\rho (t)`$ from the integral in the right-hand side of equation (6) and expand the argument of the cosine near the end point $`t_1=t`$ of the integral. The resulting differential equation reads:

$$\frac{d\rho }{dt}=4\widehat{F}(2\beta t)\rho $$
(7)
where $`\widehat{F}(q)`$ is the cosine Fourier transform of the function $`F`$:

$$\widehat{F}(q)=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{cos}(q\tau )F(\lambda |\tau |)𝑑\tau $$
(8)
Note that the characteristic value of $`q`$ are of the order $`\lambda `$ and, respectively, essential values of $`t`$ in equation (7) are $`t\lambda /\beta `$. We see that essential values of time go to infinity together with $`\lambda `$. It shows that the order of limiting processes is indeed very important. Here we first calculate the transition probability, i.e. the diagonal elements of the density matrix at $`t=\mathrm{}`$ and at very large, but still finite $`\lambda `$ and put it infinity in the end. Solving equation (7), we find:

$$\rho (t)=\rho (\mathrm{})\mathrm{exp}\left(4_{\mathrm{}}^t\widehat{F}(2\beta t^{})𝑑t^{}\right)$$
(9)
Together with the standard equation $`\rho _{11}+\rho _{22}=1`$ equation (9) determines average occupation number of each level at any time. The most interesting are the transition probabilities at $`t=+\mathrm{}`$, which can be obtained from the same equation (9). Note that the integral in the exponent at $`t=+\mathrm{}`$ becomes equal to

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\widehat{F}(2\beta t^{})𝑑t^{}=\frac{\pi }{2\beta }F(0)$$
(10)
Thus, from equations (9) and (10) we find:

$`\rho _{11}(+\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[1+\left(2\rho _{11}(\mathrm{})1\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi F(0)}{\beta }}\right)\right];`$ (11)
$`\rho _{22}(+\mathrm{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[1\left(2\rho _{11}(\mathrm{})1\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2\pi F(0)}{\beta }}\right)\right]`$ (12)
Putting $`\rho _{11}(\mathrm{})=1`$, we find the transition probability:

$$P_{12}=\rho _{22}(+\mathrm{})_{\rho _{11}(\mathrm{})=1}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi F(0)}{\beta }\right)\right]$$
(13)
For the standard white noise the correlators $`\eta _i(t)\eta _j(t^{})`$ turn into delta-functions in the limit $`\lambda =\mathrm{}`$. It means that their values at $`t=t^{}`$ become infinitely large. In particular it means that $`F(0)`$ is infinitely large for the standard white noise. In this case, as it is seen from equations (11), (12) the occupancies of both levels are equal to 1/2. Thus, the standard white noise leads to complete loss of initial state memory and equipartition of the levels. On the other hand, if the amplitude of noise remains finite, the occupation numbers conserve memory on the initial state.

In the limit of the fast noise the transition probabilities are determined only by the average square of non-diagonal noise and are not sensitive to the diagonal noise. To illustrate this statement we consider a special case when the diagonal noise does not correlate with the non-diagonal one. Then, as it is seen from equation (5), the averaging over the $`z`$-component of the noise leads to multiplication of the coefficients in this integral-differential equation by the Debye-Waller factor

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(_{t_1}^t\eta _z(\tau )𝑑\tau \right)$$

$$=exp\left(\frac{1}{2\lambda }(tt_1)_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}g_{zz}(\theta )𝑑\theta \right)$$

An essential interval of integration over $`t_1`$ near $`t_1=t`$ is $`1/\lambda `$. In this interval the Debye-Waller factor changes by the value $`1/(\lambda )^2`$ and with this precision is equal to 1.

For a special case $`g_{xx}(\tau )=J^2\mathrm{exp}(\lambda |\tau |);g_{yy}(\tau )=0`$ we reproduce the Kayanuma’s result kay3 .

## III Nondiagonal noise in spin-1 LZ theory.

The Hamiltonian $`H`$ of a general multi-state LZ problem (see for example brand  ) has the following matrix form

$$H=Bt+A,$$
(14)
where $`B`$ is a diagonal matrix and matrices $`A`$ and $`B`$ are independent on time. However, in a situation of a general position only two levels cross. Several levels can intersect at the same moment of time only due to a special symmetry. Such a symmetry is systematically realized in the model of an arbitrary spin $`S1/2`$ placed into an external magnetic field that has a time-dependent $`z`$-component vanishing at some moment of time $`t=0`$ and a constant transverse component zeeman2 . The corresponding Hamiltonian is:

$$H=\beta tS_z+gS_x$$
(15)
where $`\beta `$ and $`g`$ are constants. This exactly solvable model for a spin higher than $`1/2`$ was employed in the theory of Stark effect Kaz ; some recent applications can be found in agu ; Suo .

