You are on page 1of 105

The interplay of chaos and dissipation

in driven quantum systems
Zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines
Doktors der Naturwissenschaften
der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakult¨ at
der Universit¨ at Augsburg vorgelegte
Dissertation
von
Dipl.-Phys. Sigmund Kohler
aus
Ehingen (Donau)
Augsburg, im Februar 1999
Erster Berichter: Prof. Dr. Peter H¨ anggi
Zweiter Berichter: Prof. Dr. Thomas Dittrich
Tag der m¨ undlichen Pr¨ ufung: 5. M¨ arz 1999
Contents
1 Introduction 1
2 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory 5
2.1 Discrete time-translation and Floquet ansatz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Composite Hilbert space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Properties of Floquet states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4 The propagator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.5 Numerical computation of Floquet states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.5.1 Floquet-matrix methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5.2 Propagator methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation 15
3.1 The system-bath model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.2 Quantum Langevin equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3.3 Influence functional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.4 Markovian master equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory 23
4.1 Simple inclusion of the driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.2 An improved Markovian master equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.3 Decomposition into Floquet basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.3.1 Matrix elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.3.2 Rotating-wave approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.4 The dissipative quantum map and its numerical implementation . . . 28
5 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator 31
5.1 The model and its classical dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.2 Floquet states in stable regimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.3 Floquet-Markov description in full RWA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5.4.1 Wigner representation and Fokker-Planck equation . . . . . . 39
5.4.2 Wigner-Floquet solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
5.4.3 Influence of the driving on the master equation . . . . . . . . 41
5.5 Asymptotics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.5.1 The conservative limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
ii Contents
5.5.2 The high-temperature limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.6 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.7 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6 The harmonically driven double-well potential 51
6.1 The model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
6.1.1 Symmetries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6.1.2 Tunneling, driving, and dissipation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.1.3 The onset of chaos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.2.1 Three-level crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.2.2 Dissipative chaos-assisted tunneling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
6.2.3 Asymptotic state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
6.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.3.1 Classical attractor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.3.2 Quantum attractor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
7 Summary and outlook 79
A The harmonic oscillator 81
A.1 Number states as a basis set . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
A.2 Coherent states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
A.3 Quasiprobabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
A.3.1 Wigner function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
A.3.2 Husimi function and Wehrl entropy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
B The density operator 87
B.1 Lindblad form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
B.2 Coherence and entropy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
C Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation 89
References 93
Acknowledgment 101
1 Introduction
The interplay of classical chaos and dissipation in a quantum system bears inter-
esting effects at the border between classical and quantum mechanics like, e.g., the
suppression of classical chaos by quantum interference [1] or its restauration by dissi-
pation [2]. While the mutual influence of quantum coherence and classical chaos has
been an extensive field of research since many years, the additional effects caused
by coupling the chaotic system to an environment, namely dissipation and decoher-
ence, have been studied only rarely. A reason may be the fact that by including
dissipation, the computational effort grows drastically, since one has to deal with
density matrices instead of wave functions.
In classical Hamiltonian systems, the transition from regular motion to chaos
is most clearly visible in the change of the phase-space structure: With increasing
nonlinearity, regular tori start to dissolve in a chaotic layer which grows in size
until it covers the whole phase space. While the motion along regular tori is stable
and predictable for long times, chaotic dynamics is characterized by a sensitive
dependence on the initial conditions: Neighboring phase-space points start to diverge
exponentially in time and a completely deterministic system evolves in a practically
diffusive manner on a chaotic sea [3].
On a quantum level, the position-momentum uncertainty does not allow for
the arbitrarily fine classical phase-space structures and results in coarse-graining
over an area which is given by Planck’s quantum of action. Thus, the classical
dynamics leaves in the corresponding quantum system, at most, its signatures like,
e.g., scars along unstable periodic orbits in the wave functions [4], or the centering of
Husimi functions on classical manifolds [5]. Another characteristic quantum feature
is the discreteness of the energy levels in bounded systems. In complex systems,
eigenenergies are effectively random numbers whose statistical properties depend on
the integrability of the corresponding classical dynamics [6–8]. In the fully chaotic
case, the eigenenergies are anticorrelated and the inverse of their mean spacing
defines a time scale, the so-called break time, after which the quantum dynamics
becomes quasiperiodic and thus, classical chaos is suppressed [1]. This suppression of
chaos relies on the perfect coherence of a superposition which remains for arbitrary
long times. Therefore, any disruption of coherence, like it occurs due to the coupling
to an environment, restores the characteristics of classical features at least to some
extent [2].
One of the most intriguing quantum effects is tunneling, the coherent transport
through a potential barrier. It was originally proposed by Hund [9] to explain
the ammonium spectrum and studied since then in various modifications. A generic
setting for the observation of tunneling is a symmetric bistable potential whose wells
are separated by a static energy barrier. A time-dependent external field acting on
2 Introduction
such a system may entail dramatic consequences for the quantum dynamics, even
if its effect is barely visible in the classical phase space. Depending on the driving
amplitude and frequency, an external driving can modify the tunnel rate by orders
of magnitude or even bring tunneling to a complete standstill [10]. Tunneling is
particularly sensitive to any disruption of coherence—in presence of dissipation it
becomes a transient effect that fades out on a finite time scale [11, 12].
Driving the double-well potential with a frequency near the classical resonances
results in even more significant consequences. They are apparent already in the
classical phase space since chaos comes into play and the separatrix which encloses
the wells is replaced by a chaotic layer. In the corresponding quantum system,
we therefore observe chaotic tunneling—coherent transport between regular islands
which are separated by a chaotic layer, rather than by a static barrier. The small
but finite overlap of the tunnel doublets with the chaotic states, i.e., with states
which are localized in the chaotic layer, typically increases the tunnel splittings
and, consequently, the tunnel rates—the essence of chaos-assisted tunneling [13–15].
As soon as the chaotic layer grows in size and attains a significant overlap with
the tunnel doublets, the tunnel splittings become of the order of the mean level
spacing [16] and tunneling is replaced by chaotic diffusion [16–18].
The most successful approach to dissipation in quantum mechanics, consistent
with the fundamental laws of quantum mechanics, is based on the coupling of the
conservative system to external degrees of freedom. Probably the first proof that
such a system-bath scheme results in dissipative quantum mechanics was given by
Magalinski˘ı [19] for a harmonic oscillator. Using a perturbative approach, Zwanzig
[20] derived from this model a Markovian master equation for a general classical
system subject to weak dissipation. Master equations of this kind have been applied
to various problems in solid state physics, quantum optics, and chemistry. Later,
Caldeira and Leggett eliminated the bath exactly [11, 21], which enabled studying
dissipative quantum systems, beyond a weak-coupling limit. However, even a par-
tially analytical solution of the resulting path-integral expression is only feasible
for the simplest systems, like harmonic potentials or two-level systems—the inves-
tigation of dissipative systems with complex dynamics requires to fall back to the
weak-coupling regime.
Thus, for the description of strongly driven, nonlinear systems subject to weak
dissipation, it is desirable to combine a Markovian approach to quantum dissipation,
leading to a master equation for the density operator, with the Floquet formalism
that allows to treat time-periodic forces of arbitrary strength and frequency [22].
While the Floquet formalism is exact and essentially amounts to using an optimal
representation for the treatment of time-periodic problems [23–25], the simplification
brought about by the Markovian description is achieved only at the expense of
accuracy. Here, a subtle technical difficulty lies in the fact that the truncation of
the long-time memory introduced by the bath, and the inclusion of the driving, do
not commute. This implies that the result of the Markov approximation depends
on whether the driving is considered in its derivation or not [26, 27].
Within the present work, we will implement a Markovian approach to quan-
Introduction 3
tum dissipation based on the Floquet formalism to the investigation of two different
systems, for each of which we have, besides other interesting aspects, one central
question in mind: The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator, will serve pre-
dominantly to test different approximation schemes for the Floquet-Markov master
equation and to study the modification of its dissipative part brought about by the
driving. For this linear system, all approximative steps can be reliably checked since
an exact solution is at hand [28]. Besides being an exactly solvable model with yet
nontrivial dynamics, this system is interesting in its own right, since it describes the
motion of an ion in a Paul trap. These traps have gained new interest very recently,
since they form the central system in a scheme for a quantum computer [29] whose
experimental realization is currently attempted. Thereby the main obstacle is, be-
sides the preparation of the ground state, the loss of coherence once the computation
has started.
The harmonically driven quartic double-well potential , a system which exhibits
complex nonlinear dynamics, will be used as a working model for the investigation
of chaotic tunneling in presence of dissipation. Recent studies of non-dissipative
chaotic tunneling suggest that tunneling is accelerated by the influence of chaotic
states, replacing a doublet structure by a three-level dynamics [30–33]. The bath,
in turn, couples these states indirectly to all other states of the system and, thus,
we expect to observe a novel dissipative tunnel scenario which is on the one hand
richer than the conservative dynamics and on the other hand substantially different
from the familiar two-state tunneling.
This thesis is organized as follows: In Chapter 2 we give an introduction to
Floquet theory for quantum systems with periodic time-dependence. A brief review
of the system-bath model for quantum dissipation and a derivation of a Markovian
master equation is provided in Chapter 3 and combined with Floquet theory in
Chapter 4 to obtain a Markovian description of periodically driven quantum systems
subject to weak dissipation. Within this Floquet-Markov approach, we investigate
the dynamics of the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator and the driven double-
well potential in Chapters 5 and 6, respectively. Chapter 7 serves to summarize the
main results. A number of merely technical issues is deferred to the appendix. Parts
of this thesis have already been published in Refs. [27, 34].
4
2
Driven quantum systems
and Floquet theory
Interactions of quantum systems with strong laser fields are characterized by two
properties of the field: On the one hand, the influence of the field on the system is
typically so strong that a treatment beyond perturbation theory becomes necessary,
but the back-action of the system on the field is negligible. On the other hand,
the field is in a coherent state with large mean photon number and, thus, can
be described adequately by its expectation value, given by a function harmonic
in time. This implies that an explicit time dependence of the Hamiltonian serves
as a substitute for a canonical degree of freedom and raised interest in a theory
for quantum systems with explicit periodic time dependence, thus an extension of
Floquet theory [35] from classical to quantum mechanics. One-dimensional driven
systems also play an important role as models for (quantum) chaos: Their “one and
a half degrees of freedom” represent the minimal requirement for non-integrable
dynamics [36]. Thus, they exemplify the simplest quantum systems with chaotic
classical counterpart.
In this chapter we give an introduction to Floquet theory for quantum systems
with periodic time dependence [12, 23–25, 36, 37], where we put strong focus on the
properties of Floquet states and numerical methods which we use in subsequent
chapters.
2.1 Discrete time-translation and Floquet ansatz
To reduce the complexity of a physical system, its symmetries are analyzed to ob-
tain a proper ansatz for the symmetry-reduced solutions. In quantum mechanics,
symmetry is expressed by an operator o which leaves the Schr¨ odinger equation

H(t) −i

∂t

[ψ(t)` = 0 (2.1)
invariant, i.e., commutes with the operator H(t) − i∂
t
. Thus, the solutions of the
Schr¨ odinger equation are, besides a time-dependent phase factor, also eigenfunctions
of the symmetry operator [38].
For a Hamiltonian with T-periodic time dependence,
H(t) = H(t +T), T =


, (2.2)
the related symmetry operation is a discrete time translation by one period of the
driving,
o
T
: t →t +T. (2.3)
6 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory
As symmetry operations have to conserve the norm of any wavefunction, the eigen-
values of o are pure phase factors and we may assume for an eigenfunction [ψ(t)`
the eigenvalue exp(−iθ), θ ∈ R,
o
T
[ψ(t)` = [ψ(t +T)` = e
−iθ
[ψ(t)`. (2.4)
By inserting this eigenvalue equation into the ansatz
[ψ(t)` = e
−it/
[φ(t)`, = θ/T, (2.5)
we obtain the condition
[φ(t)` = [φ(t +T)`, (2.6)
which means that [φ(t)` is periodic in time, alike the Hamiltonian. Thus for a
system which obeys discrete time-translational symmetry, there exists a complete
set ¦[ψ
α
(t)`¦ of solutions of the Schr¨ odinger equation which have Floquet structure,
i.e., they are of the form

α
(t)` = e
−iαt/

α
(t)`, (2.7)

α
(t)` = [φ
α
(t +T)`. (2.8)
However, a general solution of the Schr¨ odinger equation (2.1) is given by a super-
position of many Floquet states,
[ψ(t)` =
¸
α
u
α
e
−iαt/

α
(t)`, (2.9)
and is in general not of the form (2.5). The Floquet states [φ
α
(t)` are, in contrast to
the [ψ
α
(t)`, not solutions of the Schr¨ odinger equation. The
α
have the dimension
energy and in periodically driven systems play a role analogous to the eigenenergies
in time-independent systems. In analogy to the quasimomentum of electrons in
spatially periodic systems, they are called quasienergies. We emphasize that the
T-periodic time-dependence of the Floquet states is only relevant for the dynamics
within a period of the driving, whereas the long-time dynamics is governed by the
phase factors exp(−i
α
t/).
Inserting (2.5) into the Schr¨ odinger equation yields the eigenvalue equation for
the Floquet states [23, 39, 40]
H(t)[φ(t)` = [φ(t)` (2.10)
with the Hermitian Floquet Hamiltonian [40]
H(t) = H(t) −i

∂t
. (2.11)
Technically, the determination of the Floquet states from (2.10) is one of the main
tasks in dealing with periodically time-dependent systems.
2.2 Composite Hilbert space 7
From a group-theoretical point of view, each Floquet state [φ
α
(t)` belongs to
an irreducible representation of an Abelian group, characterized by the Floquet
exponent θ
α
=
α
T/ [40]. This exponent allows for an interpretation as a Berry
phase [41].
Solutions of Floquet structure are found for dynamical systems that can be
described by differential equations with periodically time-dependent coefficients [35,
42]. We also use this fact for the solution of classical equations of motion and for the
solution of Fokker-Planck equations in subsequent chapters. In these cases, however,
the eigenvalue equation which corresponds to (2.10) is in general non-Hermitian, thus
the Floquet indices may be complex.
2.2 Composite Hilbert space
The state [ψ(t)` of a system, as well as the Floquet states [φ
α
(t)`, are elements of
a Hilbert space 1, which describes the system’s degrees of freedom. For a bounded
particle moving in a potential, 1 is the space of square-integrable functions [43]. In
many cases, 1 can be approximated by a Hilbert space with finite dimension.
It is possible to describe the time dependence of the Floquet states within the
framework of a Hilbert space theory. According to (2.8), the Floquet states are
elements of the space of T-periodic functions, denoted by T [40]. An inner product
on T is defined by
(f, g) =
1
T

T
0
dt f

(t) g(t), (2.12)
and a set of orthonormalized basis functions reads [43]
ϕ
n
(t) = e
−inΩt
, Ω =

T
, n ∈ Z. (2.13)
For a basis independent notation, we define the vectors [n`
T
by
ϕ
n
(t) = 't[n`
T
. (2.14)
To avoid confusion with elements of configuration space 1, we mark these vectors
by an index T . The basis set ¦ϕ
n
¦ is orthonormalized and complete [43],

n
, ϕ
n
) = δ
n,n
, (2.15)
1
T
¸
n
ϕ

n
(t) ϕ
n
(t

) = δ
T
(t −t

), (2.16)
where δ
T
denotes the T-periodic delta function.
We combine the periodic time dependence of the Floquet states with their spatial
degrees of freedom and interpret them as elements of a composite Hilbert space
1⊗T . The inner product (2.12) is extended accordingly,
''φ[φ

`` =
1
T

T
0
dt 'φ(t)[φ

(t)`. (2.17)
8 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory
The elements of this composite Hilbert space, written in “time representation,” are
T-periodic states,
't[φ`` ≡ [φ(t)` = [φ(t +T)`. (2.18)
By this introduction of a Hilbert space structure for the time dependence, we
formally traced back the computation of Floquet states to the computation of eigen-
states of a time-independent Hamiltonian with an additional degree of freedom. The
methods known for the computation of energy eigenstates of a time-independent
Hamiltonian, like e.g., perturbation theory, can be applied accordingly [39, 40].
The decomposition of a state [φ(t)` into the set of basis functions (2.13) is equi-
valent to its representation as a Fourier series,

α
(t)` =
¸
n
e
−inΩt
[c
α,n
`, (2.19)
[c
α,n
` =
1
T

T
0
dt e
inΩt

α
(t)`. (2.20)
The Fourier modes in this context are also called Floquet channels.
Semiclassical interpretation of the Floquet states
A time-dependent Hamiltonian is usually obtained from a time-independent theory
by substituting a part of the system by its classical limit [25]. This allows for a
semiclassical interpretation of the vectors [n`
T
and the Floquet states [40]. We
restrict ourselves to the case of a linearly coupled driving field with cosine shape.
A system S, which couples via dipole interaction to a single-mode laser with
frequency Ω, can be described by the Hamiltonian [44]
H = H
S
+µx(a +a
+
) +Ωa
+
a. (2.21)
We assume in the semiclassical limit that the state of the laser field is a coherent
one (see Appendix A) and that it possesses a very high mean photon number,
[z` = [

n
0
exp(iΩt)` , n
0
1. (2.22)
Under this condition, the description of the system can be simplified in two ways:
1. We replace the operators a and a
+
by their expectation values (see Ap-
pendix A) and obtain a driven system with a time-dependent Hamiltonian.
The corresponding Floquet Hamiltonian reads
H = H
S
+ 2µx

n
0
cos(Ωt) +Ωn
0
−i∂
t
, (2.23)
decomposed into the basis set ¦[n`
T
¦,
H
n,n
= H
S
δ
n,n
+µx

n
0

n,n

+1

n,n

−1
) +Ω(n
0
−n)δ
n,n
. (2.24)
2.3 Properties of Floquet states 9
2. We decompose the Hamiltonian H, whose eigenfunctions are the so-called
dressed states, into the number states (A.10) of the laser mode to obtain
H
n,n
= H
S
δ
n,n
+µx


n + 1 δ
n,n

+1
+


n,n

−1

+Ωnδ
n,n
. (2.25)
If the state of the laser field is the highly exited coherent state (2.22), we get
relevant contributions only for n ≈ n
0
1. The prefactors

n and

n + 1
in this limit become

n
0
+O(n
−1/2
0
).
The Floquet Hamiltonian (2.24) agrees—besides a shift in the index—with the
Hamiltonian (2.25). Therefore the basis states [n`
T
allow for an interpretation as
the semiclassical limit of the number states of the laser field and the Floquet states
as the semiclassical limit of the dressed states.
2.3 Properties of Floquet states
Equivalent representations
Assuming that [φ(t)` is an eigenvector of H(t) with eigenvalue ,
H(t) [φ(t)` = [φ(t)`, (2.26)
the state

(n)
(t)` = e
inΩt
[φ(t)` (2.27)
obeys
H(t) [φ
(n)
(t)` = (H(t) +∂
t
) e
inΩt
[φ(t)` (2.28)
= ( +nΩ) e
inΩt
[φ(t)`. (2.29)
This means that [φ
(n)
(t)` is also an eigenvector of the Floquet Hamiltonian H(t),
i.e., a Floquet state, but with eigenvalue

(n)
= +nΩ. (2.30)
The respective solutions of the Schr¨ odinger equation,

(n)
(t)` = e
−i(+nΩ)t/

(n)
(t)` (2.31)
= [ψ(t)` (2.32)
are identical. Thus, there exists a class of equivalent Floquet states whose quasi-
energies differ only by integer multiples of Ω. They all describe the same physical
state. Therefore, it is sufficient to take only those Floquet states into account, whose
quasienergies lie within a single Brillouin zone ω
BZ
≤ < (ω
BZ
+ Ω).
In the following, we denote by ¦[φ
α
(t)`¦ a complete set of Floquet states with
corresponding quasienergies ¦
α
¦. They are orthonormalized with respect to the
inner product (2.17),
''φ
α

α
`` = δ
α,α
. (2.33)
10 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory
Orthonormalization on 1
The inner product of two non-equivalent Floquet states on 1obeys the T-periodicity
of the Floquet states and can be written as a Fourier series,

α
(t)[φ
α
(t)` =
¸
n
κ
n
e
−inΩt
. (2.34)
The Fourier coefficients read
κ
n
=
1
T

T
0
dt

e
inΩt


α
(t

)[φ
α
(t

)` (2.35)
= ''φ
α

(n)
α

`` = δ
α,α
δ
n,0
, (2.36)
where the time integration has been expressed by the inner product (2.17). Thus,
we get

α
(t)[φ
α
(t)` = δ
α,α
. (2.37)
This means that from the orthonormalization of the Floquet states with respect to
the inner product (2.17) on 1 ⊗ T we obtain orthonormalization with respect to
the inner product on 1 at equal times. Here however, caution is appropriate: The
orthonormalization on 1 is in general only valid for equal times and is in particular
not valid for the Fourier components (2.20).
Mean energy
Due to the Brillouin-zone structure (2.30), quasienergies do not allow for global
ordering. The instantaneous energies
E
α
(t) = 'ψ
α
(t)[H(t)[ψ
α
(t)` (2.38)
= 'φ
α
(t)[H(t)[φ
α
(t)` (2.39)
do not either, since they vary with time. A quantity that is defined on the full real
axis and therefore does allow for a complete ordering is the mean energy [12, 23–25]
E
α
=
1
T

T
0
dt E
α
(t) (2.40)
=
α
+ i''φ
α
[

∂t

α
``, (2.41)
which results from averaging over one period of the driving. By use of the Fourier
representation (2.19) we obtain
E
α
=
¸
n
(
α
+nΩ)'c
α,n
[c
α,n
` (2.42)
Thus the nth Floquet channel gives a contribution
α
+nΩ, weighted by the squared
modulus 'c
α,n
[c
α,n
` of the corresponding Fourier coefficient.
2.4 The propagator 11
2.4 The propagator
The time evolution of a quantum system can be written by use of a unitary operator
U(t, t

), which is a solution of the Schr¨ odinger equation,
i

∂t
U(t, t

) = H(t) U(t, t

), (2.43)
U(t, t) = 1. (2.44)
A formal integration yields
U(t, t

) = Texp


i

t
t

dt

H(t

)

, (2.45)
where T denotes time ordering. Due to the time dependence of the Hamiltonian,
U(t, t

) depends explicitly on both times t and t

, not only on their difference.
Expressed in terms of the Floquet states, the propagator reads
U(t, t

) =
¸
α
e
−iα(t−t

)/

α
(t)`'φ
α
(t

)[, (2.46)
as this expression obviously solves the Schr¨ odinger equation and the initial condition
(2.44) is ensured by the completeness of the Floquet states.
The propagator U(T, 0) defines a quantum map for the propagation over a full
period of the driving,
U(T, 0) =
¸
α
e
−iαT/

α
(0)`'φ
α
(0)[, (2.47)
U(nT, 0) =
¸
α
e
−inαT/

α
(0)`'φ
α
(0)[ (2.48)
= [U(T, 0)]
n
, (2.49)
To obtain the last line, we used the T-periodicity of the Floquet states and their com-
pleteness and orthogonality at equal times. The propagator U(T, 0) is indispensable
for the investigation of the long-time dynamics of driven quantum systems [23, 25].
The Floquet states at time t are instantaneous eigenstates of the one-period
propagator U(t +T, t),
U(t +T, t)[φ
α
(t)` = e
−iαT/

α
(t)`, (2.50)
as can easily be seen by inserting the Floquet-state representation (2.46) of the
propagator.
2.5 Numerical computation of Floquet states
Among the methods for the computation of Floquet states of bounded systems, we
essentially discern two classes [37]: The first class consists of methods based directly
12 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory
on the solution of the eigenvalue equation (2.10) of the Floquet Hamiltonian. A sec-
ond class of methods starts with the computation of the Floquet propagator U(T, 0),
followed by the solution of the eigenvalue equation (2.50) for the propagator. In the
present work, we treat systems subject to a cosine-shaped driving. Accordingly, we
elucidate the numerical methods for the case of a Hamiltonian of the structure
H(t) = H
0
+ 2H
1
cos(Ωt), (2.51)
where we have introduced a factor 2 for ease of notation. They can be generalized
straightforwardly.
2.5.1 Floquet-matrix methods
The Floquet Hamiltonian for (2.51) decomposed into the basis ¦[n`
T
¦ reads
H
n,n
= (H
0
+nΩ)δ
n,n
+H
1

n,n

+1

n,n

−1
), (2.52)
or in matrix notation,
H =

¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
H
0
+ 2Ω H
1
0 0 0
H
1
H
0
+Ω H
1
0 0
0 H
1
H
0
H
1
0
0 0 H
1
H
0
−Ω H
1

0 0 0 H
1
H
0
−2Ω
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

. (2.53)
The eigenvectors of (2.53) are the Fourier components [c
α,n
` of the Floquet states,
as the decomposition into ¦[n`
T
¦ corresponds to Fourier representation. Due to
the Brillouin-zone like structure, it is sufficient to compute all eigenvectors whose
eigenvalues lie in an interval of size Ω.
As a basis set for the Hilbert space 1, one commonly uses M eigenstates of the
undriven Hamiltonian H
0
, which itself has been decomposed into the eigenfunctions
of the harmonic oscillator (see Appendix A). Thus, for N Floquet channels the
dimension of the Floquet matrix is NM and the computational effort for the matrix
diagonalization is proportional to (NM)
3
.
A further efficient method for the computation of eigenvectors of the tridiagonal
matrix (2.53) are matrix continued fractions [25,45]. We shall not apply this method.
2.5.2 Propagator methods
The quasienergies and the Floquet states at time t = 0 can be extracted from the
one-period propagator by use of the eigenvalue equation (2.50) of the unitary oper-
ator U(T, 0). In numerical calculations, however, it is advantageous to diagonalize
the Hermitian operator
V = i
1 +U(T, 0)
1 −U(T, 0)
. (2.54)
2.5 Numerical computation of Floquet states 13
Being a function of U(T, 0), V possesses the same eigenvectors as U(T, 0), namely
the Floquet states [φ
α
(0)`. It is straightforward to show that the corresponding
eigenvalues read cot(
α
T/2).
For the computation of the mean energies and to determine the coefficients
of the master equation for the dissipative dynamics (see next chapter), it is nec-
essary to know the Floquet states’ Fourier coefficients [c
α,n
`. They are obtained
by propagating the [φ
α
(0)` over one period of the driving, which yields [ψ
α
(t)` =
exp(−i
α
t/)[φ
α
(t)`, for t in the range [0, T]. The [c
α,n
` result from Fourier decom-
position, according to their definition (2.20). The propagation can be performed in
various ways. In the following, we sketch the methods implemented in this work.
Direct integration of the Schr¨ odinger equation
The most simple method for the computation of the propagator is the direct in-
tegration of the Schr¨ odinger equation by use of a Runge-Kutta routine, where the
initial condition is the unit matrix. An extension of this method to other shapes of
driving is rather easy.
It emerges that the numerical effort for the propagation is proportional to NM
3
,
however with a much larger prefactor compared to the diagonalization of the Floquet
matrix. Therefore, computing the Floquet states by direct integration is well-suited
if a large number of Floquet channels is required.
The (t, t

)-formalism
A very efficient numerical method for the computation of the propagator for a Hamil-
tonian of the form (2.51) is derived from the (t, t

)-formalism [38, 46, 47]. There, the
Schr¨ odinger is extended by a second time coordinate to read
i

∂t
[ψ(t, t

)` =

H(t

) −i

∂t

[ψ(t, t

)`. (2.55)
The time t

is treated formally like an additional canonical coordinate of a time-
independent problem. We postulate T-periodic boundary conditions in t

, which
enables decomposition into the basis set (2.13). Being a solution of (2.55), [ψ(t, t

)`,
on the cut t

= t where ∂t

/∂t = 1, obeys
i

∂t
[ψ(t, t)` = i


∂t
+

∂t

[ψ(t, t

)`

t

=t
(2.56)
= H(t)[ψ(t, t)`. (2.57)
Thus [ψ(t, t)` is a solution of the “true” Schr¨ odinger equation (2.1). In an analogous
way, from the propagator
|(t −t
0
) = e
−iH(t−t
0
)/
(2.58)
of the extended Schr¨ odinger equation (2.55) one can extract the “true” propagator.
It reads
U(t, t
0
) =
T
'0[|(t −t
0
)[t

`
T
[
t

=t
(2.59)
14 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory
=
¸
n
T
'0[|(t −t
0
)[n`
T
e
inΩt
. (2.60)
This is so because on the one hand it fulfills the initial condition
U(t
0
, t
0
) =
¸
n
T
'0[1
R⊗T
[n`
T
e
inΩt
0
= 1
R
, (2.61)
and on the other hand solves the Schr¨ odinger equation,
i

∂t
U(t, t
0
) = i


∂t
+

∂t

T
'0[|(t −t
0
)[t

`
T

t

=t
(2.62)
= H(t)U(t, t
0
). (2.63)
Here the time ordering, which we have to consider explicitly in (2.45), is intrinsic.
By Taylor expansion of the extended propagator | one obtains for the time step
from t to t +τ
U(t + τ, t) =
¸
n
e
inΩ(t+τ)
T
'0[|(τ)[n`
T
(2.64)
=
¸
n
e
inΩ(t+τ)

¸
ν=0
|
(ν)
0,n
(τ), (2.65)
with
|
(ν)
0,n
(τ) =
1
ν!


ν
T
'0[H
ν
[n`
T
. (2.66)
For a sufficiently small time step τ, it is possible to truncate the sum over ν after
N+1 terms. Due to the tridiagonal structure of H, in the sum over n all terms with
[n[ > N vanish. Typically, already a few Floquet channels are sufficient to obtain
numerical convergence [47].
In the special case N = 1 we obtain U(t +τ, t) = 1−iH(t +τ)τ/, the first term
of the Taylor expansion of the time-ordered exponential (2.45). For larger N, the
time ordering results in a more complicated expression.
3
Quantum dissipation and
Markov approximation
Within the framework of classical mechanics, dissipation can be introduced phe-
nomenologically just by adding a velocity-proportional friction force. Although an
extension of the Lagrange formalism to this model of dissipation is possible [48],
quantization results in unphysical properties, e.g., a time-dependent mass, or doesn’t
handle the uncertainty relation properly [49].
The most successful approach to dissipation in quantum mechanics, consistent
with the fundamental laws of quantum mechanics, is based on the coupling of the
conservative system to external degrees of freedom. Probably the first proof that
such a system-bath scheme results in dissipative quantum mechanics was given by
Magalinski˘ı [19] for a harmonic oscillator. Zwanzig generalized this concept within
the framework of classical stochastic processes to arbitrary potentials and derived
a Markovian master equation for the dynamics of the dissipative system by the
so-called projector formalism [20]. By similar approaches, master equations for
quantum systems [50–52] were derived and applied in laser physics [50] and to nuc-
lear magnetic resonance and electron-spin resonance. Later, Caldeira and Leggett
rediscovered the system-bath model in the context of dissipative tunneling [11] and,
in a path-integral formulation, eliminated the bath exactly [21,53]. This enabled the
investigation of dissipative quantum systems, beyond a weak-coupling limit. Strong
system-bath correlations result in interesting effects, among them most prominently
the algebraic decay of correlation functions at zero temperature [54, 55].
However, as soon as nonlinear forces come into play, the path-integral approach
requires to resort to extensive and sophisticated numerics, such as Monte-Carlo
calculations [56–58], with their own shortcomings. Thus, for the description of
nonlinear systems subject to weak dissipation, it is desirable to to treat the influence
of the bath in perturbation theory, leading to a Markovian master equation for the
density operator [50–52]. In this chapter, we introduce the system-bath model and
derive a Markovian master equation for the reduced density operator for the case of
a static central system.
3.1 The system-bath model
To achieve a microscopic model of dissipation, we couple the system bilinearly to
a bath of non-interacting harmonic oscillators with masses m
ν
, frequencies ω
ν
, mo-
menta p
ν
, and coordinates x
ν
, with the coupling strength c
ν
[11, 19, 59]. The total
Hamiltonian of system and bath is then given by
H = H
S
+H
SB
+H
B
, (3.1)
16 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation
where H
S
denotes the Hamiltonian of the central system and
H
B
=
¸
ν

p
2
ν
2m
ν
+
1
2
m
ν
ω
2
ν
x
2
ν

, (3.2)
H
SB
= −x
¸
ν
c
ν
x
ν
+x
2
¸
ν
c
2
ν
2m
ν
ω
2
ν
, (3.3)
describe the heat bath and its coupling to the system. The second term in H
SB
,
which depends only on the position x of the system, serves to cancel a renormaliza-
tion of the potential due to the coupling [49, 53, 59].
For the time evolution we choose an initial condition of the Feynman-Vernon
type: at t = t
0
, the bath is not correlated to the system and canonically distributed
with respect to the free bath Hamiltonian, i.e., the density operator W of system
plus bath reads
W(t
0
) = (t
0
) ⊗
e
−H
B
/k
B
T
tr e
−H
B
/k
B
T
, (3.4)
where is the density operator of the system and k
B
T denotes Boltzmann’s constant
times temperature. Although this choice is somewhat artificial, it is favorable due
to its technical simplicity. Other initial conditions, like e.g. the canonical ensemble
of the whole system including the coupling [60], are more realistic. However, below
we will deal with driven systems where specifying a more sophisticated preparation
is not meaningful without specifying an onset of the driving.
Due to the bilinearity of the bath and its coupling to the system, one can elim-
inate the bath variables to get an exact, closed integro-differential equation for the
dynamics of the central system, subject to dissipation. The elimination can be
performed in two ways, which are the subjects of the following sections.
3.2 Quantum Langevin equation
From the system-bath Hamiltonian (3.1) we derive the Heisenberg equations of mo-
tion for the system and the bath operators and solve the latter formally. This results
in a dissipative differential equation for the Heisenberg position operator of the sys-
tem, which is driven by an operator-valued stochastic force. Although in general,
this quantum Langevin equation cannot be solved exactly and thus is of limited
practical use, it offers a possibility for interpretations.
The Heisenberg equations of motion for the position operators of the system and
of the bath oscillators read
¨ x +
1
m
V

(x) =
1
m
¸
ν
c
ν

x
ν

c
ν
m
ν
ω
2
ν
x

, (3.5)
¨ x
ν

2
ν
x
ν
=
c
ν
m
ν
x. (3.6)
3.2 Quantum Langevin equation 17
Equation (3.6) is easily integrated to yield the formal solution
x
ν
(t) = x
ν
(t
0
) cos ω(t −t
0
) +
p
ν
(t
0
)
m
ν
ω
ν
sin ω
ν
(t −t
0
)
+
c
ν
m
ν
ω
ν

t
t
0
dt

sin ω
ν
(t −t

) x(t

). (3.7)
After integration by parts, inserting into (3.5) results in the so-called quantum
Langevin equation [61–64]
¨ x(t) +

t
t
0
dt

γ(t −t

) ˙ x(t

) +
1
m
V

(x(t)) =
1
m
ξ(t) −γ(t)x(t
0
) (3.8)
with the damping kernel
γ(t) =
1
m
¸
ν
c
2
ν
m
ν
ω
2
ν
cos ω
ν
(t −t
0
) (3.9)
and the operator-valued fluctuating force
ξ(t) =
¸
ν
c
ν

x
ν
(t
0
) cos ω
ν
(t −t
0
) +
p
ν
(t
0
)
m
ν
ω
ν
sin ω
ν
(t −t
0
)

. (3.10)
The last term in (3.8) gives rise to an initial slip due to the sudden coupling of the
system and the bath at time t
0
[19, 61, 64]. It will be omitted in the following as we
will not study preparation effects within this framework. The influence of the fluc-
tuating force on the system is fully characterized by its symmetric autocorrelation
function, the noise kernel
K(t −t

) =
1
2
'ξ(t)ξ(t

) +ξ(t

)ξ(t)`, (3.11)
=
¸
ν
c
2
ν
2m
ν
ω
ν
coth

ω
ν
2k
B
T

cos ω
ν
(t −t

). (3.12)
To obtain the last line, we have made use of the equilibrium expectation values
1
2
m
ν
ω
2
ν
'x
ν
x
ν
` =
1
2m
ν
'p
ν
p
ν
` =
ω
ν
4
coth

ω
ν
2k
B
T

δ
νν
(3.13)
for the bath operators in the canonical ensemble. As the system-bath Hamiltonian
(3.1) is bilinear in the bath coordinates x
ν
, the Gaussian property holds, i.e., we
can express moments and correlations of higher order by products of K’s. The
correlation function K(τ) decays within a time
τ
B
= /k
B
T, (3.14)
which also marks the time scale below which correlations between system and bath
are relevant. In the limit of zero temperature, τ
B
diverges and these correlations
play a dominant role [54, 55].
18 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation
At this point it is convenient to introduce the spectral density of the system-bath
coupling
I(ω) = π
¸
ν
c
2
ν
2m
ν
ω
ν
δ(ω −ω
ν
). (3.15)
In a continuum limit for the heat bath we assume I(ω) to be a smooth function.
The damping and the noise kernel can be expressed by the spectral function to read
γ(t) =
2
πm


0

I(ω)
ω
cos ωt (3.16)
K(t) =
1
π


0
dω I(ω) coth

ω
2k
B
T

cos ωt. (3.17)
Both are not independent of each other since they obey the so-called second fluc-
tuation-dissipation relation [49], which in Fourier representation reads
K(ω) =
1
2
mωγ(ω) coth

ω
2k
B
T

. (3.18)
In the classical limit k
B
T ω, Eq. (3.18) reads K(ω) = mγ(ω)k
B
T and the
quantum Langevin equation becomes in the long-time limit formally equivalent to
the corresponding classical Langevin equation [49, 62, 63].
As a prototypical model for damping, we use the Ohmic friction kernel γ(t) =
2γδ(t), where the memory of the friction in (3.8) drops to zero. This corresponds to
the Ohmic spectral density I(ω) = mγω. An Ohmic spectral density is often used as
an approximation to a more complicated one and therefore in literature sometimes
appears as “first Markov approximation” [50]. The assumption of an increasing
spectral density for arbitrarily high frequencies, however, is not only somewhat
artificial, but also results in divergent integrals. We regularize them, if required, by
a cutoff in the spectral density,
I(ω) = mγω
ω
2
D
ω
2

2
D
, (3.19)
which defines the Drude model. The cutoff frequency ω
D
introduces a short but
finite memory τ
D
= 1/ω
D
for the friction.
3.3 Influence functional
Despite the fact that the quantum Langevin equation (3.8) appears quite simple, its
practical use is limited to the very rare cases where it can be integrated directly. A
more useful approach is the elimination of the heat bath in the equation of motion
for the full density operator W, which results in an equation of motion for the
reduced density operator = tr
B
W of the central system subject to dissipation,
where tr
B
denotes the trace over the bath variables. For an exact elimination of the
3.3 Influence functional 19
heat bath, the path-integral formulation of quantum mechanics has proved to be
more convenient than operator notation [11, 53].
We start with the time evolution of the full density matrix,
W(t) = e
−iH(t−t
0
)/
W(t
0
)e
iH(t−t
0
)/
, (3.20)
which in position representation reads
W(x
f
, x
f
, x

f
, x

f
, t) ≡ 'x
f
, x
f
[W(t)[x

f
, x

f
` (3.21)
=

dx
0
dx

0
dx
0
dx

0
U(x
f
, x
f
, t; x
0
, x
0
, t
0
) (3.22)
U

(x

f
, x

f
, t; x

0
, x

0
, t
0
)W(x
0
, x
0
, x

0
, x

0
, t
0
). (3.23)
The propagator U(x, x, t; x
0
, x
0
, t
0
) of the system plus the bath is given by the path
integral expression [11, 49, 65]
U(x
f
, x
f
, t; x
0
, x
0
, t
0
) =

x(t)=x
f
x(t
0
)=x
0
Tx

x(t)=x
f
x(t
0
)=x
0
Txexp

i

S[x] +
i

S
B
[x, x]

.
(3.24)
The variable x is a shorthand for all bath coordinates x
ν
and Tx denotes path
integration over all of them. The actions
S[x] =

t
t
0
dt

m
2
˙ x
2
(t

) −V (x(t

))

, (3.25)
S
B
[x, x] =
¸
ν

t
t
0
dt

m
ν
2
˙ x
ν
(t

)
2

1
2
m
ν
ω
2
ν

x
ν
(t

) −
c
ν
m
ν
ω
2
ν
x(t

)

2

, (3.26)
correspond to the Hamiltonian H
S
of the central system and H
B
+ H
SB
for the
bath plus system-bath coupling, respectively. We insert the initial condition (3.4)
and evaluate the path integral over the bath variables. After tracing out the bath
variables by integrating over all the bath coordinates x
f
, we obtain [11, 21, 49]
(x
f
, x

f
, t) =

dx
0
dx

0
J(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
0
, x

0
, t
0
)(x
0
, x

0
, t
0
), (3.27)
J(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
0
, x

0
, t
0
) =

x(t)=x
f
x(t
0
)=x
0
Tx

x

(t)=x

f
x

(t
0
)=x

0
Tx

exp

i

S[x] −
i

S[x

]

exp


1

φ
FV
[x, x

]

. (3.28)
The propagator J(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
0
, x

0
, t
0
) describes the time-evolution of the dissipative
system. The entire influence of the bath is subsumed in the so-called influence
functional [21] φ
FV
[x, x

],
Re φ
FV
[x, x

] =

t
t
0
dt

t

t
0
dt

x(t

) −x

(t

)

K(t

−t

)

x(t

) −x

(t

)

, (3.29)
20 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation
Imφ
FV
[x, x

] = −
m
2

t
t
0
dt

t

t
0
dt

x(t

) −x

(t

)

γ(t

−t

)

˙ x(t

) + ˙ x

(t

)


m
2

t
t
0
dt

x(t

) −x

(t

)

γ(t

)

x(t
0
) +x

(t
0
)

. (3.30)
To obtain (3.30), we have integrated Imφ
FV
by parts, canceling the potential renor-
malization in (3.26). The last term of the imaginary part gives the initial slip,
known from Eq. (3.8), and is omitted in the following. The real part of the influence
functional describes the noise, whereas the imaginary part gives rise to friction [49].
3.4 Markovian master equation
By perturbation theory for the propagator (3.28) up to lowest non-trivial order in the
system-bath coupling, we derive a master equation of Markovian type, i.e., without
memory. The steps to introduce this Markov approximation are usually performed
in operator notation, starting from the full system-bath Hamiltonian (3.1). Here, we
give a derivation from the path-integral expression (3.28). The present derivation
requires essentially the same approximations as the standard projection technique
approach, but has some advantages. First, one can here distinguish more clearly
between the influence of friction and noise, because each of them is easily identified
in the path integral expression (3.28) [49]. A second benefit is the exact cancellation
of the potential renormalization in (3.30). And last but not least, one can show that
for the case of an Ohmic spectral density, the friction part in the Markovian master
equation becomes exact.
In standard perturbation theory for path integrals [65, 66], the exponent of the
influence functional is approximated by a Taylor series,
exp


1

φ
FV
[x, x

]

≈ 1 −
1

φ
FV
[x, x

]. (3.31)
The small parameter in this approximation is the effective coupling strength γ, which
means that γ has to be the smallest frequency scale in the problem. Thus,
γ <1/τ
B
= k
B
T/, (3.32)
γ <∆/, (3.33)
where τ
B
is the correlation time of the bath and ∆ denotes any energy difference in
the spectrum of the conservative problem.
The propagator for the density matrix is at order zero in the perturbation given
by the first line of (3.28). It can be separated into two parts, one depending only
on x, the other only on x

. They are easily identified as the propagator for the
Schr¨ odinger equation of the pure system and its complex conjugate,
J
0
(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
0
, x

0
, t
0
) = U
0
(x
f
, t; x
0
, t
0
) U

0
(x

f
, t; x

0
, t
0
). (3.34)
3.4 Markovian master equation 21
In first order of perturbation (which is already second order in the coupling con-
stants c
ν
), the influence functionals (3.29) and (3.30) only yield contributions at
times t

and t

. Thus we can dissect the path integral into an explicit integration
over x
1
= x(t

) and x
2
= x(t

) and free time evolution [65, 66] to get
(x
f
, x

f
, t) =

dx
0
dx

0
J
0
(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
0
, x

0
, t
0
)(x
0
, x

0
, t
0
)

1

t
t
0
dt

t

t
0
dt

dx
1
dx

1
dx
2
dx

2
J
0
(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
1
, x

1
, t

) (x
1
−x

1
)
J
0
(x
1
, x

1
, t

; x
2
, x

2
, t

)K(t

−t

) (x
2
−x

2
)(x
2
, x

2
, t

)
+
im
2

t
t
0
dt

t

t
0
dt

dx
1
dx

1
dx
2
dx

2
J
0
(x
f
, x

f
, t; x
1
, x

1
, t

) (x
1
−x

1
)
J
0
(x
1
, x

1
, t

; x
2
, x

2
, t

) γ(t

−t

) ( ˙ x
2
+ ˙ x

2
)(x
2
, x

2
, t

), (3.35)
where we have assumed that path integration commutes with the integrals over t

and t

. By use of (3.27) and (3.34), we can express (t

) in zeroth order of the
perturbation by (t),
(x
2
, x

2
, t

) =

dx
0
dx

0
J
0
(x
2
, x

2
, t

; x
0
, x

0
, t)(x
0
, x

0
, t). (3.36)
We insert into (3.35), differentiate with respect to t, and obtain the master equation
˙ (x
f
, x

f
, t)
= −
i

H(x
f
) −H(x

f
)

(x
f
, x

f
, t)

1

t
t
0
dτ K(τ)

dx
1
dx

1
dx
2
dx

2
(x
f
−x

f
) U
0
(x
f
, t; x
2
, t −τ)U

0
(x

f
, t; x

2
, t −τ)
(x
2
−x

2
) U
0
(x
2
, t −τ; x, t) U

0
(x

2
, t −τ; x

, t) (x, x

, t)
+
im
2

t
t
0
dτ γ(τ)

dx
1
dx

1
dx
2
dx

2
(x
f
−x

f
) U
0
(x
f
, t; x
2
, t −τ)U

0
(x

f
, t; x

2
, t −τ)
( ˙ x
2
+ ˙ x

2
) U
0
(x
2
, t −τ; x, t) U

0
(x

2
, t −τ; x

, t) (x, x

, t), (3.37)
where the free propagator J
0
for the density matrix has been substituted by the
propagator U
0
of the Schr¨ odinger equation and the integration variable t

by τ =
t − t

. This master equation is Markovian since ˙ (t) depends only on (t), i.e., at
equal times, not on the history of .
In the following chapters, we will solve the master equation in energy basis, in
Floquet basis, or in Wigner representation, respectively. In all these cases, an opera-
tor notation is more convenient than a position representation. Deriving from (3.37)
22 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation
the representation-free form is straightforward and yields
d
dt
= −
i

[H
S
, ] −
1


0
dτ K(τ) [x, [x
H
(t −τ, t), ]]
+
i
2


0
dτ γ(τ) [x, [p
H
(t −τ, t), ]
+
], (3.38)
with the anticommutator [A, B]
+
= AB + BA. The Heisenberg position and mo-
mentum operators x
H
and p
H
are defined according to
O
H
(t, t

) = U

0
(t, t

) OU
0
(t, t

), (3.39)
where U
0
(t, t

) = exp(−iH
S
(t − t

)/) denotes the propagator of the conservative
system. We have assumed further that the integration kernel K(τ) is practically
zero for τ > τ
B
[67] and extended the upper integration limit in (3.38) to infinity.
This implicitly moved the preparation time t
0
→ −∞, thus the master equation
(3.38) describes only the system dynamics sufficiently close to equilibrium.
For an Ohmic spectral density γ(τ) = 2γδ(τ), the integration in the second line
of (3.38) can be evaluated and we obtain the Markovian master equation
d
dt
= −
i

[H
S
, ] +

L
friction
+L
0
noise

. (3.40)
The commutator in (3.40) gives the coherent dynamics, whereas the superoperators
L
friction
= −

2
[x, [p, ]
+
], (3.41)
L
0
noise
= −
1

[x, [Q, ]], (3.42)
describe the influence of the the bath: friction and noise. The operator
Q =


0
dτ K(τ) x
H
(t −τ, t), (3.43)
is qualitatively the Heisenberg position operator x
H
of the system in Fourier re-
presentation. Therefore L
0
noise
depends on the conservative dynamics (superscript
0
),
thus on the energy spectrum of the central system. Note that Q is time independent,
since for a static Hamiltonian x
H
(t −τ, t) = x
H
(−τ).
The Markovian master equation (3.40) together with (3.41) and (3.42), does
not exhibit Lindblad form (B.3), thus the positivity of the density operator is not
guaranteed for all possible initial states. The violation of positivity due to a master
equation in this case, however, is a transient effect which only arises for preparations
far from equilibrium [68–71], where the conditions under which the master equation
has been derived, are not fulfilled. (See Appendix B.1 for a more detailed discussion).
4
Driving and dissipation:
Floquet-Markov theory
For a dissipative quantum system subject to external driving, even a partially analyt-
ical solution within the path-integral approach is feasible only for the very simplest
systems, in particular, for the periodically driven, damped harmonic oscillator [28],
or for driven dissipative two-level systems [72, 73]. Thus, for the description of
strongly driven systems subject to weak dissipation, it is desirable to combine a
Markovian approach to quantum dissipation, leading to a master equation for the
density operator, with the Floquet formalism that allows to treat time-periodic
forces of arbitrary strength and frequency. While the Floquet formalism amounts
essentially to using an optimal representation and is exact [23], the simplification
brought about by the Markovian description is achieved only at the expense of ac-
curacy. Here, a subtle technical difficulty lies in the fact that the truncation of the
long-time memory introduced by the bath and the inclusion of the driving do not
commute: As pointed out in Refs. [26, 27], the result of the Markov approximation
depends on whether it is made with respect to the eigenenergy spectrum of the
central system without the driving, or with respect to the quasienergy spectrum ob-
tained from the Floquet solution of the driven system. In the second case it cannot
be treated as a system with proper eigenstates and eigenenergies. Figure 4.1 depicts
the two different possibilities for including driving and dissipation to the description
of a quantum system. Both approaches yield a Markovian master equation, but
differ quantitatively. We will investigate this difference in detail for the case of a
parametrically driven harmonic oscillator in Chapter 5.
A Floquet theory for dissipative driven systems based on the energy spectrum
has been worked out and applied to intense-field excitations of atoms in Refs. [37,74];
a quasienergy spectrum approach has been implemented in recent work on driven
Rydberg atoms [22, 75] and coherent destruction of tunneling [76–78].
4.1 Simple inclusion of the driving
A simple Markovian approach to dissipative driven quantum systems results directly
from the master equation for the undriven system: We replace in (3.40) the static
Hamiltonian H
S
by the time-dependent Hamiltonian
H
S
(t) = H
0
+H
F
(t) (4.1)
which yields
d
dt
= −
i

[H
S
(t), ] +

L
friction
+L
0
noise

. (4.2)
24 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory
S
Floquet theory
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−→
for Schr¨ odinger equation
S +D
Markov
(energy spectrum)

Markov
(quasienergy spectrum)
S +B
Floquet theory
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−→
for master equation
S +D+B
Figure 4.1: Successive inclusion of the driving (D) and the influence of a heat bath (B)
to the description of a quantum system (S). The horizontal arrows denote exact Floquet
treatment, whereas the vertical arrows mark an approximate step, namely the truncation
of the long-time memory. The result depends on the route taken.
Here, the driving enters only the coherent part of the master equation, whereas
L
0
noise
has been derived from the undriven Hamiltonian H
0
. Thus, we refer to this
approach as the Markovian approach with respect to the unperturbed spectrum.
For a periodically time-dependent driving, H
F
(t) = H
F
(t +T), the master equation
(4.2) allows for a Floquet treatment [37].
4.2 An improved Markovian master equation
We pointed out in Section 3.4, that the coherent dynamics of the central system
plays an important role in the derivation of the Markovian master equation (3.40).
This means that for a driven system the Markovian master equation depends on
whether the driving is considered in its derivation or not.
To obtain an improved master equation whose dissipative kernel accounts for
the influence of the driving, we start anew from the full system-bath Hamiltonian
including the driving. Performing the same steps as in the preceeding chapter,
but for an explicitly time-dependent Hamiltonian H
S
(t), we obtain the Markovian
master equation
d
dt
= −
i

[H
S
(t), ] + (L
friction
+L
noise
) . (4.3)
Friction and noise are described by the superoperators
L
friction
= −

2
[x, [p, ]
+
], (4.4)
L
noise
= −
1

[x, [Q(t), ]]. (4.5)
Whereas L
friction
is the same for both Markovian approaches, L
noise
has acquired a
time dependence which stems from the operator
Q(t) =


0
dτ K(τ) x
H
(t −τ, t), (4.6)
4.3 Decomposition into Floquet basis 25
where
x
H
(t, t

) = U

(t, t

) xU(t, t

) (4.7)
is the Heisenberg position operator of the driven system which depends explicitly on
both times, t and t

, not only on their difference. Therefore L
noise
is time dependent
and does—in contrast to L
0
noise
—not depend on the energy spectrum of the undriven
system, but on the quasienergy spectrum of the driven system.
Since the role of the eigenenergies is now taken over by the quasienergies, we refer
to this master equation as the Markovian approach with respect to the quasienergy
spectrum. The influence of a driving force on L
noise
will be studied in detail for the
case of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator in Chapter 5.
4.3 Decomposition into Floquet basis
So far, we did not specify the time dependence of the system Hamiltonian in the
derivation of the master equation. By assuming a T-periodic Hamiltonian, we are
able to make use of the Floquet theorem and expand the reduced density operator
into the time-periodic Floquet states [φ
α
(t)` of the isolated driven system. They
form a well-adapted basis for the case of weak dissipation. A master equation for
the matrix elements

αβ
= 'φ
α
(t)[[φ
β
(t)` (4.8)
is derived from the basis-independent improved master equation (4.3).
4.3.1 Matrix elements
To decompose the master equation (4.3), we need to know the matrix elements of
the operators x, p and Q(t) in the Floquet basis. They all are T-periodic and can
be expressed as a Fourier series,
X
αβ
(t) ≡ 'φ
α
(t)[x[φ
β
(t)` =
¸
n
e
inΩt
X
αβ,n
, (4.9)
P
αβ
(t) ≡ 'φ
α
(t)[p[φ
β
(t)` =
¸
n
e
inΩt
P
αβ,n
, (4.10)
Q
αβ
(t) ≡ 'φ
α
(t)[Q(t)[φ
β
(t)` =
¸
n
e
inΩt
Q
αβ,n
. (4.11)
The Fourier coefficients of the position matrix elements read
X
αβ,n
=
1
T

T
0
dt e
−inΩt

α
(t)[x[φ
β
(t)` (4.12)
= ''φ
α
(t)[x[φ
(−n)
β
(t)``. (4.13)
Next, we will express the Fourier coefficients P
αβ,n
and Q
αβ,n
in terms of X
αβ,n
.
26 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory
For a Hamiltonian of the form H = p
2
/2m + V (x, t), the momentum operator
can be expressed by a commutator,
p =
m
i
[H, x] =
m
i
[H, x], (4.14)
where H = H −i∂/∂t denotes the Floquet Hamiltonian. Thus we get
P
αβ,n
=
m
i
''φ
α
[p[φ
(−n)
β
`` (4.15)
=
m
i
(
α

β
+nΩ)X
αβ,n
. (4.16)
To obtain the last line, we made use of the eigenvalue equation (2.29) for the Floquet
states after inserting (4.14).
The Fourier coefficients of the time-dependent matrix element Q
αβ
(t) read
Q
αβ,n
=
1
T

T
0
dt e
−inΩt


0
dτ K(τ)'φ
α
(t)[x
H
(t −τ, t)[φ
β
(t)` (4.17)
=


0


π


0
dω ω coth

ω
2k
B
T

cos(ωτ)e
−i(α−
β
+nΩ)τ/
X
αβ,n
,
where we have inserted the spectral representation (3.17) of the noise kernel and
made use of (4.12). The τ-integration is evaluated by using


0
dτ exp(iωτ) =
πδ(ω) + iP(1/ω), where P denotes Cauchy’s principal part. We end up with
Q
αβ,n
=

2
(
α

β
+nΩ) coth

α

β
+nΩ
2k
B
T

X
αβ,n
. (4.18)
The contributions of the principal part result in quasienergy shifts of the order γ,
the so-called Lamb shifts [50, 51], and have been neglected.
By use of the Fourier representations (4.9)–(4.11) we obtain from Eq. (4.3) the
Floquet-Markov master equation [22, 27, 75]
˙
αβ
(t) =
d
dt

α
(t)[(t)[φ
β
(t)`
= −
i

(
α

β
)
αβ
(t)
+
¸
α

β

nn

e
i(n+n

)Ωt

(N
αα

,n
+N
ββ

,−n
)X
αα

,n

α

β
X
β

β,n
(4.19)
−N
β

α

,n
X
αβ

,n
X
β

α

,n

α

β
−N
α

β

,−n

αβ
X
β

α

,n
X
α

β,n

.
Note that the coefficients of this differential equation are periodic in time with the
period of the driving. The N
αβ,n
are given by
N
αβ,n
= N(
α

α
+nΩ), N() =

2
n
th
(), (4.20)
with the thermal occupation number
n
th
() =
1
e
/k
B
T
−1
=
1
2
¸
coth

2k
B
T

−1

. (4.21)
For k
B
T, N() approaches zero.
4.3 Decomposition into Floquet basis 27
4.3.2 Rotating-wave approximation
We used the Floquet basis to formally eliminate a driving force of arbitrary strength
from the coherent part of the master equation. However, the coefficients of the
dissipative part are still time dependent and complicate the solution of the master
equation. Here, we explore the conditions under which these coefficients can be
replaced by their time average. This step effectively amounts to a rotating-wave
approximation (RWA).
Moderate rotating-wave approximation
Assuming that dissipative effects are relevant only on a time scale much larger than
the period 2π/Ω of the driving, we average the likewise 2π/Ω-periodic coefficients
of the master equation (4.19) over one period of the driving and end up with the
equation of motion
˙
αβ
(t) = −
i

(
α

β
)
αβ
(t) +
¸
α

β

L
αβ,α

β

α

β
(t), (4.22)
with the dissipative transition rates
L
αβ,α

β
=
¸
n
(N
αα

,n
+N
ββ

,n
) X
αα

,n
X
β

β,−n
(4.23)
−δ
ββ

¸
β

,n
N
β

α

,n
X
αβ

,−n
X
β

α

,n
−δ
αα

¸
α

n
N
α

β

,n
X
β

α

,−n
X
α

β,n
.
The time-independence of its coefficients reflects that the influence of the driving has
been formally absorbed by decomposing into the Floquet basis. Note that diagonal
and off-diagonal elements of the density matrix are not decoupled. It has also to
be stressed that the rotating-wave approximation introduced here is less restrictive
than the one in Refs. [22, 75], as detailed in the next paragraph.
Full rotating-wave approximation
In some cases one can even go one step further. We solve the coherent part of the
master equation (4.22) by the ansatz

αβ
(t) = e
−i(α−
β
)t/
σ
αβ
(t), (4.24)
a transformation to the Heisenberg picture of the central system plus the driving.
Inserting into (4.22) yields
˙ σ
αβ
(t) =
¸
α

β

e
i(α−
β

α
+
β
)t/
L
αβ,α

β
σ
α

β
(t) (4.25)
If dissipative effects are only relevant on a time scale much longer than all finite
times 2π/(
α

β

α
+
β
), we are allowed to replace the coefficients in (4.25)
by their time average. Thus only the L
αβ,α

β
which fulfill the full-RWA condition

α

β
=
α

β
, (4.26)
28 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory
remain in (4.25) or (4.22), respectively. This condition is, however, much more
restrictive than the one in the previous paragraph, since here, we have averaged
over a longer time scale. Therefore the applicability of a full RWA is limited to
very rare cases like, e.g., harmonic potentials with their equidistant (quasi-) energy
levels.
Moreover, one can assume that for the case of a completely irregular spectrum
where all quasienergies are effectively random numbers [8, 79], the quasienergy dif-
ferences have no degeneracy at all. Then the full-RWA condition (4.26) results
in [22, 75]
α = α

, β = β

or α = β, α

= β

. (4.27)
Inserting into (4.25) yields two decoupled sets of equations for the diagonal and the
off-diagonal matrix elements,
˙ σ
αα
(t) =
¸
α

L
αα,α

α
σ
α

α
(t), (4.28)
˙ σ
αβ
(t) = L
αβ,αβ
σ
αβ
(t), α = β. (4.29)
The second equation results in an exponential decay of the off-diagonal matrix ele-
ments. Therefore in the asymptotic limit, the density matrix becomes diagonal in
the Floquet basis.
We will, however, find in Section 6.3 that even in a case where the dynamics
of the system is fully chaotic and thus, a full RWA seems to be appropriate, the
off-diagonal matrix elements play an important role for the asymptotic state.
4.4 The dissipative quantum map and its numerical imple-
mentation
The master equation (4.3) generates a dynamical semigroup for the time evolution
of the density operator. Its coefficients share the T-periodicity of the driven system
Hamiltonian H
S
(t), i.e., Eq. (4.3) meets the conditions for a Floquet treatment.
Therefore, it is possible to define a dissipative quantum map ((T) [25, 74, 80]—
the analogue of the one-cycle propagator U(T, 0) in the conservative case—which
describes the stroboscopic dissipative time evolution of the density operator,
(nT) = [((T)]
n
(0). (4.30)
As the dynamics generated by (4.30) is dissipative, it converges in the long-time
limit to an asymptotic state

, the “quantum attractor” which is the fixed point
of the dissipative quantum map ((T).
Decomposing into the Floquet basis ¦[φ
α
(t)`¦ yields the one-cycle propagation
of the density matrix elements

αβ
((n + 1)T) =
¸
α

β

(
αβ,α

β
(T)
α

β
(nT). (4.31)
4.4 The dissipative quantum map and its numerical implementation 29
An equation of motion for the dissipative map,
˙
(
αβ,α

β
(t) = −
i

(
α

β
)(
αβ,α

β
(t) δ
αα
δ
ββ
+
¸
α

β

L
αβ,α

β
(
α

β

β
(t) (4.32)
follows straightforwardly from (4.22). This form enables a numerical treatment of
the master equation: We integrate (4.32) over one period of the driving T to obtain
the dissipative map ((T). The time evolution of the density operator results from
iteration according to (4.31).
30
5
The parametrically driven
harmonic oscillator
In this chapter we investigate the properties and the quality of the different Markov-
ian approaches to damped periodically driven quantum dynamics for a linear system
where an exact path-integral solution is still available: The parametrically driven,
damped harmonic oscillator allows for a very transparent and well-controlled investi-
gation of the different approximation schemes introduced in Chapters 3 and 4. Here,
their quality can be reliably checked since in this system, the quasienergy spectrum
is sufficiently different from the unperturbed energy spectrum [81,82] (this feature is
in contrast to the additively driven harmonic oscillator where the difference of two
quasienergies does not depend on the driving parameters [83]), and a comparison
with the known quantum path-integral solution [28] is possible.
Moreover, by switching to a phase-space representation such as the Wigner func-
tion, it is possible to elucidate the relationship of the quantal results to the corre-
sponding classical Fokker-Planck dynamics. Since this relation is particularly close
in the case of linear systems, this provides an additional consistency check. There-
fore, a strong emphasis of this chapter is on the testing and thorough understanding
of the available methods.
Forming a convenient “laboratory animal” due to its simplicity and linearity, the
parametrically driven harmonic oscillator still shows nontrivial behavior, interesting
in its own right. We give a brief review of the model, its classical dynamics, and its
coherent quantum dynamics in Sections 5.1 and 5.2. In Section 5.3 we present the
solution of the dissipative dynamics in Floquet-Markov description. A refined inves-
tigation within a basis-independent description, which allows for a detailed analysis
of the influence of the driving on the dissipative terms of the master equation,
is given in Section 5.4. Section 5.5 is devoted to a discussion of the asymptotics
of the quantal solutions, such as the conservative and the high-temperature lim-
its. Section 5.6 contains numerical results for a number of characteristic dynamical
quantities as obtained for the alternative Markovian approaches, and the compar-
ison to the path-integral solution. A summary of the various representations and
levels of Markovian description, with their interrelations, is given in Section 5.7. A
merely technical issue, the solution of a Fokker-Planck equation by the method of
characteristics, is deferred to Appendix C.
5.1 The model and its classical dynamics
For a particle with mass m moving in a harmonic potential with time-dependent
frequency, the Hamiltonian is given by
H
S
(t) =
p
2
2m
+
1
2
k(t)x
2
, (5.1)
32 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
where k(t) = mω
2
(t) is a periodic function with period T. An initial phase of the
driving can be taken into account by a proper time translation. A special case is
the Mathieu oscillator, where
ω
2
(t) = ω
2
0
+ε cos Ωt, Ω = 2π/T. (5.2)
This is an experimentally important case in view of the fact that it describes the
Paul trap [84]. Depending on its frequency and amplitude, the driving can stabilize
or destabilize the undriven oscillation. Figure 5.1 shows the zones of stable and
unstable motion, respectively, for the Mathieu oscillator, in the ω
2
0
-ε plane.
The equation of motion for a classical particle with Ohmic (i.e., velocity-propor-
tional) dissipation in the potential given in (5.1) reads
¨ x +γ ˙ x +
1
m
k(t)x = 0. (5.3)
By substituting x = ξ exp(−γt/2), we can formally remove the damping to get an
undamped equation with a modified potential
¨
ξ +

ω
2
(t) −γ
2
/4

ξ = 0. (5.4)
Already here, on the level of the classical equations of motion, we can apply the Flo-
quet theorem for second-order differential equations with time-periodic coefficients.
It asserts [42, 85] that Eq. (5.4) has two solutions of the form
ξ
1
(t) = e
iµt
ϕ(t), ξ
2
(t) = ξ

1
(t), ϕ(t +T) = ϕ(t). (5.5)
The solution ξ
2
(t) is related to ξ
1
(t) by the fact that the coefficients in the differential
equation (5.4) are real. Being periodic in time, the classical Floquet function ϕ(t)
can be represented as a Fourier series,
ϕ(t) =

¸
n=−∞
c
n
e
inΩt
. (5.6)
The Floquet index µ depends on the shape of the driving k(t) and is defined only
modΩ. There exist driving functions for which µ is complex so that one of the
solutions ξ
i
(t) becomes unstable (cf. Fig. 5.1). In stable regions µ is real. On the
border between a stable and an unstable region, µ becomes a multiple of Ω/2 and the
solutions ξ
1
(t) and ξ
2
(t) are not linearly independent. For given k(t), the functions
ϕ(t), ξ
i
(t) and the Floquet index µ still depend on the damping γ. We denote the
limit γ →0 of ϕ(t), ξ
i
(t), µ by ϕ
0
(t), ξ
0
i
(t), µ
0
.
The normalization of the c
n
is chosen such that the Wronskian J, which is a
constant of the motion, is given by
J =
˙
ξ
1
(t)ξ
2
(t) −ξ
1
(t)
˙
ξ
2
(t) = 2i, (5.7)
resulting in the sum rule

¸
n=−∞
c
2
n
(µ +nΩ) = 1. (5.8)
5.1 The model and its classical dynamics 33
0 5 10 15
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
ε [Ω
2
/2]
ω
2 0
[

2
/
4
]
stable stable
unstable
Figure 5.1: Stability of equation (5.3) with γ = 0 for the case of a Mathieu oscillator. In
the white areas the Floquet index µ is real, which corresponds to stable solutions. In the
shaded areas µ is complex and therefore one of the fundamental solutions (5.5) is unstable.
On the borderlines, µ becomes a multiple of Ω/2 and the motion is marginal stable.
Returning to the original x-coordinate, we find that the fundamental solutions
of (5.3) read
f
i
(t) = e
−γt/2
ξ
i
(t), i = 1, 2. (5.9)
For constant frequency of the oscillator, k(t) = const = mω
2
0
, the Floquet index
and the periodic function become µ = (ω
2
0
− γ
2
/4)
1/2
and ϕ(t) = (ω
2
0
− γ
2
/4)
−1/2
,
respectively, which reproduces the results for a damped harmonic oscillator without
driving.
The Green function for Eq. (5.3) is constructed using Eqs. (5.6) and (5.7),
G(t, t

) = e
−γ(t−t

)/2

ξ
1
(t)ξ
2
(t

) −ξ
2
(t)ξ
1
(t

)

/2i (5.10)
= e
−γ(t−t

)/2
¸
n,n

c
n
c
n
sin

µ(t −t

) + Ω(nt −n

t

)

. (5.11)
In terms of this function, the solution of (5.3) with initial conditions x(t
0
) = x
0
and
p(t
0
) = p
0
, reads
x(t, t
0
) = −x
0
∂G(t, t
0
)
∂t
0
+
p
0
m
G(t, t
0
). (5.12)
Since the potential breaks continuous time-translational invariance, this solution
depends explicitly on the initial time t
0
.
34 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
5.2 Floquet states in stable regimes
It can be shown by group theoretical methods that the quantum mechanical quasi-
energy spectrum of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator in a stable regime is
equivalent to the energy spectrum of an undriven harmonic oscillator [83]. In unsta-
ble zones or on the borderlines, the quasienergy spectrum is equivalent to the energy
spectrum of a parabolic barrier or of a free particle, respectively. The latter cases
result in a continuous quasienergy spectrum. We restrict ourselves to the motion in
stable regions.
In these regions of the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator (5.1), the Flo-
quet solutions for the Schr¨ odinger equation are derived in the literature in various
ways [81, 86–90]. Here we sketch a derivation in the spirit of Ref. [86].
A solution of the classical equation of motion (5.3) in the non-dissipative case
γ = 0 reads
x(t) =

2m

A

ξ
0
1
(t) +Aξ
0
2
(t)

, (5.13)
where A and A

are complex normal coordinates. In a quantized version, they are
replaced by the conjugate pair of operators
A(t) =
i

2m

ξ
0
1
(t)p −m
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)x

, (5.14)
A
+
(t) = −
i

2m

ξ
0
2
(t)p −m
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)x

, (5.15)
which satisfy the canonical commutation relation
[A(t), A
+
(t)] = 1. (5.16)
In the limit of zero driving amplitude they reduce to the familiar shift operators
(A.3), (A.4) of the time-independent harmonic oscillator.
The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator (5.1) possesses a T-periodic Her-
mitian invariant operator, the so-called Lewis invariant [86]
I(t) = A
+
(t)A(t) =
1
2

x ˙ r(t) −p r(t)

2
+
x
2
r
2
(t)
, (5.17)
r(t) =

ξ
0
1
(t) ξ
0
2
(t) = [ϕ
0
(t)[. (5.18)
The instantaneous eigenstates ψ
α
(x, t) of this invariant coincide—besides a time-
dependent phase factor—with the Floquet states of the system [86, 87, 91]. They
can be constructed in analogy to the energy eigenstates of the time-independent
harmonic oscillator: From the commutation relation (5.16) one obtains
A(t) ψ
α
(x, t) =

αψ
α−1
(x, t), (5.19)
A
+
(t) ψ
α
(x, t) =

α + 1 ψ
α+1
(x, t). (5.20)
5.2 Floquet states in stable regimes 35
Solving A(t)ψ
0
(x, t) = 0 and iterating according to (5.20), we find for I(t) the
eigenfunctions
ψ
α
(x, t) =
(A
+
(t))
α

α!
ψ
0
(x, t) (5.21)
=

ξ
0
2
(t)
ξ
0
1
(t)

α/2

m/π
2
α
α!ξ
0
1
(t)
H
α

x

m/ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t)

exp

im
2
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)
ξ
0
1
(t)
x
2

,
where H
α
is the αth Hermite polynomial, α = 0, 1, 2, . . . . These states are solutions
of the time-dependent Schr¨ odinger equation [86] and in the undriven limit reduce
to the position representation of the familiar eigenstates (A.10). Separating ψ
α
(x, t)
into a 2π/Ω-periodic function and an exponential prefactor, one finds the Floquet
states
φ
α
(x, t) =

m/π
2
α
α!ϕ
0
(t)
H
α

x

0
(t)[

m

exp

im
2
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)
ξ
0
1
(t)
x
2

. (5.22)
The corresponding quasienergies

α
= µ
0
(α + 1/2) (5.23)
are chosen such that in the undriven limit they reduce to the eigenenergies of the
harmonic oscillator. Thus they do not lie within a single Brillouin zone.
The matrix elements of the position operator x with the Floquet states [φ
α
(t)`,
which we will need to obtain the coefficients of the master equation, read
X
αβ
(t) = 'φ
α
(t)[x[φ
β
(t)` (5.24)
=
¸
n
e
inΩt
X
αβ,n
, (5.25)
X
αβ,n
=
1
T

T
0
dt e
−inΩt

α
(t)[x[φ
β
(t)`. (5.26)
To obtain Eqs. (5.25) and (5.26), the periodicity of the Floquet states [φ
α
(t)` has
been used. The Fourier components X
αβ,n
are preferably evaluated in the spatial
representation,
X
αβ
(t) =


−∞
dxφ
α
(x, t) xφ
β
(x, t) (5.27)
=

2m

β ϕ
0
(−t)δ
α,β−1
+

αϕ
0
(t)δ
α,β+1

, (5.28)
by inserting the Fourier expansion (5.6) for ϕ
0
(t), to give
X
αβ,n
=

2m

β c
−n
δ
α,β−1
+

αc
n
δ
α,β+1

. (5.29)
36 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
5.3 Floquet-Markov description in full RWA
In the full rotating-wave approximation (RWA) introduced in Section 4.3.2, we
neglect all contributions with
α

β
=
α

β
in Eq. (4.25). Thus in the
present case of an equidistant quasienergy spectrum, we have to keep all terms
with (α −β) = (α

−β

).
Substituting Eq. (5.29) in Eq. (4.23), we obtain from (4.25) the time-independent
master equation
˙ σ
αβ
=
γ
2

(N + 1)

2

(α + 1)(β + 1)σ
α+1,β+1
−(α +β)σ
αβ

+N

2

αβσ
α−1,β−1
−(α +β + 2)σ
αβ
¸
. (5.30)
The effective thermal-bath occupation number
N =
¸
n

c
0
n

2

0
+nΩ) n
th

0
+nΩ) (5.31)
reduces to N = n
th

0
) in the undriven limit.
Formally, this master equation coincides with the one for the undriven dissipa-
tive harmonic oscillator in rotating-wave approximation [50]. It has the stationary
solution
σ

αβ
=

αβ
=
1
N + 1

N
N + 1

α
δ
αβ
. (5.32)
The density operator of the asymptotic solution is diagonal in this representation
and reads


(t) =

¸
α=0


αα

α
(t)`'φ
α
(t)[. (5.33)
The basis ¦[φ
α
(t)`¦ corresponds to the “generalized Floquet states” introduced in
Ref. [26], i.e., they are centered on the classical asymptotic solution and diagonalize
the asymptotic density operator.
To get the variances of (5.33), we switch to the Wigner representation. There,
the asymptotic state reads
W

(x, p, t) =

¸
α=0


αα
W
α
(x, p, t), (5.34)
where
W
α
(x, p, t) =
(−1)
α
π
e
−z
2
L
α
(2z
2
), (5.35)
z
2
=
1

m
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)x
2

˙
ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t) +ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)

px +ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t)p
2
/m

,
is the Wigner function corresponding to [φ
α
(t)` [89], with the αth Laguerre polyno-
mial L
α
. Using the sum rule [92]

¸
α=0
κ
α
L
α
(x) = (1 −κ)
−1
exp


κ −1

, (5.36)
5.3 Floquet-Markov description in full RWA 37
we obtain the asymptotic solution in Wigner representation as
W

(x, p, t) =
1
π(2N + 1)
e
−z
2
/(2N+1)
. (5.37)
It is a Gaussian with the variances
σ
xx
(t) =

m
(N + 1/2)ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t), (5.38)
σ
xp
(t) = (N + 1/2)

˙
ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t) +ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)

/2, (5.39)
σ
pp
(t) = m(N + 1/2)
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t). (5.40)
To enable a comparison between the different equations of motions for the dissi-
pative quantum system, we also give for the master equation in RWA, Eq. (5.30), the
corresponding partial differential equation in Wigner representation. For a deriva-
tion, we use the shift properties (5.19) and (5.20) of the operators A and A
+
, to
obtain the corresponding basis-free operator equation from the master equation
(5.30) for the density matrix elements σ
αβ
˙ = −
i

[H
S
(t), ]
+
γ
2

(N + 1)

2AA
+
−A
+
A −A
+
A

(5.41)
+N

2A
+
A −AA
+
−AA
+

¸
.
The dissipative part of this equation is the same as for the undriven dissipative
harmonic oscillator [50], but with the shift operators for Floquet states instead of
the usual creation and annihilation operators. Obviously, this master equation is of
Lindblad form [93] (see Appendix B.1).
By substituting (5.14), (5.15), we get an operator equation which only consists
of position and momentum operators. Applying the transformations (A.25)–(A.28)
yields for the Wigner function the differential equation

t
W(x, p, t) = L
RWA
(t) W(x, p, t), (5.42)
with the differential operator
L
RWA
(t) = −
1
m
p∂
x
+
γ
2
(∂
x
x +∂
p
p) +k(t)x∂
x
+
γ
2

D
xx
(t)∂
2
x
+D
xp
(t)∂
x

p
+D
pp
(t)∂
2
p

(5.43)
and the diffusion coefficients
D
xx
(t) = ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t)(N + 1/2)/m, (5.44)
D
xp
(t) =

˙
ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t) +ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)

(N + 1/2), (5.45)
D
pp
(t) = m
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)(N + 1/2). (5.46)
38 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
The fact that there are also dissipative terms in Eq. (5.42) containing derivatives
with respect to x is a consequence of the RWA: Its effect is equivalent to using the
coupling Hamiltonian H
RWA
SB
=
¸
ν
g
ν
(ab

ν
+ a

b
ν
) instead of (3.1), where a and b
ν
are the usual annihilation operators of the system and the bath, respectively. This
introduces an additional coupling term ∝ pp
ν
. In the next section we show how to
avoid this RWA, by returning to the original Markov approximation, Eq. (4.3).
5.4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA
In the present case of a bilinear system, driven or not, for which the classical motion
is integrable, the knowledge of the classical dynamics opens a more direct access
also to the quantal time evolution. Specifically, the Heisenberg position operator
x
H
(t, t

) for the corresponding undamped quantum system is given by the solution
of the classical equation of motion in the limit γ →0, indicated by the superscript
0
.
In our case the classical solution is given by (5.12). The corresponding interaction-
picture position operator reads
x
H
(t, t

) = −x
∂G
0
(t, t

)
∂t

+
p
m
G
0
(t, t

), (5.47)
where x and p now denote the position and the momentum operator. Inserting this
operator into Eq. (4.6), leads to the master equation
˙ = −
i

[H
S
(t), ] −
i
2
γ [x, [p, ]
+
]

γ

2
D
pp
[x, [x, ]] +
γ

2
D
xp
[x, [p, ]], (5.48)
with the periodically time-dependent transport coefficients
D
pp
(t) = −

γ


0
dτ K(τ)
∂G
0
(t −τ, t

)
∂t

t

=t
, (5.49)
D
xp
(t) = −


0
dτ K(τ) G
0
(t −τ, t). (5.50)
This form of the master equation does not produce a positive semidefinite diffusion
matrix. It consequently does not exhibit Lindblad form [93] (see Appendix B.1).
Note that within a Markov approximation, the master equation is periodic with the
driving period T = 2π/Ω. This is in contrast to the non-Markovian exact master
equation [28]. In this latter case, the effective master equation has the structure
of (5.48) with coefficients D
xp
and D
pp
which depend in a non-periodic way on the
time elapsed since the preparation at t
0
. In Wigner representation, this corresponds
to a time-dependent diffusion coefficient, see Eq. (5.56), below.
To evaluate these expressions, we substitute the undamped limit of Eq. (5.11),
G
0
(t, t

) =

¸
n,n

=−∞
c
0
n
c
0
n
sin

µ
0
(t −t

) + Ω(nt −n

t

)

. (5.51)
5.4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA 39
The explicit time dependence in G(t, t

) results in a 2π/Ω-periodic time dependence
of the coefficients D
pp
and D
xp
. Averaging the transport coefficients over one period
of the driving is equivalent to the moderate rotating-wave approximation introduced
in Section 4.3.2.
After inserting the noise kernel (3.17) and assuming an Ohmic bath, I(ω) = mγω,
we find for D
pp
in an average over one period of the driving,
D
pp
=
1
2
m

¸
n=−∞

c
0
n

0
+nΩ)

2
coth

0
+nΩ)
2k
B
T
. (5.52)
This form makes explicit that the diffusion D
pp
accounts for the quasienergies (µ
0
+
nΩ). Thus the quasienergy spectrum approach is reflected solely by a driving-
induced modification of the momentum diffusion D
pp
.
The evaluation of the cross diffusion D
xp
is more complex. Its logarithmic diver-
gence is regularized by a Drude cutoff to obtain
D
xp
= −



¸
n=−∞
P


−∞
dω coth

ω
2k
B
T

ω
ω
2
−(µ
0
+nΩ)
2
ω
2
D
ω
2

2
D
, (5.53)
where P denotes Cauchy’s principal part. The integral in Eq. (5.53) is solved by
contour integration in the upper half plane. Expressing the resulting sums by the
psi function ψ(x) = d ln Γ(x)/dx [92], we obtain
D
xp
= −

π
¸
ψ

1 +
ω
D
2πk
B
T

+C

, (5.54)
where C is the Euler constant. We have neglected terms of the order (µ
0
+nΩ)/ω
D
,
i.e., we have to choose the cutoff ω
D
much larger than the relevant frequencies
µ
0
+nΩ.
Interestingly enough, mγD
xp
coincides with the Drude regularized divergent part
of the stationary momentum variance of a dissipative harmonic oscillator [54,55,60].
In contrast to the Fokker-Planck equation with RWA in the last subsection, the
terms with ∂
x
x and ∂
2
x
are now absent. In addition, the cross diffusion D
xp
in
(5.50) is completely different, and unrelated to the one in the RWA case (5.45). It
originates from a principal part that has been neglected in the derivation of the
Floquet-Markov equation in (4.18).
5.4.1 Wigner representation and Fokker-Planck equation
In order to achieve a description close to the classical phase-space dynamics, we
discuss the time evolution of the density operator in Wigner representation. Apply-
ing the transformations (A.25)–(A.28) to the master equation (5.48), we obtain a
c-number equation of motion,

t
W(x, p, t) = L(t)W(x, p, t), (5.55)
40 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
with the differential operator
L(t) = −
1
m
p∂
x
+γ∂
p
p +k(t)x∂
p
+γD
pp

2
p
+γD
xp

x

p
. (5.56)
Equation (5.56) has the structure of an effective Fokker-Planck operator. How-
ever, for any non-zero D
xp
, the diffusion matrix is not positive semidefinite; corre-
spondingly the Fokker-Planck-like equation (5.55) with Eq. (5.56) has no equivalent
Langevin representation.
As is the case for the master equation from which it has been derived, the
coefficients of the Fokker-Planck operator retain the periodicity of the driving, so
that (5.55) has solutions of Floquet form. This fact will be exploited in the following
subsection to construct the solutions.
5.4.2 Wigner-Floquet solutions
The Fokker-Planck equation for the density operator in Wigner representation,
Eq. (5.55) with Eq. (5.56), offers the opportunity to make full use of the well-known
and intuitive results for the corresponding classical stochastic system. In particular,
a solution of the Fokker-Planck equation can be obtained directly by solving the
equivalent Langevin equation [45, 94], or by using the formula for the conditional
probability of a Gauss process [94]. In the present case, however, the fact that the
diffusion matrix of (5.56) is not positive semidefinite requires to take a different
route.
Since Eq. (5.55) with Eq. (5.56) represents a differential equation with time-
periodic coefficients, it complies with the conditions of the Floquet theorem. Con-
sequently, there exists a complete set of solutions of the form
W
α
(x, p, t) = e
−µαt
u
α
(x, p, t), u
α
(x, p, t) = u
α
(x, p, t +T), (5.57)
henceforth referred to as Wigner-Floquet functions.
We construct a solution for (5.55) of this form with µ
00
= 0 by the method of
characteristics [95] in Appendix C. In the limit t
0
→−∞, the terms in the first line
of (C.18), which contain the initial condition, vanish and we obtain the asymptotic
solution
W
00
(x, p, t) =
1

σ
xx
(t) σ
xp
(t)
σ
xp
(t) σ
pp
(t)

−1/2
exp


1
2

x
p

σ
xx
(t) σ
xp
(t)
σ
xp
(t) σ
pp
(t)

−1

x
p

¸
(5.58)
with the variances
σ
xx
(t) =
2γD
pp
m
2

t
−∞
dt

[G(t, t

)]
2
, (5.59)
σ
xp
(t) =
2γD
pp
m

t
−∞
dt

G(t, t

)

∂t
G(t, t

), (5.60)
σ
pp
(t) = −mγD
xp
+ 2γD
pp

t
−∞
dt

¸

∂t
G(t, t

)

2
. (5.61)
5.4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA 41
Note that in (5.59)–(5.61) the difference in using D
pp
and D = D
pp
+ γD
xp
[see
Eq. (C.14)] is meaningless, since it is a correction of order γ. By inserting the Fourier
representation (5.11) for G(t, t

), one finds that the variances are asymptotically time
periodic.
Starting from W
00
, we construct further Wigner-Floquet functions: By solving
the characteristic equations (see Appendix C), we find the two time-dependent dif-
ferential operators
Q
1+
(t) = f
1
(t)∂
x
+m
˙
f
1
(t)∂
p
, (5.62)
Q
2+
(t) = f
2
(t)∂
x
+m
˙
f
2
(t)∂
p
, (5.63)
where the solutions f
i
(t) of the classical equation of motion are given by (5.9). The
operators Q
i+
(t) have the properties
[L(t) −∂
t
, Q
1+
(t)] = [L(t) −∂
t
, Q
2+
(t)] = 0 (5.64)
and
Q
1+
(t +T) = e
(−γ/2+iµ)T
Q
1+
(t), (5.65)
Q
2+
(t +T) = e
(−γ/2−iµ)T
Q
2+
(t). (5.66)
Taking the commutation relation (5.64) into account, the functions
W
nn
(x, p, t) = Q
n
1+
(t) Q
n

2+
(t) W
00
(x, p, t), n, n

= 0, 1, 2, . . . (5.67)
also solve Eq. (5.55).
Due to Eqs. (5.65), (5.66) they are of Floquet structure with the Floquet spec-
trum
µ
nn
= (n +n

)γ/2 −i(n −n

)µ. (5.68)
This spectrum is independent of the diffusion constants, as expected for an oper-
ator of type (5.56) [96], and therefore is the same as in the case of the classical
parametrically driven Brownian oscillator [97].
The expression for the eigenfunctions in the high-temperature limit of the (un-
driven) classical Brownian harmonic oscillator in Refs. [96, 98] is also of the struc-
ture (5.67). We can recover this solution by inserting the classical diffusion constant
mk
B
T and the undriven limit ε →0 for the classical solution, given in Section 5.1.
5.4.3 Influence of the driving on the master equation
The master equation in operator notation (5.48) and the Fokker-Planck equation
(5.55) given in this section result from a Markov approximation with respect to the
quasienergy spectrum. Nevertheless, they are formally independent of the Floquet
basis. This allows for a detailed analysis of the difference between the Markovian
approach with respect to the unperturbed spectrum and the quasienergy spectrum
approach beyond mere differences in representation.
42 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
Parametrical driving
The Markov approximation with respect to the unperturbed spectrum can be ob-
tained from the (in general more complicated) quasienergy spectrum approach by
replacing the coefficients of friction and diffusion by their corresponding limits for
zero driving amplitude ε. We obtain a master equation of the form (5.48) and accord-
ingly a Fokker-Planck equation of the form (5.55), where the momentum diffusion
coefficient D
pp
is replaced by its limit for ε →0,
D

pp
= lim
ε→0
D
pp
=
1
2

0
coth

ω
0
2k
B
T

. (5.69)
In general D

pp
= D
pp
, which we verify by numerical studies in Section 5.6. Thus
parametric driving of a dissipative harmonic oscillator modifies the momentum dif-
fusion in the master equation.
Additional additive driving
The Markovian master equation within the quasienergy spectrum approach under-
goes a further modification when the parametric oscillator is subject to an additional
additive driving −xF(t), i.e.,
H
F
(t) = H
S
(t) −xF(t). (5.70)
With H
S
(t) being a time-independent harmonic oscillator, i.e., k(t) = mω
2
0
, the
corresponding Markovian master equation in RWA for the dissipative system was
already given in [26]. Herein we generalize these results for the combined time-
dependent system Hamiltonian in (5.70).
It is known that the only effect of the driving force F(t) on the (quasi-) energy
spectrum of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator is an overall level shift
[82]. Thus the level separations remain unaffected and we expect no change in the
dissipative part of the master equation (5.48).
The classical equation of motion, which is also obeyed by the interaction-picture
position operator, now reads
m¨ x +k(t)x = F(t), (5.71)
and can be integrated to yield the interaction-picture operators
x
H
(t, t

) = −x
∂G
0
(t, t

)
∂t

+
p
m
G
0
(t, t

) +
1
m

t
t

dt

G
0
(t, t

)F(t

), (5.72)
p
H
(t, t

) = −xm

2
G
0
(t, t

)
∂t ∂t

+p
∂G
0
(t, t

)
∂t
+

t
t

dt

∂G
0
(t, t

)
∂t
F(t

). (5.73)
Thus we obtain a c-number correction to the interaction-picture position operator
(5.47), given by the third term. After inserting (5.73) into (3.38), the Markovian
5.5 Asymptotics 43
master equation emerges as
˙ = . . . +
i

F(t)[x, ] (5.74)
+
i


0
dτ γ(τ) [x, ]
2
m

t−τ
t
dt

G
0
(t −τ, t

)F(t

). (5.75)
The dots denote the old result for F(t) ≡ 0, given by the right hand side of Eq. (5.48).
The term in the first line stems from the reversible part of the master equation (4.3);
the second one is a correction of the driving force due to interaction with the bath.
Thus the equation of motion for the density operator has the structure
˙ = . . . +
i

˜
F(t)[x, ] (5.76)
with an effective total driving force
˜
F(t) = F(t) +


0
dτ γ(τ)

t−τ
t
dt

∂G
0
(t −τ, t

)
∂t
F(t

). (5.77)
Note that the dissipative parts of (5.76) are not affected by the additive driving
force F(t). This makes explicit, that we must use a parametric time-dependence to
study differences in the dissipative parts resulting from the Markov approximation
with respect to the energy spectrum versus the Markov approximation with respect
to the quasienergy spectrum.
With an Ohmic bath, γ(τ) = 2γδ(τ), the inner integral in (5.77) vanishes and
we obtain
˜
F(t) = F(t). Thus in contrast to an explicit parametric time dependence
k(t) in the quadratic part of the Hamiltonian, the time dependence of an additive
force, in this case, does not change the Markovian master equation of the dissipative
system.
5.5 Asymptotics
5.5.1 The conservative limit
In contrast to the Markov approximation with RWA in Section 5.3, the variances in
both Markov approximations without RWA still depend on the friction γ. To obtain
the conservative limit γ →0 of these, we insert the Green function (5.11) into (5.59)
and get
σ
xx
(t) = −
γD
pp
2m
2
¸
n,n

c
n
c
n

f
2
1
(t)
e
γt−i[2µ+(n+n

)Ω]t
γ −i[2µ + (n +n

)Ω]
−2f
1
(t)f
2
(t)
e
γt−i(n−n

)Ωt
γ −i(n −n

)Ω
+f
2
2
(t)
e
γt+i[2µ+(n+n

)Ω]t
γ + i[2µ + (n +n

)Ω]

. (5.78)
In the limit of weak damping, γ <[µ +nΩ[ for any integer n, only the case n = n

of the second term in the brackets remains. Note that this condition is violated in
44 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
parameter regions where the Floquet index becomes a multiple of Ω, as is the case
along the borderlines of the regions of stability in parameter space (cf. Fig. 5.1).
For the position variance, we get
σ
xx
(t) = B
D
pp
m
2
ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t), (5.79)
where
B =

¸
n=−∞

c
0
n

2
(5.80)
denotes a number of order unity.
In an analogous way, we find
σ
xp
(t) = B
D
pp
2m

˙
ξ
0
1
(t)ξ
0
2
(t) + ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t)

, (5.81)
σ
pp
(t) = BD
pp
˙
ξ
0
1
(t)
˙
ξ
0
2
(t). (5.82)
Besides the prefactor, these variances are the same as for the master equation with
RWA in Section 5.3.
Moreover, in this limit γ →0, all diagonal elements W
nn
(x, p, t) are Floquet func-
tions with the quasienergies µ
nn
= 0. However, they are different from the Wigner
representation of the stationary solutions (5.35) of the corresponding Schr¨ odinger
equation, which are also solutions of the coherent equation of motion, Eq. (5.55)
with γ = 0. Due to the degeneracy of the Floquet indices, this is no contradiction.
The lim
γ→0
W
nn
(x, p, t) can be viewed as dissipation-adapted Floquet functions.
For consistency, we check the position-momentum uncertainty relation for the
asymptotic solution. It is satisfied if the variances fulfill the inequality

σ
xx
(t) σ
xp
(t)
σ
xp
(t) σ
pp
(t)

=

D
pp
B
m

2

2
/4, (5.83)
which we have verified numerically for the case of the Mathieu oscillator.
5.5.2 The high-temperature limit
In the limit of high temperatures k
B
T ω
D
, we expect the Fokker-Planck equation
for the Wigner function to give the Kramers equation for the classical Brownian
motion [97], i.e., an equation of the form (5.55) with diffusion constants D
xp
= 0
and D
pp
= mk
B
T.
In the refined approach (Section 5.4), the Fokker-Planck equation is already of
the required structure. With ψ(1) = −C [92], the cross diffusion D
xp
vanishes in
the high-temperature limit. For D
pp
, we use coth x = 1/x +O(x) and get
D
pp
= mk
B
T
¸
n

c
0
n

2

0
+nΩ). (5.84)
With the sum rule (5.8), this reduces to D
pp
= mk
B
T.
5.6 Numerical results 45
In the quasienergy spectrum approach with RWA in Section 5.3, the variances
and diffusion constants scale with N + 1/2. This factor, in the high-temperature
limit, reads
N +
1
2
=
¸
n

c
0
n

2
k
B
T

= B
k
B
T

. (5.85)
Therefore the diffusion constants D
xx
and D
xp
remain finite and the Fokker-Planck
operator (5.42) does not approach the Kramers limit for high temperatures. Never-
theless the asymptotic variances in RWA coincide for high temperatures, with the
classical result in the limit γ →0.
5.6 Numerical results
In this section, we compare our approximate results to exact ones, obtained from
the path-integral solution in Ref. [28]. Specifically, we give the numerical results for
the Mathieu oscillator, i.e., we choose
k(t) = m

ω
2
0
+ε cos Ωt

. (5.86)
By inserting (5.86) and the ansatz (5.6) into (5.4), we obtain the tridiagonal recur-
rence relation
εc
n−1
+ 2

ω
2
0
−γ
2
/4 −(µ +nΩ)
2

c
n
+εc
n+1
= 0. (5.87)
From this equation, the classical Floquet index µ and the Fourier coefficients c
n
are
determined numerically by continued fractions [45].
In the figures, time and driving parameters are given in the units which are
commonly used in mathematical literature [85] to obtain the scaled Mathieu equation
¨ x + (¯ ω
2
0
+ 2¯ ε cos(2
¯
t))x = 0. Variances are plotted in units of the corresponding
ground-state variance for zero driving amplitude (cf. Appendix A).
We showed in Section 5.4 that the influence of the driving on the master equa-
tion results in a modification of the momentum diffusion. Figure 5.2 compares the
diffusion coefficient D

pp
, obtained from a Markov approximation with respect to the
unperturbed spectrum, to the diffusion coefficient D
pp
, which results from the quasi-
energy spectrum approach. The numerical values are given in units of the classical
momentum diffusion coefficient mk
B
T. The parameters ω
2
0
and ε are varied along
the full line in the inset. Note that within the unstable regimes, perturbation theory
is not valid. Nevertheless, Eq. (5.52) gives a smooth interpolation. The discrepan-
cies become most significant for strong driving and large ω
2
0
. Both for low driving
amplitude ε <ω
2
0
and high temperature T ω
0
/k
B
, the difference vanishes.
The variances σ
xx
(t) and σ
pp
(t) of the Markov approximations without RWA are
compared to the exact results [28] in the Figs. 5.3a and 5.3b. The chosen driving pa-
rameters ω
2
= 6.5 Ω
2
and ε = 7 Ω
2
lie inside the fifth stable zone (µ = 4.53513 Ω/2).
The temperature k
B
T = 0.5 Ω is sufficiently large, but with quantum effects still
46 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
0 10 20 30
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
ε = ω
2
0
[Ω
2
/2]
D
p
p
[
m
k
B
T
]
k
B
T/¯ hΩ = 0.5
ε = ω
2
0
0 5 10 15
0
10
20
ε [Ω
2
/2]
ω
2 0
[

2
/
4
]
Figure 5.2: The diffusion constants D
pp
for the simple (dotted) and D

pp
for the im-
proved (dashed) Markov approximation in units of the classical diffusion constant mk
B
T
for k
B
T = 0.5 Ω. The parameters ω
2
0
and ε are indicated by the full line in the inset
(cf. Fig. 5.1).
appreciable. We note that the improved Markovian treatment in Section 5.4, which
accounts for the quasienergy differences, agrees better with the exact prediction. In
the Figure we depict asymptotic times t > 100/Ω, where transient effects have al-
ready decayed. The asymptotic covariance elements retain the periodicity T = 2π/Ω
of the external driving. The relative error
η
xx
(t) =
σ
Markov
xx
(t) −σ
exact
xx
(t)
σ
exact
xx
(t)
(5.88)
of the position variance for these two Markov approximations is depicted in Fig. 5.4.
For the chosen parameters it is reduced by the use of the improved Markov scheme by
approximately 30%. Note that the maximal deviations do not occur in the extrema,
but happen to occur in the regions with negative slope.
As depicted in Fig. 5.5, the quality of both Markov approximations worsens with
increasing dissipation strength γ. This reflects the breakdown of the weak-coupling
approach.
Results for the Markovian treatment within RWA, given in Section 5.3, are de-
picted for the position variance σ
xx
(t) in Fig. 5.6. The driving parameters are the
same as in Fig. 5.3. For this example, the quality of agreement to the exact result is
similar for both Markov approximations. Nevertheless, the solution without RWA
yields—up to a scale—a better overall agreement with the exact behavior over a full
driving period T.
5.6 Numerical results 47
50 51 52 53 54 55
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
t [Ω/2]
σ
x
x
[
¯h
/
2
m
ω
0
]
T
(a)
50 51 52 53 54 55
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
t [Ω/2]
σ
p
p
[
m
¯h
ω
0
/
2
]
(b)
Figure 5.3: The asymptotic vari-
ances σ
xx
(t) (a) and σ
pp
(t) (b)
with period T = 2π/Ω for the
simple (dotted) and the improved
(dashed) Markov approximation,
compared to the exact result (full
line) for the parameters ε = 7 Ω
2
,
ω
2
0
= 6.5 Ω
2
, k
B
T = 0.5 Ω and
γ = Ω/20. The scaled driving
period T = 2π/Ω is indicated in
panel (a).
50 51 52 53 54 55
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
t [Ω/2]
η
x
x
Figure 5.4: Relative error η
xx
(t)
for the position variances of Fig.
5.3a.
48 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
0
2
4
6
8
γ [Ω/2]