In this section we generalize the result (13) to a spin 1 system. We consider a following Hamiltonian for the spin 1 system in a random magnetic field:

$$H=(\beta t)S_z+\underset{i=1}{\overset{+1}{}}\eta _iS_i$$
(16)
where $`S_i`$ are the spin projection operators for $`S=1`$. The density matrix $`\rho `$ depends on 8 independent parameters. We denote $`\rho _+=\rho _{1,1}\rho _{0,0}`$ and $`\rho _{}=\rho _{1,1}\rho _{0,0}`$. The derivation of equations for $`\rho _+`$ and $`\rho _{}`$ can be done in the same spirit as it was done for the spin $`1/2`$ case. Looking for a solution of the evolution equation for density matrix in the form of perturbation series and retaining after the averaging over the noise only the leading terms in $`1/\lambda `$, we arrive at an integral-differential equation. Additional care must be paid to the integrals of the form $`_{\mathrm{}}^t𝑑t_1_{\mathrm{}}^{t_1}𝑑t_2\mathrm{exp}(i\beta (t_1^2+t_2^2))g_{ij}(\lambda |t_1t_2|)`$ that did not appear in the two level system, but appeared in the series for the spin $`S=1`$. One can check that this integral is of the order $`1/\lambda `$ and hence we disregard it and all terms that contain it. After lengthy but straightforward calculations we find that in the leading order in $`1/\lambda `$ the elements $`\rho _+(t)`$ and $`\rho _{}(t)`$ satisfy the following integral-differential equation:

$$\frac{d}{dt}\begin{array}{c}\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho _+(t)\hfill \\ \rho _{}(t)\hfill \end{array}\right)=2_{\mathrm{}}^t𝑑t_1\mathrm{cos}(\beta (t^2t_1^2)/2)F(\lambda |tt_1|)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1/2\\ 1/2& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho _+(t_1)\\ \rho _{}(t_1)\end{array}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
The approximation of the fast noise allows to transform this equation into the following differential one:

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho _+(t)\hfill \\ \rho _{}(t)\hfill \end{array}\right)=2\widehat{F}(\beta t)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1/2\\ 1/2& 1\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho _+(t_1)\\ \rho _{}(t_1)\end{array}\right)$$
(18)
Thus, the problem is reduced to a linear differential equation with a constant matrix coefficient. The formal answer is:

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho _+(t)\hfill \\ \rho _{}(t)\hfill \end{array}\right)=\mathrm{exp}\left[2_{\mathrm{}}^t\widehat{F}(\beta |\tau |)𝑑\tau \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1/2\\ 1/2& 1\end{array}\right)\right]\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho _+(\mathrm{})\hfill \\ \rho _{}(\mathrm{})\hfill \end{array}\right)$$
(19)
This formal solution can be transformed to a more explicit form with the help of the matrix identity:

$$\mathrm{exp}\left[\gamma \left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1/2\\ 1/2& 1\end{array}\right)\right]=e^\gamma \left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cosh}\gamma /2& \mathrm{sinh}\gamma /2\\ \mathrm{sinh}\gamma /2& \mathrm{cosh}\gamma /2\end{array}\right)$$
(20)
The transition probabilities are defined by this matrix acting on vectors $`\left(\begin{array}{c}1\hfill \\ 0\hfill \end{array}\right)`$ if initially the projection $`+1`$ was occupied , or $`\left(\begin{array}{c}0\hfill \\ 1\hfill \end{array}\right)`$ if the projection $`1`$ was occupied. The transition probabilities are:

$$\begin{array}{c}P_{+0}=P_0=\frac{1}{3}\left(1e^{3\gamma /2}\right)\hfill \\ P_{++}=P_{}=\frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{6}e^{3\gamma /2}+\frac{1}{2}e^{\gamma /2}\hfill \\ P_+=P_+=\frac{1}{3}+\frac{1}{6}e^{3\gamma /2}\frac{1}{2}e^{\gamma /2}\hfill \\ P_{00}=\frac{1}{3}\left(1+e^{3\gamma /2}\right)\hfill \\ P_{0+}=P_0=\frac{1}{3}\left(1e^{3\gamma /2}\right)\hfill \end{array}$$
(21)
where $`\gamma =\pi F(0)/\beta `$.

We see that in the case of 3 levels the main results obtained in the previous section for a 2-level system persist: the standard white ($`\gamma =\mathrm{}`$) noise leads to equal population of all 3 levels, whereas the fast noise with a finite amplitude results in non-trivial transition probabilities.

## IV Transition time for colored noise

In section 2 we have shown that the typical time for establishing the asymptotic of the transition probabilities is $`\lambda /\beta F(0)`$. It is useful to look at the same problem from a different point of view. Namely, we will analyze the behavior of transitions driven by the standard $`\delta `$-like white noise, their typical rates and times. If the action of the standard white noise is limited by some finite time interval, it becomes physically equivalent to the fast noise with a finite amplitude. Simultaneously we will study directly the influence of the white noise onto the LZ transitions.