σ
x
x

t
[
¯h
/
2
m
ω
0
]
Figure 5.5: The time averaged
variance σ
xx

t
for the simple (dot-
ted) and the improved (dashed)
Markov approximation, compared
to the exact result (full line) for the
parameters ε = 7 Ω
2
, ω
2
0
= 6.5 Ω
2
and k
B
T = 0.5 Ω.
50 51 52 53 54 55
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
t [Ω/2]
σ
x
x
[
¯h
/
2
m
ω
0
]
Figure 5.6: Position variances ob-
tained with the Markov approxi-
mation with respect to the quasi-
energy spectrum with (dotted) and
without (dashed) RWA, compared
to the exact result (full line) for
γ = Ω/20 and k
B
T = 0.5 Ω. The
driving parameters are ε = 7 Ω
2
and ω
2
0
= 6.5 Ω
2
.
5.7 Conclusion
The principal distinction to be made among possible Markovian approaches to the
driven dissipative dynamics, refers to the degree to which changes in dynamical
and spectral properties of the central system due to the driving are taken into
account. In the crudest treatment introduced in Section 4.1, where the dissipative
terms in the master equation are derived ignoring the explicit time dependence of
the Hamiltonian, and the driving only appears in the coherent term. An improved
master equation results from the Floquet-Markov scheme which we obtained in
Section 4.2 by coupling the central system and the driving as one whole to the heat
bath. The energy-domain quantity relevant for all subsequent developments is then
the quasienergy spectrum, obtained within the Floquet formalism, instead of the
unperturbed spectrum. In the time domain, the quantities entering the dissipative
terms of the master equation, such as Heisenberg-picture operators of the central
system, gain an explicit time dependence with the periodicity of the driving.
Besides the differences in representation, the use of the improved Floquet-Markov
5.7 Conclusion 49
approximation in Section 5.4 mainly results in a modified momentum diffusion that
depends on the quasienergy spectrum instead of the unperturbed spectrum of the
central system. The difference becomes significant in the limits of strong driving
amplitude and low temperature. An additive time-dependent external force, applied
in addition to or instead of the parametric driving, undergoes a renormalization
which vanishes, however, in the case of an Ohmic bath.
Even within the improved Markov approach, finer levels of approximation can
be distinguished. A significant simplification of the master equation is achieved
by a rotating-wave approximation, i.e. here, by neglecting reservoir-induced virtual
transitions between Floquet states of the central system that violate quasienergy
conservation. The resulting master equation has Lindblad form, with creation and
annihilation operators acting on Floquet states, and thus manifestly generates a
dynamical semigroup. This is not the case if the RWA is avoided. Apparently a
drawback, the lack of a Lindblad structure in the master equation without RWA
faithfully reflects the failure of the Markov approximation on short time scales.
An analogous situation as with the Lindblad form of the master equation arises
with its Floquet structure. If all coefficients are at most periodically time dependent,
then the equation of motion for the reduced density operator complies with the
conditions for applicability of the Floquet theorem. As a consequence, the solutions
can be cast in Floquet form, i.e., can be written as eigenfunctions of a generalized
non-unitary Floquet operator that generates the evolution of the density operator
over a single period. Since all variants of the Markov approximation discussed here
truncate the memory of the central system on time scales shorter than the period of
the driving, the corresponding master equations have Floquet structure throughout.
The exact path-integral solution, in contrast, allows for memory effects of unlimited
duration and thereby generally prevents the consistent definition of a propagator
over a single period.
Additional insight is gained by discussing the dynamics in terms of phase-space
distributions, specifically in terms of the Wigner representation of the density oper-
ator and its equation of motion. In this representation, the Floquet formalism is a
useful device to construct and classify solutions. Since all Fokker-Planck equations
obtained are time periodic, as are the corresponding master equations, their solu-
tions may be written as eigenstates of a Wigner-Floquet operator (the Fokker-Planck
operator evolving the Wigner function, integrated over a single period), or Wigner-
Floquet states in short. They represent the quasiprobability distributions closest to
the Floquet solutions of the corresponding classical Fokker-Planck equation.
Wigner-Floquet states with Floquet index zero correspond to asymptotic solu-
tions. They are not literally stationary but retain the periodic time dependence of
the driving. Since we are here dealing with a linear system, the centers of gravity
of the asymptotic quasiprobability distributions follow the corresponding classical
limit cycles. In the case of parametric driving, these limit cycles are trivial and
correspond to a fixed point at the origin. A time dependence arises only by the
periodic variation of the shape of the asymptotic distributions.
Concluding from a numerical comparison of certain dynamical quantities, for the
50 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator
specific case of the Mathieu oscillator, the attributes “simple” and “improved” for
the two basic Markovian approaches prove adequate. Results for the Markov ap-
proximation based on the quasienergy spectrum show consistently better agreement
with the exact path-integral solution than those for the Markov approximation with
respect to the unperturbed spectrum. However, even in parameter regimes where
the respective approximations are expected to become problematic, the differences
in quality are not huge and the agreement with the exact solution is generally good.
Technical advantages of the Markov approximation in general and of its various
ramifications—easy analytical and numerical tractability, desirable formal proper-
ties such as Floquet or Lindblad form of the master equation—can justify to tolerate
their quantitative inaccuracy.
6
The harmonically driven
double-well potential
In this chapter we use the Floquet-Markov scheme to investigate the interplay of
chaos and dissipation in a bistable quantum system. The harmonically driven quar-
tic double well will serve as our working model. In Section 6.1 we introduce its
Hamiltonian and the underlying symmetries. Moreover, we briefly review coherent
driven tunneling as well as its modification caused by the influence of classical chaos.
For moderate driving near the classical resonances, chaos already plays a signif-
icant role for the classical dynamics although the motion near the bottom of the
wells is still regular. Thus, we have a mixed phase space, where the coexistence
of regular and chaotic regions leads to a variety of uncommon coherence phenom-
ena. Most prominent among them is chaotic tunneling [13–17, 30–33, 99–105], the
coherent exchange of probability between symmetry-related regular islands that are
separated by a chaotic layer, not by a static potential barrier. Chaotic tunneling
comes about by an interplay of classical nonlinear, typically bistable, dynamics and
quantum coherence. Tunneling is extremely sensitive to any disruption of coherence
as it occurs due to the unavoidable coupling to the environment: In presence of
dissipation, coherent tunneling becomes a transient that fades out on the way to an
asymptotic state [11, 12].
The quasispectrum associated with chaotic tunneling exhibits a characteristic
feature: Quasienergies of chaotic singlets intersect tunnel doublets which are sup-
ported by regular tori. We study coherent and dissipative chaotic tunneling in the
vicinity of such singlet-doublet crossings in Section 6.2. While in the coherent case
the dynamics is well described in a three-state approximation, the coupling to the
environment indirectly couples the three states to all other states. On the basis of
numerical results for the full driven double well with dissipation, we reveal the lim-
itations of the three-level approximation and identify additional features of the full
dynamics not covered by it. In particular, we consider the long-time asymptotics
and the phase-space structure associated with it.
Switching on friction has a dramatic consequence for the classical phase space:
A volume element contracts exponentially in time and therefore all trajectories con-
verge towards a submanifold of phase space with zero volume, the so-called attrac-
tor [3]. Depending on friction strength and details of the system, this attractor
may be of quite different nature. If the dissipative dynamics is also chaotic, the
attractor has in general fractal geometry—it forms a so-called strange attractor; for
sufficiently strong friction, the attractor typically shrinks to a limit cycle or a set of
isolated fixed points. On a quantum level, the structures associated with classical at-
tractors are smeared out on a scale but leave their trace in the asymptotic state of
the corresponding dissipative quantum map [106]. We study the classical-quantum
correspondence of the asymptotic state in Section 6.3.
52 The harmonically driven double-well potential
−x
0
x
0
x
0
−E
B
V
(
x
,
t
)
ω
0
E
B
t = (n + 1/2)π/Ω
t = 2πn/Ω
Figure 6.1: Sketch of the driven dou-
ble well potential described by the
time-dependent Hamiltonian (6.1) at
various times.
6.1 The model
As a prototypical working model, we consider the quartic double well with a spatially
homogeneous driving force, harmonic in time. It is defined by the Hamiltonian
H(t) = H
DW
+H
F
(t), (6.1)
H
DW
=
p
2
2m

1
4

2
0
x
2
+
m
2
ω
4
0
64E
B
x
4
, (6.2)
H
F
(t) = Sxcos(Ωt). (6.3)
The potential term of the static bistable Hamiltonian H
DW
possesses two minima at
x = ±x
0
, x
0
= (8E
B
/mω
2
0
)
1/2
, separated by a barrier of height E
B
(cf. Fig. 6.1). The
parameter ω
0
denotes the (angular) frequency of small oscillations near the bottom
of a well. Apart from mere scaling, the classical phase space of H
DW
only depends
on the presence or absence, and the signs, of the x
2
and the x
4
term. Besides that, it
has no free parameter. This is obvious from the scaled form of the classical equations
of motion,
˙
¯ x = ¯ p, (6.4)
˙
¯ p =
1
2
¯ x −
1
2
¯ x
3
−F cos(
¯

¯
t), (6.5)
where the dimensionless quantities ¯ x, ¯ p and
¯
t are given by x/x
0
, p/mω
0
x
0
and ω
0
t,
respectively. The influence of the driving on the classical phase-space structure is
fully characterized by the rescaled amplitude and frequency of the driving,
F =
S

8mω
2
0
E
B
,
¯
Ω =

ω
0
. (6.6)
This implies that the classical dynamics is independent of the barrier height E
B
.
6.1 The model 53
In the quantum-mechanical case, however, this holds no longer true: The finite
size of Planck’s constant results in a finite number of doublets with energy below
the barrier top. It is approximately given by
D =
E
B
ω
0
, (6.7)
and distinguishes the semiclassical from the deep quantum regime. This is evident
from the classical scales for position, x
0
, and momentum, mω
0
x
0
, introduced above:
The corresponding action scale is mω
0
x
2
0
and therefore, the position-momentum
uncertainty relation in the scaled phase space (¯ x, ¯ p) reads
∆¯ x∆¯ p ≥

eff
2
(6.8)
where

eff
=


0
x
2
0
=
1
8D
(6.9)
denotes the effective quantum of action. The classical limits hence amounts to
D →∞.
In the following, we restrict ourselves to moderate driving amplitudes, such that
the variation of the potential at the bottom of the wells is much smaller than the
barrier height. This implies that the bistable character of the potential is retained
at any time.
6.1.1 Symmetries
The model Hamiltonian (6.1) obviously is 2π/Ω-periodic in time, thus possesses
discrete time-translational invariance. This enables a treatment within the Floquet-
Markov scheme, introduced in Chapter 4. In addition, we find two more discrete
symmetries, which allow for an improvement of numerical efficiency and also for a
classification of the Floquet states as even or odd.
Time-reversal symmetry
It is well known that the energy eigenfunctions of an (undriven) Hamiltonian which
obeys time-reversal symmetry, can be chosen as real [8, 79]. This has, apart from
computational advantages, also direct physical consequences for the level statistics of
quantum systems with chaotic classical counterpart [8, 79]. Time-reversal symmetry
is typically broken by a magnetic field (recall that a magnetic field is described
by an axial vector and changes sign under time reversion) or by an explicit time-
dependence of the Hamiltonian. However, for the sinusoidal shape of the driving
together with the initial phase chosen above, time-reversal symmetry
T : x →x, p →−p, t →−t (6.10)
is retained and the Floquet Hamiltonian obeys H(t) = H

(−t) [cf. Eq. (2.11)]. If now
φ(x, t) is a Floquet state in position representation with quasienergy , then φ

(x, −t)
54 The harmonically driven double-well potential
also is a Floquet state with the same quasienergy. This means that we can always
choose the Floquet states by linear combination such that φ(x, t) = φ

(x, −t), which
translates to φ(x, ω) = φ

(x, ω) in the frequency regime, i.e., the Fourier coefficients
of the Floquet states can be chosen real.
Generalized parity
The undriven Hamiltonian H
DW
is invariant under the parity P: x →−x, p →−p,
t → t. This symmetry is destroyed by a linerarly coupled driving field. With
the above choice of H
F
(t), however, a more general, dynamical symmetry remains
[10, 107, 108]. It is defined by the operation
P

: x →−x, p →−p, t →t +π/Ω (6.11)
and represents a generalized parity acting in the extended phase space spanned by
x, p, and phase, i.e., time t mod(2π/Ω) or in the composite Hilbert space 1 ⊗ T ,
respectively. While such a discrete symmetry is of minor importance in classical
physics, its influence on the quantum mechanical quasispectrum ¦
α
(F)¦ is more
distinct: It devides the composite Hilbert space in an even and an odd subspace,
thus allowing for a classification of the Floquet states as even or odd. Quasiener-
gies from different symmetry classes may intersect, whereas quasienergies with the
same symmetry typically form avoided crossings [79]. However, the fact that the
generalized parity acts on the composite Hilbert space results in a particularity: If
[φ(t)` is e.g. an even Floquet state, then [φ
(1)
(t)` = exp(iΩt)[φ(t)` turns out to be
odd. Thus, two equivalent Floquet states from neighboring Brillouin zones possess
different generalized parity. This means that a classification of the corresponding
solutions of the Schr¨ odinger equation, [ψ(t)` = exp(−it/)[φ(t)`, as even or odd
requires a restriction to a single Brillouin zone.
The invariance of the system under the generalized parity is also of considerable
help in the numerical treatment of the Floquet matrix (2.53) [16, 100]. To obtain
a complete set of Floquet states, it is sufficient to compute all eigenvectors of the
Floquet Hamiltonian in the even subspace whose eigenvalues lie in the first two
Brillouin zones. The even Floquet states are given by the eigenvectors of H
e
from
the first Brillouin zone; the odd Floquet states are obtained by shifting the (even)
ones from the second to the first Brillouin zone, which changes their generalized
parity. Thus, we have to diagonalize the even supermatrix
H
e
=

¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
¸
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E
e
+ 2Ω X
eo
0 0 0
X
eo
E
o
+Ω X
oe
0 0
0 X
oe
E
e
X
eo
0
0 0 X
eo
E
o
−Ω X
oe

0 0 0 X
oe
E
e
−2Ω
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

, (6.12)
6.1 The model 55
which for the same number of Floquet channels has only half the dimension of the
original Floquet matrix (2.53). The matrices
E
e
=

¸
¸
¸
¸
E
0
0 0
0 E
2
0
0 0 E
4

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

, E
o
=

¸
¸
¸
¸
E
1
0 0
0 E
3
0
0 0 E
5

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

, (6.13)
X
eo
=
S
2

¸
¸
¸
¸
x
0,1
x
0,3
x
0,5

x
2,1
x
2,3
x
2,5

x
4,1
x
4,3
x
4,5

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

, X
oe
=
S
2

¸
¸
¸
¸
x
1,0
x
1,2
x
1,4

x
3,0
x
3,2
x
3,4

x
5,0
x
5,2
x
5,4

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

, (6.14)
which are part of the supermatrix H
e
, denote the undriven Hamiltonian H
DW
and
the coupling to the driving field H
1
= Sx/2, decomposed into the even and odd
eigenstates of H
DW
.
6.1.2 Tunneling, driving, and dissipation
With the driving H
F
(t) switched off, the classical phase space generated by H
DW
exhibits the constituent features of a bistable Hamiltonian system. There is a sepa-
ratrix at E = 0. It forms the border between two sets of trajectories: One set, with
E < 0, comes in symmetry-related pairs, each partner of which oscillates in either
one of the two potential minima. The other set consists of unpaired trajectories,
with E > 0, that encircle both wells in a spatially symmetric fashion.
Due to the integrability of the undriven double well, Eq. (6.2), we can gain a
qualitative picture of its eigenstates from simple torus quantization: The unpaired
tori correspond to singlets with positive energy, whereas the symmetry-related pairs
below the top of the barrier correspond to degenerate pairs of eigenstates. Neigh-
boring pairs are separated in energy approximately by ω
0
, which reflects the almost
harmonic potential shape near the bottom of the wells. Exact quantization, however,
predicts that the partners of these pairs have small but finite overlap. Therefore, the
true eigenstates come in doublets, each of which consists of an even and an odd state,

+
n
` and [Φ

n
`. The energies of the nth doublet are separated by a small tunnel
splitting ∆
n
. We can always choose the globals phases such that the superpositions

R,L
n
` =
1

2


+
n
` ±[Φ

n
`

(6.15)
are localized in the right and the left well, respectively. As time evolves, the states

+
n
`, [Φ

n
` acquire a relative phase exp(−i∆
n
t/) and [Φ
R
n
`, [Φ
L
n
` are transformed
into one another after a time π/∆
n
. Thus, the particle tunnels forth and back
between the wells with a frequency ∆
n
/. This introduces an additional, purely
quantum mechanical frequency-scale, the tunnel rate ∆
0
/ of a particle which resides
in the ground-state doublet. Typically, tunnel rates are extremely small compared
56 The harmonically driven double-well potential
to the frequencies of the classical dynamics, all the more in the semiclassical regime
we are interested in.
A driving of the form (6.3), even if its influence on the classical phase space is
minor, can entail significant consequences for the tunnel dynamics: It may enlarge
the tunnel rate by orders of magnitude or even suppress tunneling at all. For adia-
batically slow driving, Ω <∆
0
/, tunneling is governed by the time-average of the
instantaneous tunnel splitting, which is always larger than its unperturbed value ∆
0
and results in an enhancement of the tunneling rate [107]. If the driving is faster,

0
/
<

Ω < ω
0
, the opposite holds true: The relevant time scale is now given by
the inverse of the quasienergy splitting of the ground-state doublet /[
1

0
[. It
has been found [107,109] that in this case for finite driving amplitude [
1

0
[ < ∆
0
,
thus tunneling is always decelerated. It even happens that the quasienergies of the
ground-state doublet (which are of different generalized parity) intersect as a func-
tion of the driving amplitude F, thus the splitting vanishes and tunneling is brought
to a complete standstill by the purely coherent influence of the driving [10].
The small energy scales associated with make tunneling extremely sensitive to
any disruption of coherence, as it occurs due to the unavoidable coupling to the
environment. As an immediate consequence, the symmetry underlying the formation
of tunnel doublets is generally broken, and an additional energy scale is introduced,
the effective finite width attained by each discrete level. Tunneling and related
coherence phenomena are thus rendered transients that occur—if at all—on the way
towards an asymptotic equilibrium state and fade out on a time scale t
decoh
. In
general, this time scale gets shorter for higher temperatures, reflecting the growth
of the transition rates (4.23) [53]. However, there exist counterintuitive effects. For
example, for driven tunneling in the vicinity of an exact crossing of the ground-state
doublet, the coherent suppression of tunneling [10, 12, 107] can be stabilized with
higher temperatures [76–78] until levels outside the doublet start to play a role.
So far, we have considered only driving frequencies much smaller than the fre-
quency scale ω
0
of the relevant classical resonances, i.e., a parameter regime where
classical motion is predominantly regular. Coherent tunneling is in this case well
described within a two-state approximation [107, 109]. In the dissipative case, how-
ever, a two-state approximation of course fails for temperatures k
B
T
>

ω
0
, where
thermal activation to higher doublets becomes relevant.
6.1.3 The onset of chaos
Driving with a frequency Ω ≈ ω
0
has an even stronger influence on the dynamics of
the bistable system. It enters already on the level of classical mechanics since small
oscillations near the bottom of the wells become resonant and classical chaos comes
into play. This corresponds in a quantum description to resonant multiple excitation
of inter-doublet transitions until levels near the top of the barrier are significantly
populated.
Increasing the amplitude of the driving from zero onwards has two principal
consequences for the classical dynamics: The separatrix is destroyed as a closed
6.1 The model 57


0
/¯ h
ω
0
coherent destruction
of tunneling
chaotic tunneling
two-level description multi-level description
adiabatic energies quasienergies
almost regular
chaos
Figure 6.2: Tunneling phenomena and the according appropriate levels of description
for the non-dissipative driven double-well potential, Eq. (6.1). The bars depict the corre-
sponding regimes of the driving frequency Ω. See Section 6.1 for a detailed discussion.
curve and replaced by a homoclinic tangle [110] of stable and unstable manifolds.
As a whole, it forms a chaotic layer in the vicinity and with the topology of the
former separatrix (cf. Fig. 6.6). This opens the way for diffusive transport between
the two potential wells. Due to the nonlinearity of the potential, there is an infinite
set of resonances of the driving with the unperturbed motion, both inside and outside
the wells [111,112]. Since the period of the unperturbed, closed trajectories diverges
for E → 0, the resonances accumulate towards the separatrix of the unperturbed
system. By its sheer phase-space area, the first resonance (the one for which the
periods of the driving and of the unperturbed oscillation are in a ratio of 1:1) is
prominent among the others and soon (in terms of increasing amplitude F) exceeds
the size of the “order-zero” regular areas near the bottom of each well [16].
Both major tendencies in the evolution of the classical phase space—extension
of the chaotic layer and growth of the first resonance—leave their specific traces
in the quasienergy spectrum. The tunnel doublets characterizing the unperturbed
spectrum for E < 0 pertain to states located on pairs of symmetry-related quantizing
tori in the regular regions within the wells. With increasing size of the chaotic
layer, the quantizing tori successively resolve in the chaotic sea. The corresponding
doublets disappear as distinct structures in the spectrum as they attain a splitting of
the same order as the mean level separation. The gradual widening of the doublets
proceeds as a smooth function of the driving amplitude [16, 100]. This function
roughly obeys a power law [34, 113, 114]. As soon as a pair of states is no longer
supported by any torus-like manifold, including fractal [115] and vague tori [116],
the corresponding eigenvalues detach themselves from the regular ladder to which
they formerly belonged. They can then fluctuate freely in the spectrum and thereby
“collide” with other chaotic singlets or regular doublets.
The appearance of a regular region, large enough to accommodate several eigen-
states, around the first resonance introduces a second ladder of doublets into the
spectrum. Size and shape of the first resonance vary in a way different from the
58 The harmonically driven double-well potential
(a)


c


r

+
r


c


r
(b)
(c) (d)
Figure 6.3: Possible configura-
tions of quasienergy crossings be-
tween a chaotic singlet and a reg-
ular doublet. Different line types
signify different parity. See Sec-
tion 6.2.1 for the labeling of the
levels. Note that only for con-
figurations (a),(b), the order of
the regular doublet is restored
in passing through the crossing.
In configurations (c),(d), it is re-
versed.
main regular region. The corresponding doublet ladder therefore moves in the spec-
trum independently of the doublets that pertain to the main regular region, and
of the chaotic singlets. This gives rise to additional singlet-doublet and even to
doublet-doublet encounters.
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings
Near a crossing, level separations deviate vastly, in both directions, from the typical
tunnel splitting (cf. Fig. 6.8, below). This is reflected in time-domain phenom-
ena ranging from the suppression of tunneling to a strong increase in its rate and
to complicated quantum beats [31–33]. Singlet-doublet crossings, in turn, drasti-
cally change the non-dissipative quasienergy scales and replace the two-level by a
three-level structure. As a consequence, the familiar way tunneling fades out in the
presence of dissipation is also significantly altered. Near a crossing, the coherent
dynamics can last much longer than for the unperturbed doublet, despite the pres-
ence of the same dissipation as outside the crossing, establishing “chaos-induced
coherence.” Depending on temperature, it can also be destroyed on a much shorter
time scale.
For the parameters chosen in our numerical studies, higher resonances are neg-
ligible in size. Therefore, the borderline between the chaotic layer along the former
separatrix and the regular regions within and outside the wells is quite sharply de-
fined. The “coastal strip” formed by hierarchies of regular islands around higher
resonances remains narrow (cf. Fig. 6.6, below) on a scale of the chosen effective
quantum of action. For the tunneling dynamics, the role of states located in the
border region [102, 103] is therefore not significant in our studies.
6.2.1 Three-level crossings
Among the various types of quasienergy crossings that occur according to the above
scenario, those involving a regular doublet and a chaotic singlet are the most com-
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 59
mon. In order to give a quantitative account of such crossings and the associated
coherent dynamics, and for later reference in the context of the incoherent dynamics,
we shall now discuss them in terms of a simple three-state model, devised much in
the spirit of Ref. [30].
Far to the left of the crossing, we expect the following situation: There is a
doublet of Floquet states

+
r
(t)` = e
−i
+
r
t/

+
r
(t)`, (6.16)


r
(t)` = e
−i(
+
r
+∆)t/


r
(t)`, (6.17)
with even (superscript +) and odd (−) generalized parity, respectively, residing
on a pair of quantizing tori in one of the regular (subscript r) regions. We have
assumed that the quasienergy splitting (as opposed to the unperturbed splitting)
is

r

+
r
= ∆ > 0. The global relative phases can be chosen such that the
superpositions

R,L
(t)` =
1

2


+
r
(t)` ±[φ

r
(t)`

(6.18)
are localized in the right and the left well, respectively, and tunnel back and forth
with a frequency ∆/ given by the tunnel splitting in the presence of the driving.
As the third player, we introduce a Floquet state


c
(t)` = e
−i(
+
r
+∆+∆c)t/


c
(t)`, (6.19)
located mainly in the chaotic (subscript c) layer, so that its time-periodic part [φ

c
(t)`
contains a large number of harmonics. Without loss of generality, its generalized
parity is fixed to be odd. For the quasienergy, we have assumed that

c
=
+
r
+∆+∆
c
,
where [∆
c
[ can be regarded as a measure of the distance from the crossing.
The structure of the classical phase space then implies that the mean energy
of the chaotic state should be close to the top of the barrier and far above that of
the doublet. We assume, like for the quasienergies, a small splitting of the mean
energies pertaining to the regular doublet, [E

r
−E
+
r
[ <E

c
−E
±
r
.
In order to model an avoided crossing between [φ

r
` and [φ

c
`, we suppose that
there is a non-vanishing fixed matrix element
b ≡ ''φ

r
[H
DW


c
`` > 0. (6.20)
For the singlet-doublet crossings under study, we typically find that ∆ < b < Ω.
Neglecting the coupling with all other states, we model the system by the three-state
(subscript 3s) Floquet Hamiltonian
H
3s
=
+
r
+

¸
0 0 0
0 ∆ b
0 b ∆ + ∆
c

, (6.21)
60 The harmonically driven double-well potential
in the three-dimensional Hilbert space spanned by ¦[φ
+
r
(t)`, [φ

r
(t)`, [φ

c
(t)`¦. Its
Floquet states read

+
0
(t)` = [φ
+
r
(t)`,


1
(t)` =



r
(t)` cos β −[φ

c
(t)` sin β

, (6.22)


2
(t)` =



r
(t)` sin β +[φ

c
(t)` cos β

.
Their quasienergies are

+
0
=
+
r
,

1,2
=
+
r
+ ∆ +
1
2

c

1
2


2
c
+ 4b
2
, (6.23)
and the mean energies are approximately given by
E
+
0
= E
+
r
,
E

1
= E

r
cos
2
β +E

c
sin
2
β, (6.24)
E

2
= E

r
sin
2
β +E

c
cos
2
β,
where contributions of the matrix element b have been neglected. The angle β
describes the mixing between the Floquet states [φ

r
` and [φ

c
` and is a measure of
the distance to the avoided crossing. By diagonalizing the Hamiltonian (6.21), we
obtain
2β = arctan

2b

c

, 0 < β <
π
2
. (6.25)
For β → π/2, corresponding to −∆
c
b, we retain the situation far left of the
crossing, as outlined above, with [φ

1
` ≈ [φ

c
`, [φ

2
` ≈ [φ

r
`. To the far right of
the crossing, i.e., for β → 0 or ∆
c
b, the exact eigenstates [φ

1
` and [φ

2
` have
interchanged their identity with respect to the phase-space structure [31–33]. Here,
we have [φ

1
` ≈ [φ

r
` and [φ

2
` ≈ [φ

c
`. The mean energy is essentially determined
by the phase-space structure. Therefore, there is also an exchange of E

1
and E

2
in an exact crossing, cf. Eq. (6.24), while E
+
0
remains unaffected (Fig. 6.4b). The
quasienergies
+
0
and

1
must intersect close to the avoided crossing of

1
and

2
(Fig. 6.4a). Their crossing is exact, since they pertain to states with opposite parity
(cf. Fig. 6.3a,b).
In order to illustrate the above three-state model and to demonstrate its ade-
quacy, we have numerically studied a singlet-doublet crossing that occurs for the
double-well potential, Eq. (6.1), with D = 4, at a driving frequency Ω = 0.982 ω
0
and amplitude F = 0.015029 (Fig. 6.5). The phase-space structure of the participat-
ing Floquet states (Figs. 6.6, 6.7) meets the assumptions of our three-state theory.
A comparison of the appropriately scaled three-state theory (Fig. 6.4) with this real
singlet-doublet crossing (Fig. 6.5) shows satisfactory agreement. Note that in the
real crossing, the quasienergy of the chaotic singlet decreases as a function of F, so
that the exact crossing occurs to the left of the avoided one. This numerical ex-
ample also shows that the idealized three-state model is not always strictly correct.
Following the global tendency of widening of the splittings with increasing driv-
ing amplitude [16, 34, 114], it may well happen that even far away from a crossing,
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 61
-10 -5 0 5 10
-4b
-2b
0
2b
4b

c
/b
q
u
a
s
i
e
n
e
r
g
y
(a)

+
0

c


1


2

2b
-10 -5 0 5 10
-D
0

c
/b
m
e
a
n
e
n
e
r
g
y
(b)
E
+
0
E

c
E

r
E

1
E

2
Figure 6.4: A singlet-doublet crossing, according to a three-state model (6.21) in terms
of the dependence of the quasienergies (a) and the mean energies (b) on the coupling
parameter ∆
c
/b. Unperturbed energies are marked by dotted lines, the energies for the
case with coupling by full lines for even and dashed lines for odd states.
0.014 0.015 0.016
-0.001
0.0
0.001
(

α

+ 0
)
/
¯h
ω
0
F
(a)


2

+
0


1

+
0
a b c
0.014 0.015 0.016
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
E
α
/
¯h
ω
0
F
(b)
E
+
0
E

2
E

1
doublets
Figure 6.5: Singlet-doublet crossing found numerically for the driven double well,
Eq. (6.1), at D = 4 and Ω = 0.982 ω
0
, in terms of the dependence of the quasiener-
gies (a) and the mean energies (b) on the driving amplitude F. Values of the driving
amplitude used in Fig. 6.9 are marked by dotted vertical lines. Full and dashed lines
indicate energies of even and odd states, respectively. Bold lines give the mean energies
of the chaotic singlet and the ground-state doublet depicted in panel (a).
62 The harmonically driven double-well potential
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
Figure 6.6: Stroboscopic clas-
sical phase-space portraits, at
t = 2πn/Ω, of the harmonical-
ly driven quartic double well,
Eq. (6.1). The driving parame-
ters F = 0.015, Ω = 0.982 ω
0
,
are chosen at the the center of
the singlet-doublet crossing un-
der study.
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(a)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(b)
Figure 6.7: Contour plots of
the Husimi functions for the
Floquet states |φ

1
≈ |φ

r
(a)
and |φ

2
≈ |φ

c
(b) of the har-
monically driven quartic dou-
ble well, Eq. (6.1), at strobo-
scopic times t = 2πn/Ω. The
driving parameters F = 0.014,
Ω = 0.982 ω
0
, are in sufficient
distance to the singlet-doublet
crossing such that the mixing
between the regular and the
chaotic state is negligible. The
rectangle in the lower left cor-
ner depicts the size of the effec-
tive quantum of action
eff
.
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 63
0.0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025
10
-9
10
-8
10
-7
10
-6
10
-5
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
F

n
/
¯h
ω
0 n = 0
n = 1
n = 2
avoided
exact
Figure 6.8: Splitting of the lowest doublets for D = 4 and Ω = 0.982 ω
0
. The arrows
indicate the locations of the exact and the avoided crossing within a three-level crossing
of the type sketched in Fig. 6.3a.
the doublet splitting does not exactly return to its value on the opposite side (see
Fig. 6.8). It is even possible that an exact crossing of
+
0
and

1
does not take place
at all in the vicinity of the crossing. In that case, the relation of the quasienergies
in the doublet gets reversed via the crossing (Fig. 6.3c,d). Nevertheless, the above
scenario captures the essential features.
To study the dynamics of the tunneling process, we focus on the state
[ψ(t)` =
1

2

e
−i
+
0
t/

+
0
(t)` + e
−i

1
t/


1
(t)` cos β + e
−i

2
t/


2
(t)` sinβ

. (6.26)
It is constructed such that at t = 0, it corresponds to the decomposition of [φ
R
`
in the basis (6.22) at finite distance from the crossing. Therefore, it is initially
localized in the regular region in the right well and follows the time evolution under
the Hamiltonian (6.21). From Eqs. (6.18), (6.22), we find the probabilities for its
evolving into [φ
R
`, [φ
L
`, or [φ
c
`, respectively, to be
P
R
(t) = ['φ
R
(t)[ψ(t)`[
2
=
1
2

1 + cos
(

1

+
0
)t

cos
2
β + cos
(

2

+
0
)t

sin
2
β
+
¸
cos
(

1


2
)t

−1

cos
2
β sin
2
β

,
P
L
(t) = ['φ
L
(t)[ψ(t)`[
2
(6.27)
=
1
2

1 −cos
(

1

+
0
)t

cos
2
β −cos
(

2

+
0
)t

sin
2
β
64 The harmonically driven double-well potential
0 10
5
2 10
5
3 10
5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
t
n
= 2πn/Ω [1/ω
0
]
P
(
t
n
)
(a)
P
R
P
L
P
c
0 10
5
2 10
5
3 10
5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
t
n
= 2πn/Ω [1/ω
0
]
P
(
t
n
)
(b)
0 10
5
2 10
5
3 10
5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
P
(
t
n
)
t
n
= 2πn/Ω [1/ω
0
]
(c)
Figure 6.9: Stroboscopic time
evolution of a state initially lo-
calized in the right well, in the
vicinity of the singlet-doublet
crossing shown in Fig. 6.5, in
terms of the probabilities to be
in the right well (which here is
identical to the return proba-
bility, marked by full lines), in
the reflected state in the left
well (dashed), or in the chaotic
state |ψ
c
(dotted). Parame-
ter values are as in Fig. 6.5,
and F = 0.0145 (a), 0.0149 (b),
0.015029 (c).
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 65
+
¸
cos
(

1


2
)t

−1

cos
2
β sin
2
β

,
P
c
(t) = ['φ
c
(t)[ψ(t)`[
2
=
¸
1 −cos
(

1


2
)t

cos
2
β sin
2
β.
We discuss the coherent dynamics of the three-state model for different distances to
the crossing and illustrate it by numerical results for the real crossing introduced
above.
In sufficient distance from the crossing, there is only little mixing between the
regular and the chaotic states, i.e., sin β < 1 or cos β < 1. The tunneling process
then follows the familiar two-state dynamics involving only [φ
+
r
` and [φ

r
`, with
tunnel frequency ∆/ (Fig. 6.9a).
Close to the avoided crossing, cos β and sin β are of the same order of magnitude,
and [φ

1
`, [φ

2
` become very similar to one another. Both now have support in the
chaotic layer as well as in the symmetry-related regular regions and thus are of a
hybrid nature. Here, the tunneling involves all the three states and must at least
be described by a three-level system. The exchange of probability between the two
regular regions proceeds via a “stop-over” in the chaotic region [15, 30–33]. The
three quasienergy differences that determine the time scales of this process are in
general all different, leading to complicated beats (Fig. 6.9b).
However, for ∆
c
= −2∆, the two quasienergies

1

+
0
and
+
0


2
are de-
generate. At this point, which marks the center of the crossing, the number of
different frequencies in the three-level dynamics reduces to two again. This restores
the familiar coherent tunneling in the sense that there is again a simple periodic
exchange of probability between the regular regions [31–33]. However, the rate is
much larger if compared to the situation far off the crossing, and the chaotic region
is now temporarily populated during each probability transfer, twice per tunneling
cycle (Fig. 6.9c).
6.2.2 Dissipative chaos-assisted tunneling
The crucial effect of dissipation on a quantum system is the disruption of coherence:
a coherent superposition evolves into an incoherent mixture. Thus, phenomena
based on coherence, such as tunneling, are rendered transients that fade out on
a finite time scale t
decoh
. In general, for driven tunneling in the weakly damped
regime, this time scale gets shorter for higher temperatures, reflecting the growth of
transition rates [53]. However, in the vicinity of an exact crossing of the ground-state
quasienergies, the coherent suppression of tunneling [10, 12, 107] can be stabilized
with higher temperatures [76–78] and increasing friction [57, 58] until levels outside
the doublet start to play a role. We have studied dissipative chaos-assisted tunneling,
using again the real singlet-doublet crossing introduced in Sec. 6.2.1 (see Fig. 6.5)
as our working example. The time evolution has been computed numerically by
iterating the dissipative quantum map (4.31) for the improved master equation in
66 The harmonically driven double-well potential
0 10
5
2 10
5
3 10
5
4 10
5
5 10
5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
P
(
t
n
)
t
r
ρ
2
(
t
n
)
t
n
= 2πn/Ω [1/ω
0
]
(a)
0 2 10
4
0.98
1.0
0 10
5
2 10
5
3 10
5
4 10
5
5 10
5
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
P
(
t
n
)
t
r
ρ
2
(
t
n
)
t
n
= 2πn/Ω [1/ω
0
]
(b)
Figure 6.10: Occupation pro-
babilities as in Fig. 6.9a,c, but in
the presence of dissipation. The
dash-dotted line shows the time
evolution of tr
2
. The parameter
values are D = 4, Ω = 0.982 ω
0
,
γ = 10
−6
ω
0
, k
B
T = 10
−4
ω
0
,
and F = 0.0145 (a), 0.015029
(b). The inset in (a) is a blow
up of the rectangle in the upper
left corner of that panel.
0 5 10
6
10
7
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
P
R
(
t
n
)
t
r
ρ
2
(
t
n
)
t
n
= 2πn/Ω [1/ω
0
]
Figure 6.11: Time evolution of
the return probability P
R
(full
line) and the coherence function
tr
2
(dash-dotted) during loss
and regain of coherence. The
parameter values are as in Fig.
6.10b.
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 67
moderate rotating-wave approximation, Eq. (4.22). As an initial condition, we have
chosen the density operator (0) = [φ
R
`'φ
R
[, i.e. a state localized in the right well.
In the vicinity of a singlet-doublet crossing, the tunnel splitting increases signifi-
cantly—the essence of chaos-assisted tunneling. During the tunneling, the chaotic
singlet becomes populated periodically with frequency [

2


1
[/, cf. Eq. (6.27)
and Fig. 6.9. The high mean energy of this singlet results in an enhanced decay of
coherence at times when [φ
c
` is populated (Fig. 6.10). For the relaxation towards the
asymptotic state, also the slower transitions within doublets are relevant. Therefore,
the corresponding time scale t
relax
can be much larger than t
decoh
(Fig. 6.11).
To obtain quantitative estimates for the dissipative time scales, we approximate
t
decoh
by the decay rate of tr
2
, a measure of coherence (see Appendix B.2), averaged
over a time t
p
,
1
t
decoh
= −
1
t
p

tp
0
dt

d
dt

tr
2
(t

) (6.28)
=
1
t
p

tr
2
(0) −tr
2
(t
p
)

. (6.29)
Because of the stepwise decay of the coherence (Fig. 6.10), we have chosen the prop-
agation time t
p
as an nfold multiple of the duration 2π/[

2


1
[ of the chaotic
beats. For this procedure to be meaningful, n should be so large that the coherence
decays substantially during the time t
p
(in our numerical studies to a value of ap-
proximately 0.9). The time scale t
relax
of the approach to the asymptotic state is
given by the reciprocal of the smallest real part of the eigenvalues of the dissipative
kernel.
Outside the singlet-doublet crossing we find that the decay of coherence and the
relaxation take place on roughly the same time scale (Fig. 6.12). At F ≈ 0.013, the
chaotic singlet induces an exact crossing of the ground-state quasienergies (see Fig.
6.8), resulting in a stabilization of coherence with increasing temperature. At the
center of the avoided crossing, the decay of coherence becomes much faster and is
essentially independent of temperature. This indicates that transitions from states
with mean energy far above the ground state play a crucial role.
6.2.3 Asymptotic state
As the dynamics described by the master equation (4.3) is dissipative, it converges in
the long-time limit to an asymptotic state

(t). In general, this attractor remains
time dependent but shares all the symmetries of the central system, i.e. here, period-
icity and generalized parity. However, the coefficients of the master equation (4.22)
for the matrix elements
αβ
, valid within the moderate rotating-wave approxima-
tion, are time independent and so the asymptotic solution also is. This means that
we have eliminated the explicit time dependence of the attractor by representing it
in the Floquet basis and introducing a mild rotating-wave approximation.
To gain some qualitative insight into the asymptotic solution, we focus on the
68 The harmonically driven double-well potential
0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
10
6
10
7
10
8
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
F
t
d
e
c
o
h
[
1
/
ω
0
]
(a)
0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
10
6
10
7
10
8
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
F
t
r
e
l
a
x
[
1
/
ω
0
]
(b)
Figure 6.12: Time scales of
the decay of the coherence mea-
sure tr
2
(a) and of the relax-
ation towards the asymptotic
solution (b) near the singlet-
doublet crossing. Near the ex-
act crossing (F ≈ 0.013, full
vertical line) coherence is sta-
bilized, whereas at the center
of the avoided crossing (F ≈
0.015, dashed vertical line) the
decay of coherence is acceler-
ated. The parameter values are
D = 4, Ω = 0.982 ω
0
, γ =
10
−6
ω
0
, temperature as given
in the legend.
diagonal elements
L
αα,α

α
= 2
¸
n
N
αα

,n
[X
αα

,n
[
2
, α = α

, (6.30)
of the dissipative kernel. They give the rates of the direct transitions from [φ
α
`
to [φ
α
`. Within the full rotating-wave approximation, given in Eqs. 4.28 and 4.29,
these are the only non-vanishing contributions to the master equation which affect
the diagonal elements
αα
of the density matrix.
In the case of zero driving amplitude, the Floquet states [φ
α
` reduce to the eigen-
states of the undriven Hamiltonian H
DW
. The only non-vanishing Fourier component
is then [c
α,0
`, and the quasienergies
α
reduce to the corresponding eigenenergies E
α
.
Thus L
αα,α

α
only consists of a single term proportional to N(
α

α
). It describes
two kinds of thermal transitions: decay to states with lower energy and, if the en-
ergy difference is less than k
B
T, thermal activation to states with higher energy.
The ratio of the direct transitions forth and back then reads
L
αα,α

α

L
α

α

,αα
= exp


(
α

α
)
k
B
T

. (6.31)
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 69
We have detailed balance and therefore the steady-state solution

αα
(∞) ∼ e
−α/k
B
T
δ
αα
. (6.32)
In particular, the occupation probability decays monotonically with the energy of
the eigenstates. In the limit k
B
T →0, the system tends to occupy the ground state
only.
For a strong driving, each Floquet state [φ
α
` contains a large number of Fourier
components and L
αα,α

α
is given by a sum over contributions with quasienergies

α

α
+ nΩ. Thus a decay to states with “higher” quasienergy (recall that
quasienergies do not allow for a global ordering) becomes possible due to terms
with n < 0. Physically, they describe dissipative transitions under absorption of
driving-field quanta. Correspondingly, the system tends to occupy Floquet states
comprising many Fourier components with low index n. According to Eq. (2.42),
these states have low mean energy.
The effects under study are found for a driving with a frequency of the order of
unity. Thus for a quasienergy doublet, i.e., far off the three-level crossing, we have
[
α

α
[ < Ω, and L
α

α

,αα
is dominated by contributions with n < 0, where the
splitting has no significant influence. However, as a consequence of symmetry, the
splitting is the main difference between the two partners of the quasienergy doublet.
Therefore, with respect to dissipation, both should behave similarly. In particular,
one expects an equal population of the doublets even in the limit of zero temperature
(Fig. 6.13a). This is in contrast to the undriven case.
In the vicinity of a singlet-doublet crossing the situation is more subtle. Here,
the odd partner, say, of the doublet mixes with a chaotic singlet, cf. Eq. (6.22),
and thus acquires components with higher energy. Due to the high mean energy
E

c
of the chaotic singlet, close to the top of the barrier, the decay back to the
ground state can also proceed indirectly via other states with mean energy below
E

c
. Thus [φ

1
` and [φ

2
` are depleted and mainly [φ
+
0
` will be populated. However,
if the temperature is significantly above the splitting 2b of the avoided crossing,
thermal activation from[φ
+
0
` to [φ

1,2
`, accompanied by depletion via the states below
E

c
, becomes possible. Thus asymptotically, all these states become populated in
a steady flow (Fig. 6.13b,c). The long-time limit of the corresponding classical
dynamics converges to one of two limit cycles, each of which is located close to one
of the potential minima. In a stroboscopic map they correspond to two isolated
fixed points. This behavior is qualitatively different from the asymptotic limit of
the dissipative quantum dynamics near the center of the crossing and shows that
the occupation of the levels outside the singlet and the doublet at asymptotic times
is a pure quantum effect.
An important global characteristic of the asymptotic state is its Shannon entropy
S = −tr(

ln

) or, alternatively, its coherence tr
2

(see Appendix B.2). The
value of the latter gives approximately the reciprocal of the number of incoherently
occupied states. It equals unity only if the attractor is a pure state. According
to the above scenario, we expect tr
2

to assume the value 1/2, in a regime with
strong driving but preserved doublet structure, reflecting the incoherent population
70 The harmonically driven double-well potential
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112131415
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
10
0
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
Floquet-state index α

α
α

+
0



1



2

(a)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112131415
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
10
0
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
Floquet-state index α

α
α

+
0



1



2

(b)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112131415
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
10
0
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
Floquet-state index α

α
α

+
0



2



1

(c)
Figure 6.13: Occupation prob-
ability
αα
of the Floquet states

α
in the long-time limit. The
parameter values are D = 4, Ω =
0.982 ω
0
, γ = 10
−6
ω
0
, and F =
0.013 (a), 0.0145 (b), 0.015029
(c), temperature as given in the
legend.
6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 71
0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
k
B
T = 0
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
F
t
r
ρ
2 ∞
(a)
0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02
0
1
2
3
k
B
T = 0
k
B
T = 10
−4
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−3
¯ hω
0
k
B
T = 10
−2
¯ hω
0
F
S
(b)
Figure 6.14: Coherence (a)
and Shannon entropy (b) of the
asymptotic state in the vicinity
of a singlet-doublet crossing for
different temperatures as given
in the legend. The other pa-
rameter values are D = 4, Ω =
0.982 ω
0
, and γ = 10
−6
ω
0
.
10
-6
10
-5
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
0.0
0.5
1.0
(b)
t
r
ρ
2 ∞
0.0
0.5
1.0
(a)
T [¯ hω
0
/k
B
]
t
r
ρ
2 ∞
Figure 6.15: Coherence of the
asymptotic state in the vicin-
ity of a singlet-doublet cross-
ing for F = 0.013 (a) and F =
0.015029 (b): exact calculation
(full line) compared to the val-
ues resulting from a three-level
description (dashed) of the dis-
sipative dynamics. The other
parameter values are D = 4,
Ω = 0.982 ω
0
, and γ = 10
−6
ω
0
.
72 The harmonically driven double-well potential
of the ground-state doublet. In the vicinity of the singlet-doublet crossing where
the doublet structure is dissolved, its value should be close to unity for tempera-
tures k
B
T < 2b and much less than unity for k
B
T 2b (Figs. 6.14a, 6.15). This
means that the crossing of the chaotic singlet with the regular doublet leads to an
improvement of coherence if the temperature is below the splitting of the avoided
crossing, and a loss of coherence for temperatures above the splitting. This phe-
nomenon amounts to a chaos-induced coherence or incoherence, respectively. The
corresponding Shannon entropy (Fig. 6.14b), assumes approximately the value ln n
for n incoherently populated states. Thus outside the crossing, we have S ≈ ln 2
and at the center of the crossing the entropy exhibits a significant temperature
dependence.
The crucial role of the decay via states not involved in the three-level crossing
can be demonstrated by comparing it with the dissipative dynamics including only
these three levels (plus the bath). At the crossing, the three-state model results in
a completely different type of asymptotic state (Fig. 6.15). The failure of the three-
state model in the presence of dissipation clearly indicates that in the vicinity of the
singlet-doublet crossing, it is important to take a large set of levels into account.
6.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state
In recent work it has been demonstrated that a phase-space representation of quan-
tum mechanics, like the Husimi or Wigner distribution, reveals the structures of the
corresponding classical phase space [5,30,117–120]. In particular, for the case of reg-
ular classical dynamics, the Husimi function of an eigenstate (or of a Floquet state if
the system is driven) is localized in phase space along the corresponding quantizing
torus; for chaotic motion, it has support in the whole chaotic layer. If the classical
dynamics is mixed, one is even able to classify quantum-mechanical states as reg-
ular or chaotic according to their localization in phase space [120]. Moreover, the
phase-space representation of the asymptotic state of a dissipative quantum map
exhibits the structures of the corresponding classical attractor [106]. However, the
analogies have their limitations due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which
does not allow for arbitraryly fine phase-space structures for a quantum system and
results in coarse-graining over a “phase-space unit” 2π.
The asymptotic classical dynamics of the driven dissipative double-well potential
is for sufficiently strong driving particularly sensitive to the friction strength: With
decreasing friction, the motion changes from regular to chaotic.
6.3.1 Classical attractor
To describe the classical dissipative dynamics of the driven double well, we add an
Ohmic friction force F
γ
= −γp to the conservative equations (6.4), (6.5) and obtain
˙ x =
1
m
p, (6.33)
6.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state 73
5 10
-3
2 5 10
-2
2 5 10
-1
2 5 10
0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
γ/ω
0
d
H
Figure 6.16: Hausdorff di-
mension of the classical attrac-
tor for F = 0.09, Ω = 0.9 ω
0
.
˙ p = −γp −
∂V (x, t)
∂x
. (6.34)
As friction always decelerates a particle, it distinguishes between future and past,
thus destroys the time-reversal symmetry (6.10) of the conservative system. Ac-
cordingly, dissipation breaks the reflection symmetry at the x-axis of phase-space
portraits which we found for the chosen initial phase of the driving (cf. Fig. 6.6).
The lack of time-reversal symmetry in presence of friction is even more evident
from the time evolution of a volume element V of phase space. It evolves by having
each point on its surface ∂V follow an orbit generated by (6.33), (6.34), which yields
by the divergence theorem [3]
dV
dt
=