Let us consider the problem with the very beginning. The Hamiltonian is the generator of a random rotation:

$$H=𝐡(𝐭)𝐒$$
(22)
where $`𝐡(t)=𝐡_0(t)+\eta (t)`$ and $`𝐡_\mathrm{𝟎}(t)=\beta t\widehat{z}+\mathrm{\Gamma }\widehat{x}`$. Here we consider the isotropic white noise $`\eta _i(t)\eta _k(t^{})=\gamma \delta _{ik}\delta (tt^{})`$.
The density matrix as any Hermitian $`S\times S`$ matrix can be represented as a sum:

$$\rho =\rho ^{(0)}I+\rho _i^{(1)}S_i+\rho _{ik}^{(2)}\left[S_iS_k+S_kS_i\frac{2}{3}S(S+1)\right]+\mathrm{}$$
(23)
where the last term in equation (29) contains $`S`$ operator factors. All irreducible tensors $`\rho ^{(j)};j=0\mathrm{}S`$ evolve separately. The scalar $`\rho ^{(0)}=(1/N)Tr\rho `$ is a constant. The vector $`\rho ^{(1)}`$ obeys an obvious equation:

$$\dot{\rho ^{(1)}}=𝐡\times \rho ^{(\mathrm{𝟏})}$$
(24)
The modulus of the vector $`\stackrel{}{\rho }^{(1)}`$ is conserved.

Dynamic equation for the 2-nd order symmetric tensor $`\rho _{ik}`$ reads:

$$\dot{\rho }_{ik}=ϵ_{imn}h_m\rho _{nk}ϵ_{kmn}h_m\rho _{in}$$
(25)
The extension for the rest of irreducible components is obvious. In equation (24) for the vectorial part it is useful to apply the interaction representation: $`\rho ^{(\mathrm{𝟏})}(𝐭)=𝐔_\mathrm{𝟎}(𝐭,𝐭_\mathrm{𝟎})\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(\mathrm{𝟏})}(𝐭)`$, where $`U_0(t,t_0)`$ is the evolution matrix for the field $`𝐡_0(t)=\widehat{z}\beta t+\widehat{x}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The reduced vector $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(1)}(t)`$ obeys the following equation:

$$\frac{d}{dt}\stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(1)}(t)=\stackrel{~}{\eta }\times \stackrel{~}{\rho }^{(1)}(t)$$
(26)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }=U_0^1(\eta \times U_0)`$. In terms of the Cartesian coordinates this equation reads:

$$\dot{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}_i=T_{ikl}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_k\eta _l$$
(27)
where the matrix $`T_{ikl}`$ is:

$$T_{ikl}(t,t_0)=(U_0)_{mi}(U_0)_{nk}ϵ_{mln}$$
(28)
Initial values of $`\rho `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$ coincide since $`U_0(t_0,t_0)=I`$. Equation (27) can be solved by power expansion over the noise:

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_i(t)=\rho _i(t_0)+_{t_0}^tT_{ikl}(t^{},t_0)\eta _l(t^{})𝑑t\rho _k(t_0)+\mathrm{}$$
(29)
When averaging the expansion over the noise, all odd terms vanish. To understand what happens with even terms consider first the quadratic term:

$$_{t_0}^t𝑑t_1_{t_0}^{t_1}𝑑t_2T_{ik_1l_1}(t_1,t_0)T_{k_1,k,l_2}(t_2,t_0)\eta _{l_1}(t_1)\eta _{l_2}(t_2)\rho _k(t_0)$$

For the isotropic noise the contribution to the vector $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(t)`$ up to the second order in $`\eta `$ can be represented as follows (we write equations for averages omitting the angular brackets):

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{2,i}(t)=\left(\delta _{ik}+_{t_0}^t𝑑t_1M_{ik}(t_1)\right)\rho _k(t_0)$$
(30)
where

$$M_{ik}(t)=(\gamma /2)T_{iml}(t,t_0)T_{mkl}(t,t_0)=\gamma \delta _{ik}$$
(31)
Here we have used properties of the orthogonal matrices $`U_0`$: $`(U_0)_{mi}(U_0)_{mk}=\delta _{ik}`$.

Next we proceed to the quartic term:

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{4,i}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{t_0}^t}𝑑t_1{\displaystyle _{t_0}^{t_1}}𝑑t_2{\displaystyle _{t_0}^{t_2}}𝑑t_3{\displaystyle _{t_0}^{t_3}}𝑑t_4T_{ipk}(t_1,t_0)T_{pql}(t_2,t_0)T_{qrm}(t_3,t_0)T_{rsn}(t_4,t_0)`$ (32)
$`\times `$ $`\eta _k(t_1)\eta _l(t_2)\eta _m(t_3)\eta _n(t_4)\rho _s(t_0)`$
Quartic average of Gaussian field decays into quadratic averages:

$`\eta _k(t_1)\eta _l(t_2)\eta _m(t_3)\eta _n(t_4)=\eta _k(t_1)\eta _l(t_2)\eta _m(t_3)\eta _n(t_4)`$
$`+\eta _k(t_1)\eta _m(t_3)\eta _l(t_2)\eta _n(t_4)+\eta _k(t_1)\eta _n(t_4)\eta _l(t_2)\eta _m(t_3)`$ (33)
Only the first term contributes to the integral (32). Two others are zero at correct time ordering $`t_1t_2t_3t_4`$. In both cases considered earlier we obtain:

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_{4,i}=_{t_0}^t𝑑t_1_{t_0}^{t_1}𝑑t_2M_{ij}(t_1)M_{jk}(t_2)\rho _k(t_0)$$
(34)
The same result could be obtained from an effective equation of motion for $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$:

$$\dot{\stackrel{~}{\rho }}_i=M_{ik}\stackrel{~}{\rho }_k$$
(35)
Thus, the operator $`𝐌`$ plays the role of effective non-Hermitian Hamiltonian.

For the white isotropic noise the solution of the equation (35) is:

$$\stackrel{~}{\rho }_i(t)=\stackrel{~}{\rho }_i(t_0)exp(\gamma t)$$
(36)
At $`t\mathrm{}`$ the formula (36) always leads to the occupation numbers $`p=1/2`$. As we know, this does not happen for the colored noise with a finite amplitude. The reason is that in the genuine LZ problem the solution strongly oscillates with the frequency roughly $`\omega (t)\beta t`$ long before and after the level crossing point. This introduces a new energy scale that must be compared with $`\lambda `$. For time in the range $`|\beta t|<\lambda `$, the approximation of white noise is roughly valid even for finite amplitude noise, but beyond this interval of time the oscillations of the LZ solution become faster than the correlation time of the noise, and the action of the noise is suppressed by the oscillations.

In $`Fig.1`$ we demonstrate a typical evolution of the probability for the system to stay in the same state as a function of time. The evolution reminds diffusive motion that slowly stops at large absolute values of time. The sharp change of the absolute value of the amplitude near $`t=0`$ is due to the constant transverse field.

To estimate roughly the transition probability one can apply the standard white noise approximation in the time interval $`|t|<C\lambda /\beta `$ and accept that at $`|t|>C\lambda /\beta `$ no transitions due to the noise happen. The parameter $`C`$ is a constant of the order of unity. Then we automatically get the result $`\rho (\mathrm{})=\mathrm{exp}(2C\lambda \gamma /\beta )\rho (\mathrm{})`$. According to the definition, $`\gamma F(0)/\lambda `$ in agreement with the calculations of the previous sections. Summarizing, the transitions mediated by the fast noise proceed during the large time interval of the order of $`\lambda /\beta `$. This is the reason why its total effect remains finite, though it is very small on a typical time scale of the usual LZ-transitions mediated by constant field ($`\tau \mathrm{\Gamma }/\beta `$) Gef-time .

## V Landau-Zener transitions in a constant transverse field and in the colored noise.

In previous sections we assumed that only the noise was responsible for transitions, whereas the regular part of the Hamiltonian operator was diagonal. In this section we incorporate a regular non-diagonal operator (the transverse field) into the Hamiltonian together with a noise. The most general Hamiltonian for such a two-level system reads:

$$H=\beta t\sigma _z+g\sigma _x+\underset{i}{}\eta _i(t)\sigma _i,i=x,y,z$$
(37)
where $`\eta _i`$ are coordinates of the vectorial Gaussian noise with correlators given by (3).

The second term in the Hamiltonian (37) can be considered as a constant transverse magnetic field acting on a spin $`S=1/2`$. The Hamiltonian (37) describes a spin (q-bit) weakly interacting with the environment, for example with the nuclear spin bath PS . If this interaction is so small that the bath relaxation is much faster than the inverse interaction energy, the bath can be treated as a fast noisy magnetic field. The measurements of the LZ transition probabilities can provide an information about the strength of the coupling to the bath. Another possible example is a molecular nanomagnet in fluctuating dipole field. The Hamiltonian (37) may be relevant to the quantum shuttle problem where avoided level crossings occurred to be important shuttle . The fast noise in this example corresponds to thermal fluctuations.

As it was discussed in the previous section, in the interval of time $`|\beta t|<<\lambda `$ the spin experiences an equivalent white noise with the amplitude $`\gamma =F(0)/(2\lambda )`$ vanishing at $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. The noise causes a slow decay of the population difference $`\rho =\rho _{11}\rho _{22}`$. The action of the noise becomes noticeable only after long evolution time of the order $`|\lambda /\beta |`$. On the contrary, the transitions due to the constant transverse field proceed predominantly during a much shorter interval of time $`|t|<|g/\beta |`$. During this interval of time the role of noise is negligible comparing with the role of the constant transverse field. Let us choose $`t_0`$ much less than $`|\lambda /\beta |`$, but much larger than $`g/\beta `$ to make sure that the transverse magnetic field is neglegible beyond the interval of time $`(t_0,t_0)`$. The evolution from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`t_0`$ is influenced mainly by the noise. The result of such an evolution is almost the same as that in the absence of the constant transverse field with $`t_0=0`$. Since the effective attenuation coefficient for $`\rho `$ is an even function of time (see equation (7)), the resulting exponent for $`\rho (t_0)`$ is twice less than that for the problem of the section (2) at $`t=+\mathrm{}`$ (equations (9,10):