V
dxdp

∂ ˙ x
∂x
+
∂ ˙ p
∂p

= −γV. (6.35)
Thus, we obtain an exponential contraction of a phase-space volume V —a con-
stituent feature of dissipative flows. Therefore, the dynamics is asymptotically
confined to an attractor, a formation in phase space with zero volume to which
all sufficiently close trajectories from the so-called basin of attraction converge for
long times. For periodically driven dissipative systems, the attractor is in general
also time-dependent with the period of the driving and is properly rendered by its
stroboscopic map [121–123].
Depending on the values of the driving parameters and the friction strength,
an attractor consists of limit cycles or isolated fixed points. For sufficiently weak
dissipation, however, it may even happen that the dissipative dynamics is chaotic
and the attractor possess fractal geometry, forming a so-called strange attractor.
The type of geometry can be characterized as fractal or regular according to its
Hausdorff dimension d
H
which is defined by the scaling assumption
N ∼ l
−d
H
, l →0. (6.36)
Here, N is the number of squares with width l needed to cover the whole attractor.
74 The harmonically driven double-well potential
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.. . ... ... .. . .. .... ..
... .... ... . ... ... ..... ..... ... . .. . ... .. . ... ... . .... .. .. . ... .. . ... ... . .... ...... ... .. .. .. .. . ... .... .. .. ... .... .... ... . ...
... .. .. .... .. .. .. .. . .. ... .. .... .... .... . .. .. .... ... ... .. ... ..... .. .... .. ... .... .
.. .. .. ... ...... .... .
... .. . .. ...... .. ........ .. ... ... ... ... ..
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(a)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
. .. .. ... .. .. .. . .. ...
. .. ... . .. . .. .. .. . . ..
... .. .. .. . .. .. .... . .. . .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ..
. . .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ..... . ... .. ... ... .. . . .... . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. .
... . . ... . .. . ... .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. . ... .. ... .. . . .. ... ... . ... .. . .. ... . . .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. ... . . .. ... .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. . . ...
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(b)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. . .
. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. ... .... . . ... .. . . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. . .. ... ... .. ... .. . . ... .. . ... ... .. ... .. . ... ..... . .. . .. . . .... .. .. . .. .. .... ... ..... .. . .. .. . .. . ... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. ... . . .. .. . ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. ... . . .. ... .. ..... .. ... ... . .. ... ... . .. .. ... . ... ..... .. .... ... . .. ... .... ... .. ... .. . ... .. . . .... .. . . .. ... . .. . . ... . .... .. .. .. . ... .... ... . . ... . ... ... . ... ... ... .. .. . .... . .. .... . ... . ..... . ... ... ... ... . .. .. .. .. .. ... .... .. .. .. ... . ... .. . ... . .... .. ... . ... .. ... .. .. .... .. . .. . .... .... .. .. .... .. .. . .... .. .. ... ... ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. . .... . . .. ... ... .. .. .... . .. . .. ..... ... ..... .... .. .. .... . .. ... . . .. ... .. ..... . .. . ... . .. ... . .. . ... ... .. ... . ... . .. ... .. . . .... ... ... .. ...... ... .. .. ..... .. .. .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... ..... . . . .... . .... ..... .. .. . . . . ... .. .. . ... ... ... .. .. ... .. . .. ... .. . .. ... .. .. . .. .. .. ... . .. .. . ... . .. .. .. . .. . .... .. .. .... .. . ... .. ... . .. . . . ..... ... .. .. . . ... .. ... . ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .... . ... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. .. . .. .... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... . ... .. ... .. .. .... . . .. .. . .. . . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... .. .. ... .... .. ... .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .... . .. .. .. . .. . .. . ... .... .. ... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. . . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... . . . . ... .. ... .... .. .. .. ... . .. .. ... .. .. . . .. .. . . ... .. ... . .... ... .. . .. . ... ... .... ... . ... . ... .. ... . ... .. . .. .. .. ... ... ...... .. .. .... .. ... .. .. .. ... .. .... . .. ... .. .. ... ... . . .. .. .... . ..... .. ... . ... ... . .. .. ... . .... ... .. . ... .. .. ... ... .. . ... .. .. . . ... . .... .. ... .. . .. .... . .. .... .... ... .. .. .. . .. .. . ..... ... . .. . .. ... . ..... .... .. ... .. . ... ...... . ... .. ... . ..... .. ... .. . . ... .. ... . .. ... .. .... . ... .. ... ... .. .. .. ... . ... ... .... .... .. .. . . .... .. ... . .. . ..... . .. ... .. . .. ... . ... .. .... .. . .. .. . ... .. ... . .. .. ... .. . .. .. .... .. .. .. ... . .... .. ... ... .. .... ... . ... .... . ... . ... ... . .. ... .. ... . .... . . .. ... .. .. . .... . . .. ... .... .. .. ... .. . .. .. .... ... .... ... . .. .. . .... .. . ... . . .. . .... ... . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... ..... ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. ... . . .. . ... . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. ..... .. .. . .... .... ... .... ... .... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... ... . .. .. .. ... . .. . .... .. . .. ... .. .. .... . .. .. .. .. ... . .. ... .... . .. ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... . .. .. . .. . . .... .. .. .... . .... . ... ... .. .... . .. ... .. . ... .. ... ... . .. ... . .. .. . ... .. .. .... .. ... . .. .. .. .. .. ... . ... .. .. ... ... .. . ... ... .... . ... .. ... ... .. .. .. . ... ... .. . .... .. .. .. . .. .. ...... . .. . .. ... .... . .. ... .. .... ... .. .. ... .. ... . ... .. .. .. .. . ... . ... .. .. ... .... .. ... . ... .. .. ... . ... .. . .. . ... . . .. .. .. .. ... .. ... . . .. ... .. . ... . .... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .... . .. .... . .. .... .. .. . .. ... .. .... . ... .... . ... .. ... . .. . . ... .. .... .. .. . .. .. .... .... .. .. ... .... . ... .. ... . ... . .. .. ... . .. . ... . .. .. ... ..... ... . . .. .. . . .. . ..... . ... . .. ...... ... .. ... . ... .. ... ... . .. . .. .. . ..... ..... . . .. ... ..... ... ... .. .. .. ... . ... .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . ... ... ... ... .. . ... . . .... .. .. .. .. ... . ... ... .. . .. .. . ... ... ... .. ... .. .. ... .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. ... ... .. . .. ... .. .. . .. ... .. ... . ... . . .. . .. ... ... .... .. .... ... .. ..... . ... . .... .... . . ... .. .. . .. . .. .. .... . .. .. . ... .. .. ... . .... .. .... .. .. . .. .. ... . .. . ... .. ... . . ... . ..... .. ..... .... ... .. ... ... ..... .. . .. ... . .... ... .. .. ... . .. . .. .. ... ... .. ... . ... . ... .... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .. . .. ..... ... .. . . .. .. . .. ... . .. .. .. .... .. .. ... . .. .. .. ... .. . .. . .. .... . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... . .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .... .. ... .... . ... ... . ... .. .. ... .. . ... . . ... . .. .. .. .. ... ... . ... .. .. .. .... . .. ... .. ... ... .. .. . ... .. .... .. ... . .... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . ... .. . .. . ... . .. .. ... ... .. .. ... . . ... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . .. ... .... . .. .. .... ... .. .. ... . ... . .. . ... ... .. ... .. .... ... . .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ... .... .. . ... .. .. . ... .. ... .. .. .... . .. ... . .. ... ... .. .. ... ... .. .. . .. . . .. . .... .. ... ... .. ... .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. ... .... . ... .. .. . ... .... . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. . . . ... ... . .. . .. .... . . .... .. .. .... . .. ... .. ... ... ... ... .. ..... . ... ... .. ... .. . .. .... .. . .. .. .. ... . .... ... .. ... . .. .... . .. . ... .. ... .. .... . .. ...... ... ... . . .. ... .. . .... . .. . .. . ... ... . .. ... . .. . ... .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. ... .. ... ... ... .. . .... . ... .. . .. . ... . . .... . .. .. .. .. .. . .... .. ... .. .. ... . ...... .. . ... . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... . . . .. .. .... .. . .. .... . .. ... .... . .... .... .. .. . ... . . ... . .. .. .. . .. .. .... .. . .. .. ... . . ... . .. ... . .. .... . .... .... ... . .. ... .. .. . . .. . ... ..... ... ... ... . ... .. . . . .. .... .. ... .. .... ..... .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. ... .. . . ... ... ... . ... . ... .. .. . .. .. ..... ... .. ... . .. .. . .. .. . . . ... .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... . ... .. ... ... ... .. .. .. ... .. ....... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . . .. .. ... .. ... .. . .. .. .. .... .. ... . .. .. ... .. ...... . .. .. ... . ... ... ..... . ... ... .... .. . .... ... .. .. .. ...... .. . .. .. .. .. .. . ... .. .... . .. .... . . . .. .... .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .. ... . . ..... . ... . ... . . ... . . ... ... .... .. ... ... .... ... .. ... .... .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. .. .. ... . . .. .. . . .. ... .. .. .... ... .. .... . .. . .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .... .... ... . .....
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(c)
Figure 6.17: Stroboscopic clas-
sical phase-space portrait at t =
2πn/Ω, of the dissipative harmon-
ically driven quartic double well,
Eqs. (6.33), (6.34), for the driv-
ing amplitude F = 0.09 and fre-
quency Ω = 0.9 ω
0
. The fric-
tion strength is γ = 0.3 ω
0
(a),
0.2 ω
0
(b), 0.03 ω
0
(c). In panels
(a) and (b) the stroboscopic por-
trait is marked by a full dot and
the broken lines show the corres-
ponding limit cycles.
6.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state 75
It is computed numerically by box counting. Consequently, continuous formations
correspond to integer values of d
H
. For d
H
< 2 the attractor has zero volume.
The Hausdorff dimension of the classical attractor for the parameter values
F = 0.09 and Ω = 0.9 ω
0
for different friction strength γ is depicted in Fig. 6.16.
Although the attractor of the driven dissipative double well is periodically time-
dependent with the period of the driving, its Hausdorff dimension d
H
has no sig-
nificant time-dependence [121]. Near γ ≈ 0.06 ω
0
, the classical dynamics undergoes
with decreasing γ a transition from regular motion (Fig. 6.17a, 6.17b) to chaos,
manifest by a strange attractor (Fig. 6.17c). For this driving amplitude and fre-
quency, the regular islands near the bottom of the wells (cf. Fig. 6.6) are in absence
of dissipation already completely resolved in the chaotic sea.
6.3.2 Quantum attractor
In the quantum case, the self-similar fine structures of a strange attractor are in
contradiction to the position-momentum uncertainty relation, thus they are smeared
out in the Husimi representation of the asymptotic state (Figs. 6.18, 6.19). These
“quantum attractors” clearly reflect the structures of the corresponding classical
asymptotic state as well as their qualitative change from isolated fixed points to a
strange attractor. This transition is, however, in the quantum case not as sharp as in
the classical case: Although the asymptotic state for γ = 0.2 ω
0
(Figs. 6.18b, 6.19b)
is still mainly located near the fixed points of the classical stroboscopic map, it covers
a broader phase-space area that already indicates the shape of the strange attractor.
The underlying classical structures in the Husimi functions become more distinct for
smaller values of the effective quantum of action
eff
= 1/8D, as expected. Like the
phase-space portrait of the dissipative classical dynamics (Fig. 6.17), its quantum-
mechanical counterparts obey no reflection symmetry at the x-axis. This feature is
in contrast to the Husimi representation of the Floquet states in absence of dissi-
pation (cf. Fig. 6.7) and is caused by finite off-diagonal elements of the asymptotic
density matrix in Floquet representation, since diagonal representations share the
symmetries of the basis. Thus, off-diagonal matrix elements play a significant role
for the asymptotic state. This demonstrates that a description within a full rotating-
wave approximation is insufficient, since it would result in a diagonal asymptotic
state (see Section 4.3.2).
Because the self-similar structures at an arbitrary small length scale of the classi-
cal attractor are washed out in the quantum case, we cannot characterize the quan-
tum attractor by a Hausdorff dimension. A more suitable measure for the qualitative
shape of the quantum attractor is the Wehrl entropy S
Q
of its Husimi representa-
tion [120, 124] (see Appendix A.3.2). Its exponential, exp(S
Q
), gives approximately
the number of minimum uncertainty states covered by the Husimi function. Thus,
the occupied phase-space area is 2π exp(S
Q
). The Wehrl entropy of the asymptotic
state for our numerical example for different values of the effective quantum of action
is depicted in Fig. 6.20. It becomes larger with decreasing friction γ, reflecting the
increasing dispersion of the Husimi functions. In the semiclassical regime, i.e., for
76 The harmonically driven double-well potential
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.. . ... ... .. . .. .... ..
... .... ... . ... ... ..... ..... ... . .. . ... .. . ... ... . .... .. .. . ... .. . ... ... . .... ...... ... .. .. .. .. . ... .... .. .. ... .... .... ... . ...
... .. .. .... .. .. .. .. . .. ... .. .... .... .... . .. .. .... ... ... .. ... ..... .. .... .. ... .... .
.. .. .. ... ...... .... .
... .. . .. ...... .. ........ .. ... ... ... ... ...
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(a)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
. .. .. ... .. .. .. . .. ...
. .. ... . .. . .. .. .. . . ..
... .. .. .. . .. .. .... . .. . .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ..
. . .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ..... . ... .. ... ... .. . . .... . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. .
... . . ... . .. . ... .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. . ... .. ... .. . . .. ... ... . ... .. . .. ... . . .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. ... . . .. ... .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. . . ....
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(b)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. . .
. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. ... .... . . ... .. . . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. . .. ... ... .. ... .. . . ... .. . ... ... .. ... .. . ... ..... . .. . .. . . .... .. .. . .. .. .... ... ..... .. . .. .. . .. . ... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. ... . . .. .. . ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. ... . . .. ... .. ..... .. ... ... . .. ... ... . .. .. ... . ... ..... .. .... ... . .. ... .... ... .. ... .. . ... .. . . .... .. . . .. ... . .. . . ... . .... .. .. .. . ... .... ... . . ... . ... ... . ... ... ... .. .. . .... . .. .... . ... . ..... . ... ... ... ... . .. .. .. .. .. ... .... .. .. .. ... . ... .. . ... . .... .. ... . ... .. ... .. .. .... .. . .. . .... .... .. .. .... .. .. . .... .. .. ... ... ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. . .... . . .. ... ... .. .. .... . .. . .. ..... ... ..... .... .. .. .... . .. ... . . .. ... .. ..... . .. . ... . .. ... . .. . ... ... .. ... . ... . .. ... .. . . .... ... ... .. ...... ... .. .. ..... .. .. .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... ..... . . . .... . .... ..... .. .. . . . . ... .. .. . ... ... ... .. .. ... .. . .. ... .. . .. ... .. .. . .. .. .. ... . .. .. . ... . .. .. .. . .. . .... .. .. .... .. . ... .. ... . .. . . . ..... ... .. .. . . ... .. ... . ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .... . ... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. .. . .. .... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... . ... .. ... .. .. .... . . .. .. . .. . . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... .. .. ... .... .. ... .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .... . .. .. .. . .. . .. . ... .... .. ... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. . . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... . . . . ... .. ... .... .. .. .. ... . .. .. ... .. .. . . .. .. . . ... .. ... . .... ... .. . .. . ... ... .... ... . ... . ... .. ... . ... .. . .. .. .. ... ... ...... .. .. .... .. ... .. .. .. ... .. .... . .. ... .. .. ... ... . . .. .. .... . ..... .. ... . ... ... . .. .. ... . .... ... .. . ... .. .. ... ... .. . ... .. .. . . ... . .... .. ... .. . .. .... . .. .... .... ... .. .. .. . .. .. . ..... ... . .. . .. ... . ..... .... .. ... .. . ... ...... . ... .. ... . ..... .. ... .. . . ... .. ... . .. ... .. .... . ... .. ... ... .. .. .. ... . ... ... .... .... .. .. . . .... .. ... . .. . ..... . .. ... .. . .. ... . ... .. .... .. . .. .. . ... .. ... . .. .. ... .. . .. .. .... .. .. .. ... . .... .. ... ... .. .... ... . ... .... . ... . ... ... . .. ... .. ... . .... . . .. ... .. .. . .... . . .. ... .... .. .. ... .. . .. .. .... ... .... ... . .. .. . .... .. . ... . . .. . .... ... . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... ..... ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. ... . . .. . ... . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. ..... .. .. . .... .... ... .... ... .... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... ... . .. .. .. ... . .. . .... .. . .. ... .. .. .... . .. .. .. .. ... . .. ... .... . .. ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... . .. .. . .. . . .... .. .. .... . .... . ... ... .. .... . .. ... .. . ... .. ... ... . .. ... . .. .. . ... .. .. .... .. ... . .. .. .. .. .. ... . ... .. .. ... ... .. . ... ... .... . ... .. ... ... .. .. .. . ... ... .. . .... .. .. .. . .. .. ...... . .. . .. ... .... . .. ... .. .... ... .. .. ... .. ... . ... .. .. .. .. . ... . ... .. .. ... .... .. ... . ... .. .. ... . ... .. . .. . ... . . .. .. .. .. ... .. ... . . .. ... .. . ... . .... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .... . .. .... . .. .... .. .. . .. ... .. .... . ... .... . ... .. ... . .. . . ... .. .... .. .. . .. .. .... .... .. .. ... .... . ... .. ... . ... . .. .. ... . .. . ... . .. .. ... ..... ... . . .. .. . . .. . ..... . ... . .. ...... ... .. ... . ... .. ... ... . .. . .. .. . ..... ..... . . .. ... ..... ... ... .. .. .. ... . ... .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . ... ... ... ... .. . ... . . .... .. .. .. .. ... . ... ... .. . .. .. . ... ... ... .. ... .. .. ... .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. ... ... .. . .. ... .. .. . .. ... .. ... . ... . . .. . .. ... ... .... .. .... ... .. ..... . ... . .... .... . . ... .. .. . .. . .. .. .... . .. .. . ... .. .. ... . .... .. .... .. .. . .. .. ... . .. . ... .. ... . . ... . ..... .. ..... .... ... .. ... ... ..... .. . .. ... . .... ... .. .. ... . .. . .. .. ... ... .. ... . ... . ... .... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .. . .. ..... ... .. . . .. .. . .. ... . .. .. .. .... .. .. ... . .. .. .. ... .. . .. . .. .... . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... . .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .... .. ... .... . ... ... . ... .. .. ... .. . ... . . ... . .. .. .. .. ... ... . ... .. .. .. .... . .. ... .. ... ... .. .. . ... .. .... .. ... . .... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . ... .. . .. . ... . .. .. ... ... .. .. ... . . ... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . .. ... .... . .. .. .... ... .. .. ... . ... . .. . ... ... .. ... .. .... ... . .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ... .... .. . ... .. .. . ... .. ... .. .. .... . .. ... . .. ... ... .. .. ... ... .. .. . .. . . .. . .... .. ... ... .. ... .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. ... .... . ... .. .. . ... .... . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. . . . ... ... . .. . .. .... . . .... .. .. .... . .. ... .. ... ... ... ... .. ..... . ... ... .. ... .. . .. .... .. . .. .. .. ... . .... ... .. ... . .. .... . .. . ... .. ... .. .... . .. ...... ... ... . . .. ... .. . .... . .. . .. . ... ... . .. ... . .. . ... .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. ... .. ... ... ... .. . .... . ... .. . .. . ... . . .... . .. .. .. .. .. . .... .. ... .. .. ... . ...... .. . ... . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... . . . .. .. .... .. . .. .... . .. ... .... . .... .... .. .. . ... . . ... . .. .. .. . .. .. .... .. . .. .. ... . . ... . .. ... . .. .... . .... .... ... . .. ... .. .. . . .. . ... ..... ... ... ... . ... .. . . . .. .... .. ... .. .... ..... .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. ... .. . . ... ... ... . ... . ... .. .. . .. .. ..... ... .. ... . .. .. . .. .. . . . ... .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... . ... .. ... ... ... .. .. .. ... .. ....... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . . .. .. ... .. ... .. . .. .. .. .... .. ... . .. .. ... .. ...... . .. .. ... . ... ... ..... . ... ... .... .. . .... ... .. .. .. ...... .. . .. .. .. .. .. . ... .. .... . .. .... . . . .. .... .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .. ... . . ..... . ... . ... . . ... . . ... ... .... .. ... ... .... ... .. ... .... .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. .. .. ... . . .. .. . . .. ... .. .. .... ... .. .... . .. . .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .... .... ... . .....
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(c)
Figure 6.18: Contour plot of
the Husimi function of the quan-
tum attractor (full lines) at t =
2πn/Ω, n → ∞, superposed on
the corresponding classical phase-
space portrait, Fig. 6.17. The pa-
rameter values F = 0.09, Ω =
0.9 ω
0
, γ = 0.3 ω
0
(a), 0.2 ω
0
(b),
0.03 ω
0
(c) are as in Fig. 6.17. The
effective action is D = 6. The
rectangle in the lower left corner
depicts the size of the effective
quantum of action
eff
= 1/8D.
6.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state 77
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.. . ... ... .. . .. .... ..
... .... ... . ... ... ..... ..... ... . .. . ... .. . ... ... . .... .. .. . ... .. . ... ... . .... ...... ... .. .. .. .. . ... .... .. .. ... .... .... ... . ...
... .. .. .... .. .. .. .. . .. ... .. .... .... .... . .. .. .... ... ... .. ... ..... .. .... .. ... .... .
.. .. .. ... ...... .... .
... .. . .. ...... .. ........ .. ... ... ... ... ...
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(a)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
. .. .. ... .. .. .. . .. ...
. .. ... . .. . .. .. .. . . ..
... .. .. .. . .. .. .... . .. . .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ..
. . .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ..... . ... .. ... ... .. . . .... . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. .
... . . ... . .. . ... .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. . ... .. ... .. . . .. ... ... . ... .. . .. ... . . .. ... .. ... .. ... .. .. .. ... . . .. ... .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. . . ....
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(b)
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
-0.5
0.0
0.5
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. . .
. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. ... .... . . ... .. . . ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. . .. ... ... .. ... .. . . ... .. . ... ... .. ... .. . ... ..... . .. . .. . . .... .. .. . .. .. .... ... ..... .. . .. .. . .. . ... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. ... . . .. .. . ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. ... . . .. ... .. ..... .. ... ... . .. ... ... . .. .. ... . ... ..... .. .... ... . .. ... .... ... .. ... .. . ... .. . . .... .. . . .. ... . .. . . ... . .... .. .. .. . ... .... ... . . ... . ... ... . ... ... ... .. .. . .... . .. .... . ... . ..... . ... ... ... ... . .. .. .. .. .. ... .... .. .. .. ... . ... .. . ... . .... .. ... . ... .. ... .. .. .... .. . .. . .... .... .. .. .... .. .. . .... .. .. ... ... ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. . .... . . .. ... ... .. .. .... . .. . .. ..... ... ..... .... .. .. .... . .. ... . . .. ... .. ..... . .. . ... . .. ... . .. . ... ... .. ... . ... . .. ... .. . . .... ... ... .. ...... ... .. .. ..... .. .. .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... ..... . . . .... . .... ..... .. .. . . . . ... .. .. . ... ... ... .. .. ... .. . .. ... .. . .. ... .. .. . .. .. .. ... . .. .. . ... . .. .. .. . .. . .... .. .. .... .. . ... .. ... . .. . . . ..... ... .. .. . . ... .. ... . ... .. .. ... .. ... .. ... .... . ... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. .. . .. .... .. .. .. ... .. ... .. ... . ... .. ... .. .. .... . . .. .. . .. . . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... .. .. ... .... .. ... .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .... . .. .. .. . .. . .. . ... .... .. ... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. . . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... .. . .. . .. ... . . . . ... .. ... .... .. .. .. ... . .. .. ... .. .. . . .. .. . . ... .. ... . .... ... .. . .. . ... ... .... ... . ... . ... .. ... . ... .. . .. .. .. ... ... ...... .. .. .... .. ... .. .. .. ... .. .... . .. ... .. .. ... ... . . .. .. .... . ..... .. ... . ... ... . .. .. ... . .... ... .. . ... .. .. ... ... .. . ... .. .. . . ... . .... .. ... .. . .. .... . .. .... .... ... .. .. .. . .. .. . ..... ... . .. . .. ... . ..... .... .. ... .. . ... ...... . ... .. ... . ..... .. ... .. . . ... .. ... . .. ... .. .... . ... .. ... ... .. .. .. ... . ... ... .... .... .. .. . . .... .. ... . .. . ..... . .. ... .. . .. ... . ... .. .... .. . .. .. . ... .. ... . .. .. ... .. . .. .. .... .. .. .. ... . .... .. ... ... .. .... ... . ... .... . ... . ... ... . .. ... .. ... . .... . . .. ... .. .. . .... . . .. ... .... .. .. ... .. . .. .. .... ... .... ... . .. .. . .... .. . ... . . .. . .... ... . .. ... .. . .. .. ... ... ..... ... .. .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. ... . . .. . ... . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. ..... .. .. . .... .... ... .... ... .... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... ... . .. .. .. ... . .. . .... .. . .. ... .. .. .... . .. .. .. .. ... . .. ... .... . .. ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . .
. ... ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... . .. .. . .. . . .... .. .. .... . .... . ... ... .. .... . .. ... .. . ... .. ... ... . .. ... . .. .. . ... .. .. .... .. ... . .. .. .. .. .. ... . ... .. .. ... ... .. . ... ... .... . ... .. ... ... .. .. .. . ... ... .. . .... .. .. .. . .. .. ...... . .. . .. ... .... . .. ... .. .... ... .. .. ... .. ... . ... .. .. .. .. . ... . ... .. .. ... .... .. ... . ... .. .. ... . ... .. . .. . ... . . .. .. .. .. ... .. ... . . .. ... .. . ... . .... .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .... . .. .... . .. .... .. .. . .. ... .. .... . ... .... . ... .. ... . .. . . ... .. .... .. .. . .. .. .... .... .. .. ... .... . ... .. ... . ... . .. .. ... . .. . ... . .. .. ... ..... ... . . .. .. . . .. . ..... . ... . .. ...... ... .. ... . ... .. ... ... . .. . .. .. . ..... ..... . . .. ... ..... ... ... .. .. .. ... . ... .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . ... ... ... ... .. . ... . . .... .. .. .. .. ... . ... ... .. . .. .. . ... ... ... .. ... .. .. ... .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. ... ... .. . .. ... .. .. . .. ... .. ... . ... . . .. . .. ... ... .... .. .... ... .. ..... . ... . .... .... . . ... .. .. . .. . .. .. .... . .. .. . ... .. .. ... . .... .. .... .. .. . .. .. ... . .. . ... .. ... . . ... . ..... .. ..... .... ... .. ... ... ..... .. . .. ... . .... ... .. .. ... . .. . .. .. ... ... .. ... . ... . ... .... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... .. .. . .. ..... ... .. . . .. .. . .. ... . .. .. .. .... .. .. ... . .. .. .. ... .. . .. . .. .... . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... . .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .. ... .. ... .. .. .. .... .. ... .... . ... ... . ... .. .. ... .. . ... . . ... . .. .. .. .. ... ... . ... .. .. .. .... . .. ... .. ... ... .. .. . ... .. .... .. ... . .... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. .
.
. .
.
. .
.
. . . .. . .. . .. ... ... ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... ... .. . ... .. . .. . ... . .. .. ... ... .. .. ... . . ... .. .... .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . .. ... .... . .. .. .... ... .. .. ... . ... . .. . ... ... .. ... .. .... ... . .. .. .. .. .. .... .. ... .... .. . ... .. .. . ... .. ... .. .. .... . .. ... . .. ... ... .. .. ... ... .. .. . .. . . .. . .... .. ... ... .. ... .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. ... .... . ... .. .. . ... .... . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. . . . ... ... . .. . .. .... . . .... .. .. .... . .. ... .. ... ... ... ... .. ..... . ... ... .. ... .. . .. .... .. . .. .. .. ... . .... ... .. ... . .. .... . .. . ... .. ... .. .... . .. ...... ... ... . . .. ... .. . .... . .. . .. . ... ... . .. ... . .. . ... .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. ... .. ... ... ... .. . .... . ... .. . .. . ... . . .... . .. .. .. .. .. . .... .. ... .. .. ... . ...... .. . ... . .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... . . . .. .. .... .. . .. .... . .. ... .... . .... .... .. .. . ... . . ... . .. .. .. . .. .. .... .. . .. .. ... . . ... . .. ... . .. .... . .... .... ... . .. ... .. .. . . .. . ... ..... ... ... ... . ... .. . . . .. .... .. ... .. .... ..... .. . .. . .. .. .. . .. ... .. . . ... ... ... . ... . ... .. .. . .. .. ..... ... .. ... . .. .. . .. .. . . . ... .. . .. .. .. . .. .. .. ... . ... .. ... ... ... .. .. .. ... .. ....... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... . . .. .. ... .. ... .. . .. .. .. .... .. ... . .. .. ... .. ...... . .. .. ... . ... ... ..... . ... ... .... .. . .... ... .. .. .. ...... .. . .. .. .. .. .. . ... .. .... . .. .... . . . .. .... .. .. ... ... .. .. .. .. .. ... . . ..... . ... . ... . . ... . . ... ... .... .. ... ... .... ... .. ... .... .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. .. .. .. ... . . .. .. . . .. ... .. .. .... ... .. .... . .. . .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .... .... ... . .....
x/x
0
p
/
m
ω
0
x
0
(c)
Figure 6.19: Same as Fig. 6.18
for the effective action D = 12.
78 The harmonically driven double-well potential
10
-3
2 5 10
-2
2 5 10
-1
2 5 10
0
2
3
4
D = 12
D = 6
D = 3
γ/ω
0
S
Q
Figure 6.20: Wehrl entropy of
the asymptotic state of the dissi-
pative quantum map for different
values of the effective quantum of
action
eff
= 1/8D. Other pa-
rameters like in Fig. 6.16.
a sufficiently large value of the effective action D, we observe a kink of the entropy
near γ ≈ 0.06 ω
0
, where the classical attractor undergoes a transition from a set of
isolated fixed points to a strange attractor.
Note that for γ
>

0.1 ω
0
, the Markov approximation becomes inaccurate, since
γ is of the order of the mean level spacing and the condition (3.33) is violated for
at least some of the transitions between Floquet states. Nevertheless, we obtain the
qualitative behavior which we expected from classical considerations.
7 Summary and outlook
In this thesis, we put focus on a special class of system: a particle which moves in a
one-dimensional potential under the influence of a heat bath and of an external field
which is periodic in time. A Markovian approach to quantum dissipation, based
on the Floquet solutions of the coherent dynamics, has proven well-adapted to the
description of such systems. We have derived this Floquet-Markov approach from
an exact path-integral expression and have applied it to the parametrically driven
harmonic oscillator and the driven double-well potential.
The study of the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator has been devoted
mainly to a thorough understanding of the different approximation schemes. It
turned out that the dissipative part of the Markovian master equation depends
quantitatively on whether the driving is included in its derivation or not: Consider-
ing the driving mainly results in a modified momentum diffusion that depends on
the quasienergy spectrum instead of the unperturbed spectrum of the central system
without the driving. The difference becomes significant in the limits of strong driv-
ing and low temperature. An additional additive time-dependent force undergoes a
renormalization which, however, vanishes for strictly Ohmic damping. Concluding
from numerical results for the case of a Mathieu oscillator, the attributes “simple”
and “improved” for the two basic Markovian approaches prove adequate. To solve
the master equation, we have transformed it to Wigner representation, thus obtained
a partial differential equation for the Wigner function that corresponds to the den-
sity operator, and derived an analytical expression for the Floquet solutions of the
resulting Fokker-Planck-like equation. In doing so, we have incidentally obtained
the Floquet solutions of the Fokker-Planck equation for the corresponding classical
Brownian motion.
A quantum system with more complex dynamics is the quartic double-well po-
tential under the influence of a driving with frequency near resonance. Here, classical
chaos plays a significant role for the coherent dynamics. Even for arbitrarily small
driving amplitude, the separatrix is replaced by a chaotic layer, but the motion near
the bottom of the wells remains regular. Nevertheless, the influence of states located
in the chaotic region alters the splittings of the regular doublets and thus the tunnel
rates, which is the essence of chaotic tunneling. We have studied chaotic tunneling
in the vicinity of crossings of chaotic singlets with tunnel doublets under the influ-
ence of an environment. As a simple intuitive model to compare against, we have
constructed a three-state system which in the case of vanishing dissipation, provides
a faithful description of an isolated singlet-doublet crossing. Dissipation introduces
new time scales to the system: one for the loss of coherence and a second one for
the relaxation to an asymptotic state. Well outside the crossing, both time-scales
are of the same order, reflecting an effective two-state behavior. The center of the
80 Summary and outlook
crossing is characterized by a strong mixing of the chaotic state with one state of
the tunnel doublet. The high mean energy of the chaotic state introduces additional
decay channels to states outside the three-state system. Thus, decoherence becomes
far more effective and, accordingly, tunneling fades out much faster.
The study of the asymptotic state, the quantum attractor, demonstrates clearly
that a three-state model of the singlet-doublet crossing is insufficient once dissipation
is effective. This is so because the coupling to the heat bath enables processes of
decay and thermal activation that connect the states in the crossing with other,
“external” states of the central system. In the presence of driving, the asymptotic
state is no longer literally a state of equilibrium. Rather, incoherent processes create
a steady flow of probability involving states within as well as outside the crossing.
As a result, the composition of the asymptotic state, expressed for example by its
coherence tr
2

, are markedly different at the center of the crossing as compared to
the asymptotic state far away from the crossing, even if that is barely visible in the
corresponding classical phase-space structure.
With increasing driving amplitude, the dynamics near the bottom of the wells,
in absence of dissipation, becomes fully chaotic. This has striking consequences
for the dissipative classical dynamics: For sufficiently small dissipation, it remains
chaotic, but for strong friction it becomes regular. Accordingly, the geometry of the
classical attractor is fractal or regular, respectively. We have observed the signatures
of this qualitative difference in the asymptotic state of the corresponding quantum
dynamics. However, in contrast to the sudden change of the classical behavior, the
quantum attractor undergoes a smooth transition: The structure of the strange
attractor is already felt by the Husimi function for parameter values where the
classical attractor consists only of two isolated fixed points. For the observation of
these semiclassical structures, off-diagonal matrix elements of the asymptotic state
in Floquet basis proved crucial. This clearly reflects the failure a full rotating-wave
approximation.
Many more phenomena at the overlap of chaos, tunneling, and dissipation await
being unraveled. They include four-state crossings formed when two doublets inter-
sect, chaotic Bloch tunneling along extended potentials with a large number of unit
cells instead of just two, and the influence of decoherence on a multi-step mechanism
of chaotic tunneling. These phenomena are typically observed in the far semiclas-
sical regime, which requires to take very many levels into account. A semiclassical
description of the dissipative quantum system may circumvent this problem.
A The harmonic oscillator
In many fields of physics, the harmonic oscillator plays an important role as an ex-
actly solvable model as well as an approximation to a smooth potential minimum.
In this work, we use its eigenfunctions as a basis set for numerical computations.
Moreover, the ground state of a harmonic oscillator, displaced in phase space (co-
herent state), forms the initial state for the propagation of the density matrix in
Chapter 6. In this appendix, we give a synopsis of basic properties of the harmonic
oscillator, described by the Hamiltonian
H
HO
=
1
2m
p
2
+

2
HO
2
x
2
(A.1)
= ω
HO

a
+
a +
1
2

, (A.2)
and of the closely related coherent states and quasiprobabilities.
The form (A.2) of the Hamiltonian is achieved by the transformation
a =


HO
2
x + i

1
2mω
HO
p, (A.3)
a
+
=


HO
2
x −i

1
2mω
HO
p, (A.4)
x =

2mω
HO
(a
+
+a), (A.5)
p = i


HO
2
(a
+
−a). (A.6)
From [x, p] = i results the bosonic commutation relation
[a, a
+
] = 1, (A.7)
which yields for the energy eigenstates [n` the relations [125]
a[n` =

n[n −1`, (A.8)
a
+
[n` =

n + 1 [n + 1`. (A.9)
These justify the denotation creation and destruction operator (of a quantum) or
shift operators (between eigenstates) for a
+
and a. By recursion of (A.9), the so-
called number states
[n` =
(a
+
)
n

n!
[0` (A.10)
82 The harmonic oscillator
are constructed from the ground state [0`, which is defined by a[0` = 0.
The state [n` in a semiclassical interpretation [126,127] is a quantized torus with
action (n + 1/2). Therefore, it is restricted to phase-space areas which obey
p
2
2m
+
1
2

2
HO
x
2
<


HO
, (A.11)
thus
[p[
<

p
n
=

2nω
HO
m, (A.12)
[x[
<

x
n
=

2n

HO
. (A.13)
A.1 Number states as a basis set
For numerical computations, wave functions and operators are decomposed into a
complete set of basis functions. Dealing with polynomial potentials, the eigenfunc-
tions of the harmonic oscillator form a well-suited basis set, as matrix elements of
powers of the position operator for these states obey a simple analytical expression
resulting from (A.5)–(A.9).
In numerical calculations, one uses N number states (A.10) as a (incomplete)
basis set, thus formally approximates infinite matrices by finite ones. Thus, we
effectively diagonalize—instead of the Hamiltonian H—the truncated Hamiltonian
{
N
H{
N
, where {
N
projects on the subspace spanned by the first N basis functions
¦[n`¦
n=0...N
. This subspace, according to (A.12), (A.13), corresponds to a finite
region of phase space. Consequently, a state with energy E can be approximated
reasonably by a linear combination of the first N number states only if its corre-
sponding classical torus is contained in this region of phase space. This results in
the conditions
E <
p
2
N
2m
= Nω
HO
, (A.14)
E < V (x
N
) = −

2
0

HO
+
N
2

2
ω
4
0
16E
B
ω
2
HO
. (A.15)
To visualize the influence of a finite basis set, we have depicted some eigenvalues
of the truncated Hamiltonian {
N
H
DW
{
N
for N = 100 over the scaling parameter
ω
HO

0
of the basis functions in Fig. A.1. Outside the limits (A.14) and (A.15), the
energies depend on the scaling parameter, thus their value is a numerical artefact
caused by using a finite basis set. The numerical computations in Chapter 6 were
performed using number states with an oscillator frequency
ω
HO
= ω
0


0
16E
B

1/3
, (A.16)
and N was chosen according to the required numerical precision.
A.2 Coherent states 83
10
-1
2 5 10
0
2 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
ω
HO

0
E
/
¯h
ω
0
Figure A.1: Some eigenval-
ues of the truncated Hamil-
tonian P
N
H
DW
P
N
for N =
100 and D = 4 (full lines).
The broken lines give the lim-
its of convergence according
to (A.14) and (A.15).
A.2 Coherent states
Due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
∆x∆p ≥

2
(A.17)
a quantum-mechanical state cannot be localized in phase space with arbitrary pre-
cision, as would be possible in classical mechanics. The coherent states (or Glauber
states) [128, 129]
[z` = e
za
+
−z

a
[0`, z ∈ C (A.18)
obey
'z[x[z` =

2

HO
Re z, 'z[∆x
2
[z` =

2mω
HO
, (A.19)
'z[p[z` =

2mω
HO
Imz, 'z[∆p
2
[z` =

HO
2
. (A.20)
Thus according to (A.17), they have minimal uncertainty and approximate a point
in phase space at best.
A.3 Quasiprobabilities
The unique representation of a density operator as a phase-space function is closely
related to the question on quasi-classical states. The most prominent example from
a variety of possibilities [130–134] is the s-parameterized quasiprobability or Cahill-
Glauber distribution [135]
W
s
(x, p) =
1

2

e


−z

ξ
χ
s
(ξ), (A.21)
84 The harmonic oscillator
χ
s
(ξ) = tr

e
ξa
+
−ξ

a+sξ

ξ/2

¸
, s ∈ [−1, 1], (A.22)
z = x


HO
2
+ ip

1
2mω
HO
. (A.23)
It includes the Wigner and the Husimi function as limiting cases. The integration
in (A.21) runs over real and imaginary part of ξ. In general, W
s
may also assume
negative values and for positive s may even be singular—thus a strict probabilistic
interpretation is not possible. Quasi-probabilities are used for the calculation of
expectation values alike classical phase-space distributions. Thereby the operator
ordering is fixed by the parameter s as the s-ordered product
¸
(a
+
)
n
a
m
¸
s
=


∂z

n



∂z

m
exp

za
+
−z

a +
s
2
z

z

z

=z=0
, (A.24)
which gives an interpolation between normal ordering (a
+
)
n
a
m
= ¦(a
+
)
n
a
m
¦
1
and
anti-normal ordering a
m
(a
+
)
n
= ¦(a
+
)
n
a
m
¦
−1
of creation and annihilation operators
[136].
For each operator acting on the density matrix , there exists a corresponding
differential operator acting on W
s
(x, p) [137]. From Eq. (A.21) with Eq. (A.22) we
obtain the relations
x ←→

x +
i
2

p

s
2mω
HO

x

W
s
(x, p), (A.25)
p ←→

p −
i
2

x

smω
HO
2

p

W
s
(x, p), (A.26)
x ←→

x −
i
2

p

s
2mω
HO

x

W
s
(x, p), (A.27)
p ←→

p +
i
2

x

smω
HO
2

p

W
s
(x, p). (A.28)
For powers of x and p they hold iteratively. It is obvious from these operator cor-
respondences that, except for the case s = 0, the s-parameterized quasiprobability
depends on the choice of the oscillator frequency ω
HO
.
A.3.1 Wigner function
For s = 0, W
s
results in the Wigner function [130, 133]
W(x, p) =
1

dx

e
ipx

/
'x +x

/2[[x −x

/2` = W
0
(x, p). (A.29)
It is independent of the oscillator frequency ω
HO
, thus basis independent. In nu-
merical computations of Wigner functions or their reconstruction from experimental
data, a negative s with small absolute value is often used to ensure numerical con-
vergence.
A.3 Quasiprobabilities 85
A.3.2 Husimi function and Wehrl entropy
The Husimi function is defined as the expectation value of the density operator with
coherent states [131] and coincides with the quasiprobability W
−1
,
Q(x, p) =
1

'z[[z` = W
−1
(x, p), (A.30)
where z(x, p) is given by (A.23). It is non-negative, due to the positivity of the
density operator [133]. The fact that already the diagonal matrix elements hold the
full information on the quantum state reflects the over-completeness of the coherent
states [128].
In a semiclassical limit, the Husimi function of a state is localized in phase space
along the corresponding Lagrangian manifolds. Thus, in case of regular classical
dynamics, the Husimi function of an eigenstate is located on the corresponding
quantizing torus; for the case of irregular classical dynamics, it is smeared out over
the whole chaotic layer [5]. This allows for a classification of single eigenstates
as regular or chaotic if the classical dynamics is mixed. For driven systems, the
respective assignment of Floquet states to regions in classical phase space holds
true [120].
For a classification of quantum mechanical states according to their phase-space
structure, it is desirable to have a direct measure for localization properties. One
possibility is provided by the Wehrl entropy S
Q
of the state which is defined as the
entropy of the corresponding Husimi function [120, 124],
S
Q
= −

dxdp Q(x, p) ln[2πQ(x, p)]. (A.31)
The number of minimum uncertainty states occupied by the Husimi function is
approximately given by exp(S
Q
), thus the occupied phase-space area is 2π exp(S
Q
).
Consequently, for a coherent state the Wehrl entropy assumes its minimum value
S
Q
min
= 1.
86
B The density operator
An observer, who is not fully aware of the state of a system, can at best describe it
by a density operator [138]. Its eigenvalues p
i
give the probability for the system
to reside in the corresponding eigenstate. Therefore, the eigenvalues of a proper
density operator have to suffice the intrinsic restrictions of probabilities,
0 ≤ p
i
≤ 1, (B.1)
¸
i
p
i
= tr = 1, (B.2)
i.e. positivity and a total probability which equals unity. In the limit of a pure state,
where the full quantum-mechanical information (i.e. the wavefunction) is known, one
of the probabilities p
i
equals unity, all the others vanish.
B.1 Lindblad form
The conditions on a physically meaningful density operator, Eqs. (B.1) and (B.2),
as well as its Hermitecity, of course, have to be conserved during time evolution.
Lindblad proved [93] that a Markovian master equation with constant coefficients
meets this requirement, thus generates a so-called completely positive dynamical
semigroup, if and only if it is of the form
˙ = −
i

[H, ] +
¸
i
γ
i

2Q
i
Q

i
−Q

i
Q
i
−Q

i
Q
i

. (B.3)
The operators Q
i
, which are introduced phenomenologically, induce dissipative tran-
sitions of the system.
It turned out, however, that many Markovian master equations occurring in the
literature [11, 70, 71, 139, 140], including our master equation (4.3), are not of this
so-called Lindblad form, thus they do not ensure positivity of an arbitrary density
operator at any future time. This apparent contradiction was resolved only recently:
A master equation of the form (4.3) violates positivity only for initial conditions
that do not meet the requirements under which it has been derived. Namely, if the
system is prepared with a position variance ∆x smaller than the thermal de Broglie
wavelength,
∆x < λ
dB
= /

4mk
B
T, (B.4)
positivity will be violated until ∆x becomes larger than λ
dB
[68–71, 141]. Thus,
dissipative effects on a length scale l < λ
dB
cannot be described selfconsistently
within a Markov approximation.
88 The density operator
B.2 Coherence and entropy
The lack of information inherent in a density operator can be measured by the
Shannon entropy
S = −
¸
i
p
i
ln p
i
= −tr( ln ). (B.5)
Consequently, for a pure state S = 0. This definition agrees, besides a factor k
B
,
with the entropy known from statistical thermodynamics. The entropy also gives a
proper measure for the coherence of a system, thus for the ability to observe interfer-
ence effects. However, it has the disadvantage that its direct numerical computation
requires diagonalization of the density operator. A numerically less expensive, re-
lated quantity is the “linearized entropy”
S
lin
= tr (1 −) = 1 −tr
2
, (B.6)
introduced by Zurek et al. [142]. It arises formally by Taylor expansion of (B.5) if
describes an almost pure state. In the case of many incoherently populated states,
all p
i
<1 and both entropies differ drastically. Nevertheless, the related quantity
C = tr
2
= 1 −S
lin
(B.7)
is a proper measure for the coherence of a density operator. Its value approximately
gives the reciprocal of the number of incoherently populated states and equals unity
if the system resides in a pure state.
C
Solution of the
Fokker-Planck equation
In this appendix, we solve the equation of motion (5.55) for the Wigner function by
the method of characteristics. We write W(x, p, t) as
W(x, p, t) =

dXdP e
ixX+ipP
e
S(X,P,t)
. (C.1)
By this ansatz, equation (5.55) is transformed to the quasilinear partial differential
equation
T(X, S
X
, P, S
P
, t, S
t
) = 0 (C.2)
for S(X, P, t), where T is given by
T = S
t
−XS
P
+γPS
P

2
(t)PS
X
+γD
pp
P
2
+γD
xp
XP. (C.3)
We denote the partial derivatives of S(X, P, t) with respect to X, P, and t by S
X
,
S
P
, and S
t
, respectively.
The characteristic equations [95] of (C.2) are given by
˙
t =
∂T
∂S
t
= 1, (C.4)
˙
X =
∂T
∂S
X
= ω
2
(t)P, (C.5)
˙
P =
∂T
∂S
P
= γP −X, (C.6)
˙
S
X
= −
∂T
∂X
= S
P
−γD
xp
P, (C.7)
˙
S
P
= −
∂T
∂P
= −γS
P
−ω
2
(t)S
X
−2γD
pp
P −γD
xp
X, (C.8)
˙
S
t
= −
∂T
∂t
= −

2
(t)
dt
PS
X
, (C.9)
whose solutions give the characteristics of the partial differential equation (C.2).
Equation (C.4) signifies that the characteristics can be parameterized by the
time t. Instead of equation (C.9), we will use (C.2) to get an expression for S
t
. So
we only have to solve (C.5)–(C.8). The solutions of these equations can be traced
back to the fundamental solutions f
i
(t) of the classical equation of motion (5.3).
From (C.5) and (C.6), we find
¨
P −γ
˙
P +ω
2
(t)P = 0. (C.10)
90 Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation
This is simply the classical equation of motion with a negative damping constant.
Therefore the solutions for X and P read
P(t) = −c
1+
e
γt
f
2
(t) +c
2+
e
γt
f
1
(t), (C.11)
X(t) = c
1+
e
γt
˙
f
2
(t) −c
2+
e
γt
˙
f
1
(t), (C.12)
where c
i+
denote integration constants.
From (C.7) and (C.8) we find for S
X
¨
S
X