$$\rho (t_0)=e^{\pi F(0)/\beta }$$
(38)
In the interval of time $`|t|<t_0`$ the noise is neglegible and transitions are completely due to the genuine Landau-Zener mechanism, i.e. due to the constant transverse field $`g`$. Since $`t_0g/\beta `$, we can use the LZ formula to determine $`\rho (t_0)`$. Let $`a_1(t)`$ and $`a_2(t)`$ be the amplitudes to find the system at the first and the second diabatic states, respectively, (to find the spin projection equals $`1/2`$ or $`1/2`$) at the moment of time $`t`$. Their values at $`t=t_0`$ can be expressed in terms of the population difference $`\rho ^{}`$ and two phase factors as follows:

$$\begin{array}{c}a_1(t_0)=e^{i\varphi _1}\sqrt{(1+\rho ^{})/2}\hfill \\ a_2(t_0)=e^{i\varphi _2}\sqrt{(1\rho ^{})/2}\hfill \end{array}$$
(39)
The phase diference $`\varphi _1\varphi _2`$ is essentially random and independent on $`\rho ^{}`$ since, the solution of the Shrödinger equation strongly oscillates at $`t<t_0`$ and transitions are presumably due to the non-diagonal noise. The amplitudes at time $`t_0`$ are related to those at $`t=t_0`$ by a linear relation $`a_i(t_0)=S_{ij}(t_0,t_0)a_j(t_0)`$, where $`S`$ is the transition matrix in the noiseless LZ Hamiltonian from $`t=t_0`$ to $`t=t_0`$. Using this property and averaging over the random phases $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$ and over $`\rho ^{}`$ with $`<\rho ^{}>=\rho (t_0)`$, we arrive at a following result:

$$\rho (t_0)=<|a_1(t_0)|^2|a_2(t_0)|^2>=e^{\pi F(0)/\beta }(2e^{\pi |g|^2/\beta }1)$$
(40)
Here we employed the fact that our choise of time $`t_0`$ allows the approximations $`|S_{ij}(t_0,t_0)||S_{ij}(\mathrm{},\mathrm{})|`$ and $`\rho (t_0)\rho (0)`$ The evolution from $`t_0`$ to $`t=+\mathrm{}`$ brings an additional exponential factor equal to that in equation (38):

$$\rho (t\mathrm{})=e^{2\pi F(0)/\beta }(2e^{\pi |g|^2/\beta }1)$$
(41)
Correspondingly the probability to stay on the same diabatic level is

$$P_{11}=\frac{1}{2}(1+e^{2\pi F(0)/\beta }(2e^{\pi |g|^2/\beta }1))$$
(42)
In the limit of the noise only ($`g=0`$) and of zero noise ($`F(0)=0`$) the result (42) transits into formula (13) or to the LZ formula, respectively.

The matching procedure used in this section is asymptotically exact at $`\lambda \mathrm{}`$. To check how it works at large but finite $`\lambda `$ we studied the LZ transitions subject to a fast noise numerically.

We simulated the evolution generated by the Hamiltonian (37). For simplification we put $`\eta _y=\eta _z=0`$ and accept the following form for the correlator of the noise $`x`$-component: $`\eta _x(t)\eta _x(t^{})=J_x^2\mathrm{exp}(\lambda |tt^{}|)`$. The time interval of the evolution was chosen to be much larger than $`\lambda /\beta `$. In $`Fig.2`$ we depict the probability to stay in the same state after the level crossing vs. the constant transverse field $`g`$ at a fixed coupling to the noise $`J_x=0.28`$. Each discrete point represents the averaging over 100 simulations with the same coupling constants. The solid line is the graph of the theoretical formula (42). The deviations of the simulation results from the analytical predictions do not exceed the accuracy of our calculations. We conclude that equation (42) describes well the transition probability for the LZ system subject to a fast noise.

## VI  Arbitrary spin in a strong diagonal random field

We have demonstrated that the non-diagonal $`\delta `$-like white noise leads to the equilibration of population between all states. It is not correct for the white noise directed along the sweeping field. Such a noise does not couple different states and its action leads to the loss of coherence only. As it was shown earlier, in the case of a 2-level system it results in a Debye-Waller factor for $`\rho `$. We consider the case of a general spin S placed into a regular field $`𝐡_0=\widehat{z}\beta t+\widehat{x}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and the random field directed along $`z`$-axis. Its Hamiltonian reads:

$$H_{tot}=H+H_{noise}=\beta tS_z+\mathrm{\Gamma }S_x+\eta (t)S_z$$
(43)
We assume $`<\eta (t)\eta (t^{})>=2\gamma \delta (tt^{})`$.