˙
S
X

2
(t)S
X
= −2γDP, (C.13)
which is the classical equation of motion with an inhomogeneity. The effective
diffusion constant D is given by
D = D
pp
+γD
xp
. (C.14)
With the integration constants c
i−
, we integrate (C.13) with the Green function
(5.10) to
S
X
(t) = c
1−
f
1
(t) +c
2−
f
2
(t) −2γD

t
t
0
dt

G(t, t

)P(t

), (C.15)
and get by use of (C.7)
S
P
(t) = c
1−
˙
f
1
(t) +c
2−
˙
f
2
(t) −2γD

t
t
0
dt

∂G(t, t

)
∂t
P(t

) +γD
xp
P(t). (C.16)
By inserting
P(t

) = G(t, t

)X(t) +
∂G(t, t

)
∂t
P(t), (C.17)
obtained from Eqs. (C.11) and (C.12), we get a result for S
X
and S
P
that only
depends on the endpoints of the characteristics. Now together with Eq. (C.2), we
have an expression for grad S(X, P, t) = (S
X
, S
P
, S
t
), which can be integrated to
S(X, P, t) =

c
1−
f
1
(t) +c
2−
f
2
(t)

X +

c
1−
˙
f
1
(t) +c
2−
˙
f
2
(t)

P

1
2
σ
xx
(t, t
0
)X
2
−σ
xp
(t, t
0
)XP −
1
2
σ
pp
(t, t
0
)P
2
, (C.18)
with
σ
xx
(t, t
0
) = 2γD

t
t
0
dt

[G(t, t

)]
2
, (C.19)
σ
xp
(t, t
0
) = 2γD

t
t
0
dt

G(t, t

)

∂t
G(t, t

), (C.20)
σ
pp
(t, t
0
) = −γD
xp
+ 2γD

t
t
0
dt

¸

∂t
G(t, t

)

2
. (C.21)
By inserting S(X, P, t) into (C.1), we find a time-dependent solution for the Wigner
function W(x, p, t).
Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation 91
The integration constants c

are constant along the characteristics by construc-
tion. Thus, the Poisson brackets between the expressions c

(X, S
X
, P, S
P
, t) and
T(X, S
X
, P, S
P
, t, S
t
) vanish [95]. By transforming back from Fourier space to real
space, one finds that the operators ˆ c

≡ c

(−i∂
x
, −ix, −i∂
p
, −ip, t) commute with
the operator ∂
t
− L(t), whose nullspace is the solution of the equation of motion.
Therefore, the ˆ c

are shift operators in the subspace of solutions, i.e., if W(x, p, t)
is a solution of (5.55), then ˆ c

W(x, p, t) is also a solution. For the ˆ c

we find
ˆ c
1+
=
1
2

f
1
(t)∂
x
+
˙
f
1
(t)∂
p

, (C.22)
ˆ c
2+
=
1
2

f
2
(t)∂
x
+
˙
f
2
(t)∂
p

, (C.23)
ˆ c
1−
= i
˙
f
2
(t)

x +σ
xx
(t, t
0
)∂
x

xp
(t, t
0
)∂
p

−if
2
(t)

p +σ
xp
(t, t
0
)∂
x

pp
(t, t
0
)∂
p

, (C.24)
ˆ c
2−
= −i
˙
f
1
(t)

x +σ
xx
(t, t
0
)∂
x

xp
(t, t
0
)∂
p

+ if
1
(t)

p +σ
xp
(t, t
0
)∂
x

pp
(t, t
0
)∂
p

. (C.25)
Note that because of the linear structure of the characteristic equations, there is
no ambiguity concerning the ordering of operators. The operators Q
i+
(t), used in
Section 5.4.2 to construct the Floquet solutions of the Fokker-Planck equation, are
proportional to the ˆ c
i+
.
92
References
[1] G. Casati, B. V. Chirikov, F. M. Izrailev, and J. Ford, in Stochastic Behavior
in Classical and Quantum Hamiltonian Systems, Vol. 93 of Lecture Notes in
Physics, edited by G. Casati and J. Ford (Springer, Berlin, 1979), p. 334.
[2] T. Dittrich and R. Graham, Long Time Behavior in the Quantized Standard
Map with Dissipation, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 200, 363 (1990).
[3] H.-G. Schuster, Deterministic chaos: an introduction, 2nd ed. (VCH, Wein-
heim, 1989).
[4] E. Heller, Bound-State Eigenfunctions of Classically Chaotic Hamiltonian Sys-
tems: Scars of Periodic Orbits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1515 (1984).
[5] K. Takahashi and N. Saitˆ o, Chaos and Husimi Distribution Function in Quan-
tum Mechanics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 645 (1985).
[6] F. J. Dyson, The Threefold Way: Algebraic Structure of Symmetry Groups
and Ensembles in Quantum Mechanics, J. Math. Phys. 3, 1199 (1962).
[7] M. V. Berry and M. Robnik, Semiclassical level spacings when regular and
chaotic orbits coexist, J. Phys. A 17, 2413 (1984).
[8] M. L. Mehta, Random matrices and the statistical theory of energy levels (Aca-
demic Press, New York, 1967).
[9] F. Hund, Zur Deutung der Molekelspektren III: Bemerkungen ¨ uber das
Schwingungs- und Rotationsspektrum bei Molekeln mit mehr als zwei Kernen,
Z. Phys. 43, 805 (1927).
[10] F. Grossmann, T. Dittrich, P. Jung, and P. H¨ anggi, Coherent Destruction of
Tunneling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 516 (1991).
[11] A. O. Caldeira and A. L. Leggett, Quantum Tunnelling in a Dissipative Sys-
tem, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 149, 374 (1983).
[12] M. Grifoni and P. H¨ anggi, Driven Quantum Tunneling, Phys. Rep. 304, 219
(1998).
[13] O. Bohigas, S. Tomsovic, and D. Ullmo, Dynamical quasidegeneracies and
separation of regular and irregular quantum levels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1479
(1990).
[14] O. Bohigas, S. Tomsovic, and D. Ullmo, Classical transport effects on chaotic
levels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 5 (1990).
[15] S. Tomsovic and D. Ullmo, Chaos-assisted tunneling, Phys. Rev. E 50, 145
(1994).
[16] R. Utermann, T. Dittrich, and P. H¨ anggi, Tunneling and the Onset of Chaos
in a Driven Bistable System, Phys. Rev. E 49, 273 (1994).
[17] W. A. Lin and L. E. Ballentine, Quantum tunneling and chaos in a driven
anharmonic oscillator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2927 (1990).
94 References
[18] J. Plata and J. M. Gomez Llorente, Classical-quantum correspondence for
barrier crossing in a driven bistable potential, J. Phys. A 25, L303 (1992).
[19] V. B. Magalinski˘ı, Dynamical model in the theory of the Brownian motion,
Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 36, 1942 (1959), [Sov. Phys. JETP 9, 1381 (1959)].
[20] R. Zwanzig, Ensemble method in the theory of irreversibility, J. Chem. Phys.
33, 1338 (1960).
[21] R. P. Feynman and F. L. Vernon, The theory of a general quantum system
interacting with a linear dissipative system, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 24, 118 (1963).
[22] R. Bl¨ umel, R. Graham, L. Sirko, U. Smilansky, H. Walther, and K. Yamada,
Microwave excitation of Rydberg atoms in presence of noise, Phys. Rev. Lett.
62, 341 (1989).
[23] A. G. Fainshtein, N. L. Manakov, and L. P. Rapoport, Some general proper-
ties of quasi-energetic spectra of quantum systems in classical monochromatic
fields, J. Phys. B 11, 2561 (1978).
[24] N. L. Manakov, V. D. Ovsiannikov, and L. P. Rapoport, Atoms in a laser
field, Phys. Rep. 141, 319 (1986).
[25] T. Dittrich, P. H¨ anggi, G.-L. Ingold, B. Kramer, G. Sch¨ on, and W. Zwerger,
Quantum Transport and Dissipation (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 1998).
[26] R. Graham and R. H¨ ubner, Generalized Quasi-Energies and Floquet States for
a Dissipative System, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 234, 300 (1994).
[27] S. Kohler, T. Dittrich, and P. H¨ anggi, Floquet-Markovian description of the
parametrically driven, dissipative harmonic quantum oscillator, Phys. Rev. E
55, 300 (1997).
[28] C. Zerbe and P. H¨ anggi, Brownian parametric quantum oscillators with dissi-
pation, Phys. Rev. E 52, 1533 (1995).
[29] J. I. Cirac and P. Zoller, Quantum Computations with Cold Trapped Ions,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4091 (1995).
[30] O. Bohigas, S. Tomsovic, and D. Ullmo, Manifestations of classical phase space
structures in quantum mechanics, Phys. Rep. 223, 43 (1993).
[31] M. Latka, P. Grigolini, and B. J. West, Chaos and avoided level crossing, Phys.
Rev. E 50, 596 (1994).
[32] M. Latka, P. Grigolini, and B. J. West, Chaos-induced avoided level crossing
and tunneling, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1071 (1994).
[33] M. Latka, P. Grigolini, and B. J. West, Control of dynamical tunneling in a
bichromatically driven pendulum, Phys. Rev. E 50, R3299 (1994).
[34] S. Kohler, R. Utermann, P. H¨ anggi, and T. Dittrich, Coherent and incoherent
chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings, Phys. Rev. E 58, 7219 (1998).
[35] G. Floquet, Ann. de l’Ecole Norm. Sup. 12, 47 (1883).
References 95
[36] G. Casati and L. Molinari, “Quantum Chaos” with Time-Periodic Hamiltoni-
ans, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 98, 287 (1989).
[37] S.-I. Chu, Generalized Floquet theoretical approach to intense-field multiphoton
and nonlinear optical processes, Adv. Chem. Phys. 73, 739 (1989).
[38] J. S. Howland, Stationary Scattering Theory for Time-dependent Hamiltoni-
ans, Math. Ann. 207, 315 (1974).
[39] J. H. Shirley, Solution of the Schr¨ odinger Equation with a Hamiltonian Peri-
odic in Time, Phys. Rev. 138, B979 (1965).
[40] H. Sambe, Steady States and Quasienergies of a Quantum-Mechanical System
in an Oscillating Field, Phys. Rev. A 7, 2203 (1973).
[41] D. J. Moore, Time dependence in quantum mechanics—Floquet theory and the
Berry phase, Helv. Phys. Acta 66, 3 (1993).
[42] W. Magnus and S. Winkler, Hill’s Equation (Dover, New York, 1979).
[43] J. von Neumann, Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics (Princeton
Univ. Press, Princeton, 1955).
[44] C. Cohen-Tannoudji, J. Dupont-Roc, and G. Grynberg, Atom photon interac-
tion: basic processes and applications (Wiley, New York, 1992).
[45] H. Risken, The Fokker-Planck Equation, Vol. 18 of Springer Series in Syner-
getics (Springer, Berlin, 1984).
[46] N. Moiseyev, Time-independent scattering theory for general time-dependent
Hamiltonians, Comments At. Mol. Phys. 31, 87 (1995).
[47] U. Peskin and N. Moiseyev, The solution of the time-dependent Schr¨ odinger
equation by the (t, t

) method: Theory, computational algorithm and applica-
tions, J. Chem. Phys. 99, 4590 (1993).
[48] H. Goldstein, Classical Mechanics, 2nd ed. (Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1980).
[49] U. Weiss, Quantum Dissipative Systems, Vol. 2 of Series in Modern Condensed
Matter Physics (World Scientific, Singapore, 1993).
[50] W. H. Louisell, Quantum Statistical Properties of Radiation (Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1973).
[51] F. Haake, in Quantum Statistics in Optics and Solid-State Physics, Vol. 66
of Springer Tracts in Modern Physics, edited by G. H¨ ohler (Springer, Berlin,
1973).
[52] H. Grabert, in Projection Operator Techniques in Nonequilibrium Statistical
Mechanics, Vol. 95 of Springer Tracts in Modern Physics, edited by G. H¨ ohler
(Springer, Berlin, 1982).
[53] P. H¨ anggi, P. Talkner, and M. Borkovec, Reaction-rate theory: fifty years after
Kramers, Rev. Mod. Phys. 62, 251 (1990).
96 References
[54] H. Grabert, U. Weiss, and P. Talkner, Quantum Theory of the Damped Har-
monic Oscillator, Z. Phys. B 55, 87 (1984).
[55] P. Riseborough, P. H¨ anggi, and U. Weiss, Exact Results for a Damped Quan-
tum Mechanical Harmonic Oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 31, 471 (1985).
[56] G. A. Voth, Feynman Path Integral of Quantum Mechanical Transition-State
Theory, J. Phys. Chem. 97, 8365 (1993).
[57] D. E. Makarov and N. Makri, Control of dissipative tunnelling dynamics by
continuous wave electromagnetic fields: Localization and large-amplitude co-
herent motion, Phys. Rev. E 52, 5863 (1995).
[58] N. Makri, Stabilization of localized states in dissipative tunneling systems in-
teracting with monochromatic fields, J. Chem. Phys. 106, 2286 (1997).
[59] R. Zwanzig, Nonlinear Generalized Langevin Equations, J. Stat. Phys. 9, 215
(1973).
[60] H. Grabert, P. Schramm, and G.-L. Ingold, Quantum Brownian Motion: The
Funtional Integral Approach, Phys. Rep. 168, 115 (1988).
[61] R. Benguria and M. Kac, Quantum Langevin Equation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46,
1 (1981).
[62] A. Schmid, On a Quasiclassical Langevin Equation, J. Low Temp. Phys. 49,
609 (1982).
[63] G. W. Ford and M. Kac, On the Quantum Langevin Equation, J. Stat. Phys.
46, 803 (1987).
[64] P. H¨ anggi, Generalized Langevin Equations: A Useful Tool for the Perplexed
Modeller of Nonequilibrium Fluctuations?, in Stochastic Dynamics, Vol. 484
of Lecture Notes in Physics, edited by L. Schimansky-Geier and T. P¨ oschel
(Springer, Berlin, 1997), p. 15.
[65] R. P. Feynman and A. R. Hibbs, Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1965).
[66] L. S. Schulman, Techniques and Applications of Path Integrals (Wiley & Sons,
New York, 1981).
[67] N. Makri and D. E. Makarov, Tensor propagator for iterative quantum evolu-
tion of reduced density matrices. I. Theory, J. Chem. Phys. 102, 4600 (1995).
[68] P. Pechukas, in Proc. NATO ASI “Large-scale molecular systems”, edited by
W. Gans (Plenum Press, New York, 1991), Vol. B258, p. 123.
[69] P. Pechukas, Reduced Dynamics Need Not Be Completely Positive, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 73, 1060 (1994).
[70] L. Di´ osi, Caldeira-Leggett master equation and medium temperatures, Physica
A 199, 517 (1993).
[71] L. Di´ osi, On High-Temperature Markovian Equation for Quantum Brownian
Motion, Europhys. Lett. 22, 1 (1993).
References 97
[72] M. Grifoni, M. Sassetti, J. Stockburger, and U. Weiss, Nonlinear response of
a periodically driven damped two-state system, Phys. Rev. E 48, 3497 (1993).
[73] M. Grifoni, M. Sassetti, P. H¨ anggi, and U. Weiss, Cooperative effects in the
nonlinearly driven spin-boson system, Phys. Rev. E 52, 3596 (1995).
[74] T.-S. Ho, K. Wang, and S.-I. Chu, Floquet-Liouville supermatrix approach:
Time development of density-matrix operator and multiphoton resonance spec-
tra in intense laser fileds, Phys. Rev. A 33, 1798 (1986).
[75] R. Bl¨ umel, A. Buchleitner, R. Graham, L. Sirko, U. Smilansky, and H.
Walther, Dynamical localization in the microwave interaction of Rydberg
atoms: The influence of noise, Phys. Rev. A 44, 4521 (1991).
[76] T. Dittrich, B. Oelschl¨ agel, and P. H¨ anggi, Driven Dissipative Tunneling, Eu-
rophys. Lett. 22, 5 (1993).
[77] B. Oelschl¨ agel, T. Dittrich, and P. H¨ anggi, Damped periodically driven quan-
tum transport in bistable systems, Acta Physica Polonica B 24, 845 (1993).
[78] T. Dittrich, P. H¨ anggi, B. Oelschl¨ agel, and R. Utermann, Driven Tunneling:
New Possibilities for Coherent and Incoherent Quantum Transport, in 25 Years
of Non-Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics, Vol. 445 of Lecture Notes in Physics,
edited by J. J. Brey (Springer, Berlin, 1995), p. 269.
[79] F. Haake, Quantum Signatures of Chaos, Vol. 54 of Springer Series in Syner-
getics (Springer, Berlin, 1991).
[80] R. Graham, Global and Local Dissipation in a Quantum Map, Z. Phys. B 59,
75 (1985).
[81] V. S. Popov and A. M. Perelomov, Parametric exitation of a quantum oscil-
lator, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 55, 589 (1968), [Sov. Phys. JETP 29, 719 (1969)].
[82] V. S. Popov and A. M. Perelomov, Parametric exitation of a quantum os-
cillator II, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 57, 1684 (1969), [Sov. Phys. JETP 30, 910
(1970)].
[83] V. S. Perelomov, A. M. Popov, Group-theoretical aspects of the variable fre-
quency oscillator problem, Teor. Mat. Fiz. 1, 360 (1969).
[84] W. Paul, Electromagnetic traps for charged and neutral particles, Rev. Mod.
Phys. 62, 531 (1990).
[85] N. W. McLachlan, Theory and Applications of Mathieu Functions (Dover Pub-
lications Inc., New York, 1964).
[86] H. R. Lewis, Jr., Classical and Quantum Systems with Time-Dependent
Harmonic-Oscillator-Type Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 510, 636 (1967).
[87] H. R. Lewis, Jr. and W. B. Riesenfeld, An Exact Quantum Theory of the
Time-Dependent Harmonic Oscillator and of a Charged Particle in a Time-
Dependent Electromagnetic Field, J. Math. Phys. 10, 1458 (1969).
[88] L. S. Brown, Quantum Motion in a Paul Trap, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 527 (1991).
98 References
[89] G. Schrade, V. I. Man’ko, W. P. Schleich, and R. J. Glauber, Wigner Functions
in the Paul Trap, Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 7, 307 (1995).
[90] J. G. Hartley and J. R. Ray, Coherent States for the time-dependent harmonic
oscillator, Phys. Rev. D 25, 382 (1982).
[91] D. B. Monteoliva, B. Mirbach, and H.-J. Korsch, Global and local dynamical
invariants and quasienergy states of time-periodic Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev.
A 57, 746 (1998).
[92] I. M. Gradshteyn, I. S. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series, and Products, 5th
ed. (Academic Press, San Diego, 1994).
[93] G. Lindblad, On the Generators of Quantum Dynamical Semigroups, Com-
mun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976).
[94] P. H¨ anggi and H. Thomas, Stochastic Processes: Time Evolution, Symmetries
and Linear Response, Phys. Rep. 88, 206 (1982).
[95] E. Kamke, Differentialgleichungen, Vol. II: Partielle Differentialgleichungen,
6th ed. (Teubner, Stuttgart, 1979).
[96] L. H’walisz, P. Jung, P. H¨ anggi, P. Talkner, and L. Schimansky-Geier, Colored
noise driven systems with inertia, Z. Phys. B 77, 471 (1989).
[97] C. Zerbe, P. Jung, and P. H¨ anggi, Brownian parametric oscillators, Phys. Rev.
E 49, 3626 (1994).
[98] U. M. Titulaer, A systematic solution procedure for the Fokker-Planck equation
of a Brownian particle in the high friction case, Physica A 91, 321 (1978).
[99] W. A. Lin and L. E. Ballentine, Quantum tunneling and regular and irregular
quantum dynamics of a driven double-well oscillator, Phys. Rev. A 45, 3637
(1992).
[100] P. H¨ anggi, R. Utermann, and T. Dittrich, Tunnel Splittings and Chaotic Trans-
port in Periodically Driven Bistable Systems, Physica B 194-196, 1013 (1994).
[101] E. M. Zanardi, J. Guti´errez, and J. M. Gomez Llorente, Mixed dynamics and
tunneling, Phys. Rev. E 52, 4736 (1995).
[102] E. Doron and S. D. Frischat, Semiclassical description of tunneling in mixed
systems: Case of the annular billiard, Phys. Rev. Lett 75, 3661 (1995).
[103] S. D. Frischat and E. Doron, Dynamical tunneling in mixed systems, Phys.
Rev. E 57, 1421 (1998).
[104] F. Leyvraz and D. Ullmo, The level splitting distribution in chaos-assisted
tunneling, J. Phys. A 29, 2529 (1996).
[105] R. Roncaglia, L. Bonci, F. M. Izrailev, B. J. West, and P. Grigolini, Tunneling
versus chaos in the kicked Harper model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 802 (1994).
[106] T. Dittrich and R. Graham, Quantum Effects in the Steady State of the Dis-
sipative Standard Map, Europhys. Lett. 4, 263 (1987).
References 99
[107] F. Grossmann, P. Jung, T. Dittrich, and P. H¨ anggi, Tunneling in a Periodically
Driven Bistable System, Z. Phys. B 84, 315 (1991).
[108] A. Peres, Dynamical quasidegeneracies and quantum tunneling, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 67, 158 (1991).
[109] F. Großmann and P. H¨ anggi, Localization in a Driven Two-Level Dynamics,
Europhys. Lett. 18, 571 (1992).
[110] A. J. Lichtenberg and M. A. Liebermann, Regular and Stochastic Motion,
Vol. 38 of Applied Mathical Sciences (Springer, New York, 1983).
[111] D. F. Escande, Stochasticity in classical Hamiltonian systems: universal as-
pects, Phys. Rep. 121, 165 (1985).
[112] L. E. Reichl and W. M. Zheng, in Directions in Chaos, edited by H. B. Lin
(World Scientific, Singapore, 1987), Vol. 1, p. 17.
[113] M. Wilkinson, Tunnelling between tori in phase space, Physica D 21, 341
(1986).
[114] M. Wilkinson, Narrowly avoided crossings, J. Phys. A 20, 635 (1987).
[115] L. E. Reichl, The Transition to Chaos: In Conservative and Classical Systems:
Quantum Manifestations (Springer, New York, 1992).
[116] R. B. Shirts and W. P. Reinhardt, Approximate constants of motion for clas-
sically chaotic vibrational dynamics: Vague tori, semiclassical quantization,
and classical intramolecular energy flow, J. Chem. Phys. 77, 5204 (1982).
[117] S.-J. Chang and K.-J. Shi, Time Evolution and Eigenstates of a Quantum
Iterative System, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 269 (1985).
[118] S.-J. Chang and K.-J. Shi, Evolution and exact eigenstates of a resonant quan-
tum system, Phys. Rev. A 34, 7 (1986).
[119] B. Mirbach and H. J. Korsch, Semiclassical quantization of KAM resonances
in time-periodic systems, J. Phys. A 27, 6579 (1994).
[120] T. Gorin, H. J. Korsch, and B. Mirbach, Phase-space localization and level
spacing distributions for a driven rotor with mixed regular/chaotic dynamics,
Chem. Phys. 217, 145 (1997).
[121] F. C. Moon and G.-X. Li, The fractal dimension of the two-well potential
strange attractor, Physica D 17, 99 (1985).
[122] F. C. Moon and G.-X. Li, Fractal Basin Boundaries and Homoclinic Orbits for
Periodic Motion in a Two-Well Potential, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1439 (1985).
[123] W. Szemplinska-Stupnicka, Cross-Well Chaos and Escape Phenomena in
Driven Oscillators, Nonlinear Dynamics 3, 225 (1992).
[124] A. Wehrl, On the relation between classical and quantum-mechanical entropy,
Reps. Math. Phys. 16, 353 (1979).
100 References
[125] A. Messiah, Quantum Mechanics, 3rd ed. (Wiley & Sons, New York, 1965),
Vol. I.
[126] M. V. Berry, Semi-classical mechanics in phase space: a study of Wigner’s
function, Proc. R. Soc. A 287, 237 (1977).
[127] M. Brack and R. K. Bhaduri, Semiclassical Physics, Vol. 96 of Frontiers in
Physics (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1997).
[128] R. J. Glauber, Coherent and Incoherent States of a Radiation Field, Phys.
Rev. 131, 2766 (1963).
[129] E. C. G. Sudarshan, Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical
description of statistical light beams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 277 (1963).
[130] E. P. Wigner, On the Quantum Correction for Thermodynamic Equilibrium,
Phys. Rev. 40, 749 (1932).
[131] K. Husimi, Proc. Phys. Math. Soc. Japan 22, 264 (1940).
[132] P. J. Drummond and C. W. Gardiner, Generalised P-representations in quan-
tum optics, J. Phys. A 13, 2353 (1980).
[133] M. Hillery, R. F. O’Connell, M. Scully, and E. P. Wigner, Distribution Func-
tions in Physics: Fundamentals, Phys. Rep. 106, 121 (1984).
[134] C. W. Gardiner, Handbook of Stochastic Methods, Vol. 13 of Springer Series
in Synergetics, 2nd ed. (Springer, Berlin, 1985).
[135] K. E. Cahill and R. J. Glauber, Density Operators and Quasiprobability Dis-
tributions, Phys. Rev. 177, 1883 (1969).
[136] K. E. Cahill and R. J. Glauber, Ordered Expansions in Boson Amplitude Op-
erators, Phys. Rev. 177, 1857 (1969).
[137] H. Weyl, Quantenmechanik und Gruppentheorie, Z. Phys. 46, 1 (1927).
[138] E. Fick, Einf¨ uhrung in die Grundlagen der Quantentheorie, 6th ed. (Aula,
Wiesbaden, 1988).
[139] R. Alicki and K. Lendi, in Quantum Dynamical Semigroups and Applications,
Vol. 286 of Lecture Notes in Physics, edited by W. Beiglb¨ ock (Springer, Berlin,
1987).
[140] P. Talkner, The Failure of the Quantum Regression Hypothesis, Ann. Phys.
(N.Y.) 167, 390 (1986), see Appendix C therein.
[141] V. Ambegaokar, Quantum Brownian Motion and its Classical Limit, Berichte
der Bunsengesellschaft 95, 400 (1991).
[142] W. H. Zurek, S. Habib, and J. P. Paz, Coherent states via decoherence, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 70, 1187 (1993).
Acknowledgment
First, I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Peter H¨ anggi and Prof. Dr. Thomas Dittrich
for accepting me as a Doktorand and for giving me the opportunity to work on an
intriguing project. I gained a lot from their experience. I’m grateful to Thomas also
for collaborating with me, even while staying at several remote places all over the
world.
Christine Zerbe provided the numerical code for the exact solution of the dissipative,
parametrically driven harmonic oscillator.
During the time I spent in Augsburg, I enjoyed many discussions on dissipative quan-
tum mechanics and driven quantum systems with Milena Grifoni, Ludwig Hartmann,
Gert-Ludwig Ingold, Michael Thorwart, Ralf Utermann, and Dietmar Weinmann.
Especially Gert has always been a competent and interested partner for discussions
and questions during his Teerunde.
Ralf Utermann not only built up a great computer environment, but also kept it
(mostly :-) well tuned. With him, Peter Schmitteckert, and Andr´e Wobst, I had
lots of fruitful discussions about efficient computing and object-oriented program-
ming.
The members of the groups Theoretische Physik I and Theoretische Physik II—
present and former ones—provided a stimulating and pleasant working atmosphere.
Thomas Dittrich, Gert-Ludwig Ingold, and Sonja Thunnessen were of indispensible
help in proofreading and improving the English of this thesis.
Last, but not least, I’m grateful to the DFG-Schwerpunkt “Zeitabh¨ angige Ph¨ ano-
mene und Methoden in Quantensystemen der Physik und Chemie” for founding my
position at the Universit¨ at Augsburg from September ’95 to February ’99 under
grant no. Di 511/1 and Di 511/2 as well as for the possibility to participate in
conferences in Freiburg, Berlin, Dresden, W¨ urzburg, and Haifa.

Erster Berichter: Prof. Dr. Peter H¨nggi a Zweiter Berichter: Prof. Dr. Thomas Dittrich Tag der m¨ ndlichen Pr¨ fung: 5. M¨rz 1999 u u a

Contents
1 Introduction 2 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory 2.1 Discrete time-translation and Floquet ansatz . 2.2 Composite Hilbert space . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Properties of Floquet states . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 The propagator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 Numerical computation of Floquet states . . . 2.5.1 Floquet-matrix methods . . . . . . . . 2.5.2 Propagator methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 5 7 9 11 11 12 12 15 15 16 18 20 23 23 24 25 25 27 28 31 31 34 36 38 39 40 41 43 43

3 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation 3.1 The system-bath model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Quantum Langevin equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Influence functional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Markovian master equation . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory 4.1 Simple inclusion of the driving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 An improved Markovian master equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Decomposition into Floquet basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1 Matrix elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.2 Rotating-wave approximation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 The dissipative quantum map and its numerical implementation 5 The 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 parametrically driven harmonic oscillator The model and its classical dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . Floquet states in stable regimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Floquet-Markov description in full RWA . . . . . . . . . . Basis-independent description beyond RWA . . . . . . . . 5.4.1 Wigner representation and Fokker-Planck equation 5.4.2 Wigner-Floquet solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.3 Influence of the driving on the master equation . . 5.5 Asymptotics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5.1 The conservative limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .2 Tunneling.1 Classical attractor . . . . 6. . .3 harmonic oscillator Number states as a basis set . .1 Lindblad form . . . .3 Asymptotic state . 48 . . . . . .1 Three-level crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ii 5. . . . . . . 6. . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 5. . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . .7 Contents 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Coherence and entropy . . . . . Coherent states . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . 51 52 53 55 56 58 58 65 67 72 72 75 79 . . 6. . . . . . driving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Husimi function and Wehrl entropy B The density operator 87 B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 A. . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. . . . . .3 The onset of chaos . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 82 83 83 84 85 6 The harmonically driven double-well potential 6. . . . . 7 Summary and outlook A The A. . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . .3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . .2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . A. . . . . Quasiprobabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 Wigner function . . . . .2 Dissipative chaos-assisted tunneling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Quantum attractor . . . . . . . . . . and dissipation . .1 The model . 45 Conclusion . . . .5. . . . . . . . .1 Symmetries . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . 87 B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 C Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation References Acknowledgment 89 93 101 . .2. . .1. . . . .2. . . . .1 A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . .2 The high-temperature limit . .

g. scars along unstable periodic orbits in the wave functions [4]. after which the quantum dynamics becomes quasiperiodic and thus. the transition from regular motion to chaos is most clearly visible in the change of the phase-space structure: With increasing nonlinearity. the classical dynamics leaves in the corresponding quantum system. A time-dependent external field acting on . A reason may be the fact that by including dissipation. the position-momentum uncertainty does not allow for the arbitrarily fine classical phase-space structures and results in coarse-graining over an area which is given by Planck’s quantum of action. restores the characteristics of classical features at least to some extent [2]. chaotic dynamics is characterized by a sensitive dependence on the initial conditions: Neighboring phase-space points start to diverge exponentially in time and a completely deterministic system evolves in a practically diffusive manner on a chaotic sea [3]. In classical Hamiltonian systems. its signatures like. since one has to deal with density matrices instead of wave functions. the coherent transport through a potential barrier. Another characteristic quantum feature is the discreteness of the energy levels in bounded systems. any disruption of coherence. In complex systems. While the motion along regular tori is stable and predictable for long times. While the mutual influence of quantum coherence and classical chaos has been an extensive field of research since many years. In the fully chaotic case. the additional effects caused by coupling the chaotic system to an environment. A generic setting for the observation of tunneling is a symmetric bistable potential whose wells are separated by a static energy barrier.. On a quantum level. the eigenenergies are anticorrelated and the inverse of their mean spacing defines a time scale.1 Introduction The interplay of classical chaos and dissipation in a quantum system bears interesting effects at the border between classical and quantum mechanics like. the suppression of classical chaos by quantum interference [1] or its restauration by dissipation [2]. Thus. eigenenergies are effectively random numbers whose statistical properties depend on the integrability of the corresponding classical dynamics [6–8]. e. One of the most intriguing quantum effects is tunneling. e. at most.. the so-called break time. or the centering of Husimi functions on classical manifolds [5].g. classical chaos is suppressed [1]. the computational effort grows drastically. It was originally proposed by Hund [9] to explain the ammonium spectrum and studied since then in various modifications. have been studied only rarely. like it occurs due to the coupling to an environment. regular tori start to dissolve in a chaotic layer which grows in size until it covers the whole phase space. Therefore. namely dissipation and decoherence. This suppression of chaos relies on the perfect coherence of a superposition which remains for arbitrary long times.

for the description of strongly driven. the simplification brought about by the Markovian description is achieved only at the expense of accuracy. 21]. Probably the first proof that such a system-bath scheme results in dissipative quantum mechanics was given by Magalinski˘ [19] for a harmonic oscillator. The small but finite overlap of the tunnel doublets with the chaotic states. Using a perturbative approach. an external driving can modify the tunnel rate by orders of magnitude or even bring tunneling to a complete standstill [10]. quantum optics. do not commute. nonlinear systems subject to weak dissipation. 12]. Master equations of this kind have been applied to various problems in solid state physics. Thus. As soon as the chaotic layer grows in size and attains a significant overlap with the tunnel doublets. like harmonic potentials or two-level systems—the investigation of dissipative systems with complex dynamics requires to fall back to the weak-coupling regime. 27]. even if its effect is barely visible in the classical phase space. Tunneling is particularly sensitive to any disruption of coherence—in presence of dissipation it becomes a transient effect that fades out on a finite time scale [11. and chemistry. While the Floquet formalism is exact and essentially amounts to using an optimal representation for the treatment of time-periodic problems [23–25]. Here.. it is desirable to combine a Markovian approach to quantum dissipation.2 Introduction such a system may entail dramatic consequences for the quantum dynamics. consistent with the fundamental laws of quantum mechanics. Zwanzig ı [20] derived from this model a Markovian master equation for a general classical system subject to weak dissipation. They are apparent already in the classical phase space since chaos comes into play and the separatrix which encloses the wells is replaced by a chaotic layer. However. the tunnel rates—the essence of chaos-assisted tunneling [13–15].e. rather than by a static barrier. leading to a master equation for the density operator. we will implement a Markovian approach to quan- . consequently. which enabled studying dissipative quantum systems. with states which are localized in the chaotic layer. typically increases the tunnel splittings and. the tunnel splittings become of the order of the mean level spacing [16] and tunneling is replaced by chaotic diffusion [16–18]. Depending on the driving amplitude and frequency. The most successful approach to dissipation in quantum mechanics. Later. Within the present work. a subtle technical difficulty lies in the fact that the truncation of the long-time memory introduced by the bath. beyond a weak-coupling limit. Driving the double-well potential with a frequency near the classical resonances results in even more significant consequences. we therefore observe chaotic tunneling—coherent transport between regular islands which are separated by a chaotic layer. In the corresponding quantum system. and the inclusion of the driving. Caldeira and Leggett eliminated the bath exactly [11. i. This implies that the result of the Markov approximation depends on whether the driving is considered in its derivation or not [26. even a partially analytical solution of the resulting path-integral expression is only feasible for the simplest systems. with the Floquet formalism that allows to treat time-periodic forces of arbitrary strength and frequency [22]. is based on the coupling of the conservative system to external degrees of freedom.

A number of merely technical issues is deferred to the appendix. will be used as a working model for the investigation of chaotic tunneling in presence of dissipation. Recent studies of non-dissipative chaotic tunneling suggest that tunneling is accelerated by the influence of chaotic states. These traps have gained new interest very recently. Within this Floquet-Markov approach. we expect to observe a novel dissipative tunnel scenario which is on the one hand richer than the conservative dynamics and on the other hand substantially different from the familiar two-state tunneling. Parts of this thesis have already been published in Refs. the loss of coherence once the computation has started. besides the preparation of the ground state. This thesis is organized as follows: In Chapter 2 we give an introduction to Floquet theory for quantum systems with periodic time-dependence. Thereby the main obstacle is. all approximative steps can be reliably checked since an exact solution is at hand [28]. for each of which we have. respectively. replacing a doublet structure by a three-level dynamics [30–33]. in turn. Besides being an exactly solvable model with yet nontrivial dynamics. couples these states indirectly to all other states of the system and. since it describes the motion of an ion in a Paul trap. A brief review of the system-bath model for quantum dissipation and a derivation of a Markovian master equation is provided in Chapter 3 and combined with Floquet theory in Chapter 4 to obtain a Markovian description of periodically driven quantum systems subject to weak dissipation. this system is interesting in its own right. will serve predominantly to test different approximation schemes for the Floquet-Markov master equation and to study the modification of its dissipative part brought about by the driving. For this linear system. thus. since they form the central system in a scheme for a quantum computer [29] whose experimental realization is currently attempted. 34]. . The bath. one central question in mind: The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator . Chapter 7 serves to summarize the main results. besides other interesting aspects. a system which exhibits complex nonlinear dynamics. we investigate the dynamics of the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator and the driven doublewell potential in Chapters 5 and 6. [27. The harmonically driven quartic double-well potential .Introduction 3 tum dissipation based on the Floquet formalism to the investigation of two different systems.

4 .

also eigenfunctions o of the symmetry operator [38]. One-dimensional driven systems also play an important role as models for (quantum) chaos: Their “one and a half degrees of freedom” represent the minimal requirement for non-integrable dynamics [36]. In this chapter we give an introduction to Floquet theory for quantum systems with periodic time dependence [12. H(t) = H(t + T ). i. the field is in a coherent state with large mean photon number and. This implies that an explicit time dependence of the Hamiltonian serves as a substitute for a canonical degree of freedom and raised interest in a theory for quantum systems with explicit periodic time dependence. thus. can be described adequately by its expectation value. 37]. commutes with the operator H(t) − i ∂t . Thus. thus an extension of Floquet theory [35] from classical to quantum mechanics. In quantum mechanics.2) the related symmetry operation is a discrete time translation by one period of the driving. given by a function harmonic in time.e. Thus. but the back-action of the system on the field is negligible. the influence of the field on the system is typically so strong that a treatment beyond perturbation theory becomes necessary. For a Hamiltonian with T -periodic time dependence. the solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation are.2 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory Interactions of quantum systems with strong laser fields are characterized by two properties of the field: On the one hand. where we put strong focus on the properties of Floquet states and numerical methods which we use in subsequent chapters.1 Discrete time-translation and Floquet ansatz To reduce the complexity of a physical system. T = 2π . (2. Ω (2. its symmetries are analyzed to obtain a proper ansatz for the symmetry-reduced solutions. 2.. besides a time-dependent phase factor.3) . On the other hand. 23–25. 36. they exemplify the simplest quantum systems with chaotic classical counterpart. ST : t → t + T. symmetry is expressed by an operator S which leaves the Schr¨dinger equation o H(t) − i ∂ ∂t |ψ(t) = 0 (2.1) invariant.

the eigenvalues of S are pure phase factors and we may assume for an eigenfunction |ψ(t) the eigenvalue exp(−iθ). whereas the long-time dynamics is governed by the phase factors exp(−i α t/ ). We emphasize that the T -periodic time-dependence of the Floquet states is only relevant for the dynamics within a period of the driving. ∂t (2.. a general solution of the Schr¨dinger equation (2. Inserting (2. The Floquet states |φα (t) are.10) is one of the main tasks in dealing with periodically time-dependent systems. there exists a complete set {|ψα (t) } of solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation which have Floquet structure.11) (2. |φα (t) = |φα (t + T ) . By inserting this eigenvalue equation into the ansatz |ψ(t) = e−i t/ |φ(t) .4) However.1) is given by a supero position of many Floquet states.8) = θ/T. . (2. they are of the form |ψα (t) = e−i α t/ |φα (t) .6) which means that |φ(t) is periodic in time. the determination of the Floquet states from (2. The α have the dimension o energy and in periodically driven systems play a role analogous to the eigenenergies in time-independent systems.e.5).7) (2.5) (2. 40] H(t)|φ(t) = |φ(t) with the Hermitian Floquet Hamiltonian [40] H(t) = H(t) − i ∂ . they are called quasienergies. (2. alike the Hamiltonian. Thus for a system which obeys discrete time-translational symmetry. in contrast to the |ψα (t) .6 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory As symmetry operations have to conserve the norm of any wavefunction.10) Technically. ST |ψ(t) = |ψ(t + T ) = e−iθ |ψ(t) . 39. θ ∈ R. we obtain the condition |φ(t) = |φ(t + T ) . (2. not solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation. o i. (2. |ψ(t) = uα e−i α t/ |φα (t) .9) α and is in general not of the form (2. In analogy to the quasimomentum of electrons in spatially periodic systems.5) into the Schr¨dinger equation yields the eigenvalue equation for o the Floquet states [23.

13) by (2. R is the space of square-integrable functions [43].16) ϕ∗ (t) ϕn (t ) = δT (t − t ). In these cases. According to (2. which describes the system’s degrees of freedom. thus the Floquet indices may be complex. we define the vectors |n ϕn (t) = t|n T . ϕn ) = δn. For a bounded particle moving in a potential.2 Composite Hilbert space 7 From a group-theoretical point of view. as well as the Floquet states |φα (t) . The inner product (2. the Floquet states are elements of the space of T -periodic functions. are elements of a Hilbert space R.2. Solutions of Floquet structure are found for dynamical systems that can be described by differential equations with periodically time-dependent coefficients [35. φ|φ = 1 T T dt φ(t)|φ (t) . In many cases. The basis set {ϕn } is orthonormalized and complete [43].10) is in general non-Hermitian.15) (2.8). 2. (2. We also use this fact for the solution of classical equations of motion and for the solution of Fokker-Planck equations in subsequent chapters. To avoid confusion with elements of configuration space R.12) (f. 1 T n (2.14) For a basis independent notation. each Floquet state |φα (t) belongs to an irreducible representation of an Abelian group.2 Composite Hilbert space The state |ψ(t) of a system. This exponent allows for an interpretation as a Berry phase [41].17) . (ϕn . We combine the periodic time dependence of the Floquet states with their spatial degrees of freedom and interpret them as elements of a composite Hilbert space R ⊗ T . Ω= 2π . R can be approximated by a Hilbert space with finite dimension. the eigenvalue equation which corresponds to (2. 42]. It is possible to describe the time dependence of the Floquet states within the framework of a Hilbert space theory. we mark these vectors by an index T . characterized by the Floquet exponent θα = α T / [40].12) is extended accordingly. T (2.n . however. 0 (2. denoted by T [40]. g) = T 0 and a set of orthonormalized basis functions reads [43] ϕn (t) = e−inΩt . T n ∈ Z. n where δT denotes the T -periodic delta function. An inner product on T is defined by 1 T dt f ∗ (t) g(t).

The Fourier modes in this context are also called Floquet channels.24) . 40].n + µx n0 (δn.20) n 1 = T dt einΩt |φα (t) .23) (2. We replace the operators a and a+ by their expectation values (see Appendix A) and obtain a driven system with a time-dependent Hamiltonian.n . √ |z = | n0 exp(iΩt) . can be applied accordingly [39.18) By this introduction of a Hilbert space structure for the time dependence.n +1 + δn.13) is equivalent to its representation as a Fourier series.8 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory The elements of this composite Hilbert space. |φα (t) = |cα.22) Under this condition. Semiclassical interpretation of the Floquet states A time-dependent Hamiltonian is usually obtained from a time-independent theory by substituting a part of the system by its classical limit [25]. like e.21) We assume in the semiclassical limit that the state of the laser field is a coherent one (see Appendix A) and that it possesses a very high mean photon number.n −1 ) + Ω(n0 − n)δn. The corresponding Floquet Hamiltonian reads √ H = HS + 2µx n0 cos(Ωt) + Ωn0 − i ∂t . We restrict ourselves to the case of a linearly coupled driving field with cosine shape. (2. t|φ ≡ |φ(t) = |φ(t + T ) . the description of the system can be simplified in two ways: 1.g. The methods known for the computation of energy eigenstates of a time-independent Hamiltonian. T 0 (2. (2. This allows for a semiclassical interpretation of the vectors |n T and the Floquet states [40]. which couples via dipole interaction to a single-mode laser with frequency Ω.n . A system S.” are T -periodic states.19) (2. decomposed into the basis set {|n T }. n0 1.. (2. (2. perturbation theory.n = HS δn. we formally traced back the computation of Floquet states to the computation of eigenstates of a time-independent Hamiltonian with an additional degree of freedom. √ Hn. can be described by the Hamiltonian [44] H = HS + µx(a + a+ ) + Ωa+ a. written in “time representation. The decomposition of a state |φ(t) into the set of basis functions (2.n e−inΩt |cα.

We decompose the Hamiltonian H.e. H(t) |φ(t) = |φ(t) .. In the following. (2.25) If the state of the laser field is the highly exited coherent state (2.3 Properties of Floquet states Equivalent representations Assuming that |φ(t) is an eigenvector of H(t) with eigenvalue . the state obeys |φ(n) (t) = einΩt |φ(t) H(t) |φ(n) (t) = (H(t) + ∂t ) einΩt |φ(t) = ( + n Ω) einΩt |φ(t) . (2.28) (2.30) The respective solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation. The prefactors n and n + 1 √ −1/2 in this limit become n0 + O(n0 ). They all describe the same physical state. whose quasienergies lie within a single Brillouin zone ωBZ ≤ < (ωBZ + Ω). into the number states (A.n −1 + Ωn δn.26) (2.31) (2.24) agrees—besides a shift in the index—with the Hamiltonian (2. Therefore. The Floquet Hamiltonian (2.√ get we √ relevant contributions only for n ≈ n0 1. there exists a class of equivalent Floquet states whose quasienergies differ only by integer multiples of Ω. but with eigenvalue (n) = + n Ω.22).α .17). it is sufficient to take only those Floquet states into account. Thus. Therefore the basis states |n T allow for an interpretation as the semiclassical limit of the number states of the laser field and the Floquet states as the semiclassical limit of the dressed states.3 Properties of Floquet states 9 2.27) (2.32) are identical. whose eigenfunctions are the so-called dressed states. (2. i. (2. o |ψ (n) (t) = e−i( +n = |ψ(t) Ω)t/ |φ(n) (t) (2. They are orthonormalized with respect to the inner product (2. φα |φα = δα.2. we denote by {|φα (t) } a complete set of Floquet states with corresponding quasienergies { α }.n + µx n + 1 δn.n = HS δn.n +1 + n δn.25).33) . a Floquet state.10) of the laser mode to obtain √ √ Hn. 2.29) This means that |φ(n) (t) is also an eigenvector of the Floquet Hamiltonian H(t).n .

since they vary with time.42) Thus the nth Floquet channel gives a contribution α +n Ω. Mean energy Due to the Brillouin-zone structure (2. Thus.39) do not either.40) (2.n |cα.36) φα |φα (n) = δα. quasienergies do not allow for global ordering.20). caution is appropriate: The orthonormalization on R is in general only valid for equal times and is in particular not valid for the Fourier components (2. 23–25] Eα = = 1 T α T dt Eα (t) 0 (2.34) The Fourier coefficients read 1 κn = T = T dt einΩt φα (t )|φα (t ) 0 (2. weighted by the squared modulus cα. .0 . (2. (2. A quantity that is defined on the full real axis and therefore does allow for a complete ordering is the mean energy [12. ∂t which results from averaging over one period of the driving.10 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory Orthonormalization on R The inner product of two non-equivalent Floquet states on R obeys the T -periodicity of the Floquet states and can be written as a Fourier series.n |cα.35) (2. Here however.41) +i φα | ∂ |φα .17). By use of the Fourier representation (2. we get φα (t)|φα (t) = δα.n of the corresponding Fourier coefficient. where the time integration has been expressed by the inner product (2.n (2.α δn.α . The instantaneous energies Eα (t) = ψα (t)|H(t)|ψα (t) = φα (t)|H(t)|φα (t) (2.17) on R ⊗ T we obtain orthonormalization with respect to the inner product on R at equal times.30).19) we obtain Eα = n ( α + n Ω) cα.37) This means that from the orthonormalization of the Floquet states with respect to the inner product (2.38) (2. φα (t)|φα (t) = n κn e−inΩt .

25]. we used the T -periodicity of the Floquet states and their completeness and orthogonality at equal times. e−in α T / |φα (0) φα (0)| (2.46) as this expression obviously solves the Schr¨dinger equation and the initial condition o (2. t ).50) as can easily be seen by inserting the Floquet-state representation (2. which is a solution of the Schr¨dinger equation.43) (2. t)|φα (t) = e−i α T / |φα (t) . o i ∂ U (t. 0) is indispensable for the investigation of the long-time dynamics of driven quantum systems [23. 0) defines a quantum map for the propagation over a full period of the driving. t ).44) A formal integration yields U (t.49) U (nT. The propagator U (T. (2. To obtain the last line. 2. t). Expressed in terms of the Floquet states. The propagator U (T. 0) = α e−i α T / |φα (0) φα (0)|. (2. ∂t U (t. Due to the time dependence of the Hamiltonian. 0) = α = [U (T.4 The propagator 11 2.5 Numerical computation of Floquet states Among the methods for the computation of Floquet states of bounded systems. t ) = T exp − i t t dt H(t ) . (2. U (T. The Floquet states at time t are instantaneous eigenstates of the one-period propagator U (t + T.44) is ensured by the completeness of the Floquet states. (2.47) (2.45) where T denotes time ordering. U (t.48) (2. not only on their difference. 0)]n . t) = 1. the propagator reads U (t.2. U (t + T. t ) = α e−i α (t−t )/ |φα (t) φα (t )|. t ) depends explicitly on both times t and t .46) of the propagator. we essentially discern two classes [37]: The first class consists of methods based directly . t ) = H(t) U (t.4 The propagator The time evolution of a quantum system can be written by use of a unitary operator U (t.