Following SaiKay , we expand the solution of equation (43) in the power series over the noise amplitude and average each term. The resulting series over powers of $`\gamma `$ is a formal solution of a differential equation known as master equation: SaiKay

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho (t)}{t}}=i[H(t),\rho (t)]\gamma [S_z,[S_z,\rho (t)]]=`$
$`i[vtS_z+\mathrm{\Gamma }S_x,\rho (t)]\gamma (S_z^2\rho (t)+\rho (t)S_z^22S_z\rho S_z)`$ (44)
It is convenient to introduce notations $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ij}=\mathrm{\Gamma }<i|S_x|j>`$. Below we write down equation (44) for diagonal and non-diagonal elements of the density matrix separately:

$$\begin{array}{c}\dot{\rho }_{ii}=i(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i,i1}(\rho _{i1,i}\rho _{i,i1})+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i,i+1}(\rho _{i+1,i}\rho _{i,i+1}))\hfill \\ i=S,S+1,\mathrm{},S\hfill \end{array}$$
(45)
$$\begin{array}{c}\dot{\rho }_{mn}=(i\beta t(mn)+\gamma (nm)^2)\rho _{mn}\hfill \\ i(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m,m1}\rho _{m1,n}\rho _{m,n+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{n+1,n}+\mathrm{\Gamma }_{m,m+1}\rho _{m+1,n}\rho _{m,n1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{n1,n}),mn\hfill \end{array}$$
(46)
It is possible to find an asymptotically exact solution of equations (45), (46) in the limit of strong noise $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma },\beta `$. In this limiting case, non-diagonal elements of the density matrix are $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/\gamma `$ times smaller than diagonal ones. Indeed, let us disregard the dynamical term $`\dot{\rho }_{ij}`$ in equations for the non-diagonal elements. We will justify this approximation later. Then equation (46) at $`n=m\pm 1`$ implies that the non-diagonal elements $`\rho _{n,n\pm 1}`$ are suppressed comparing with diagonal matrix element by the factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/\gamma `$. The matrix elements $`\rho _{n,n\pm 2}`$ are suppressed by the same factor with respect to $`\rho _{n,n\pm 1}`$ etc. The characteristic time interval following from equation (45)is $`\mathrm{\Delta }t|\rho _{nn}/(\mathrm{\Gamma }\rho _{n,n\pm 1})\gamma /\mathrm{\Gamma }^2`$. From this estimate we find that the time derivative of the largest non-diagonal matrix element $`|\dot{\rho }_{i,i\pm 1}|(\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/\gamma )|\rho _{i,i\pm 1}|\gamma \rho _{i,i\pm 1}`$ can be neglected. Retaining only main diagonal and two adjacent non-diagonals in the matrix equations (45),(46), we express the non-diagonal elements in terms of diagonal:

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho _{i+1,i}=\frac{i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1,i}}{i\beta t+\gamma }(\rho _{i,i}\rho _{i+1,i+1}),\hfill \\ \rho _{i,i+1}=\frac{i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i,i+1}}{i\beta t\gamma }(\rho _{i+1,i+1}\rho _{i,i}),\hfill \\ \rho _{i,j}=0,|ij|>1\hfill \end{array}$$
(47)
The problem is reduced to determining of the $`2S+1`$ diagonal elements. Let introduce a vector $`𝐜`$ with the coordinates $`c_i=\rho _{ii}`$. They are probabilities to find the spin in a particular eigenstate of the operator $`S_z`$. Substitution of (47) into (45) gives a differential equation for the vector $`𝐜(t)`$

$$\dot{𝐜}(t)=(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{i\beta t+\gamma }\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{i\beta t\gamma })\widehat{M}𝐜(t)$$
(48)
were the constant matrix $`\widehat{M}`$ has following matrix elements:

$$\begin{array}{c}M_{ii}=(<i+1|S_x|i>^2+<i|S_x|i1>^2)=\frac{1}{2}(S^2+Si^2)\hfill \\ M_{i,i+1}=M_{i+1,i}=<i+1|S_x|i>^2=\frac{1}{4}(S+i+1)(Si)\hfill \end{array}$$
(49)
All other elements are zeros. Equation (48) can be easily integrated

$$𝐜(t)=\mathrm{exp}(_{t_0}^t\frac{2\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{(\beta t^{})^2+\gamma ^2}𝑑t^{}\widehat{M})𝐜(t_0)$$
(50)
To find transition probabilities we take limits of integral in equation (50) as $`t_0=\mathrm{}`$ and $`t=+\mathrm{}`$:

$$𝐜(+\mathrm{})=\mathrm{exp}(\frac{2\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{\beta }\widehat{M})𝐜(\mathrm{})$$
(51)
This result demonstrates that, for a general spin $`S`$ as well as for a spin $`1/2`$, the transition probabilities do not depend on the specific value of $`\gamma `$ provided that $`\gamma `$ is large. Below we present explicitly the transition probabilities for some values of spin. We denote $`E_1=e^{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\pi /\beta }`$, $`E_2=e^{3\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\pi /\beta }`$ and $`E_3=e^{6\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }^2/\beta }`$. Then for $`S=1/2`$ the formula (51) reads

$$\begin{array}{c}P_{1/21/2}=P_{1/21/2}=\frac{1}{2}(1+E_1)\hfill \\ P_{1/21/2}=P_{1/21/2}=\frac{1}{2}(1E_1)\hfill \end{array}$$
(52)
For $`S=1`$

$$\begin{array}{c}P_{11}=P_{11}=\frac{1}{6}(2+E_2+3E_1)\hfill \\ P_{10}=P_{10}=P_{01}=P_{01}=\frac{1}{3}(1E_2)\hfill \\ P_{11}=P_{11}=\frac{1}{6}(2+E_23E_1)\hfill \\ P_{00}=\frac{1}{3}(1+2E_2)\hfill \end{array}$$
(53)
The results (52) and (53) coincide with already known solutions for two- and three-level LZ models with strong decoherence SaiKay . A new result for a spin $`S=3/2`$ that follows from (51) reads:

$$\begin{array}{c}P_{3/23/2}=P_{3/23/2}=\frac{1}{4}+\frac{1}{20}E_3+\frac{1}{4}E_2+\frac{9}{20}E_1\hfill \\ P_{3/21/2}=P_{3/21/2}=P_{1/23/2}=P_{1/23/2}=\frac{1}{4}\frac{3}{20}E_3\frac{1}{4}E_2+\frac{3}{20}E_1\hfill \\ P_{3/21/2}=P_{3/21/2}=P_{1/23/2}=P_{1/23/2}=\frac{1}{4}+\frac{3}{20}E_3\frac{1}{4}E_2\frac{3}{20}E_1\hfill \\ P_{3/23/2}=P_{3/23/2}=\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{20}E_3+\frac{1}{4}E_2\frac{9}{20}E_1\hfill \\ P_{1/21/2}=P_{1/21/2}=\frac{1}{4}+\frac{9}{20}E_3+\frac{1}{4}E_2+\frac{1}{20}E_1\hfill \\ P_{1/21/2}=P_{1/21/2}=\frac{1}{4}\frac{9}{20}E_3+\frac{1}{4}E_2\frac{1}{20}E_1\hfill \end{array}$$
(54)
In $`Fig3`$ and $`Fig4`$ we show the dependences of transition probabilities for $`S=3/2`$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. In adiabatic limit $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/\beta >>1`$ all states are equally populated after the evolution.

## VII  Electron motion driven by electric field

.

Now we consider another multi-state Landau-Zener model that, in the absence of the noise, was solved exactly PS . Physically the model describes the transport of a charged particle in a regular linear chain driven by a time-dependent homogeneous external field. Such a model is an idealization of atomic scale molecular wires or linear arrays of quantum dots. An important assumption in the model that makes it exactly solvable is that all sites of the chain are identical and equidistant. External electric field splits the energy levels at different sites of the chain and suppresses the tunnelling between them. Hence the transitions proceed in a narrow time intervals close to moments at which the electric field becomes zero. The noise in such a system arises due to thermal fluctuations chaotically changing the energy of the electron. We suppose that there are no correlations of noise at different sites.

Let us denote $`|n`$ a state located at the $`n`$-th site of the chain. We assume that these states form a complete orthonormal set (Wannier basis). In terms of this set the electron Hamiltonian with linear dependence of an external field on time reads:

$`\widehat{H}={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}(gnn+1+c.c.)+nvtnn+\eta _n(t)nn`$ (55)
where $`v`$ and $`g`$ are constants and we assume that the noise power is the same for all sites i.e. $`<\eta _m\eta _n>=2\gamma \delta _{mn}`$. The derivation of the master equation for this case is similar to that of the previous section. We consider only the limit of strong noise $`\gamma >>g`$. Then, as in previous example, the non-diagonal elements of the density matrix $`\rho _{i,j}`$ with $`|ij|>1`$ can be neglected. Equations for diagonal matrix elements of the density matrix are:

$$\dot{\rho _{nn}}=ig(\rho _{n+1,n}+\rho _{n1,n}\rho _{n,n+1}\rho _{n,n1})$$
(56)
Equations for non-diagonal elements after the averaging over the random noise read:

$$\begin{array}{c}\dot{\rho }_{n+1,n}=(ivt2\gamma )\rho _{n+1,n}ig(\rho _{n,n}\rho _{n+1,n+1})\hfill \\ \dot{\rho }_{n1,n}=(ivt2\gamma )\rho _{n1,n}ig(\rho _{n,n}\rho _{n1,n1})\hfill \end{array}$$
(57)
Neglecting again time derivatives in these equations, we find:

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho _{n+1,n}=\frac{ig}{ivt+2\gamma }(\rho _{n,n}\rho _{n+1,n+1})\hfill \\ \rho _{n1,n}=\frac{ig}{ivt2\gamma }(\rho _{n,n}\rho _{n1,n1})\hfill \end{array}$$
(58)
Substituting (58) into the equations (56) for diagonal elements, we obtain the evolution equations for diagonal matrix elements of the density matrix $`\rho _{n,n}`$:

$$\dot{\rho }_{n,n}=g^2\left(\frac{1}{ivt2\gamma }\frac{1}{ivt+2\gamma }\right)(2\rho _{n,n}\rho _{n+1,n}\rho _{n1,n})$$
(59)
Without loss of generality we can assume that initially, at $`t=\mathrm{}`$, the particle was located at the site number zero. It can be treated as initial conditions for the master equation: $`\rho _{0,0}(t=\mathrm{})=1`$ and all other elements of the density matrix are zeros at $`t=\mathrm{}`$. Then diagonal matrix elements $`\rho _{n,n}`$ acquire the meaning of transition probabilities from zeroth to the $`n`$-th site at a current time $`t`$. As in the previous example we can find the solution for a chain of arbitrary number of sites in the matrix form.