.5. A further efficient method for the computation of eigenvectors of the tridiagonal matrix (2. As a basis set for the Hilbert space R. 0 0 ··· 0 0 ··· H1 0 ··· H0 − Ω H1 ··· H1 H0 − 2 Ω · · · . .   · · · H0 + 2 Ω H1   ··· H1 H0 + Ω  0 H1 H =  ···   ··· 0 0   ··· 0 0  .52) The eigenvectors of (2. Accordingly. Due to the Brillouin-zone like structure. .45].51) where we have introduced a factor 2 for ease of notation. 0). however.10) of the Floquet Hamiltonian. .51) decomposed into the basis {|n T } reads Hn. . They can be generalized straightforwardly.12 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory on the solution of the eigenvalue equation (2.  (2. which itself has been decomposed into the eigenfunctions of the harmonic oscillator (see Appendix A).       .50) of the unitary operator U (T. one commonly uses M eigenstates of the undriven Hamiltonian H0 .50) for the propagator.5. it is advantageous to diagonalize the Hermitian operator 1 + U (T.n −1 ). . (2. In numerical calculations. . . . it is sufficient to compute all eigenvectors whose eigenvalues lie in an interval of size Ω. . . . (2. . 0 H1 H0 H1 0 .1 Floquet-matrix methods The Floquet Hamiltonian for (2. . . . followed by the solution of the eigenvalue equation (2. . . we treat systems subject to a cosine-shaped driving. for N Floquet channels the dimension of the Floquet matrix is N M and the computational effort for the matrix diagonalization is proportional to (N M )3 .53)      2. or in matrix notation.2 Propagator methods The quasienergies and the Floquet states at time t = 0 can be extracted from the one-period propagator by use of the eigenvalue equation (2. . we elucidate the numerical methods for the case of a Hamiltonian of the structure H(t) = H0 + 2H1 cos(Ωt).54) 1 − U (T. as the decomposition into {|n T } corresponds to Fourier representation. . We shall not apply this method. . 0) V =i . 0) . (2. . .n of the Floquet states.n = (H0 + n Ω)δn. . . A second class of methods starts with the computation of the Floquet propagator U (T. . 2.. In the present work. .n +1 + δn.n + H1 (δn.53) are the Fourier components |cα. . Thus. .53) are matrix continued fractions [25. 0).. .  .

the Schr¨dinger is extended by a second time coordinate to read o i ∂ |ψ(t. obeys i ∂ ∂ ∂ |ψ(t.1).58) of the extended Schr¨dinger equation (2. They are obtained by propagating the |φα (0) over one period of the driving. The (t. it is necessary to know the Floquet states’ Fourier coefficients |cα.51) is derived from the (t. t) . t0 ) = T 0|U (t − t0 )|t T |t =t (2.55) The time t is treated formally like an additional canonical coordinate of a timeindependent problem. The propagation can be performed in various ways. (2. It is straightforward to show that the corresponding eigenvalues read cot( α T /2 ). The |cα. t ) ∂t ∂t ∂t = H(t)|ψ(t. which yields |ψα (t) = exp(−i α t/ )|φα (t) .13). T ]. In the following. V possesses the same eigenvectors as U (T. o It reads U (t. 0).55) one can extract the “true” propagator.56) t =t (2. according to their definition (2. we sketch the methods implemented in this work. namely the Floquet states |φα (0) . t ) = ∂t H(t ) − i ∂ ∂t |ψ(t. 46.20).55). t) is a solution of the “true” Schr¨dinger equation (2. t) = i + |ψ(t. In an analogous o way. 47]. There. We postulate T -periodic boundary conditions in t . 0). where the o initial condition is the unit matrix. for t in the range [0.n result from Fourier decomposition. t )-formalism [38. t ) . t )-formalism A very efficient numerical method for the computation of the propagator for a Hamiltonian of the form (2. An extension of this method to other shapes of driving is rather easy. Direct integration of the Schr¨dinger equation o The most simple method for the computation of the propagator is the direct integration of the Schr¨dinger equation by use of a Runge-Kutta routine.5 Numerical computation of Floquet states 13 Being a function of U (T. It emerges that the numerical effort for the propagation is proportional to N M 3 . (2. which enables decomposition into the basis set (2.n . Being a solution of (2. Therefore.57) Thus |ψ(t. |ψ(t.59) .2. however with a much larger prefactor compared to the diagonalization of the Floquet matrix. computing the Floquet states by direct integration is well-suited if a large number of Floquet channels is required. t ) . on the cut t = t where ∂t /∂t = 1. For the computation of the mean energies and to determine the coefficients of the master equation for the dissipative dynamics (see next chapter). from the propagator U (t − t0 ) = e−iH(t−t0 )/ (2.

45). already a few Floquet channels are sufficient to obtain numerical convergence [47]. the first term of the Taylor expansion of the time-ordered exponential (2. (2. t0 ) = i + ∂t ∂t ∂t = H(t)U (t. (ν) 1 = ν! − iτ 0|Hν |n T . For larger N .n (τ ).n (τ ) U0. In the special case N = 1 we obtain U (t + τ.66) For a sufficiently small time step τ . t) = 1 − iH(t + τ )τ / . (2. T 0|U (t − t0 )|t T (2.63) Here the time ordering. (2. the time ordering results in a more complicated expression. t0 ) = n T 0|1R⊗T |n T einΩt0 = 1R . is intrinsic. Typically. By Taylor expansion of the extended propagator U one obtains for the time step from t to t + τ U (t + τ.65) = with (ν) U0.45). in the sum over n all terms with |n| > N vanish. which we have to consider explicitly in (2. t0 ).61) and on the other hand solves the Schr¨dinger equation.64) (2. it is possible to truncate the sum over ν after N + 1 terms.62) t =t (2.60) This is so because on the one hand it fulfills the initial condition U (t0 . t) = n ∞ einΩ(t+τ ) T 0|U (τ )|n e n inΩ(t+τ ) ν=0 ν T T (2.14 Driven quantum systems and Floquet theory = n T 0|U (t − t0 )|n T einΩt . . o i ∂ ∂ ∂ U (t. Due to the tridiagonal structure of H.

Caldeira and Leggett rediscovered the system-bath model in the context of dissipative tunneling [11] and. quantization results in unphysical properties. we introduce the system-bath model and derive a Markovian master equation for the reduced density operator for the case of a static central system. is based on the coupling of the conservative system to external degrees of freedom. we couple the system bilinearly to a bath of non-interacting harmonic oscillators with masses mν . Later.g. Zwanzig generalized this concept within ı the framework of classical stochastic processes to arbitrary potentials and derived a Markovian master equation for the dynamics of the dissipative system by the so-called projector formalism [20]. in a path-integral formulation. Strong system-bath correlations result in interesting effects. beyond a weak-coupling limit. 19. it is desirable to to treat the influence of the bath in perturbation theory.1 The system-bath model To achieve a microscopic model of dissipation. eliminated the bath exactly [21. the path-integral approach requires to resort to extensive and sophisticated numerics. master equations for quantum systems [50–52] were derived and applied in laser physics [50] and to nuclear magnetic resonance and electron-spin resonance. frequencies ων . with the coupling strength cν [11. 59]. or doesn’t handle the uncertainty relation properly [49].53]. consistent with the fundamental laws of quantum mechanics.. Thus. This enabled the investigation of dissipative quantum systems. among them most prominently the algebraic decay of correlation functions at zero temperature [54. such as Monte-Carlo calculations [56–58]. Although an extension of the Lagrange formalism to this model of dissipation is possible [48]. for the description of nonlinear systems subject to weak dissipation. 55]. leading to a Markovian master equation for the density operator [50–52]. The total Hamiltonian of system and bath is then given by H = HS + HSB + HB . a time-dependent mass. and coordinates xν . By similar approaches. as soon as nonlinear forces come into play. momenta pν . The most successful approach to dissipation in quantum mechanics. However. dissipation can be introduced phenomenologically just by adding a velocity-proportional friction force. 3. Probably the first proof that such a system-bath scheme results in dissipative quantum mechanics was given by Magalinski˘ [19] for a harmonic oscillator.3 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation Within the framework of classical mechanics. with their own shortcomings. e. (3.1) . In this chapter.

For the time evolution we choose an initial condition of the Feynman-Vernon type: at t = t0 . Although this choice is somewhat artificial. one can eliminate the bath variables to get an exact. i. the canonical ensemble of the whole system including the coupling [60]. which depends only on the position x of the system.e. 3. it is favorable due to its technical simplicity. like e. The second term in HSB . This results in a dissipative differential equation for the Heisenberg position operator of the system.16 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation where HS denotes the Hamiltonian of the central system and HB = ν 2 pν 1 2 + m ν ω ν x2 .1) we derive the Heisenberg equations of motion for the system and the bath operators and solve the latter formally. Other initial conditions. below we will deal with driven systems where specifying a more sophisticated preparation is not meaningful without specifying an onset of the driving. it offers a possibility for interpretations. are more realistic.6) .4) W (t0 ) = (t0 ) ⊗ tr e−HB /kB T where is the density operator of the system and kB T denotes Boltzmann’s constant times temperature. 53. (3.g. ν 2mν 2 (3. The elimination can be performed in two ways. The Heisenberg equations of motion for the position operators of the system and of the bath oscillators read ¨ x+ 1 1 cν V (x) = c ν xν − x .2 Quantum Langevin equation From the system-bath Hamiltonian (3. this quantum Langevin equation cannot be solved exactly and thus is of limited practical use. Due to the bilinearity of the bath and its coupling to the system. which are the subjects of the following sections.3) HSB = −x c ν xν + x 2 ν ν c2 ν . However. the bath is not correlated to the system and canonically distributed with respect to the free bath Hamiltonian. 2 m m ν mν ω ν cν 2 x. x ν + ω ν xν = ¨ mν (3.5) (3. subject to dissipation. 59]. which is driven by an operator-valued stochastic force. closed integro-differential equation for the dynamics of the central system. the density operator W of system plus bath reads e−HB /kB T . 2 2mν ων describe the heat bath and its coupling to the system. serves to cancel a renormalization of the potential due to the coupling [49.2) (3.. Although in general.

In the limit of zero temperature. 2 c2 ων ν = cos ων (t − t ). inserting into (3. (3. the Gaussian property holds. . coth 2mν ων 2kB T ν (3.. we have made use of the equilibrium expectation values ων 1 1 2 p ν pν = m ν ω ν x ν xν = coth 2 2mν 4 ων 2kB T δνν (3.14) which also marks the time scale below which correlations between system and bath are relevant.2 Quantum Langevin equation Equation (3.1) is bilinear in the bath coordinates xν . The influence of the fluctuating force on the system is fully characterized by its symmetric autocorrelation function.8) gives rise to an initial slip due to the sudden coupling of the system and the bath at time t0 [19.10) The last term in (3.11) (3. τB diverges and these correlations play a dominant role [54. i. 55].5) results in the so-called quantum Langevin equation [61–64] t x(t) + ¨ t0 dt γ(t − t )x(t ) + ˙ 1 1 V (x(t)) = ξ(t) − γ(t)x(t0 ) m m (3.6) is easily integrated to yield the formal solution xν (t) = xν (t0 ) cos ω(t − t0 ) + + cν mν ω ν t t0 17 pν (t0 ) sin ων (t − t0 ) mν ω ν (3.3. The correlation function K(τ ) decays within a time τB = /kB T. we can express moments and correlations of higher order by products of K’s.8) with the damping kernel γ(t) = 1 m c2 ν cos ων (t − t0 ) 2 mν ω ν (3. mν ω ν (3.12) To obtain the last line.e. the noise kernel K(t − t ) = 1 ξ(t)ξ(t ) + ξ(t )ξ(t) . As the system-bath Hamiltonian (3. After integration by parts.7) dt sin ων (t − t ) x(t ). It will be omitted in the following as we will not study preparation effects within this framework. 64].9) ν and the operator-valued fluctuating force ξ(t) = ν cν xν (t0 ) cos ων (t − t0 ) + pν (t0 ) sin ων (t − t0 ) .13) for the bath operators in the canonical ensemble. 61.

8) drops to zero. 3. where trB denotes the trace over the bath variables.15) 2mν ων ν In a continuum limit for the heat bath we assume I(ω) to be a smooth function. (3.19) which defines the Drude model. The assumption of an increasing spectral density for arbitrarily high frequencies. 63]. 2 ω 2 + ωD (3. The damping and the noise kernel can be expressed by the spectral function to read ∞ I(ω) 2 dω cos ωt πm 0 ω ω 1 ∞ dω I(ω) coth K(t) = π 0 2kB T γ(t) = (3. which results in an equation of motion for the reduced density operator = trB W of the central system subject to dissipation. This corresponds to the Ohmic spectral density I(ω) = mγω. (3. Eq. which in Fourier representation reads 1 ω K(ω) = m ωγ(ω) coth 2 2kB T .16) cos ωt. As a prototypical model for damping. is not only somewhat artificial. we use the Ohmic friction kernel γ(t) = 2γδ(t). We regularize them. (3. but also results in divergent integrals. 62. An Ohmic spectral density is often used as an approximation to a more complicated one and therefore in literature sometimes appears as “first Markov approximation” [50]. The cutoff frequency ωD introduces a short but finite memory τD = 1/ωD for the friction.18 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation At this point it is convenient to introduce the spectral density of the system-bath coupling c2 ν I(ω) = π δ(ω − ων ). (3.3 Influence functional Despite the fact that the quantum Langevin equation (3. For an exact elimination of the .18) reads K(ω) = mγ(ω)kB T and the quantum Langevin equation becomes in the long-time limit formally equivalent to the corresponding classical Langevin equation [49.18) In the classical limit kB T ω. A more useful approach is the elimination of the heat bath in the equation of motion for the full density operator W . by a cutoff in the spectral density. its practical use is limited to the very rare cases where it can be integrated directly. where the memory of the friction in (3. however.8) appears quite simple.17) Both are not independent of each other since they obey the so-called second fluctuation-dissipation relation [49]. I(ω) = mγω 2 ωD . if required.

We start with the time evolution of the full density matrix. t t Re φFV [x. t0 ) describes the time-evolution of the dissipative system.25) . t. xf . x0 . 49. 65] x(t)=xf x(t)=xf Dx x(t0 )=x0 Dx exp U (xf . xf . x ] . x0 . x(t0 )=x0 (3. x] .24) The variable x is a shorthand for all bath coordinates xν and Dx denotes path integration over all of them. We insert the initial condition (3. (3. t0 ). t0 )W (x0 . t. xf = dx0 dx0 dx0 dx0 U (xf . x0 . t. t0 ). t0 ) ×U ∗ (xf . x0 . t.27) Dx x (t0 )=x0 Dx exp i i S[x] − S[x ] (3. ˙ 2 dt 1 cν mν 2 xν (t )2 − mν ων xν (t ) − ˙ x(t ) 2 2 2 mν ω ν 2 (3. xf . x(t)=xf x(t0 )=x0 x (t)=xf (3. the path-integral formulation of quantum mechanics has proved to be more convenient than operator notation [11. (3.23) (3. x0 . t0 ) of the system plus the bath is given by the path integral expression [11. respectively. xf . t) = J(xf . t. x0 . x0 . 53]. x ]. x0 . we obtain [11. t0 ) = dx0 dx0 J(xf . After tracing out the bath variables by integrating over all the bath coordinates xf . t) ≡ xf . x0 . W (t) = e−iH(t−t0 )/ W (t0 )eiH(t−t0 )/ . x ] = t0 dt t0 dt x(t ) − x (t ) K(t − t ) x(t ) − x (t ) .29) . x0 .22) (3. 21. xf . xf . xf . x0 .20) The propagator U (x.3.4) and evaluate the path integral over the bath variables. xf |W (t)|xf . The entire influence of the bath is subsumed in the so-called influence functional [21] φFV [x. which in position representation reads W (xf . t0 ) = i i S[x] + SB [x. x0 . t0 ) (x0 . x0 . The propagator J(xf . (3. The actions t S[x] = t0 dt t m 2 x (t ) − V (x(t )) .26) SB [x.21) (3. t. x0 . x0 . xf . x0 . t. x0 . x. x] = ν t0 correspond to the Hamiltonian HS of the central system and HB + HSB for the bath plus system-bath coupling. xf . 49] (xf . x0 .3 Influence functional 19 heat bath.28) 1 × exp − φFV [x. xf .

t. 66]. (3. t0 ). one depending only on x. Thus.20 Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation Im φFV [x. It can be separated into two parts.1). The last term of the imaginary part gives the initial slip. The steps to introduce this Markov approximation are usually performed in operator notation. xf . In standard perturbation theory for path integrals [65. x ] 1 ≈ 1 − φFV [x. starting from the full system-bath Hamiltonian (3. whereas the imaginary part gives rise to friction [49]. ∆/ .31) The small parameter in this approximation is the effective coupling strength γ. They are easily identified as the propagator for the Schr¨dinger equation of the pure system and its complex conjugate. Here.28).8). x0 .30).30). without memory. one can here distinguish more clearly between the influence of friction and noise.30) dt x(t ) − x (t ) γ(t ) x(t0 ) + x (t0 ) .28) [49]. i. First. t. x0 .34) . but has some advantages. x ]. The present derivation requires essentially the same approximations as the standard projection technique approach. A second benefit is the exact cancellation of the potential renormalization in (3. we give a derivation from the path-integral expression (3. the friction part in the Markovian master equation becomes exact. the exponent of the influence functional is approximated by a Taylor series. because each of them is easily identified in the path integral expression (3. we have integrated Im φFV by parts. canceling the potential renormalization in (3.4 Markovian master equation By perturbation theory for the propagator (3. The propagator for the density matrix is at order zero in the perturbation given by the first line of (3. which means that γ has to be the smallest frequency scale in the problem.28) up to lowest non-trivial order in the system-bath coupling. known from Eq.32) (3. And last but not least. the other only on x . t. The real part of the influence functional describes the noise. γ γ 1/τB = kB T / .28).26).33) where τB is the correlation time of the bath and ∆ denotes any energy difference in the spectrum of the conservative problem. t0 ) U0 (xf . t0 ) = U0 (xf . 3. x0 . (3.e. and is omitted in the following. (3. one can show that for the case of an Ohmic spectral density. 1 exp − φFV [x. (3. x0 . x ] = − m 2 m − 2 t t dt t0 t t0 t0 dt x(t ) − x (t ) γ(t − t ) x(t ) + x (t ) ˙ ˙ (3. To obtain (3. we derive a master equation of Markovian type. o ∗ J0 (xf ..

t ). t. x2 . t − τ .27) and (3. x2 .36) We insert into (3. x0 . t) = − dx0 dx0 J0 (xf . t ) γ(t − t ) (x2 + x2 ) (x2 . x1 . xf . we will solve the master equation in energy basis. t − τ ) ∗ ×(x2 + x2 ) U0 (x2 . x2 . x2 . t − τ . t . x. where we have assumed that path integration commutes with the integrals over t and t . t) + im 2 t dτ γ(τ ) t0 ∗ dx1 dx1 dx2 dx2 (xf − xf ) U0 (xf . x.30) only yield contributions at times t and t . t) U0 (x2 . t ) (x1 − x1 ) (3.. x2 . or in Wigner representation.29) and (3. (x2 . t) ∗ dx1 dx1 dx2 dx2 (xf − xf ) U0 (xf . By use of (3. the influence functionals (3. t − τ ) dτ K(τ ) t0 ∗ ×(x2 − x2 ) U0 (x2 . in Floquet basis. x0 . x2 . t )K(t − t ) (x2 − x2 ) (x2 . t . an operator notation is more convenient than a position representation. t. t ) = dx0 dx0 J0 (x2 . t) i = − H(xf ) − H(xf ) − 1 t (xf . 66] to get (xf . x1 . x .35). t. t). In all these cases. i. This master equation is Markovian since ˙(t) depends only on (t). Deriving from (3. t0 ) (x0 . x2 . xf . not on the history of . t. x0 . x2 . t ) (x1 − x1 ) ×J0 (x1 . xf . t) (x. t ) im + 2 t t dt t0 t0 dt dx1 dx1 dx2 dx2 J0 (xf . t − τ . x2 . t. x2 . xf .e. differentiate with respect to t.4 Markovian master equation 21 In first order of perturbation (which is already second order in the coupling constants cν ). t − τ )U0 (xf . x . and obtain the master equation ˙ (xf . x2 . t) (x. x .37) where the free propagator J0 for the density matrix has been substituted by the propagator U0 of the Schr¨dinger equation and the integration variable t by τ = o t − t . x0 . x1 . xf .37) .3. at equal times. x0 . t − τ . x1 . t) U0 (x2 . In the following chapters. t) (x0 . t. xf . x1 . Thus we can dissect the path integral into an explicit integration over x1 = x(t ) and x2 = x(t ) and free time evolution [65. (3. x1 . ˙ ˙ (3. respectively. t0 ) 1 t t dt t0 t0 dt dx1 dx1 dx2 dx2 J0 (xf . t. x0 . t). x . t − τ )U0 (xf . we can express (t ) in zeroth order of the perturbation by (t).35) ˙ ˙ ×J0 (x1 .34). x2 . t .

22

Quantum dissipation and Markov approximation

the representation-free form is straightforward and yields d i 1 ∞ = − [HS , ] − dτ K(τ ) [x, [xH (t − τ, t), ]] dt 0 ∞ i dτ γ(τ ) [x, [pH (t − τ, t), ]+ ], + 2 0

(3.38)

with the anticommutator [A, B]+ = AB + BA. The Heisenberg position and momentum operators xH and pH are defined according to
† OH (t, t ) = U0 (t, t ) O U0 (t, t ),

(3.39)

where U0 (t, t ) = exp(−iHS (t − t )/ ) denotes the propagator of the conservative system. We have assumed further that the integration kernel K(τ ) is practically zero for τ > τB [67] and extended the upper integration limit in (3.38) to infinity. This implicitly moved the preparation time t0 → −∞, thus the master equation (3.38) describes only the system dynamics sufficiently close to equilibrium. For an Ohmic spectral density γ(τ ) = 2γδ(τ ), the integration in the second line of (3.38) can be evaluated and we obtain the Markovian master equation d i = − [HS , ] + Lfriction + L0 noise dt . (3.40)

The commutator in (3.40) gives the coherent dynamics, whereas the superoperators Lfriction = − L0 noise iγ [x, [p, ]+ ], 2 1 = − [x, [Q, ]], (3.41) (3.42)

describe the influence of the the bath: friction and noise. The operator

Q=
0

dτ K(τ ) xH (t − τ, t),

(3.43)

is qualitatively the Heisenberg position operator xH of the system in Fourier representation. Therefore L0 depends on the conservative dynamics (superscript 0 ), noise thus on the energy spectrum of the central system. Note that Q is time independent, since for a static Hamiltonian xH (t − τ, t) = xH (−τ ). The Markovian master equation (3.40) together with (3.41) and (3.42), does not exhibit Lindblad form (B.3), thus the positivity of the density operator is not guaranteed for all possible initial states. The violation of positivity due to a master equation in this case, however, is a transient effect which only arises for preparations far from equilibrium [68–71], where the conditions under which the master equation has been derived, are not fulfilled. (See Appendix B.1 for a more detailed discussion).

4

Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory

For a dissipative quantum system subject to external driving, even a partially analytical solution within the path-integral approach is feasible only for the very simplest systems, in particular, for the periodically driven, damped harmonic oscillator [28], or for driven dissipative two-level systems [72, 73]. Thus, for the description of strongly driven systems subject to weak dissipation, it is desirable to combine a Markovian approach to quantum dissipation, leading to a master equation for the density operator, with the Floquet formalism that allows to treat time-periodic forces of arbitrary strength and frequency. While the Floquet formalism amounts essentially to using an optimal representation and is exact [23], the simplification brought about by the Markovian description is achieved only at the expense of accuracy. Here, a subtle technical difficulty lies in the fact that the truncation of the long-time memory introduced by the bath and the inclusion of the driving do not commute: As pointed out in Refs. [26, 27], the result of the Markov approximation depends on whether it is made with respect to the eigenenergy spectrum of the central system without the driving, or with respect to the quasienergy spectrum obtained from the Floquet solution of the driven system. In the second case it cannot be treated as a system with proper eigenstates and eigenenergies. Figure 4.1 depicts the two different possibilities for including driving and dissipation to the description of a quantum system. Both approaches yield a Markovian master equation, but differ quantitatively. We will investigate this difference in detail for the case of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator in Chapter 5. A Floquet theory for dissipative driven systems based on the energy spectrum has been worked out and applied to intense-field excitations of atoms in Refs. [37,74]; a quasienergy spectrum approach has been implemented in recent work on driven Rydberg atoms [22, 75] and coherent destruction of tunneling [76–78].

4.1

Simple inclusion of the driving

A simple Markovian approach to dissipative driven quantum systems results directly from the master equation for the undriven system: We replace in (3.40) the static Hamiltonian HS by the time-dependent Hamiltonian HS (t) = H0 + HF (t) which yields i d = − [HS (t), ] + Lfriction + L0 noise dt . (4.2) (4.1)

24

Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory

S  Markov  (energy spectrum)

Floquet theory −− − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − − −→ for Schr¨dinger equation o

S+D   Markov (quasienergy spectrum)

S+B

Floquet theory −− − − − − − − − − − − − − −→ for master equation

S+D+B

Figure 4.1: Successive inclusion of the driving (D) and the influence of a heat bath (B) to the description of a quantum system (S). The horizontal arrows denote exact Floquet treatment, whereas the vertical arrows mark an approximate step, namely the truncation of the long-time memory. The result depends on the route taken.

Here, the driving enters only the coherent part of the master equation, whereas L0 noise has been derived from the undriven Hamiltonian H0 . Thus, we refer to this approach as the Markovian approach with respect to the unperturbed spectrum. For a periodically time-dependent driving, HF (t) = HF (t + T ), the master equation (4.2) allows for a Floquet treatment [37].

4.2

An improved Markovian master equation

We pointed out in Section 3.4, that the coherent dynamics of the central system plays an important role in the derivation of the Markovian master equation (3.40). This means that for a driven system the Markovian master equation depends on whether the driving is considered in its derivation or not. To obtain an improved master equation whose dissipative kernel accounts for the influence of the driving, we start anew from the full system-bath Hamiltonian including the driving. Performing the same steps as in the preceeding chapter, but for an explicitly time-dependent Hamiltonian HS (t), we obtain the Markovian master equation i d = − [HS (t), ] + (Lfriction + Lnoise ) . (4.3) dt Friction and noise are described by the superoperators Lfriction = − Lnoise iγ [x, [p, ]+ ], 2 1 = − [x, [Q(t), ]]. (4.4) (4.5)

Whereas Lfriction is the same for both Markovian approaches, Lnoise has acquired a time dependence which stems from the operator

Q(t) =
0

dτ K(τ ) xH (t − τ, t),

(4.6)

.4.3).11) = Qαβ (t) ≡ φα (t)|Q(t)|φβ (t) = einΩt Qαβ. Therefore Lnoise is time dependent and does—in contrast to L0 —not depend on the energy spectrum of the undriven noise system. we are able to make use of the Floquet theorem and expand the reduced density operator into the time-periodic Floquet states |φα (t) of the isolated driven system. einΩt Pαβ.13) φα (t)|x|φβ (−n) (t) .3 Decomposition into Floquet basis So far. but on the quasienergy spectrum of the driven system. t ) x U (t. The influence of a driving force on Lnoise will be studied in detail for the case of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator in Chapter 5.10) (4. They all are T -periodic and can be expressed as a Fourier series.8) αβ = φα (t)| |φβ (t) is derived from the basis-independent improved master equation (4. t ) = U † (t.n .n = = 1 T T dt e−inΩt φα (t)|x|φβ (t) 0 (4.n and Qαβ. we will express the Fourier coefficients Pαβ. A master equation for the matrix elements (4. Xαβ (t) ≡ Pαβ (t) ≡ φα (t)|x|φβ (t) φα (t)|p|φβ (t) = n einΩt Xαβ. not only on their difference. t ) 25 (4. Next. we did not specify the time dependence of the system Hamiltonian in the derivation of the master equation. Since the role of the eigenenergies is now taken over by the quasienergies. we need to know the matrix elements of the operators x. 4.7) is the Heisenberg position operator of the driven system which depends explicitly on both times. They form a well-adapted basis for the case of weak dissipation. we refer to this master equation as the Markovian approach with respect to the quasienergy spectrum.n in terms of Xαβ. n The Fourier coefficients of the position matrix elements read Xαβ.3).3.n .n .3 Decomposition into Floquet basis where xH (t.9) (4.12) (4. t and t . By assuming a T -periodic Hamiltonian. p and Q(t) in the Floquet basis.1 Matrix elements To decompose the master equation (4. n (4. 4.n .

n . By use of the Fourier representations (4.−n )Xαα .17) Xαβ. i i where H = H − i ∂/∂t denotes the Floquet Hamiltonian.14). 27. dτ mγ π ∞ dω ω coth 0 where we have inserted the spectral representation (3. the so-called Lamb shifts [50. (4. x] = [H. and have been neglected. with the thermal occupation number nth ( ) = For 1 e /kB T kB T .n .n = mγ ( 2 α − β + n Ω) coth α − +n Ω 2kB T β Xαβ.n − Nα β .18) The contributions of the principal part result in quasienergy shifts of the order γ. the momentum operator can be expressed by a commutator. Note that the coefficients of this differential equation are periodic in time with the period of the driving. (4.14) p = [H.n = N ( α − α + n Ω). 75] ˙ αβ (t) = d φα (t)| (t)|φβ (t) dt i = − ( α − β ) αβ (t) + α β nn ei(n+n )Ωt (Nαα . We end up with Qαβ. The Fourier coefficients of the time-dependent matrix element Qαβ (t) read Qαβ.n (4.n Xβ α .n Xα β.n Xαβ .n αβ αβ Xβ β.26 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory For a Hamiltonian of the form H = p2 /2m + V (x.n = φα |p|φβ (4.20) Nαβ. The τ -integration is evaluated by using 0 dτ exp(iωτ ) = πδ(ω) + iP(1/ω).17) of the noise kernel and ∞ made use of (4. N ( ) approaches zero.n = = 0 1 T T ∞ dt e−inΩt 0 ∞ 0 dτ K(τ ) φα (t)|xH (t − τ.21) . t). Thus we get m (−n) Pαβ. m m (4. where P denotes Cauchy’s principal part.12).n are given by mγ (4. we made use of the eigenvalue equation (2.9)–(4. i To obtain the last line.19) − Nβ α . 51].16) = ( α − β + n Ω)Xαβ. N ( ) = 2 nth ( ). x].3) the Floquet-Markov master equation [22.15) i m (4.29) for the Floquet states after inserting (4.11) we obtain from Eq.n .n + Nββ . −1 = 1 coth 2 2kB T −1 . t)|φβ (t) ω 2kB T cos(ωτ )e−i( α − β +n Ω)τ / (4. The Nαβ.−n αβ Xβ α . (4.n .

25) by their time average. we average the likewise 2π/Ω-periodic coefficients of the master equation (4. 75].−n Xβ α .n Xαβ .3. (4. as detailed in the next paragraph. Thus only the Lαβ.n + Nββ .n − δαα The time-independence of its coefficients reflects that the influence of the driving has been formally absorbed by decomposing into the Floquet basis. Full rotating-wave approximation In some cases one can even go one step further. we explore the conditions under which these coefficients can be replaced by their time average. (4.22) by the ansatz αβ (t) = e−i( α − β )t/ σαβ (t).−n n (4.25) If dissipative effects are only relevant on a time scale much longer than all finite times 2π /( α − β − α + β ). we are allowed to replace the coefficients in (4.n . the coefficients of the dissipative part are still time dependent and complicate the solution of the master equation.α β = (Nαα .n α . Moderate rotating-wave approximation Assuming that dissipative effects are relevant only on a time scale much larger than the period 2π/Ω of the driving.2 Rotating-wave approximation We used the Floquet basis to formally eliminate a driving force of arbitrary strength from the coherent part of the master equation. Note that diagonal and off-diagonal elements of the density matrix are not decoupled. It has also to be stressed that the rotating-wave approximation introduced here is less restrictive than the one in Refs.22) with the dissipative transition rates Lαβ. Here. We solve the coherent part of the master equation (4. This step effectively amounts to a rotating-wave approximation (RWA). [22.−n Xα β.26) .4.3 Decomposition into Floquet basis 27 4.n Xβ α .α β which fulfill the full-RWA condition α − β = α − β .α β αβ (t).22) yields σαβ (t) = ˙ αβ ei( α − β − α + β )t/ Lαβ. Inserting into (4.n Xβ β.24) a transformation to the Heisenberg picture of the central system plus the driving. However. (4.n ) Xαα . − δββ Nβ β .19) over one period of the driving and end up with the equation of motion i ˙ αβ (t) = − ( α − β ) αβ (t) + αβ Lαβ.23) Nα α n β .α β σα β (t) (4.

σαα (t) = ˙ α Lαα.26) results in [22. since here. (4. Moreover. it converges in the long-time limit to an asymptotic state ∞ . This condition is.3) meets the conditions for a Floquet treatment. α = β.4 The dissipative quantum map and its numerical implementation The master equation (4.. 75] α=α. Therefore. ˙ The second equation results in an exponential decay of the off-diagonal matrix elements. find in Section 6. 0) in the conservative case—which describes the stroboscopic dissipative time evolution of the density operator. it is possible to define a dissipative quantum map G(T ) [25.29) σαβ (t) = Lαβ.22). Eq.28 Driving and dissipation: Floquet-Markov theory remain in (4. the off-diagonal matrix elements play an important role for the asymptotic state.α α σα α (t). harmonic potentials with their equidistant (quasi-) energy levels. Then the full-RWA condition (4. (4. Decomposing into the Floquet basis {|φα (t) } yields the one-cycle propagation of the density matrix elements αβ ((n + 1)T ) = αβ Gαβ..28) (4. however.25) yields two decoupled sets of equations for the diagonal and the off-diagonal matrix elements. the “quantum attractor” which is the fixed point of the dissipative quantum map G(T ). a full RWA seems to be appropriate. the quasienergy differences have no degeneracy at all. 74.3) generates a dynamical semigroup for the time evolution of the density operator.e. Therefore in the asymptotic limit. (4.30) is dissipative.31) . we have averaged over a longer time scale. much more restrictive than the one in the previous paragraph.αβ σαβ (t). β =β or α = β. the density matrix becomes diagonal in the Floquet basis.3 that even in a case where the dynamics of the system is fully chaotic and thus. (4. (4. α = β .g. We will.α β (T ) αβ (nT ). (nT ) = [G(T )]n (0). 4. Its coefficients share the T -periodicity of the driven system Hamiltonian HS (t). 80]— the analogue of the one-cycle propagator U (T.27) Inserting into (4. i. 79]. Therefore the applicability of a full RWA is limited to very rare cases like.25) or (4. one can assume that for the case of a completely irregular spectrum where all quasienergies are effectively random numbers [8. respectively. e.30) As the dynamics generated by (4. however.

The time evolution of the density operator results from iteration according to (4.31).32) over one period of the driving T to obtain the dissipative map G(T ).α β (t) (4.22).α β (t) = − ( α 29 − β )Gαβ. .4.32) follows straightforwardly from (4. i ˙ Gαβ.α β (t) δαα δββ + α β Lαβ. This form enables a numerical treatment of the master equation: We integrate (4.α β Gα β .4 The dissipative quantum map and its numerical implementation An equation of motion for the dissipative map.

30 .

Here. their quality can be reliably checked since in this system. is given in Section 5. interesting in its own right.4. Forming a convenient “laboratory animal” due to its simplicity and linearity. Therefore.7. which allows for a detailed analysis of the influence of the driving on the dissipative terms of the master equation. We give a brief review of the model. A refined investigation within a basis-independent description.1 and 5.1) . and a comparison with the known quantum path-integral solution [28] is possible.5 is devoted to a discussion of the asymptotics of the quantal solutions. A merely technical issue. Since this relation is particularly close in the case of linear systems. and the comparison to the path-integral solution.5 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator In this chapter we investigate the properties and the quality of the different Markovian approaches to damped periodically driven quantum dynamics for a linear system where an exact path-integral solution is still available: The parametrically driven. 5. the quasienergy spectrum is sufficiently different from the unperturbed energy spectrum [81. with their interrelations.82] (this feature is in contrast to the additively driven harmonic oscillator where the difference of two quasienergies does not depend on the driving parameters [83]).2.6 contains numerical results for a number of characteristic dynamical quantities as obtained for the alternative Markovian approaches. by switching to a phase-space representation such as the Wigner function. damped harmonic oscillator allows for a very transparent and well-controlled investigation of the different approximation schemes introduced in Chapters 3 and 4. the Hamiltonian is given by HS (t) = 1 p2 + k(t)x2 . A summary of the various representations and levels of Markovian description. its classical dynamics. the solution of a Fokker-Planck equation by the method of characteristics. it is possible to elucidate the relationship of the quantal results to the corresponding classical Fokker-Planck dynamics. this provides an additional consistency check. Section 5. Section 5. is deferred to Appendix C. and its coherent quantum dynamics in Sections 5. such as the conservative and the high-temperature limits. a strong emphasis of this chapter is on the testing and thorough understanding of the available methods.1 The model and its classical dynamics For a particle with mass m moving in a harmonic potential with time-dependent frequency. Moreover. In Section 5. 2m 2 (5. the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator still shows nontrivial behavior. is given in Section 5.3 we present the solution of the dissipative dynamics in Floquet-Markov description.

ϕ(t + T ) = ϕ(t).1 shows the zones of stable and 2 unstable motion. for the Mathieu oscillator. resulting in the sum rule ∞ (5.e. Ω = 2π/T.8) . the functions ϕ(t). 5. m (5. An initial phase of the driving can be taken into account by a proper time translation. Fig.1). we can formally remove the damping to get an undamped equation with a modified potential ¨ ξ + ω 2 (t) − γ 2 /4 ξ = 0. is given by ˙ ˙ W = ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) − ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) = 2i. we can apply the Floquet theorem for second-order differential equations with time-periodic coefficients. The equation of motion for a classical particle with Ohmic (i. In stable regions µ is real. ∞ ϕ(t) = n=−∞ cn einΩt . µ by ϕ0 (t).. For given k(t). velocity-proportional) dissipation in the potential given in (5. It asserts [42. Being periodic in time.5) The solution ξ2 (t) is related to ξ1 (t) by the fact that the coefficients in the differential equation (5.1) reads x + γx + ˙ ¨ 1 k(t)x = 0. Figure 5. in the ω0 -ε plane. Depending on its frequency and amplitude. We denote the limit γ → 0 of ϕ(t). On the border between a stable and an unstable region. 85] that Eq. The normalization of the cn is chosen such that the Wronskian W. There exist driving functions for which µ is complex so that one of the solutions ξi (t) becomes unstable (cf.4) are real. (5. ∗ ξ2 (t) = ξ1 (t). (5. which is a constant of the motion. µ becomes a multiple of Ω/2 and the solutions ξ1 (t) and ξ2 (t) are not linearly independent. A special case is the Mathieu oscillator.4) has two solutions of the form ξ1 (t) = eiµt ϕ(t). the driving can stabilize or destabilize the undriven oscillation.32 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator where k(t) = mω 2 (t) is a periodic function with period T . the classical Floquet function ϕ(t) can be represented as a Fourier series. (5. n n=−∞ (5.3) By substituting x = ξ exp(−γt/2). on the level of the classical equations of motion.6) The Floquet index µ depends on the shape of the driving k(t) and is defined only mod Ω. (5. ξi (t). where 2 ω 2 (t) = ω0 + ε cos Ωt. (5. µ0 . ξi0 (t).2) This is an experimentally important case in view of the fact that it describes the Paul trap [84]. respectively.7) c2 (µ + nΩ) = 1. ξi (t) and the Floquet index µ still depend on the damping γ.4) Already here.

5.3) with γ = 0 for the case of a Mathieu oscillator. In the shaded areas µ is complex and therefore one of the fundamental solutions (5. In terms of this function. which corresponds to stable solutions.9) 2 For constant frequency of the oscillator. µ becomes a multiple of Ω/2 and the motion is marginal stable. reads ∂G(t.5) is unstable. Returning to the original x-coordinate. t0 ).6) and (5. On the borderlines. respectively. the Floquet index 2 2 1/2 2 and the periodic function become µ = (ω0 − γ /4) and ϕ(t) = (ω0 − γ 2 /4)−1/2 . In the white areas the Floquet index µ is real.3) with initial conditions x(t0 ) = x0 and p(t0 ) = p0 .7).3) is constructed using Eqs. the solution of (5.1 The model and its classical dynamics 30 25 20 33 [Ω2 /4] 15 stable 2 ω0 10 5 0 -5 0 5 10 15 unstable ε [Ω2 /2] Figure 5. this solution depends explicitly on the initial time t0 . (5. G(t.10) (5. which reproduces the results for a damped harmonic oscillator without driving. t0 ) = −x0 ∂t0 m Since the potential breaks continuous time-translational invariance. k(t) = const = mω0 .3) read fi (t) = e−γt/2 ξi (t).1: Stability of equation (5. (5. 2. t0 ) p0 + G(t. we find that the fundamental solutions of (5.n (5. t ) = e−γ(t−t )/2 ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t ) − ξ2 (t)ξ1 (t ) /2i = e−γ(t−t )/2 n. i = 1. .12) x(t. (5. (5.11) cn cn sin µ(t − t ) + Ω(nt − n t ) . The Green function for Eq.

In unstable zones or on the borderlines. 2 m A(t) = √ which satisfy the canonical commutation relation [A(t). t) of this invariant coincide—besides a timedependent phase factor—with the Floquet states of the system [86.1) possesses a T -periodic Hermitian invariant operator. (5.2 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator Floquet states in stable regimes It can be shown by group theoretical methods that the quantum mechanical quasienergy spectrum of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator in a stable regime is equivalent to the energy spectrum of an undriven harmonic oscillator [83]. the quasienergy spectrum is equivalent to the energy spectrum of a parabolic barrier or of a free particle. 87. In a quantized version. They can be constructed in analogy to the energy eigenstates of the time-independent harmonic oscillator: From the commutation relation (5. the so-called Lewis invariant [86] I(t) = A+ (t)A(t) = r(t) = 1 x r(t) − p r(t) ˙ 2 2 + x2 .15) x(t) = 0 0 A∗ ξ1 (t) + Aξ2 (t) .3) in the non-dissipative case γ = 0 reads (5. the Floquet solutions for the Schr¨dinger equation are derived in the literature in various o ways [81.16) (5. 91].3).14) (5.16) one obtains √ A(t) ψα (x.34 5. The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator (5. t) = α + 1 ψα+1 (x. Here we sketch a derivation in the spirit of Ref.1). In the limit of zero driving amplitude they reduce to the familiar shift operators (A. (A. We restrict ourselves to the motion in stable regions.20) . r 2 (t) (5. A solution of the classical equation of motion (5.17) (5.13) 2m where A and A∗ are complex normal coordinates. A+ (t)] = 1. (5. t) = α ψα−1 (x. 86–90]. The latter cases result in a continuous quasienergy spectrum. [86]. The instantaneous eigenstates ψα (x. √ A+ (t) ψα (x. t).4) of the time-independent harmonic oscillator. In these regions of the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator (5. 2 m i 0 ˙0 A+ (t) = − √ ξ2 (t)p − mξ2 (t)x . they are replaced by the conjugate pair of operators i 0 ˙0 ξ1 (t)p − mξ1 (t)x .19) (5. t). respectively.18) 0 0 ξ1 (t) ξ2 (t) = |ϕ0 (t)|.

β+1 .26). .20). t) β ϕ0 (−t)δα. 2. . (5. Thus they do not lie within a single Brillouin zone. one finds the Floquet states φα (x. t) α! 0 ξ2 (t) 0 ξ1 (t) α/2 α (5. T Xαβ.6) for ϕ0 (t). . (5.β−1 + √ α ϕ0 (t)δα. t) into a 2π/Ω-periodic function and an exponential prefactor. α = 0.n are preferably evaluated in the spatial representation.26) einΩt Xαβ.10).β+1 .n = β c−n δα. to give Xαβ. Separating ψα (x.23) are chosen such that in the undriven limit they reduce to the eigenenergies of the harmonic oscillator. t) x φβ (x. The matrix elements of the position operator x with the Floquet states |φα (t) .24) (5. (5.5.22) The corresponding quasienergies α = µ0 (α + 1/2) (5. t) = m/π Hα 2α α!ϕ0 (t) x 0 (t)| |ϕ m exp ˙0 im ξ1 (t) 2 x 0 2 ξ1 (t) . ∞ Xαβ (t) = −∞ dx φα (x. the periodicity of the Floquet states |φα (t) has been used. 1. These states are solutions of the time-dependent Schr¨dinger equation [86] and in the undriven limit reduce o to the position representation of the familiar eigenstates (A. t) = 0 and iterating according to (5. 0 To obtain Eqs.2 Floquet states in stable regimes 35 Solving A(t)ψ0 (x.29) 2m . read Xαβ (t) = φα (t)|x|φβ (t) = n (5.β−1 + √ α cn δα. we find for I(t) the eigenfunctions ψα (x. which we will need to obtain the coefficients of the master equation. .n 1 = T dt e−inΩt φα (t)|x|φβ (t) . (5.27) (5. t) = = (A+ (t)) √ ψ0 (x.n .25) and (5. The Fourier components Xαβ.25) (5. where Hα is the αth Hermite polynomial.21) 0 0 m/ ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) exp m/π Hα x α α!ξ 0 (t) 2 1 ˙0 im ξ1 (t) 2 x 0 2 ξ1 (t) .28) = 2m by inserting the Fourier expansion (5.

the asymptotic state reads ∞ W∞ (x.3 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator Floquet-Markov description in full RWA In the full rotating-wave approximation (RWA) introduced in Section 4.35) e Lα (2z 2 ). t) = is the Wigner function corresponding to |φα (t) [89].29) in Eq.30) The effective thermal-bath occupation number N= n c0 n 2 (µ0 + nΩ) nth ( µ0 + n Ω) (5. p.36 5.3. we neglect all contributions with α − β = α − β in Eq. we switch to the Wigner representation. (5. (5. p. we obtain from (4. t) = α=0 ∞ αα Wα (x.2.25) the time-independent master equation γ σαβ = ˙ (N + 1) 2 (α + 1)(β + 1)σα+1. we have to keep all terms with (α − β) = (α − β ). t).33) The basis {|φα (t) } corresponds to the “generalized Floquet states” introduced in Ref.34) where (−1)α −z 2 (5.33). (5. Wα (x. Substituting Eq.32) σαβ = αβ = N +1 N +1 The density operator of the asymptotic solution is diagonal in this representation and reads ∞ ∞ (t) = α=0 ∞ αα |φα (t) φα (t)|. (5. Thus in the present case of an equidistant quasienergy spectrum.23).β−1 − (α + β + 2)σαβ . i. Using the sum rule [92] ∞ α=0 κα Lα (x) = (1 − κ)−1 exp xκ κ−1 .β+1 − (α + β)σαβ 2 + N 2 αβσα−1. they are centered on the classical asymptotic solution and diagonalize the asymptotic density operator. To get the variances of (5.36) . this master equation coincides with the one for the undriven dissipative harmonic oscillator in rotating-wave approximation [50].e.25). (5. with the αth Laguerre polynomial Lα .31) reduces to N = nth ( ω0 ) in the undriven limit. (5. (4. Formally.. [26]. (4. There. p. π 1 0 0 0 0 ˙0 ˙0 ˙0 ˙0 z2 = mξ1 (t)ξ2 (t)x2 − ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) + ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) px + ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t)p2 /m . It has the stationary solution α 1 N ∞ ∞ δαβ .

(5. ˙ 0 ˙0 σpp (t) = m(N + 1/2)ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t). 0 0 (N + 1/2)ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t). 37 1 2 e−z /(2N +1) . p. we get an operator equation which only consists of position and momentum operators.44) (5. By substituting (5. . t) = It is a Gaussian with the variances σxx (t) = m 0 0 ˙0 ˙0 σxp (t) = (N + 1/2) ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) + ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) /2. this master equation is of Lindblad form [93] (see Appendix B. t).42) (5.30).40) To enable a comparison between the different equations of motions for the dissipative quantum system. For a derivation. (5. π(2N + 1) (5.20) of the operators A and A+ . ] γ (N + 1) 2A A+ − A+ A − A+ A + 2 + N 2A+ A − AA+ − AA+ . but with the shift operators for Floquet states instead of the usual creation and annihilation operators.3 Floquet-Markov description in full RWA we obtain the asymptotic solution in Wigner representation as W∞ (x. p.14).38) (5. we also give for the master equation in RWA.19) and (5. p. we use the shift properties (5. (5. (5. 0 0 ˙0 ˙0 Dxp (t) = ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) + ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) (N + 1/2).30) for the density matrix elements σαβ i ˙ = − [HS (t).45) (5. Eq.1).28) yields for the Wigner function the differential equation ∂t W (x. with the differential operator LRWA (t) = − 1 γ p∂x + (∂x x + ∂p p) + k(t)x∂x m 2 γ 2 2 + Dxx (t)∂x + Dxp (t)∂x ∂p + Dpp (t)∂p 2 (5. to obtain the corresponding basis-free operator equation from the master equation (5. t) = LRWA (t) W (x.43) and the diffusion coefficients 0 0 Dxx (t) = ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t)(N + 1/2)/m. Obviously.15).37) (5.39) (5. the corresponding partial differential equation in Wigner representation.25)–(A. Applying the transformations (A.5.46) ˙0 ˙0 Dpp (t) = m ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t)(N + 1/2).41) The dissipative part of this equation is the same as for the undriven dissipative harmonic oscillator [50].

for which the classical motion is integrable. This introduces an additional coupling term ∝ ppν .50) dτ K(τ ) G0 (t − τ. ]+ ] 2 γ γ − 2 Dpp [x. below. where a and bν ν are the usual annihilation operators of the system and the bath. Inserting this operator into Eq. In Wigner representation. (5. t ) + G0 (t.4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA In the present case of a bilinear system.51) . driven or not. indicated by the superscript 0 . (4. t ) for the corresponding undamped quantum system is given by the solution of the classical equation of motion in the limit γ → 0. the effective master equation has the structure of (5. ] − γ [x. Note that within a Markov approximation.1). [p. t ) ∂t . [x.3). (5. This is in contrast to the non-Markovian exact master equation [28]. In this latter case. t). with the periodically time-dependent transport coefficients ∞ (5. this corresponds to a time-dependent diffusion coefficient.42) containing derivatives with respect to x is a consequence of the RWA: Its effect is equivalent to using the RWA coupling Hamiltonian HSB = ν gν (ab† + a† bν ) instead of (3. It consequently does not exhibit Lindblad form [93] (see Appendix B. (5. by returning to the original Markov approximation.12).48) Dpp (t) = − Dxp (t) = − γ mγ dτ K(τ ) 0 ∞ 0 ∂G0 (t − τ. ∞ G (t. the Heisenberg position operator xH (t. the master equation is periodic with the driving period T = 2π/Ω.6).49) (5. t ) = −x i i ˙ = − [HS (t). t ) = n. ]]. t ). (5. In our case the classical solution is given by (5. n n (5. This form of the master equation does not produce a positive semidefinite diffusion matrix. the knowledge of the classical dynamics opens a more direct access also to the quantal time evolution. Eq. The corresponding interactionpicture position operator reads p ∂G0 (t. leads to the master equation xH (t. In the next section we show how to avoid this RWA. see Eq. To evaluate these expressions. respectively. Specifically. (4.48) with coefficients Dxp and Dpp which depend in a non-periodic way on the time elapsed since the preparation at t0 . [p. we substitute the undamped limit of Eq.11).56).47) ∂t m where x and p now denote the position and the momentum operator.n =−∞ 0 c0 c0 sin µ0 (t − t ) + Ω(nt − n t ) . ]] + 2 Dxp [x. t =t (5. 5.1).38 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator The fact that there are also dissipative terms in Eq.

55. Applying the transformations (A.53) is solved by contour integration in the upper half plane.5. Interestingly enough.4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA 39 The explicit time dependence in G(t.28) to the master equation (5.e.2. 5.54) π where C is the Euler constant. Its logarithmic divergence is regularized by a Drude cutoff to obtain ∞ ∞ Dxp = − 2π P n=−∞ −∞ dω coth ω 2kB T 2 ω ωD . the 2 terms with ∂x x and ∂x are now absent.50) is completely different. 2kB T (5. t ) results in a 2π/Ω-periodic time dependence of the coefficients Dpp and Dxp .4. mγDxp coincides with the Drude regularized divergent part of the stationary momentum variance of a dissipative harmonic oscillator [54. In contrast to the Fokker-Planck equation with RWA in the last subsection. Averaging the transport coefficients over one period of the driving is equivalent to the moderate rotating-wave approximation introduced in Section 4.45).17) and assuming an Ohmic bath. Dpp 1 = m 2 ∞ 0 cn (µ0 + nΩ) coth n=−∞ 2 (µ0 + nΩ) . we discuss the time evolution of the density operator in Wigner representation. (5. ∂t W (x. Expressing the resulting sums by the psi function ψ(x) = d ln Γ(x)/dx [92].1 Wigner representation and Fokker-Planck equation In order to achieve a description close to the classical phase-space dynamics. In addition. Thus the quasienergy spectrum approach is reflected solely by a drivinginduced modification of the momentum diffusion Dpp . It originates from a principal part that has been neglected in the derivation of the Floquet-Markov equation in (4. we find for Dpp in an average over one period of the driving. t) = L(t)W (x. p..3. we have to choose the cutoff ωD much larger than the relevant frequencies µ0 + nΩ. The integral in Eq. 2 ω 2 − (µ0 + nΩ)2 ω 2 + ωD (5. After inserting the noise kernel (3. p.60].53) where P denotes Cauchy’s principal part. (5.55) . We have neglected terms of the order (µ0 + nΩ)/ωD . the cross diffusion Dxp in (5. i.25)–(A.18).52) This form makes explicit that the diffusion Dpp accounts for the quasienergies (µ0 + nΩ). The evaluation of the cross diffusion Dxp is more complex.48). I(ω) = mγω. and unrelated to the one in the RWA case (5. we obtain a c-number equation of motion. we obtain Dxp = − ψ 1+ ωD 2πkB T +C . (5. t).

p. the diffusion matrix is not positive semidefinite. m Equation (5. so that (5. (5. or by using the formula for the conditional probability of a Gauss process [94].55) of this form with µ00 = 0 by the method of characteristics [95] in Appendix C. for any non-zero Dxp .58) dt [G(t.56) has the structure of an effective Fokker-Planck operator. However.18). t )] . We construct a solution for (5. t ). 5. t) = e−µα t uα (x. uα (x.55) has solutions of Floquet form. it complies with the conditions of the Floquet theorem.56) L(t) = − p∂x + γ∂p p + k(t)x∂p + γDpp ∂p + γDxp ∂x ∂p . p. Since Eq. (5. p.56). correspondingly the Fokker-Planck-like equation (5. This fact will be exploited in the following subsection to construct the solutions. p.55) with Eq. t ) ∂t . t + T ). t) = 1 2π σxx (t) σxp (t) σxp (t) σpp (t) x p t −∞ t −1/2 1 × exp − 2 with the variances σxx (t) = 2γDpp m2 2γDpp σxp (t) = m σxx (t) σxp (t) σxp (t) σpp (t) −1 x p (5. ∂t dt ∂ G(t. which contain the initial condition. In the present case. As is the case for the master equation from which it has been derived.4. t).55) with Eq.56) is not positive semidefinite requires to take a different route. Eq. (5. the fact that the diffusion matrix of (5. vanish and we obtain the asymptotic solution W00 (x. 94]. In particular. In the limit t0 → −∞.59) (5. t ) −∞ t 2 (5.56) represents a differential equation with timeperiodic coefficients. Consequently. a solution of the Fokker-Planck equation can be obtained directly by solving the equivalent Langevin equation [45.61) −∞ .55) with Eq. however. t) = uα (x. (5. dt G(t.60) 2 ∂ G(t. σpp (t) = −mγDxp + 2γDpp (5.56) has no equivalent Langevin representation. p.40 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator with the differential operator 1 2 (5.2 Wigner-Floquet solutions The Fokker-Planck equation for the density operator in Wigner representation. (5. the coefficients of the Fokker-Planck operator retain the periodicity of the driving. there exists a complete set of solutions of the form Wα (x. (5. offers the opportunity to make full use of the well-known and intuitive results for the corresponding classical stochastic system.57) henceforth referred to as Wigner-Floquet functions. the terms in the first line of (C.

5. (5.11) for G(t. the functions n Wnn (x.3 Influence of the driving on the master equation The master equation in operator notation (5. . We can recover this solution by inserting the classical diffusion constant mkB T and the undriven limit ε → 0 for the classical solution.65).67). (5. t) = Q1+ (t) Qn (t) W00 (x. Nevertheless. .9). 1. (5.68) This spectrum is independent of the diffusion constants. (5. Due to Eqs. p.48) and the Fokker-Planck equation (5. .56) [96].64) (5. p. Taking the commutation relation (5. since it is a correction of order γ. The expression for the eigenfunctions in the high-temperature limit of the (undriven) classical Brownian harmonic oscillator in Refs. Q2+ (t + T ) = e(−γ/2−iµ)T Q2+ (t). they are formally independent of the Floquet basis. and therefore is the same as in the case of the classical parametrically driven Brownian oscillator [97].55). The operators Qi+ (t) have the properties [L(t) − ∂t . as expected for an operator of type (5. we construct further Wigner-Floquet functions: By solving the characteristic equations (see Appendix C). we find the two time-dependent differential operators Q1+ (t) = f1 (t)∂x + mf˙1 (t)∂p . (5.61) the difference in using Dpp and D = Dpp + γDxp [see Eq. By inserting the Fourier representation (5. 2+ (5.4. (5.14)] is meaningless. t).64) into account. t ). This allows for a detailed analysis of the difference between the Markovian approach with respect to the unperturbed spectrum and the quasienergy spectrum approach beyond mere differences in representation.66) they are of Floquet structure with the Floquet spectrum µnn = (n + n )γ/2 − i(n − n )µ. Q2+ (t)] = 0 and Q1+ (t + T ) = e(−γ/2+iµ)T Q1+ (t). Starting from W00 . (C.1.67) also solve Eq. n = 0.55) given in this section result from a Markov approximation with respect to the quasienergy spectrum. Q1+ (t)] = [L(t) − ∂t .4 Basis-independent description beyond RWA 41 Note that in (5. 98] is also of the structure (5. Q2+ (t) = f2 (t)∂x + mf˙2 (t)∂p .66) n.63) where the solutions fi (t) of the classical equation of motion are given by (5.65) (5. [96. 5. .59)–(5. given in Section 5. one finds that the variances are asymptotically time periodic. 2.62) (5.

t )F (t ).48). We obtain a master equation of the form (5. i. 1 Dpp = lim Dpp = m ω0 coth ε→0 2 ω0 2kB T . (5.70). t ) ∂G0 (t. the Markovian . Thus parametric driving of a dissipative harmonic oscillator modifies the momentum diffusion in the master equation.42 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator Parametrical driving The Markov approximation with respect to the unperturbed spectrum can be obtained from the (in general more complicated) quasienergy spectrum approach by replacing the coefficients of friction and diffusion by their corresponding limits for zero driving amplitude ε. i.71) dt G0 (t. where the momentum diffusion coefficient Dpp is replaced by its limit for ε → 0. (5. given by the third term.73) into (3. t t (5.69) In general Dpp = Dpp . k(t) = mω0 . HF (t) = HS (t) − xF (t).e. ∂t Thus we obtain a c-number correction to the interaction-picture position operator (5. t ) + ∂t m m ∂ 2 G0 (t. x and can be integrated to yield the interaction-picture operators xH (t. which we verify by numerical studies in Section 5.48) and accordingly a Fokker-Planck equation of the form (5.47). After inserting (5. t ) pH (t.6.72) (5. Thus the level separations remain unaffected and we expect no change in the dissipative part of the master equation (5. t ) = −x 1 p ∂G0 (t.38). The classical equation of motion..70) 2 With HS (t) being a time-independent harmonic oscillator.73) dt t ∂G0 (t.e.55). Additional additive driving The Markovian master equation within the quasienergy spectrum approach undergoes a further modification when the parametric oscillator is subject to an additional additive driving −xF (t). t ) F (t ). It is known that the only effect of the driving force F (t) on the (quasi-) energy spectrum of a parametrically driven harmonic oscillator is an overall level shift [82].. now reads m¨ + k(t)x = F (t). the corresponding Markovian master equation in RWA for the dissipative system was already given in [26]. which is also obeyed by the interaction-picture position operator. Herein we generalize these results for the combined timedependent system Hamiltonian in (5. t ) + G0 (t. t ) = −x m +p + ∂t ∂t ∂t t (5.

] with an effective total driving force ˜ F (t) = F (t) + 0 ∞ t−τ (5. γ(τ ) = 2γδ(τ ). Thus the equation of motion for the density operator has the structure i ˜ ˙ = . . With an Ohmic bath.3). t )F (t ).77) Note that the dissipative parts of (5. the inner integral in (5.3.48). the second one is a correction of the driving force due to interaction with the bath. The term in the first line stems from the reversible part of the master equation (4. To obtain the conservative limit γ → 0 of these. ] + i 0 ∞ 43 (5.77) vanishes and ˜ we obtain F (t) = F (t). Thus in contrast to an explicit parametric time dependence k(t) in the quadratic part of the Hamiltonian. in this case. + F (t)[x.59) and get σxx (t) = − γDpp 2m2 cn cn n. (5. ∂t (5.1 Asymptotics The conservative limit In contrast to the Markov approximation with RWA in Section 5. .78) − 2f1 (t)f2 (t) eγt+i[2µ+(n+n )Ω]t eγt−i(n−n )Ωt 2 +f2 (t) γ − i(n − n )Ω γ + i[2µ + (n + n )Ω] In the limit of weak damping. that we must use a parametric time-dependence to study differences in the dissipative parts resulting from the Markov approximation with respect to the energy spectrum versus the Markov approximation with respect to the quasienergy spectrum. we insert the Green function (5.11) into (5. given by the right hand side of Eq. the variances in both Markov approximations without RWA still depend on the friction γ. γ |µ + nΩ| for any integer n.76) are not affected by the additive driving force F (t). the time dependence of an additive force. Note that this condition is violated in . (5.74) 2 m t−τ t dτ γ(τ ) [x. ] dt G0 (t − τ. (5.76) dτ γ(τ ) t dt ∂G0 (t − τ.n 2 f1 (t) eγt−i[2µ+(n+n )Ω]t γ − i[2µ + (n + n )Ω] . . does not change the Markovian master equation of the dissipative system. + F (t)[x. only the case n = n of the second term in the brackets remains. This makes explicit. 5.5 Asymptotics master equation emerges as i ˙ = . .5 5.75) The dots denote the old result for F (t) ≡ 0. t ) F (t ).5.5.

we get σxx (t) = B where B= n=−∞ Dpp 0 0 ξ (t)ξ2 (t). i.84) With the sum rule (5. . all diagonal elements Wnn (x. It is satisfied if the variances fulfill the inequality σxx (t) σxp (t) σxp (t) σpp (t) = Dpp B m 2 ≥ 2 /4. In an analogous way. (5.3..44 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator parameter regions where the Floquet index becomes a multiple of Ω.e. For consistency. (5.55) with γ = 0.2 The high-temperature limit In the limit of high temperatures kB T ωD . In the refined approach (Section 5. 5. the cross diffusion Dxp vanishes in the high-temperature limit. (5. t) are Floquet functions with the quasienergies µnn = 0. 5. Moreover. an equation of the form (5. t) can be viewed as dissipation-adapted Floquet functions.83) which we have verified numerically for the case of the Mathieu oscillator. the Fokker-Planck equation is already of the required structure.4).79) c0 n 2 (5. With ψ(1) = −C [92]. p. we find σxp (t) = B Dpp ˙0 0 0 ˙0 ξ (t)ξ2 (t) + ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t) . we expect the Fokker-Planck equation for the Wigner function to give the Kramers equation for the classical Brownian motion [97]. However. in this limit γ → 0.35) of the corresponding Schr¨dinger o equation. 2m 1 ˙0 ˙0 σpp (t) = BDpp ξ1 (t)ξ2 (t). Due to the degeneracy of the Floquet indices. which are also solutions of the coherent equation of motion. 2 1 m ∞ (5. For the position variance.82) Besides the prefactor.55) with diffusion constants Dxp = 0 and Dpp = mkB T .8).5. we check the position-momentum uncertainty relation for the asymptotic solution. as is the case along the borderlines of the regions of stability in parameter space (cf.80) denotes a number of order unity.81) (5.1). they are different from the Wigner representation of the stationary solutions (5. Eq. For Dpp . Fig. (5. we use coth x = 1/x + O(x) and get Dpp = mkB T n c0 n 2 (µ0 + nΩ). p. this reduces to Dpp = mkB T . The limγ→0 Wnn (x. this is no contradiction. these variances are the same as for the master equation with RWA in Section 5.

we choose 2 k(t) = m ω0 + ε cos Ωt .4). the classical Floquet index µ and the Fourier coefficients cn are determined numerically by continued fractions [45].. 5.4 that the influence of the driving on the master equation results in a modification of the momentum diffusion. obtained from a Markov approximation with respect to the unperturbed spectrum. reads kB T 1 2 kB T c0 =B . Note that within the unstable regimes. Appendix A). (5.3a and 5. Figure 5. The discrepan2 cies become most significant for strong driving and large ω0 . Eq. Both for low driving 2 amplitude ε ω0 and high temperature T ω0 /kB . [28].86) and the ansatz (5. Specifically. the difference vanishes. We showed in Section 5.5 Ω is sufficiently large. 5. we compare our approximate results to exact ones. i. in the high-temperature limit. we obtain the tridiagonal recurrence relation 2 εcn−1 + 2 ω0 − γ 2 /4 − (µ + nΩ)2 cn + εcn+1 = 0.87) From this equation. (5. we give the numerical results for the Mathieu oscillator. The chosen driving parameters ω 2 = 6.5. time and driving parameters are given in the units which are commonly used in mathematical literature [85] to obtain the scaled Mathieu equation ¯ x + (¯ 0 + 2¯ cos(2t))x = 0. (5. with the classical result in the limit γ → 0. which results from the quasienergy spectrum approach. This factor.53513 Ω/2).86) By inserting (5. obtained from the path-integral solution in Ref. The temperature kB T = 0. The parameters ω0 and ε are varied along the full line in the inset.85) N+ = n 2 n Therefore the diffusion constants Dxx and Dxp remain finite and the Fokker-Planck operator (5.6) into (5. The variances σxx (t) and σpp (t) of the Markov approximations without RWA are compared to the exact results [28] in the Figs. The numerical values are given in units of the classical 2 momentum diffusion coefficient mkB T .42) does not approach the Kramers limit for high temperatures.3. Variances are plotted in units of the corresponding ¨ ω2 ε ground-state variance for zero driving amplitude (cf. In the figures.2 compares the diffusion coefficient Dpp . (5. Nevertheless the asymptotic variances in RWA coincide for high temperatures.3b. the variances and diffusion constants scale with N + 1/2. but with quantum effects still . perturbation theory is not valid. Nevertheless.6 Numerical results In this section.6 Numerical results 45 In the quasienergy spectrum approach with RWA in Section 5.e. to the diffusion coefficient Dpp .52) gives a smooth interpolation.5 Ω2 and ε = 7 Ω2 lie inside the fifth stable zone (µ = 4.

but happen to occur in the regions with negative slope.3. As depicted in Fig.5.6. .4.2: The diffusion constants D pp for the simple (dotted) and Dpp for the improved (dashed) Markov approximation in units of the classical diffusion constant mk B T 2 for kB T = 0.1). The relative error ηxx (t) = Markov exact σxx (t) − σxx (t) exact σxx (t) (5. Results for the Markovian treatment within RWA. For the chosen parameters it is reduced by the use of the improved Markov scheme by approximately 30%. This reflects the breakdown of the weak-coupling approach. Fig. Note that the maximal deviations do not occur in the extrema.5 Ω. In the Figure we depict asymptotic times t > 100/Ω. given in Section 5. For this example. Nevertheless. The driving parameters are the same as in Fig. The asymptotic covariance elements retain the periodicity T = 2π/Ω of the external driving. the solution without RWA yields—up to a scale—a better overall agreement with the exact behavior over a full driving period T . where transient effects have already decayed. 5. 5.3. are depicted for the position variance σxx (t) in Fig. appreciable. 5. We note that the improved Markovian treatment in Section 5.4.88) of the position variance for these two Markov approximations is depicted in Fig.5 h 2 ε = ω0 [mkB T ] 4 [Ω2 /4] 2 ω0 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 10 0 0 5 10 ε [Ω2 /2] 15 Dpp 20 30 2 ε = ω0 [Ω2 /2] Figure 5.46 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator 6 5 kB T /¯ Ω = 0. The parameters ω0 and ε are indicated by the full line in the inset (cf. which accounts for the quasienergy differences. 5. agrees better with the exact prediction. the quality of agreement to the exact result is similar for both Markov approximations. the quality of both Markov approximations worsens with increasing dissipation strength γ. 5.

The scaled driving period T = 2π/Ω is indicated in panel (a).5 Ω2 .6 0.6 Numerical results 47 14 12 [¯ /2mω0 ] h (a) T 10 8 6 4 2 0 50 51 52 53 t [Ω/2] 54 55 σxx 12 (b) 10 [m¯ ω0 /2] h 8 6 4 2 0 50 51 52 53 t [Ω/2] 54 55 Figure 5.3 0.3: The asymptotic variances σxx (t) (a) and σpp (t) (b) with period T = 2π/Ω for the simple (dotted) and the improved (dashed) Markov approximation. 5.0 50 51 52 53 t [Ω/2] 54 55 Figure 5.1 0.4 0. σpp ηxx 0.5. compared to the exact result (full line) for the parameters ε = 7 Ω2 . kB T = 0.5 Ω and γ = Ω/20. 2 ω0 = 6.3a.2 0.4: Relative error ηxx (t) for the position variances of Fig.5 0. .

The driving parameters are ε = 7 Ω2 2 and ω0 = 6. In the crudest treatment introduced in Section 4.6: Position variances obtained with the Markov approximation with respect to the quasienergy spectrum with (dotted) and without (dashed) RWA. gain an explicit time dependence with the periodicity of the driving. refers to the degree to which changes in dynamical and spectral properties of the central system due to the driving are taken into account.5 Ω2 .5: The time averaged variance σxx t for the simple (dotted) and the improved (dashed) Markov approximation. the use of the improved Floquet-Markov . ω0 = 6.6 γ [Ω/2] 0.4 0. where the dissipative terms in the master equation are derived ignoring the explicit time dependence of the Hamiltonian.5 Ω. The energy-domain quantity relevant for all subsequent developments is then the quasienergy spectrum. 0.8 1. instead of the unperturbed spectrum.48 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator 8 [¯ /2mω0 ] h 6 4 2 0 Figure 5. and the driving only appears in the coherent term. compared to the exact result (full line) for γ = Ω/20 and kB T = 0.2 0. In the time domain.0 σxx t 12 10 [¯ /2mω0 ] h 8 6 4 2 0 50 51 52 53 t [Ω/2] 54 55 Figure 5. obtained within the Floquet formalism. An improved master equation results from the Floquet-Markov scheme which we obtained in Section 4. compared to the exact result (full line) for the 2 parameters ε = 7 Ω2 . Besides the differences in representation.5 Ω. the quantities entering the dissipative terms of the master equation.1.7 σxx Conclusion The principal distinction to be made among possible Markovian approaches to the driven dissipative dynamics. such as Heisenberg-picture operators of the central system.2 by coupling the central system and the driving as one whole to the heat bath. 5.5 Ω2 and kB T = 0.

by neglecting reservoir-induced virtual transitions between Floquet states of the central system that violate quasienergy conservation. these limit cycles are trivial and correspond to a fixed point at the origin. the Floquet formalism is a useful device to construct and classify solutions. A time dependence arises only by the periodic variation of the shape of the asymptotic distributions. undergoes a renormalization which vanishes. the corresponding master equations have Floquet structure throughout.4 mainly results in a modified momentum diffusion that depends on the quasienergy spectrum instead of the unperturbed spectrum of the central system. the centers of gravity of the asymptotic quasiprobability distributions follow the corresponding classical limit cycles. specifically in terms of the Wigner representation of the density operator and its equation of motion. Even within the improved Markov approach.. then the equation of motion for the reduced density operator complies with the conditions for applicability of the Floquet theorem.e. and thus manifestly generates a dynamical semigroup. Apparently a drawback. They represent the quasiprobability distributions closest to the Floquet solutions of the corresponding classical Fokker-Planck equation. The difference becomes significant in the limits of strong driving amplitude and low temperature. however. Since all variants of the Markov approximation discussed here truncate the memory of the central system on time scales shorter than the period of the driving. This is not the case if the RWA is avoided. allows for memory effects of unlimited duration and thereby generally prevents the consistent definition of a propagator over a single period. the lack of a Lindblad structure in the master equation without RWA faithfully reflects the failure of the Markov approximation on short time scales. An additive time-dependent external force. A significant simplification of the master equation is achieved by a rotating-wave approximation. They are not literally stationary but retain the periodic time dependence of the driving. The resulting master equation has Lindblad form. applied in addition to or instead of the parametric driving. As a consequence. Since all Fokker-Planck equations obtained are time periodic. The exact path-integral solution. In the case of parametric driving. or WignerFloquet states in short. i. An analogous situation as with the Lindblad form of the master equation arises with its Floquet structure. here.e. as are the corresponding master equations. In this representation. i. Concluding from a numerical comparison of certain dynamical quantities. in contrast. for the . Additional insight is gained by discussing the dynamics in terms of phase-space distributions. can be written as eigenfunctions of a generalized non-unitary Floquet operator that generates the evolution of the density operator over a single period. Since we are here dealing with a linear system. with creation and annihilation operators acting on Floquet states. Wigner-Floquet states with Floquet index zero correspond to asymptotic solutions. integrated over a single period). their solutions may be written as eigenstates of a Wigner-Floquet operator (the Fokker-Planck operator evolving the Wigner function. finer levels of approximation can be distinguished. If all coefficients are at most periodically time dependent.5.7 Conclusion 49 approximation in Section 5. the solutions can be cast in Floquet form. in the case of an Ohmic bath.

Technical advantages of the Markov approximation in general and of its various ramifications—easy analytical and numerical tractability. even in parameter regimes where the respective approximations are expected to become problematic. However. the attributes “simple” and “improved” for the two basic Markovian approaches prove adequate. the differences in quality are not huge and the agreement with the exact solution is generally good. desirable formal properties such as Floquet or Lindblad form of the master equation—can justify to tolerate their quantitative inaccuracy. Results for the Markov approximation based on the quasienergy spectrum show consistently better agreement with the exact path-integral solution than those for the Markov approximation with respect to the unperturbed spectrum.50 The parametrically driven harmonic oscillator specific case of the Mathieu oscillator. .

6 The harmonically driven double-well potential In this chapter we use the Floquet-Markov scheme to investigate the interplay of chaos and dissipation in a bistable quantum system. we reveal the limitations of the three-level approximation and identify additional features of the full dynamics not covered by it. 30–33. While in the coherent case the dynamics is well described in a three-state approximation. this attractor may be of quite different nature. In particular. the coupling to the environment indirectly couples the three states to all other states. we have a mixed phase space. Tunneling is extremely sensitive to any disruption of coherence as it occurs due to the unavoidable coupling to the environment: In presence of dissipation.2.1 we introduce its Hamiltonian and the underlying symmetries. coherent tunneling becomes a transient that fades out on the way to an asymptotic state [11. On the basis of numerical results for the full driven double well with dissipation. Depending on friction strength and details of the system. . Chaotic tunneling comes about by an interplay of classical nonlinear. where the coexistence of regular and chaotic regions leads to a variety of uncommon coherence phenomena. In Section 6. we briefly review coherent driven tunneling as well as its modification caused by the influence of classical chaos. Thus. the so-called attractor [3]. the structures associated with classical attractors are smeared out on a scale but leave their trace in the asymptotic state of the corresponding dissipative quantum map [106]. 12]. the coherent exchange of probability between symmetry-related regular islands that are separated by a chaotic layer. we consider the long-time asymptotics and the phase-space structure associated with it. Most prominent among them is chaotic tunneling [13–17. Switching on friction has a dramatic consequence for the classical phase space: A volume element contracts exponentially in time and therefore all trajectories converge towards a submanifold of phase space with zero volume. dynamics and quantum coherence. Moreover. We study coherent and dissipative chaotic tunneling in the vicinity of such singlet-doublet crossings in Section 6. On a quantum level. If the dissipative dynamics is also chaotic.3. for sufficiently strong friction. not by a static potential barrier. the attractor typically shrinks to a limit cycle or a set of isolated fixed points. We study the classical-quantum correspondence of the asymptotic state in Section 6. The harmonically driven quartic double well will serve as our working model. The quasispectrum associated with chaotic tunneling exhibits a characteristic feature: Quasienergies of chaotic singlets intersect tunnel doublets which are supported by regular tori. For moderate driving near the classical resonances. typically bistable. 99–105]. the attractor has in general fractal geometry—it forms a so-called strange attractor. chaos already plays a significant role for the classical dynamics although the motion near the bottom of the wells is still regular.

It is defined by the Hamiltonian H(t) = HDW + HF (t). ¯ 2 2 ¯ where the dimensionless quantities x. ˙ x = p.2) (6. of the x2 and the x4 term.52 The harmonically driven double-well potential t = (n + 1/2)π/Ω t = 2πn/Ω V (x. we consider the quartic double well with a spatially homogeneous driving force.3) The potential term of the static bistable Hamiltonian HDW possesses two minima at 2 x = ±x0 .6) This implies that the classical dynamics is independent of the barrier height EB . x0 = (8EB /mω0 )1/2 . HDW = 2m 4 64EB HF (t) = Sx cos(Ωt). Apart from mere scaling.4) 1 3 1 ¯¯ ˙ ¯ ¯ (6. it has no free parameter. the classical phase space of HDW only depends on the presence or absence. 4 1 m2 ω 0 4 p2 2 − mω0 x2 + x . The influence of the driving on the classical phase-space structure is fully characterized by the rescaled amplitude and frequency of the driving. ω0 (6. −x0 6.1: Sketch of the driven double well potential described by the time-dependent Hamiltonian (6.1). p/mω0 x0 and ω0 t. ¯ ¯ (6. Besides that.1) at various times.1) (6. p and t are given by x/x0 . ¯ ¯ respectively. harmonic in time. Fig. .1 The model As a prototypical working model. separated by a barrier of height EB (cf. The parameter ω0 denotes the (angular) frequency of small oscillations near the bottom of a well. This is obvious from the scaled form of the classical equations of motion. 6. Ω ¯ Ω= .5) p = x − x − F cos(Ωt). and the signs. F = S 2 8mω0 EB . (6. t) 0 EB −EB ω0 x0 x Figure 6.

79]. This enables a treatment within the FloquetMarkov scheme. can be chosen as real [8.7) and distinguishes the semiclassical from the deep quantum regime.1 Symmetries The model Hamiltonian (6. such that the variation of the potential at the bottom of the wells is much smaller than the barrier height.11)]. for the sinusoidal shape of the driving together with the initial phase chosen above. Time-reversal symmetry It is well known that the energy eigenfunctions of an (undriven) Hamiltonian which obeys time-reversal symmetry. p → −p. thus possesses discrete time-translational invariance.6. Time-reversal symmetry is typically broken by a magnetic field (recall that a magnetic field is described by an axial vector and changes sign under time reversion) or by an explicit timedependence of the Hamiltonian. x0 . The classical limits hence amounts to D → ∞. Eq. which allow for an improvement of numerical efficiency and also for a classification of the Floquet states as even or odd. we find two more discrete symmetries. apart from computational advantages. we restrict ourselves to moderate driving amplitudes. −t) . It is approximately given by D= EB . 6. ω0 (6.1 The model 53 In the quantum-mechanical case. This has. In addition. If now φ(x. t → −t (6. then φ∗ (x. This is evident from the classical scales for position.9) denotes the effective quantum of action.10) is retained and the Floquet Hamiltonian obeys H(t) = H∗ (−t) [cf.8) = mω0 x2 0 (6. However. mω0 x0 . In the following. this holds no longer true: The finite size of Planck’s constant results in a finite number of doublets with energy below the barrier top.1. introduced in Chapter 4. This implies that the bistable character of the potential is retained at any time. 79]. t) is a Floquet state in position representation with quasienergy . the position-momentum 0 uncertainty relation in the scaled phase space (¯. time-reversal symmetry T: x → x.1) obviously is 2π/Ω-periodic in time. (2. and momentum. however. also direct physical consequences for the level statistics of quantum systems with chaotic classical counterpart [8. introduced above: The corresponding action scale is mω0 x2 and therefore. p) reads x ¯ ∆¯ ∆¯ ≥ x p where eff eff 2 = 1 8D (6.

. i. . which translates to φ(x. p. . Thus. . . the fact that the generalized parity acts on the composite Hilbert space results in a particularity: If |φ(t) is e. . (6. two equivalent Floquet states from neighboring Brillouin zones possess different generalized parity. i. . . ω) in the frequency regime. . |ψ(t) = exp(−i t/ )|φ(t) . 107.e. . Thus. . p → −p. t → t. 108].54 The harmonically driven double-well potential also is a Floquet state with the same quasienergy. While such a discrete symmetry is of minor importance in classical physics. and phase. we have to diagonalize the even supermatrix   . . time t mod(2π/Ω) or in the composite Hilbert space R ⊗ T . the Fourier coefficients of the Floquet states can be chosen real. . Quasienergies from different symmetry classes may intersect. it is sufficient to compute all eigenvectors of the Floquet Hamiltonian in the even subspace whose eigenvalues lie in the first two Brillouin zones. thus allowing for a classification of the Floquet states as even or odd. respectively. The invariance of the system under the generalized parity is also of considerable help in the numerical treatment of the Floquet matrix (2.    · · · Ee + 2 Ω 0 Xeo 0 0 ···     ··· Eo + Ω 0 Xeo Xoe 0 ···    Ee Xeo 0 0 Xoe · · ·  . . This means that a classification of the corresponding solutions of the Schr¨dinger equation. It is defined by the operation PΩ : x → −x. ω) = φ∗ (x. However. To obtain a complete set of Floquet states. however. This means that we can always choose the Floquet states by linear combination such that φ(x.. . t) = φ∗ (x. −t). . whereas quasienergies with the same symmetry typically form avoided crossings [79]. Generalized parity The undriven Hamiltonian HDW is invariant under the parity P: x → −x. 100]. an even Floquet state.12) He =  · · ·    ··· 0 0 Xeo Eo − Ω Xoe ···     ··· 0 0 0 Xoe Ee − 2 Ω · · ·    . . p → −p. then |φ(1) (t) = exp(iΩt)|φ(t) turns out to be odd. a more general. . dynamical symmetry remains [10.e.. . . . . the odd Floquet states are obtained by shifting the (even) ones from the second to the first Brillouin zone. ..53) [16. as even or odd o requires a restriction to a single Brillouin zone. This symmetry is destroyed by a linerarly coupled driving field. . .g. . .11) and represents a generalized parity acting in the extended phase space spanned by x. . . which changes their generalized parity. . t → t + π/Ω (6. its influence on the quantum mechanical quasispectrum { α (F )} is more distinct: It devides the composite Hilbert space in an even and an odd subspace. .. . The even Floquet states are given by the eigenvectors of He from the first Brillouin zone. With the above choice of HF (t). .

Eq.. respectively. . |Φ− acquire a relative phase exp(−i∆n t/ ) and |ΦR .5 x2.1 x0. Eo =  0 0 E 4 5    . Therefore. . . .14)  6.6.. Thus. (6. .1. . we can gain a qualitative picture of its eigenstates from simple torus quantization: The unpaired tori correspond to singlets with positive energy. .13) x1.2 x5. The matrices    E0 0 0 · · · E1 0 0  0 E2 0 · · ·   0 E3 0    Ee =  0 0 E · · ·  .1 The model which for the same number of Floquet channels has only half original Floquet matrix (2.5 . .1 x2. each partner of which oscillates in either one of the two potential minima. There is a separatrix at E = 0. whereas the symmetry-related pairs below the top of the barrier correspond to degenerate pairs of eigenstates.53).0 x5. .2). . |ΦL are transformed n n n n into one another after a time π /∆n .. ··· ··· ··· . predicts that the partners of these pairs have small but finite overlap. purely quantum mechanical frequency-scale. . .0 x1. Neighboring pairs are separated in energy approximately by ω0 . The other set consists of unpaired trajectories. . . . . .   . with E < 0. We can always choose the globals phases such that the superpositions 1 |ΦR. . however. that encircle both wells in a spatially symmetric fashion.2 x1. Xeo = S 2      x0. driving. and dissipation With the driving HF (t) switched off. . .  (6. Due to the integrability of the undriven double well. . . the states |Φ+ .   Xoe = S 2      55 the dimension of the ··· ··· ··· .3 x4. which reflects the almost harmonic potential shape near the bottom of the wells. As time evolves. . .    . . .4 . . .0 x3.15) are localized in the right and the left well. denote the undriven Hamiltonian HDW and the coupling to the driving field H1 = Sx/2.2 Tunneling. This introduces an additional. . . Typically..1 x4. .4 x5. each of which consists of an even and an odd state. |Φ+ and |Φ− .3 x2. comes in symmetry-related pairs. . the tunnel rate ∆0 / of a particle which resides in the ground-state doublet.  ··· ··· ··· .4 x3. .L = √ |Φ+ ± |Φ− n n n 2 (6. (6. The energies of the nth doublet are separated by a small tunnel n n splitting ∆n . the classical phase space generated by HDW exhibits the constituent features of a bistable Hamiltonian system. . . . It forms the border between two sets of trajectories: One set.3 x0. with E > 0.5 x4. . which are part of the supermatrix He . decomposed into the even and odd eigenstates of HDW . the particle tunnels forth and back between the wells with a frequency ∆n / . Exact quantization.2 x3. tunnel rates are extremely small compared . the true eigenstates come in doublets. .    .

Increasing the amplitude of the driving from zero onwards has two principal consequences for the classical dynamics: The separatrix is destroyed as a closed . thus the splitting vanishes and tunneling is brought to a complete standstill by the purely coherent influence of the driving [10]. For adiabatically slow driving. and an additional energy scale is introduced. i. As an immediate consequence. In general. In the dissipative case. even if its influence on the classical phase space is minor. If the driving is faster. which is always larger than its unperturbed value ∆0 and results in an enhancement of the tunneling rate [107]. the coherent suppression of tunneling [10. A driving of the form (6. However. For example. tunneling is governed by the time-average of the instantaneous tunnel splitting. < ∆0 / ∼ Ω ω0 . there exist counterintuitive effects. the opposite holds true: The relevant time scale is now given by the inverse of the quasienergy splitting of the ground-state doublet /| 1 − 0 |. 6. It has been found [107.3). It even happens that the quasienergies of the ground-state doublet (which are of different generalized parity) intersect as a function of the driving amplitude F . reflecting the growth of the transition rates (4.23) [53].56 The harmonically driven double-well potential to the frequencies of the classical dynamics. the effective finite width attained by each discrete level. So far. Coherent tunneling is in this case well described within a two-state approximation [107. The small energy scales associated with make tunneling extremely sensitive to any disruption of coherence. It enters already on the level of classical mechanics since small oscillations near the bottom of the wells become resonant and classical chaos comes into play. as it occurs due to the unavoidable coupling to the environment. a parameter regime where classical motion is predominantly regular. all the more in the semiclassical regime we are interested in.109] that in this case for finite driving amplitude | 1 − 0 | < ∆0 . thus tunneling is always decelerated. Ω ∆0 / . This corresponds in a quantum description to resonant multiple excitation of inter-doublet transitions until levels near the top of the barrier are significantly populated. 109]. for driven tunneling in the vicinity of an exact crossing of the ground-state doublet. a two-state approximation of course fails for temperatures kB T ∼ ω0 . where thermal activation to higher doublets becomes relevant. how> ever. we have considered only driving frequencies much smaller than the frequency scale ω0 of the relevant classical resonances. can entail significant consequences for the tunnel dynamics: It may enlarge the tunnel rate by orders of magnitude or even suppress tunneling at all. this time scale gets shorter for higher temperatures. Tunneling and related coherence phenomena are thus rendered transients that occur—if at all—on the way towards an asymptotic equilibrium state and fade out on a time scale tdecoh .3 The onset of chaos Driving with a frequency Ω ≈ ω0 has an even stronger influence on the dynamics of the bistable system.1. 107] can be stabilized with higher temperatures [76–78] until levels outside the doublet start to play a role. 12..e. the symmetry underlying the formation of tunnel doublets is generally broken.

As a whole. around the first resonance introduces a second ladder of doublets into the spectrum. closed trajectories diverges for E → 0. By its sheer phase-space area.6. The appearance of a regular region. This opens the way for diffusive transport between the two potential wells. 100].112]. Fig. The tunnel doublets characterizing the unperturbed spectrum for E < 0 pertain to states located on pairs of symmetry-related quantizing tori in the regular regions within the wells. They can then fluctuate freely in the spectrum and thereby “collide” with other chaotic singlets or regular doublets. the corresponding eigenvalues detach themselves from the regular ladder to which they formerly belonged. there is an infinite set of resonances of the driving with the unperturbed motion. the resonances accumulate towards the separatrix of the unperturbed system. (6.1). As soon as a pair of states is no longer supported by any torus-like manifold. Eq. the quantizing tori successively resolve in the chaotic sea. The gradual widening of the doublets proceeds as a smooth function of the driving amplitude [16. curve and replaced by a homoclinic tangle [110] of stable and unstable manifolds. Due to the nonlinearity of the potential. See Section 6. both inside and outside the wells [111. The corresponding doublets disappear as distinct structures in the spectrum as they attain a splitting of the same order as the mean level separation. it forms a chaotic layer in the vicinity and with the topology of the former separatrix (cf. With increasing size of the chaotic layer. Both major tendencies in the evolution of the classical phase space—extension of the chaotic layer and growth of the first resonance—leave their specific traces in the quasienergy spectrum. 114]. including fractal [115] and vague tori [116].6). 6. 113.2: Tunneling phenomena and the according appropriate levels of description for the non-dissipative driven double-well potential. large enough to accommodate several eigenstates.1 The model 57 almost regular adiabatic energies quasienergies chaos two-level description coherent destruction of tunneling ∆0 /¯ h multi-level description chaotic tunneling ω0 Ω Figure 6.1 for a detailed discussion. Size and shape of the first resonance vary in a way different from the . The bars depict the corresponding regimes of the driving frequency Ω. This function roughly obeys a power law [34. the first resonance (the one for which the periods of the driving and of the unperturbed oscillation are in a ratio of 1:1) is prominent among the others and soon (in terms of increasing amplitude F ) exceeds the size of the “order-zero” regular areas near the bottom of each well [16]. Since the period of the unperturbed.

58 The harmonically driven double-well potential − c − r + r (a) − r (b) − c (c) (d) Figure 6. For the parameters chosen in our numerical studies. in both directions. the familiar way tunneling fades out in the presence of dissipation is also significantly altered.” Depending on temperature. See Section 6. the borderline between the chaotic layer along the former separatrix and the regular regions within and outside the wells is quite sharply defined. it can also be destroyed on a much shorter time scale. For the tunneling dynamics. in turn.2. Singlet-doublet crossings.8. below) on a scale of the chosen effective quantum of action. Different line types signify different parity. As a consequence. the coherent dynamics can last much longer than for the unperturbed doublet. This gives rise to additional singlet-doublet and even to doublet-doublet encounters. 6. 6. 6. the order of the regular doublet is restored in passing through the crossing. The corresponding doublet ladder therefore moves in the spectrum independently of the doublets that pertain to the main regular region. 6. The “coastal strip” formed by hierarchies of regular islands around higher resonances remains narrow (cf. Fig. higher resonances are negligible in size. despite the presence of the same dissipation as outside the crossing. Fig. below). Near a crossing.1 for the labeling of the levels. Note that only for configurations (a). from the typical tunnel splitting (cf. drastically change the non-dissipative quasienergy scales and replace the two-level by a three-level structure. and of the chaotic singlets. This is reflected in time-domain phenomena ranging from the suppression of tunneling to a strong increase in its rate and to complicated quantum beats [31–33].3: Possible configurations of quasienergy crossings between a chaotic singlet and a regular doublet. In configurations (c).2. Therefore.6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings Near a crossing. 103] is therefore not significant in our studies.1 Three-level crossings Among the various types of quasienergy crossings that occur according to the above scenario. level separations deviate vastly. the role of states located in the border region [102.(b).(d). those involving a regular doublet and a chaotic singlet are the most com- . it is reversed. main regular region. establishing “chaos-induced coherence.

As the third player. (6.18) |φR. respectively. The global relative phases can be chosen such that the r r superpositions 1 − (6. a small splitting of the mean − + − ± energies pertaining to the regular doublet. and tunnel back and forth with a frequency ∆/ given by the tunnel splitting in the presence of the driving.16) . r − |ψr (t) + (6. residing on a pair of quantizing tori in one of the regular (subscript r) regions. Without loss of generality. and for later reference in the context of the incoherent dynamics. so that its time-periodic part |φ− (t) c contains a large number of harmonics. We have assumed that the quasienergy splitting (as opposed to the unperturbed splitting) is − − + = ∆ > 0.21) . (6.17) =e −i( + r +∆)t/ |φ− (t) r with even (superscript +) and odd (−) generalized parity. we have assumed that c = + +∆+∆c .20) For the singlet-doublet crossings under study. In order to give a quantitative account of such crossings and the associated coherent dynamics. Neglecting the coupling with all other states. c + (6. |Er − Er | Ec − Er . we suppose that r c there is a non-vanishing fixed matrix element b≡ φ− |HDW |φ− r c > 0.6. [30]. In order to model an avoided crossing between |φ− and |φ− . Far to the left of the crossing. we introduce a Floquet state − |ψc (t) = e−i( r +∆+∆c )t/ |φ− (t) . r where |∆c | can be regarded as a measure of the distance from the crossing. we shall now discuss them in terms of a simple three-state model. The structure of the classical phase space then implies that the mean energy of the chaotic state should be close to the top of the barrier and far above that of the doublet.19) located mainly in the chaotic (subscript c) layer. we typically find that ∆ b Ω.L (t) = √ |φ+ (t) ± |φr (t) r 2 are localized in the right and the left well. H3s = + +  0 ∆ b r 0 b ∆ + ∆c  (6. we expect the following situation: There is a doublet of Floquet states + |ψr (t) = e−i r t/ |φ+ (t) . like for the quasienergies. We assume. devised much in the spirit of Ref. we model the system by the three-state (subscript 3s) Floquet Hamiltonian  0 0 0 . its generalized − parity is fixed to be odd. respectively.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 59 mon. For the quasienergy.

Note that in the real crossing. Eq. This numerical example also shows that the idealized three-state model is not always strictly correct. while E0 remains unaffected (Fig. 6. Following the global tendency of widening of the splittings with increasing driving amplitude [16. 6. Eq. r c − − − |φ2 (t) = |φr (t) sin β + |φc (t) cos β . The phase-space structure of the participating Floquet states (Figs. A comparison of the appropriately scaled three-state theory (Fig. we have numerically studied a singlet-doublet crossing that occurs for the double-well potential. as outlined above.1). (6. so that the exact crossing occurs to the left of the avoided one.60 The harmonically driven double-well potential in the three-dimensional Hilbert space spanned by {|φ+ (t) . Therefore. 6. − 1.24). ∆c 2 For β → π/2. it may well happen that even far away from a crossing. 114]. The mean energy is essentially determined 2 1 c r − − by the phase-space structure. |φ− (t) }. 0<β< . Its r r c Floquet states read |φ+ (t) = |φ+ (t) . To the far right of c 2 r the crossing. 6. since they pertain to states with opposite parity (cf. we obtain 2b π (6. c (6. 6. (6.3a. The angle β describes the mixing between the Floquet states |φ− and |φ− and is a measure of r c the distance to the avoided crossing.5) shows satisfactory agreement. The − quasienergies + and − must intersect close to the avoided crossing of − and 2 0 1 1 (Fig. Their quasienergies are + 0 (6.6.4a). 6. In order to illustrate the above three-state model and to demonstrate its adequacy. 6. with D = 4. i. Their crossing is exact. at a driving frequency Ω = 0.25) 2β = arctan . 0 r − |φ1 (t) = |φ− (t) cos β − |φ− (t) sin β .e.5).23) and the mean energies are approximately given by + + E0 = E r .2 = + r 1 + ∆ + ∆c 2 1 2 ∆2 + 4b2 . − − − E1 = Er cos2 β + Ec sin2 β. cf.7) meets the assumptions of our three-state theory. there is also an exchange of E1 and E2 + in an exact crossing. 6. the exact eigenstates |φ− and |φ− have 1 2 interchanged their identity with respect to the phase-space structure [31–33].21). we retain the situation far left of the − crossing.015029 (Fig.24) where contributions of the matrix element b have been neglected. corresponding to −∆c b. the quasienergy of the chaotic singlet decreases as a function of F . with |φ1 ≈ |φ− . By diagonalizing the Hamiltonian (6..4b). we have |φ− ≈ |φ− and |φ− ≈ |φ− .22) = + r . |φ− (t) .4) with this real singlet-doublet crossing (Fig. − − − E2 = Er sin2 β + Ec cos2 β. . for β → 0 or ∆c b. |φ− ≈ |φ− . (6. Fig. 34.982 ω0 and amplitude F = 0.b). Here.

Eq.001 0.4: A singlet-doublet crossing.0 − 1 − ( − + 0 -0.9 are marked by dotted vertical lines.015 F 0. the energies for the case with coupling by full lines for even and dashed lines for odd states. respectively. Bold lines give the mean energies of the chaotic singlet and the ground-state doublet depicted in panel (a). Full and dashed lines indicate energies of even and odd states.014 α a b c 0. 6.016 0. Values of the driving amplitude used in Fig.015 F 0.6. Unperturbed energies are marked by dotted lines. according to a three-state model (6. (6. at D = 4 and Ω = 0. in terms of the dependence of the quasienergies (a) and the mean energies (b) on the driving amplitude F . 0. .1).982 ω0 .001 (a) + h 0 )/¯ ω0 (b) 2 1 − 2 − E2 − E1 Eα /¯ ω0 h − + 0 0 -1 -2 -3 doublets + E0 0.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 61 4b quasienergy (a) 2b ∆ + 0 − 2 (b) mean energy − Ec − E2 2b 0 -2b ∆c 0 − 1 − Er − E1 -4b -10 -5 0 ∆c /b 5 10 -D -10 -5 + E0 0 ∆c /b 5 10 Figure 6.014 0.5: Singlet-doublet crossing found numerically for the driven double well.21) in terms of the dependence of the quasienergies (a) and the mean energies (b) on the coupling parameter ∆c /b.016 Figure 6.