In the limit of infinite number of sites a compact solution can be found by employing the Fourier-transformation $`\rho _{n,n}=\frac{1}{2\pi }_0^{2\pi }e^{in\varphi }u(\varphi ,t)`$. The system of coupled differential equations (59) is diagonalized by this transformation. Corresponding differential equation of the first order for the function $`u(\varphi ,t)`$ is readily solved. Its solution with the initial condition $`u(\varphi ,\mathrm{}=1)`$ is

$$u(\varphi ,t)=\mathrm{exp}\left[2\left(\frac{\pi }{2}+\mathrm{arctan}\frac{vt}{2\gamma }\right)(1\mathrm{cos}\varphi )\right]$$

In the limit $`t+\mathrm{}`$ it approaches its limiting value:

$$u(\varphi ,t+\mathrm{})=e^{\frac{4\pi g^2}{v}(1\mathrm{cos}\varphi )}$$
(60)
By the inverse Fourier-transformation we find the diagonal elements of the density matrix:

$$\rho _{n,n}(t+\mathrm{})=P_n=e^{\frac{4\pi g^2}{v}}I_n(\frac{4\pi g^2}{v})$$
(61)
Here $`P_n`$ is the transition probability from the site with the index $`0`$ to the cite with the index $`n`$ .

It is interesting to compare results of this calculation which incorporates a strong noise with the transition probabilities without noise. In the absence of the noise $`(\gamma =0)`$ the transition probabilities are PS :

$$P_n^{(coh)}=|J_n(\sqrt{8\pi }g)|^2$$
(62)
$`Fig.5`$ shows a typical behavior of the transition probabilities for both cases. The difference in the behavior is clearly pronounced. In the absence of the noise the transition probabilities oscillate as functions of $`n`$ and $`g`$ (see PS  for details). These oscillations arise due to the interference among the amplitudes of different Feynman paths leading from the initial to the final point. In the case of a strong noise these oscillation are suppressed by the noise imposed decoherence and the probability distribution is a smooth bell-like curve. A simple parameter that is related to the effective diffusion coefficient and can be measured experimentally is the average square displacement of the particle during one sweep of the external field. For a chain with a strong noise it is:

$$<n^2>=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}n^2e^{\frac{4\pi g^2}{v}}I_n(\frac{4\pi g^2}{v})=\frac{4\pi g^2}{v}$$
(63)
Despite a strong difference in the distribution functions, the average square displacement (63) coincides with that for the coherent evolution without noise.

## VIII Conclusion

In conclusion, we have derived the formula for the transition probabilities at the non-adiabatic crossing of two levels coupled by a fast non-diagonal random field in the Landau-Zener approximation. Depending on the strength of parameters it interpolates between the Landau-Zener formula for noiseless system and the Kayanuma’s result for transitions mediated by the transverse noise only. We have determined the time intervals during which transitions are substantial and showed that time of transitions mediated by the constant field is much shorter than the time necessary for transition caused by the fast noise. Our numerical simulations are in a good agreement with the analytical formulas . We have discovered an important property of the non-adiabatic tunnelling process: its probability depends not on the ”power” of the noise $`_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}g(t)𝑑t`$ but rather on the coupling to the noise $`g(0)`$. The former usually is responsible for the decoherence rate in systems without time- dependent fields. Measurements of the LZ transition probability can provide the information about the value of this coupling. The multi-level systems placed in regular time-dependent fields feel subtle differences of the noise statistical properties.

We assumed that the diagonal noise does not dominate. In this situation it does not play any role. However, if the component of the diagonal noise is much stronger than non-diagonal ones, the situation may change drastically. The problem of strong transverse field compatible with noise inverse correlation time also remains open.

We have extended the formulas and methods employed for two-level systems to a couple of multi-state LZ systems: an arbitrary spin experiencing the time-dependent regular and random magnetic field and a linear chain of sites in the external time-dependent homogeneous electric field plus noise. The Landau-Zener transitions for spins higher than $`1/2`$ were observed in a number of systems Kaz ; agu ; Suo . Therefore we believe that our solutions can be checked experimentally.

## IX acknowledgements

This work was supported by the NSF under the grant DMR0072115 and DMR 0103455, by the TITF of Texas A$`\&`$M University and by the DOE under the grant DE-FG03-96ER45598. We are grateful to M. Nishino for useful discussion.