.. .... ... .... .. The driving parameters F = 0.. ... .... ........ . .......5 (b) 0.. ..... . ... .. . ....... .015. ... ..... Ω = 0..... .. ........ ......... ... .. .............. ... Ω = 0. .. . ....... ...... .... ..... ..... .... .. .... .... .............................. ... . .... ... . .. .. .... ... .... . .. . ........ .... ... ... .... .. . ...... . .. .. .. ................... .....5 0. ...... ............ .. ... ... ..... ... ... ..... ... .. .. .. ............ ..... .. ..... ....... .... . . .. ..... . ..... .... . . ... .. . .. ... .... ....... ... . .. . .......... ... . . ..... . .. . ..0 0. ... . .. ....... . ....982 ω0 .. .......... . . .. ... ..... Eq.. ..... ... . .. .... ... ... ......... ...... .. .... .. . ..... .. ....... .. . . ..5 -1.. ..... . .... .. .5 0.. ...... . ........ . ... ......... .. ........ at t = 2πn/Ω. .... ....... .......1). .... .. .. .... ...... .. . .... .. ....... .............. .. ............ .. .... .... ...... ... .. . .... ... . ... .. .. .. . .. ...... . .. ......5 0. ........... . ...5 x/x0 1. ...... ... ....... .. ... .......... ..5 p/mω0 x0 0. . .. .... . . . ......... ... . .. .. .... .. ............. . .... . ......... ............ .. . .. ..... ..... .. ... .... .... ............... . . ... . ....... .....6: Stroboscopic classical phase-space portraits. .. .... ........... ........... .0 -0..... .. ......... ...... . .... . . ..... ..... ........... .... ..... ..... ...... ........ ...... ... .. The driving parameters F = 0.... . .. ... ... .. .... ... . ......... .. .. ... ........ .... .. . ....... . ...... . .............. . . ..... .. -1... ..... . ... .. . ... ... . ...... ... ... . .......... .... ....... ........ . Eq. ............. .... .... . .... . .. ..... .. . . ..... . ........ . ............ . ... ... . .... .. .. . .... ...... . ... .. .. .... ...... .. ... ... .... . ... . . .. . of the harmonically driven quartic double well. ... ..... . ........... .. .. . ..... ....... ... . . ... .................. . .. .... .. . .0 -0. ......... ........ .. ...... ... ..... ... ..... ... . ..... .. ..... .. . ... .... .. .. . are chosen at the the center of the singlet-doublet crossing under study... . . ... ..... .. . ...... ...... ....... .. . . .. . ... ....... . .......... .... . . . .. . . . .. . . .... ..... ... .. .. .... ... . . ... ... ...... ... .. .... . ........... .. .. .. . ....... ...... .. . ........5 x/x0 1. ..... . ...... ... ... ....... .. . .. ........ . ......... ....0 1.. .. ..... ........ .. .. ... ........... ........ ......... ....0 -0. ... .. . ... .. .. . . ... ....... . .... .. ... . .. . -1....... .... ........ ... .. . ........ .. . .... ..... . . . ...... ... . ...... . ........... .. .. ..... ..... .. ...... .....5 -1.. . ..... . ..... .. . ... ........ .. .. ..... ... ........ .... . ..... ...... .... . ... .... . .... .. ... .. ... ... .. ........ ..............5 .... .. ..... .. ..... .. . ...... . .. ...... . ...... ... ..0 1..... . . . ....... ..... .... .... ....... .. .....0 0. ...... .. . . ... ... . ....... .. . ... ........ ....... . .. ..... . ....... .. .. .. ...... .. .......... .... ... ...... ...... .... . ..... .. ... .. ..... . . ...... . . .... ........... .. .......... .. ........... ... . . ........ (6... .. .. .. ... .... ........ .. ...... .5 .. ... .. ... .......... . ........... .. . . ... .. . .... .. ... .. ...... ....... ........... . ...... ....... . .. .. .. ......... .... ... ....... ... ... ... . .. .. ... .. . ..... .. .0 -0..... ... are in sufficient distance to the singlet-doublet crossing such that the mixing between the regular and the chaotic state is negligible......... ..... ... ..... . ....0 -0. . . ..982 ω0 . .... ... . . ... .... .. ..... .... ... .... .. ...... ..................... . ... . ... .. .. ........ ... . .014. .. .......... ..... .... .. .. .... . .... .. .. . . ...7: Contour plots of the Husimi functions for the Floquet states |φ− ≈ |φ− (a) r 1 and |φ− ≈ |φ− (b) of the harc 2 monically driven quartic double well.. ......... . Figure 6. .. . .... .. ... ..... . ............. . . .. .... .. ..... ....5 (a) 0. ... ..... .... . . . ....... .. .... . . . .5 -1.. ............ .. .. ........ .. ..... ... .. ... .. . ..... . ... . .....0 0... ........... . ... . ... . . .... . . .. ............. ... ..... ..... ...... ...... . ...... ...... ... ... ..... . .... ... . ..62 The harmonically driven double-well potential 0.... . .. .. . .. ..0 -0.... at stroboscopic times t = 2πn/Ω... ..5 p/mω0 x0 0....... ....... .... ... . . ..... ...5 -1..... ... . . .. . .. ...... .0 1. .... .1)... .......... ..... . (6.... . .......... . .... . ..... . .. ...... .. . . .... . The rectangle in the lower left corner depicts the size of the effective quantum of action eff . . ..... ... . . . .. . ....... . ....... .. .. ............ . . .. .. . ....... ....... ...... .. .... . ... ..... .... .. . . .. ..... ......... ...... .. .5 Figure 6..... ..... .... ... .. . .. . . .... .... ........... ..... .. ...5 p/mω0 x0 0..... ....... ..... ............... ...... .... ....... ......5 x/x0 1.. .. ... .... ... . . . . ...... . ... . .. .. ..... . . ..... . .... ...... ........... .... .... . .. . ......... ...... ....... .... ..... ...... .

3a. In that case. or |φc . the doublet splitting does not exactly return to its value on the opposite side (see Fig.01 0.0 0.3c. It is even possible that an exact crossing of + and − does not take place 0 1 at all in the vicinity of the crossing. The arrows indicate the locations of the exact and the avoided crossing within a three-level crossing of the type sketched in Fig. 6. it corresponds to the decomposition of |φR in the basis (6. To study the dynamics of the tunneling process. Therefore.025 F Figure 6.26) 0 1 2 2 It is constructed such that at t = 0. 6. Nevertheless. PL (t) = | φL (t)|ψ(t) |2 ( −− 1 1 − cos 1 = 2 + 0 )t + 0 )t sin2 β (6. (6. the above scenario captures the essential features. respectively.18).22) at finite distance from the crossing.982 ω 0 .27) cos2 β − cos ( − 2 − + 0 )t sin2 β .8).d). we focus on the state + − − 1 |ψ(t) = √ e−i 0 t/ |φ+ (t) + e−i 1 t/ |φ− (t) cos β + e−i 2 t/ |φ− (t) sin β . to be PR (t) = | φR (t)|ψ(t) |2 1 ( − − + )t ( −− 0 = 1 + cos 1 cos2 β + cos 2 2 ( − − − )t 2 + cos 1 − 1 cos2 β sin2 β .2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 63 10 -2 n=2 -3 10 10 avoided n=1 n=0 -4 -5 ∆n /¯ ω0 h 10 10 -6 -7 -8 10 exact 10 10 -9 0. we find the probabilities for its evolving into |φR .015 0.8: Splitting of the lowest doublets for D = 4 and Ω = 0. the relation of the quasienergies in the doublet gets reversed via the crossing (Fig.02 0. (6. it is initially localized in the regular region in the right well and follows the time evolution under the Hamiltonian (6.6. 6. From Eqs.21).005 0. |φL .22). (6.

64

The harmonically driven double-well potential

1.0 0.8
P (tn ) (a) PR PL

0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
5

Pc

0

10 2 10 tn = 2πn/Ω [1/ω0 ]

5

3 10

5

1.0 0.8
P (tn )

(b)

0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
5 5 5

0

10 2 10 tn = 2πn/Ω [1/ω0 ]

3 10

1.0 0.8
P (tn )

(c)

0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
5 5 5

Figure 6.9: Stroboscopic time evolution of a state initially localized in the right well, in the vicinity of the singlet-doublet crossing shown in Fig. 6.5, in terms of the probabilities to be in the right well (which here is identical to the return probability, marked by full lines), in the reflected state in the left well (dashed), or in the chaotic state |ψc (dotted). Parameter values are as in Fig. 6.5, and F = 0.0145 (a), 0.0149 (b), 0.015029 (c).

0

10 2 10 tn = 2πn/Ω [1/ω0 ]

3 10

6.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings + cos (
− 1

65

− 2 )t

− 1 cos2 β sin2 β , cos2 β sin2 β.

Pc (t) = | φc (t)|ψ(t) |2 ( −− = 1 − cos 1

− 2 )t

We discuss the coherent dynamics of the three-state model for different distances to the crossing and illustrate it by numerical results for the real crossing introduced above. In sufficient distance from the crossing, there is only little mixing between the regular and the chaotic states, i.e., sin β 1 or cos β 1. The tunneling process + then follows the familiar two-state dynamics involving only |φr and |φ− , with r tunnel frequency ∆/ (Fig. 6.9a). Close to the avoided crossing, cos β and sin β are of the same order of magnitude, and |φ− , |φ− become very similar to one another. Both now have support in the 1 2 chaotic layer as well as in the symmetry-related regular regions and thus are of a hybrid nature. Here, the tunneling involves all the three states and must at least be described by a three-level system. The exchange of probability between the two regular regions proceeds via a “stop-over” in the chaotic region [15, 30–33]. The three quasienergy differences that determine the time scales of this process are in general all different, leading to complicated beats (Fig. 6.9b). However, for ∆c = −2∆, the two quasienergies − − + and + − − are de1 0 0 2 generate. At this point, which marks the center of the crossing, the number of different frequencies in the three-level dynamics reduces to two again. This restores the familiar coherent tunneling in the sense that there is again a simple periodic exchange of probability between the regular regions [31–33]. However, the rate is much larger if compared to the situation far off the crossing, and the chaotic region is now temporarily populated during each probability transfer, twice per tunneling cycle (Fig. 6.9c).

6.2.2

Dissipative chaos-assisted tunneling

The crucial effect of dissipation on a quantum system is the disruption of coherence: a coherent superposition evolves into an incoherent mixture. Thus, phenomena based on coherence, such as tunneling, are rendered transients that fade out on a finite time scale tdecoh . In general, for driven tunneling in the weakly damped regime, this time scale gets shorter for higher temperatures, reflecting the growth of transition rates [53]. However, in the vicinity of an exact crossing of the ground-state quasienergies, the coherent suppression of tunneling [10, 12, 107] can be stabilized with higher temperatures [76–78] and increasing friction [57, 58] until levels outside the doublet start to play a role. We have studied dissipative chaos-assisted tunneling, using again the real singlet-doublet crossing introduced in Sec. 6.2.1 (see Fig. 6.5) as our working example. The time evolution has been computed numerically by iterating the dissipative quantum map (4.31) for the improved master equation in

66

The harmonically driven double-well potential

1.0
tr ρ2 (tn )

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0

(a)

1.0

P (tn )

0.98 0 0 10
5 5 5

2 10

4

2 10 3 10 4 10 tn = 2πn/Ω [1/ω0 ]

5

5 10

5

1.0
tr ρ2 (tn )

(b)

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
5 5 5 5 5

0

10

2 10 3 10 4 10 tn = 2πn/Ω [1/ω0 ]

5 10

Figure 6.10: Occupation probabilities as in Fig. 6.9a,c, but in the presence of dissipation. The dash-dotted line shows the time evolution of tr 2 . The parameter values are D = 4, Ω = 0.982 ω0 , γ = 10−6 ω0 , kB T = 10−4 ω0 , and F = 0.0145 (a), 0.015029 (b). The inset in (a) is a blow up of the rectangle in the upper left corner of that panel.

P (tn ) tr ρ2 (tn )

1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
6 7

Figure 6.11: Time evolution of the return probability PR (full line) and the coherence function tr 2 (dash-dotted) during loss and regain of coherence. The parameter values are as in Fig. 6.10b.

PR (tn )

0

5 10 tn = 2πn/Ω [1/ω0 ]

10

For the relaxation towards the asymptotic state.10). we approximate tdecoh by the decay rate of tr 2 . The time scale trelax of the approach to the asymptotic state is given by the reciprocal of the smallest real part of the eigenvalues of the dissipative kernel. a measure of coherence (see Appendix B. also the slower transitions within doublets are relevant. i. this attractor remains time dependent but shares all the symmetries of the central system.27) 2 1 and Fig. The high mean energy of this singlet results in an enhanced decay of coherence at times when |φc is populated (Fig. periodicity and generalized parity. 6. In general.3) is dissipative. This means that we have eliminated the explicit time dependence of the attractor by representing it in the Floquet basis and introducing a mild rotating-wave approximation. Eq. averaged over a time tp . we focus on the . n should be so large that the coherence decays substantially during the time tp (in our numerical studies to a value of approximately 0.11). are time independent and so the asymptotic solution also is. 6. the coefficients of the master equation (4. the chaotic singlet induces an exact crossing of the ground-state quasienergies (see Fig. i. At the center of the avoided crossing. valid within the moderate rotating-wave approximation. here. the tunnel splitting increases significantly—the essence of chaos-assisted tunneling. At F ≈ 0.2.12). we have chosen the density operator (0) = |φR φR |. 6.3 Asymptotic state As the dynamics described by the master equation (4. (4.9. For this procedure to be meaningful. 6. 1 tdecoh d 1 tp dt =− tr 2 (t ) tp 0 dt 1 tr 2 (0) − tr 2 (tp ) . the chaotic singlet becomes populated periodically with frequency | − − − |/ . we have chosen the propagation time tp as an nfold multiple of the duration 2π /| − − − | of the chaotic 2 1 beats. Therefore. This indicates that transitions from states with mean energy far above the ground state play a crucial role. Eq.e. a state localized in the right well.8). the corresponding time scale trelax can be much larger than tdecoh (Fig. = tp (6.28) (6.22) for the matrix elements αβ . Outside the singlet-doublet crossing we find that the decay of coherence and the relaxation take place on roughly the same time scale (Fig. the decay of coherence becomes much faster and is essentially independent of temperature.6. it converges in the long-time limit to an asymptotic state ∞ (t). 6.22).29) Because of the stepwise decay of the coherence (Fig.2). resulting in a stabilization of coherence with increasing temperature. However.013.e.10).2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 67 moderate rotating-wave approximation.9). cf. 6. (6. 6. To obtain quantitative estimates for the dissipative time scales. To gain some qualitative insight into the asymptotic solution. During the tunneling. In the vicinity of a singlet-doublet crossing. As an initial condition.

It describes two kinds of thermal transitions: decay to states with lower energy and. whereas at the center of the avoided crossing (F ≈ 0. They give the rates of the direct transitions from |φα to |φα .013. Thus Lαα.982 ω0 . In the case of zero driving amplitude. The only non-vanishing Fourier component is then |cα. The ratio of the direct transitions forth and back then reads ( α− α) Lαα.αα kB T . dashed vertical line) the decay of coherence is accelerated.02 10 [1/ω0 ] 8 (b) kB T = 10−4 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ 10 trelax 7 10 6 Figure 6.012 0.α α only consists of a single term proportional to N ( α − α ).28 and 4.014 F 0.01 0. α=α. Ω = 0.30) of the dissipative kernel. (6. Within the full rotating-wave approximation. Near the exact crossing (F ≈ 0.02 diagonal elements Lαα.012 0.018 0. these are the only non-vanishing contributions to the master equation which affect the diagonal elements αα of the density matrix.α α = 2 n Nαα .29. thermal activation to states with higher energy.0 .n |Xαα . temperature as given in the legend.α α = exp − Lα α . the Floquet states |φα reduce to the eigenstates of the undriven Hamiltonian HDW .01 0.68 The harmonically driven double-well potential 10 [1/ω0 ] 8 (a) kB T = 10−4 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ tdecoh 10 7 10 6 0.016 0. given in Eqs. and the quasienergies α reduce to the corresponding eigenenergies Eα . The parameter values are D = 4. 0.31) . (6.n |2 . 4.014 F 0.016 0. if the energy difference is less than kB T .12: Time scales of the decay of the coherence measure tr 2 (a) and of the relaxation towards the asymptotic solution (b) near the singletdoublet crossing.015. full vertical line) coherence is stabilized.018 0. γ = 10−6 ω0 .

its coherence tr 2 (see Appendix B. both should behave similarly.22). It equals unity only if the attractor is a pure state. The long-time limit of the corresponding classical dynamics converges to one of two limit cycles. the system tends to occupy the ground state only.13a). 6. Thus a decay to states with “higher” quasienergy (recall that quasienergies do not allow for a global ordering) becomes possible due to terms with n < 0. In the vicinity of a singlet-doublet crossing the situation is more subtle. 1 2 0 if the temperature is significantly above the splitting 2b of the avoided crossing. thermal activation from |φ+ to |φ− . becomes possible. we have | α− α| Ω. as a consequence of symmetry. alternatively.α α is given by a sum over contributions with quasienergies α − α + n Ω. 6. In a stroboscopic map they correspond to two isolated fixed points. the splitting is the main difference between the two partners of the quasienergy doublet. An important global characteristic of the asymptotic state is its Shannon entropy S = − tr( ∞ ln ∞ ) or.32) In particular. one expects an equal population of the doublets even in the limit of zero temperature (Fig. In particular. According to Eq. Due to the high mean energy − Ec of the chaotic singlet.6. where the splitting has no significant influence. Here.. accompanied by depletion via the states below 0 1. However. According to the above scenario. The effects under study are found for a driving with a frequency of the order of unity. the odd partner. Eq. in a regime with ∞ strong driving but preserved doublet structure. This behavior is qualitatively different from the asymptotic limit of the dissipative quantum dynamics near the center of the crossing and shows that the occupation of the levels outside the singlet and the doublet at asymptotic times is a pure quantum effect. Thus asymptotically.13b.2). reflecting the incoherent population .αα is dominated by contributions with n < 0.e. The ∞ value of the latter gives approximately the reciprocal of the number of incoherently occupied states. In the limit kB T → 0. This is in contrast to the undriven case. close to the top of the barrier.c). (6. Thus |φ− and |φ− are depleted and mainly |φ+ will be populated. with respect to dissipation. (6. of the doublet mixes with a chaotic singlet. i. the system tends to occupy Floquet states comprising many Fourier components with low index n. Physically. However. Therefore. For a strong driving. these states have low mean energy. the occupation probability decays monotonically with the energy of the eigenstates. and thus acquires components with higher energy. say. they describe dissipative transitions under absorption of driving-field quanta. each of which is located close to one of the potential minima. and Lα α .2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings We have detailed balance and therefore the steady-state solution αα 69 (∞) ∼ e− α /kB T δαα . far off the three-level crossing. cf.42).2 − Ec . (2. all these states become populated in a steady flow (Fig. each Floquet state |φα contains a large number of Fourier components and Lαα. we expect tr 2 to assume the value 1/2. the decay back to the ground state can also proceed indirectly via other states with mean energy below − Ec . Thus for a quasienergy doublet. Correspondingly.

0. γ = 10−6 ω0 .015029 (c). 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 1314 15 Floquet-state index α .0145 (b). temperature as given in the legend. and F = 0.70 The harmonically driven double-well potential 10 0 |φ+ 0 |φ− 1 (a) kB T = 10−4 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ 10 αα -1 |φ− 2 10 -2 10 -3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 1314 15 Floquet-state index α 0 10 |φ+ 0 |φ− 1 (b) kB T = 10−4 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ 10 αα -1 |φ− 2 10 -2 10 -3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 1314 15 Floquet-state index α 0 10 |φ+ 0 |φ− 2 (c) kB T = 10−4 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ 10 αα -1 |φ− 1 10 -2 10 -3 Figure 6. The parameter values are D = 4.13: Occupation probability αα of the Floquet states |φα in the long-time limit. Ω = 0.982 ω0 .013 (a). 0.

0.018 0.15: Coherence of the asymptotic state in the vicinity of a singlet-doublet crossing for F = 0.018 0.6.01 0.5 0.14: Coherence (a) and Shannon entropy (b) of the asymptotic state in the vicinity of a singlet-doublet crossing for different temperatures as given in the legend.0 kB T = 0 kB T = 10−4 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ 0.6 0. The other parameter values are D = 4.982 ω0 .02 3 kB T = 0 kB T = 10 −4 (b) hω0 ¯ kB T = 10−3 hω0 ¯ 2 S kB T = 10−2 hω0 ¯ 1 0 Figure 6.0 1.8 tr ρ2 ∞ 0.0 (a) 0.0 10 -6 10 -5 10 10 T [¯ ω0 /kB ] h -4 -3 10 -2 10 -1 Figure 6. Ω = 0.982 ω0 .014 F 0.0 (b) 0.012 0.016 F 0. Ω = 0.014 0.02 1.012 0.01 0.013 (a) and F = 0.2 0. and γ = 10−6 ω0 . tr ρ2 ∞ .0 (a) tr ρ2 ∞ 0. and γ = 10−6 ω0 .015029 (b): exact calculation (full line) compared to the values resulting from a three-level description (dashed) of the dissipative dynamics.016 0.5 0.4 0.2 Chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings 71 1. The other parameter values are D = 4.

for the case of regular classical dynamics.3.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state In recent work it has been demonstrated that a phase-space representation of quantum mechanics. the three-state model results in a completely different type of asymptotic state (Fig. 6. 6. its value should be close to unity for temperatures kB T 2b and much less than unity for kB T 2b (Figs. it is important to take a large set of levels into account. This phenomenon amounts to a chaos-induced coherence or incoherence.15). The failure of the threestate model in the presence of dissipation clearly indicates that in the vicinity of the singlet-doublet crossing. The crucial role of the decay via states not involved in the three-level crossing can be demonstrated by comparing it with the dissipative dynamics including only these three levels (plus the bath). the phase-space representation of the asymptotic state of a dissipative quantum map exhibits the structures of the corresponding classical attractor [106]. like the Husimi or Wigner distribution. m (6. Moreover. and a loss of coherence for temperatures above the splitting.30. reveals the structures of the corresponding classical phase space [5. it has support in the whole chaotic layer. we have S ≈ ln 2 and at the center of the crossing the entropy exhibits a significant temperature dependence. Thus outside the crossing. the analogies have their limitations due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which does not allow for arbitraryly fine phase-space structures for a quantum system and results in coarse-graining over a “phase-space unit” 2π .5) and obtain x= ˙ 1 p. the Husimi function of an eigenstate (or of a Floquet state if the system is driven) is localized in phase space along the corresponding quantizing torus. In particular. assumes approximately the value ln n for n incoherently populated states. 6. In the vicinity of the singlet-doublet crossing where the doublet structure is dissolved. the motion changes from regular to chaotic. we add an Ohmic friction force Fγ = −γp to the conservative equations (6.14b). The asymptotic classical dynamics of the driven dissipative double-well potential is for sufficiently strong driving particularly sensitive to the friction strength: With decreasing friction.14a. At the crossing. The corresponding Shannon entropy (Fig. This means that the crossing of the chaotic singlet with the regular doublet leads to an improvement of coherence if the temperature is below the splitting of the avoided crossing. one is even able to classify quantum-mechanical states as regular or chaotic according to their localization in phase space [120].4).117–120].72 The harmonically driven double-well potential of the ground-state doublet. However. 6.1 Classical attractor To describe the classical dissipative dynamics of the driven double well. for chaotic motion. 6. 6. respectively. If the classical dynamics is mixed.15). (6.33) .

it may even happen that the dissipative dynamics is chaotic and the attractor possess fractal geometry. however. the dynamics is asymptotically confined to an attractor. For periodically driven dissipative systems.5 0. the attractor is in general also time-dependent with the period of the driving and is properly rendered by its stroboscopic map [121–123]. (6. (6.9 ω0 .34) As friction always decelerates a particle. we obtain an exponential contraction of a phase-space volume V —a constituent feature of dissipative flows. The type of geometry can be characterized as fractal or regular according to its Hausdorff dimension dH which is defined by the scaling assumption N ∼ l−dH . γ/ω0 p = −γp − ˙ ∂V (x.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state 2. Therefore. forming a so-called strange attractor. thus destroys the time-reversal symmetry (6.33).0 1. l → 0. . an attractor consists of limit cycles or isolated fixed points. a formation in phase space with zero volume to which all sufficiently close trajectories from the so-called basin of attraction converge for long times.0 0.36) Here. It evolves by having each point on its surface ∂V follow an orbit generated by (6.09. Accordingly. N is the number of squares with width l needed to cover the whole attractor. 6.6. For sufficiently weak dissipation. Fig.0 5 10 -3 2 5 10 -2 2 5 10 -1 2 5 10 0 Figure 6. which yields by the divergence theorem [3] dV = dt dx dp V ∂x ∂p ˙ ˙ + ∂x ∂p = −γV.6). ∂x (6. dissipation breaks the reflection symmetry at the x-axis of phase-space portraits which we found for the chosen initial phase of the driving (cf. it distinguishes between future and past. The lack of time-reversal symmetry in presence of friction is even more evident from the time evolution of a volume element V of phase space.34).10) of the conservative system.35) Thus. Ω = 0.5 dH 73 1. Depending on the values of the driving parameters and the friction strength. t) . (6.16: Hausdorff dimension of the classical attractor for F = 0.

. ... ..... . . . . . .. .... ... . .. ... .. .. .. . .. ...... .. . 0.... .... . . .. ..... . . . .. .... . . . .. ... .. ... . .. .. . .. .. .... . . ... . ... ... ... .. . . . .... .. ... ............. ... .. ......... .. . . . . .... .. ... .. .... . . .... . .. ..5 0... .. ..... .... ...... .. .. .. .. ... . .. . ..... . .. . ..... .. .. ....... . ....... . ... .... .... . ...... .. . ...... . ..... ... .. . . .5 -1... . .. . ... ... .. . ...5 . .. . .... ... ..... .. ... . .... . . ...5 . . .. .. .... .. .... .. ..34)... ... .. ..... . . .. .. ...... . .... . ..... . .. .. ...... ......5 0. .. .. ....... ....... ... . . .. ... ... .. .. . .. .... .... .... .... . ... . .... ..... . ...... . .. .... ..... . ... .. ..5 0.... .. . . ..... .. ..... .. . . .... .... . . . ... . .. . ..... . ...... ... ... . .. ... ............. . .. .... ..5 -1. ...... ... .. . . .... . .. (6... .. ....... .. ... . .. . ... ...... . ..........33).. . . .. ..... ... .... . ...... .. .. .. ... .... ... ........ . .. . ... . . ... . ... .. .. ..... . . .... ........... ...... . .. .... ... . . . . ... ... . .... . . . .. . ...... . ...... .. ..... ....... . .. ... Figure 6.. . .... .5 -0. . .. . ... ... . ... . .. . .. . . .. ... .... . ....... . ... .5 p/mω0 x0 0. ....... . ... . . ... . .... . ..... .. .. . ... .... . . .. . ..... ..... . ...0 -0..... .. . . ... ...... .. .... . . .. . .. .... .. .0 x/x0 0. .. ..... ... .. .. .... . .. ... .. . ... .... . . .. ... ........... .. . .... . .. ... ...... ..... .... ... .. ..... ...... .5 0. .3 ω0 (a)...... .. . .... ... . ....... ... . . .. .. ... ...... .. .. ...74 The harmonically driven double-well potential (a) 0. .. . ... ..... .. .. . Eqs........0 -0. .. .. . . . ..... . ..... .. .. .17: Stroboscopic classical phase-space portrait at t = 2πn/Ω...... ..... ... . ....... ... -0..... ... . . .. .... ... . . .. ..... .. ..... ....... ..... . .... . . . .. . .....2 ω0 (b). . . .. . .... .. .. ... . ... . .. .. .. . .. .. . . . .... ..... . ....... . .. ...... ... for the driving amplitude F = 0.. .. . ... ... ... . ... . . ....... . ..5 p/mω0 x0 0.. . .... ..03 ω0 (c). of the dissipative harmonically driven quartic double well... . . . . . . .. ..... In panels (a) and (b) the stroboscopic portrait is marked by a full dot and the broken lines show the corresponding limit cycles.. .....0 1. .. . . .. . . ...... . -1........ ...... .. ..... . . . ...0 -0. .... . . ......... . ... . .. . . .. .. . . . ... .. ............ .. ....... ... . . .5 . .. ... .. .. . .. . ...... . .. .. ... . .... . ...... .. ... . .. .... . . .. ... ...5 1. ... ... . . . . . .. . .. ...... .... .... . .... .. ...... .. ... .. .... . . . ........ .... .. ... . .. ..... . . .. . .... .. . ....... ..... ..... . . . . .... -1. . ... ........... . .. . . . .. ..... . ... . ...... . . ..... .. . .. ... .. ... . .... ..... ..... . .9 ω0 .0 1.. ..... .. . ....... .. . ..... .... .. .... . . . . . ..... .. ....... . 1. . ..0 1..... .... .. ....0 x/x0 0.. ..... .. .. .. ... .. .. ... ... ... .... . . . . . .. . ... .. .... .. ... .. . .. 0. (6... . . .. . ... . . . .... . ... ........ ... . ...5 (c) . .. .. . .. .. . . . .... ... .... ... .. ... .. . . . .... .... ... ......... ...5 -1. .. ...... .. . . . . .. . . ..... . ... .. . ... ..5 -1. . . . . . .. ... .... .. . .... . . .. ....... .. ... .... . .. ... ... . . .. .. ..5 p/mω0 x0 0.... . ...... ...... . . .... . .. ..0 ....0 x/x0 0........ ...... . . . .. . .. .. .. . ..... . ............ .. . .. . .... ........ . .... . .. . .5 (b) 0. .. ... . .09 and frequency Ω = 0. . .... The friction strength is γ = 0. . ........ . . . ... ... . . .. . ...... . .. ........0 .. . ........ 1. ..... . . .. . ... ... ... .... ....... .... ...0 -0..... .. . . ... . ..

6. 6.17c).3. 6. 6.17). It becomes larger with decreasing friction γ. This feature is in contrast to the Husimi representation of the Floquet states in absence of dissipation (cf.. since it would result in a diagonal asymptotic state (see Section 4. we cannot characterize the quantum attractor by a Hausdorff dimension.09 and Ω = 0.6) are in absence of dissipation already completely resolved in the chaotic sea.6. This demonstrates that a description within a full rotatingwave approximation is insufficient.17a. This transition is.3. continuous formations correspond to integer values of dH .2 ω0 (Figs.06 ω0 .19). 6. Thus. exp(S Q ). Thus. its quantummechanical counterparts obey no reflection symmetry at the x-axis. the occupied phase-space area is 2π exp(S Q ).19b) is still mainly located near the fixed points of the classical stroboscopic map. 6.3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state 75 It is computed numerically by box counting. manifest by a strange attractor (Fig. 6. Like the phase-space portrait of the dissipative classical dynamics (Fig. 124] (see Appendix A. 6. These “quantum attractors” clearly reflect the structures of the corresponding classical asymptotic state as well as their qualitative change from isolated fixed points to a strange attractor. gives approximately the number of minimum uncertainty states covered by the Husimi function. its Hausdorff dimension dH has no significant time-dependence [121]. The Wehrl entropy of the asymptotic state for our numerical example for different values of the effective quantum of action is depicted in Fig. In the semiclassical regime. A more suitable measure for the qualitative shape of the quantum attractor is the Wehrl entropy S Q of its Husimi representation [120.2).2 Quantum attractor In the quantum case. 6. thus they are smeared out in the Husimi representation of the asymptotic state (Figs.18. in the quantum case not as sharp as in the classical case: Although the asymptotic state for γ = 0.9 ω0 for different friction strength γ is depicted in Fig.3. it covers a broader phase-space area that already indicates the shape of the strange attractor. Consequently. since diagonal representations share the symmetries of the basis. as expected. Although the attractor of the driven dissipative double well is periodically timedependent with the period of the driving. 6. Near γ ≈ 0. Fig.18b.16.7) and is caused by finite off-diagonal elements of the asymptotic density matrix in Floquet representation. the classical dynamics undergoes with decreasing γ a transition from regular motion (Fig.2). however. for . Its exponential. For this driving amplitude and frequency. Because the self-similar structures at an arbitrary small length scale of the classical attractor are washed out in the quantum case. The underlying classical structures in the Husimi functions become more distinct for smaller values of the effective quantum of action eff = 1/8D. the self-similar fine structures of a strange attractor are in contradiction to the position-momentum uncertainty relation. 6. reflecting the increasing dispersion of the Husimi functions.e. 6. Fig.17b) to chaos. 6.20. For dH < 2 the attractor has zero volume. off-diagonal matrix elements play a significant role for the asymptotic state. The Hausdorff dimension of the classical attractor for the parameter values F = 0. i. the regular islands near the bottom of the wells (cf.

. . ... . ... . ....... .. . ... . . .... ... . ... .. . . .... .... . . .. ......... .. ... . ... .. .... ... . .. .. .. .............. .. .. . ..... . . ... . . .. ... . . .. . . ... ... .. . .. . The rectangle in the lower left corner depicts the size of the effective quantum of action eff = 1/8D.. . . .. ..... . ... ....... . ..... .. .. ..5 -1......... .. . .. . ....... .. .. ... ... ....... . .. .. .... .... . . . .. . . ..... .... . ...... .. .. .. 0.. .... . .... ... . ....0 -0. ........ Ω = 0... .. .. ..... . ... . ... . .0 x/x0 0. . ... .... . ..17. . ......... .... .... ..... .. .. ... .9 ω0 ... . .... .... .. . .... . ... .. ... . .. .. ..5 0. .... . .. ...... . .... .. . . . ... . . .. .. . . ... ....... ...... .. . .. ... . ... . . . . ..... 6... ... ... . . ...0 x/x0 0.... .. . . ... ..... . .. -0.. .. . .. ........ ..... . .... . .... . ... .. . ... .. . . ... . γ = 0. . .. .. . . .. .. .. . .. .... . . .. ... ... ........ . . ... . . .5 (b) 0. .. .. . . ..0 -0.. ... .. . .. .. .... .. . .. .... ... .... ... ... . . .. ... . . . . .. ...... .. ... ..... ..... ... . .. .. . .. . ....... .... ..... ... . .... ... .. ......... .... .. ...... . .... . .. . .... . . .. . .... . . .. .. .. . . .. . . ... ..... . . . .. ... . . . ...0 1.. ... .... ... . . . . ...... .5 -1. . . . .... .. ... ...... .... . .. ...0 x/x0 0.. .... ... . . . .. ....... ......... The effective action is D = 6.... .... .... ... .... ... .. .. . . ... . .. .... .. superposed on the corresponding classical phasespace portrait...... .... .. 1... . . ... . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. ... . . ......... . .. ....... .. ... .. 6. . . .. . .. ... .. .. ... . . . ... . ..... .5 . . . .... . .. . ....... .. . ..... .. . ... ..... The parameter values F = 0... .. .. ... .. ....... . .. . ...76 The harmonically driven double-well potential (a) 0. .. ... . . . .. ... . ... ........ . .. ........ . ... .. .... .... .. ... . ..... .. . ...... .. ...3 ω0 (a)...... . .... . . .... .. . ... .... .. .... ..... . .5 p/mω0 x0 0.... . . . ........ ... . .. .. . ....... .. . .... ..... .... .. . . . ..5 0....... ... . . ..... .... ...... . . ... . ... . . ... . ........ .. .... .5 -1... ... . Fig.. . ..... ..... . ... .. . ... . .. ...... . .... . ... 0.. .... . .. . ....... . .. . .... . .. . . ..... .. ..... ... . .... .... .... . . . . .. . . . .. n → ∞. ..... . ....5 p/mω0 x0 0..... . ........ ... ........ .... ... . ... .. .. ........ . ...... ...... .... ....5 0.. .. .. .. ... . .. .. .03 ω0 (c) are as in Fig. .. ... .. ... .. . .. .... .. ...... . .... .. .... ..... ... ... .. ... . . .. ...... . .. . ... . ..0 .. ..... .. . . ... . . -1..... .. . .... .. . . ... . . . . . -1.0 -0.. . . ... .. . .... .. . .. ........ .. .. .... ..... .17... . . ... ....... . .. ..09..... . ..... . ... . ...... ..... .. . ......... ...... .. ... ....... .. ... .... ... ... ... . .. .. . . .. ...... . ... ..... . .. .. . ...0 -0.... . . ...... . ..... .... .. . ..... ...... .... .... ......5 . . .. ..5 (c) . . ........ . ........ . ..... . ...... . ... ..... .. .. .. . ......... . . . ... . ... .. ..... .. .. ... .. ... .0 1. . .. ............ ... . . . .5 -1.5 ... .. .. ... ... . .. .. . .. ... . . ... . . .. ...... .... . . 1...... .......... .. . ..... . ... . .. .... .. ... . . .. .... .. .. . .. .. ..... . ... . .. . ..... ... ... .........5 0. . .. . .... ... ... . ..5 p/mω0 x0 0.. ..5 1..... .. .. . . . .. ... . .5 -0. . ... ....18: Contour plot of the Husimi function of the quantum attractor (full lines) at t = 2πn/Ω... ... ..... . ... ..... .0 .... .. .. .. .. . . Figure 6.. . . . . .. ... .. . . ....... ... .... .. ..... ... .. . ..0 1. . . ..... .. ... . .. . . ............. . . ... . .... . ... .... ..... .....2 ω0 (b). ... .. .... ...............

. . ... . ..0 1... ... ... . . ...... .. ... ....... . ... . ..... . . ........ . .. . .. ..... .. . .. .. ......... ... .. . . .. ...... . ... .. . ........... .. .. . . .......... .. ... . . ... .... . . . . .... .. .....5 0.... ...... . . ....5 .3 Signatures of chaos in the asymptotic state 77 (a) 0... ... ... .... .. .. .. . . . . .. .... . . . ... .... .. . .....0 -0..5 -1.... .. ..0 x/x0 0. ... ..... .. . . ... ... ...... ....... ...5 p/mω0 x0 0. 1. . .... ... . .. . .... .. . . ... . . ...18 for the effective action D = 12.... . . . . . .... .... .. .. .. .. . . .. . ... . ...... ..... .. . ... . .. .... .. .... .. . . Figure 6... . ... .. .... ... .......... ... .. ... ........ ... . ..... . ... .... .. ...... .. .......... ..... . . .... . . ... . .. .. . . . ...... . .... . ..0 -0..... .. ....... . . .... .... -1.... .. . . ... .. ..... .. .. ..... . .... ..... .. .. . . . .... . . . ......... .. ... . ........ .... .. .. ... . . . ... ... ... . . .... .. . ....... . .. .. ... .... .. ....... . ..... . .. . . .... . ........... .5 -1. . .. ... . . .. . .. . ........ ...5 (b) 0..... .. . . ..6. ..... .. . ... ..... . .. .. . . .. .... .... . . .... ... . . .... .. .. . ............... . . ... .. . . . . . ..... . . ..... . .... .5 0. . ... .. . ... ... ... . . ........ ... ... ... ... .. ........ .......... . . ... -0...... . . .. . .. .... . . . ... . .. . ..... . . . . . . ..... . .. ... ... . .5 1. ... .. . ....... . ... . .... . .. . ........ . ... . .. .. .... . .... . . ... ...... . .. ... . . ......... ..... . ........... . .. .. ... .. . ... . ... . ... . .. .. .. . . . ... . ... ... .. -1. .. .. .. . .. .... . .... . . ..... .. . . .. . .... . ..... . ....... . ... .5 p/mω0 x0 0.. ................. ..0 x/x0 0. . ...... . .. . . .. .... .. ..... .. ...... . ......5 (c) . .. .. . ... . . . ... . . .... .... . ... ... . . . .. ... ... ... ... . . . ... .... . .... . ... . ... .....5 -0.. . .. . .. .. . ... . . . ......... ....... .... .... .. .. .. .... .. .. . . ... . ..... .. . .... .. .. ....... .. . . .... . . .......... ..... ............ . ... ... .. .. . . .5 .... ..... .... . . .. . . . ..... ... . ... . . ... .... .. .. . . . .... ... .. . ... .. .0 .. .. ... . ..... . ... .. . . ... . ... 1.. ....... ............. .... ... ...... . . ..... . .. . .. .. . . . .... ... . .. .... . . ..... .. . ....... .. . ... .... .. . .. .... . . . ... . . . .. .... ......... .. ..... . . .. ... . . ... .. ...5 0. .. .. .. . . . . . ..... .... . . ... .. ... . . . . . ..... . . ..... ........... .... ....... . .... . . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. ..... . .. .... .. . . .. ..19: Same as Fig.... ..... ...0 1. .. ..0 .... .. .. . . ..5 0. . . ........ . . . ... . .. .. .. .... . .. . . ... ... .. .5 ... . .. .... ... .. ... .. . . ..0 -0.. .. .... . . .. .... .... . . . ... . .. .. . .. .. .... . .. ...... .... .. ... ...5 p/mω0 x0 0..0 -0...... .... . .... . . ... . .. .. . ... .... ... .. .. ..... . . . ...... ... . . .. .... .......... ...... ...... ....... ... ... . .. . . ... ... .. ..... .... . ... ...... ....... . ... .... .0 x/x0 0. .. . ... ... ... . ... ........ ... .. . .. .... .. .. ...... .... ................ . ........0 1. .5 -1.. . .... .. ....... .. .. .. . . . 6....... . . .... . . . ... . . .. ...... . . .. . ... . ......... .. . . . . .... ... .. . . .. ....... ... ..... . ... ... . .. ........ . ..... .... .. .. ... .. ....... ...... ..5 -1. .

Other parameters like in Fig. > Note that for γ ∼ 0. we observe a kink of the entropy near γ ≈ 0. -2 2 5 SQ 10 -3 2 5 10 10 -1 2 5 10 0 γ/ω0 a sufficiently large value of the effective action D. 6.78 The harmonically driven double-well potential 4 3 D = 12 D=6 D=3 2 Figure 6.1 ω0 . the Markov approximation becomes inaccurate. where the classical attractor undergoes a transition from a set of isolated fixed points to a strange attractor. Nevertheless.06 ω0 .20: Wehrl entropy of the asymptotic state of the dissipative quantum map for different values of the effective quantum of action eff = 1/8D.16. . we obtain the qualitative behavior which we expected from classical considerations. since γ is of the order of the mean level spacing and the condition (3.33) is violated for at least some of the transitions between Floquet states.

we have incidentally obtained the Floquet solutions of the Fokker-Planck equation for the corresponding classical Brownian motion. A Markovian approach to quantum dissipation. thus obtained a partial differential equation for the Wigner function that corresponds to the density operator. vanishes for strictly Ohmic damping. Concluding from numerical results for the case of a Mathieu oscillator. The difference becomes significant in the limits of strong driving and low temperature. provides a faithful description of an isolated singlet-doublet crossing. the separatrix is replaced by a chaotic layer. reflecting an effective two-state behavior. based on the Floquet solutions of the coherent dynamics. An additional additive time-dependent force undergoes a renormalization which. which is the essence of chaotic tunneling. Even for arbitrarily small driving amplitude. We have derived this Floquet-Markov approach from an exact path-integral expression and have applied it to the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator and the driven double-well potential. Here. Well outside the crossing. both time-scales are of the same order. To solve the master equation. Nevertheless. has proven well-adapted to the description of such systems. The center of the . It turned out that the dissipative part of the Markovian master equation depends quantitatively on whether the driving is included in its derivation or not: Considering the driving mainly results in a modified momentum diffusion that depends on the quasienergy spectrum instead of the unperturbed spectrum of the central system without the driving. As a simple intuitive model to compare against. we have transformed it to Wigner representation. and derived an analytical expression for the Floquet solutions of the resulting Fokker-Planck-like equation. the influence of states located in the chaotic region alters the splittings of the regular doublets and thus the tunnel rates. the attributes “simple” and “improved” for the two basic Markovian approaches prove adequate.7 Summary and outlook In this thesis. but the motion near the bottom of the wells remains regular. classical chaos plays a significant role for the coherent dynamics. We have studied chaotic tunneling in the vicinity of crossings of chaotic singlets with tunnel doublets under the influence of an environment. Dissipation introduces new time scales to the system: one for the loss of coherence and a second one for the relaxation to an asymptotic state. we have constructed a three-state system which in the case of vanishing dissipation. In doing so. The study of the parametrically driven harmonic oscillator has been devoted mainly to a thorough understanding of the different approximation schemes. we put focus on a special class of system: a particle which moves in a one-dimensional potential under the influence of a heat bath and of an external field which is periodic in time. however. A quantum system with more complex dynamics is the quartic double-well potential under the influence of a driving with frequency near resonance.

With increasing driving amplitude. it remains chaotic. “external” states of the central system. the quantum attractor undergoes a smooth transition: The structure of the strange attractor is already felt by the Husimi function for parameter values where the classical attractor consists only of two isolated fixed points. the geometry of the classical attractor is fractal or regular. the quantum attractor. accordingly. but for strong friction it becomes regular. A semiclassical description of the dissipative quantum system may circumvent this problem. As a result. chaotic Bloch tunneling along extended potentials with a large number of unit cells instead of just two. In the presence of driving. Many more phenomena at the overlap of chaos. even if that is barely visible in the corresponding classical phase-space structure. However. which requires to take very many levels into account. These phenomena are typically observed in the far semiclassical regime. the asymptotic state is no longer literally a state of equilibrium. incoherent processes create a steady flow of probability involving states within as well as outside the crossing. This is so because the coupling to the heat bath enables processes of decay and thermal activation that connect the states in the crossing with other. expressed for example by its coherence tr 2 . Thus. tunneling fades out much faster. They include four-state crossings formed when two doublets intersect. are markedly different at the center of the crossing as compared to ∞ the asymptotic state far away from the crossing. the dynamics near the bottom of the wells. tunneling. This has striking consequences for the dissipative classical dynamics: For sufficiently small dissipation. and the influence of decoherence on a multi-step mechanism of chaotic tunneling. This clearly reflects the failure a full rotating-wave approximation.80 Summary and outlook crossing is characterized by a strong mixing of the chaotic state with one state of the tunnel doublet. respectively. in absence of dissipation. We have observed the signatures of this qualitative difference in the asymptotic state of the corresponding quantum dynamics. . decoherence becomes far more effective and. For the observation of these semiclassical structures. in contrast to the sudden change of the classical behavior. Accordingly. becomes fully chaotic. the composition of the asymptotic state. The high mean energy of the chaotic state introduces additional decay channels to states outside the three-state system. off-diagonal matrix elements of the asymptotic state in Floquet basis proved crucial. Rather. demonstrates clearly that a three-state model of the singlet-doublet crossing is insufficient once dissipation is effective. and dissipation await being unraveled. The study of the asymptotic state.

7) (A.8) (A.9) These justify the denotation creation and destruction operator (of a quantum) or shift operators (between eigenstates) for a+ and a. we use its eigenfunctions as a basis set for numerical computations. the harmonic oscillator plays an important role as an exactly solvable model as well as an approximation to a smooth potential minimum. By recursion of (A. = ωHO a+ a + 2 (A. 2m ωHO 1 p. the ground state of a harmonic oscillator.2) and of the closely related coherent states and quasiprobabilities. a+ ] = 1. displaced in phase space (coherent state).2) of the Hamiltonian is achieved by the transformation a= a+ = x= mωHO x+i 2 mωHO x−i 2 1 p.9). p] = i results the bosonic commutation relation [a. p=i 2 (a+ + a). The form (A. the socalled number states (a+ )n (A.A The harmonic oscillator In many fields of physics. 2m ωHO (A. we give a synopsis of basic properties of the harmonic oscillator.6) 2mωHO m ωHO + (a − a). forms the initial state for the propagation of the density matrix in Chapter 6.4) (A.5) (A. In this appendix. which yields for the energy eigenstates |n the relations [125] √ a|n = n |n − 1 . described by the Hamiltonian HHO = 2 1 2 mωHO 2 p + x 2m 2 1 . (A. √ a+ |n = n + 1 |n + 1 . From [x. In this work. Moreover.10) |n = √ |0 n! .3) (A.1) (A.

2m 2 thus < |p| ∼ pn = < |x| ∼ xn = 2n ωHO m .15) To visualize the influence of a finite basis set. thus their value is a numerical artefact caused by using a finite basis set. thus formally approximates infinite matrices by finite ones. as matrix elements of powers of the position operator for these states obey a simple analytical expression resulting from (A. which is defined by a|0 = 0. we have depicted some eigenvalues of the truncated Hamiltonian PN HDW PN for N = 100 over the scaling parameter ωHO /ω0 of the basis functions in Fig.13). the energies depend on the scaling parameter. where PN projects on the subspace spanned by the first N basis functions {|n }n=0. Thus.14) (A. we effectively diagonalize—instead of the Hamiltonian H—the truncated Hamiltonian PN HPN . the eigenfunctions of the harmonic oscillator form a well-suited basis set.13) (A. This subspace. The state |n in a semiclassical interpretation [126. Therefore.9).12) (A. it is restricted to phase-space areas which obey 1 p2 2 < + mωHO x2 ∼ n ωHO .12)..127] is a quantized torus with action (n + 1/2). one uses N number states (A. .11) A.14) and (A.82 The harmonic oscillator are constructed from the ground state |0 .N ..5)–(A. The numerical computations in Chapter 6 were performed using number states with an oscillator frequency ωHO = ω0 N ω0 16EB 1/3 . (A. 2n . A. In numerical calculations.1.10) as a (incomplete) basis set. mωHO (A. (A. This results in the conditions p2 N = N ωHO . a state with energy E can be approximated reasonably by a linear combination of the first N number states only if its corresponding classical torus is contained in this region of phase space. corresponds to a finite region of phase space. according to (A.16) and N was chosen according to the required numerical precision. 2 2ωHO 16EB ωHO E< (A.15). wave functions and operators are decomposed into a complete set of basis functions. Dealing with polynomial potentials. Consequently. 2m 2 4 N ω0 N 2 2 ω0 E < V (xN ) = − + .1 Number states as a basis set For numerical computations. Outside the limits (A.

p) = 1 2π 2 dξ dξ ezξ ∗ −z ∗ ξ χs (ξ).15).17) a quantum-mechanical state cannot be localized in phase space with arbitrary precision.1: Some eigenvalues of the truncated Hamiltonian PN HDW PN for N = 100 and D = 4 (full lines). z ∈ C (A.19) (A. they have minimal uncertainty and approximate a point in phase space at best.2 Coherent states 83 100 80 60 40 20 0 -1 10 Figure A. 2 (A.18) obey z|x|z = z|p|z = 2 Re z. mωHO 2m ωHO Im z. 2 5 E/¯ ω0 h 10 ωHO /ω0 0 2 5 A.A. z|∆x2 |z = .3 Quasiprobabilities The unique representation of a density operator as a phase-space function is closely related to the question on quasi-classical states. 129] + ∗ |z = eza −z a |0 .20) Thus according to (A. A. The most prominent example from a variety of possibilities [130–134] is the s-parameterized quasiprobability or CahillGlauber distribution [135] Ws (x.14) and (A. (A. The coherent states (or Glauber states) [128. The broken lines give the limits of convergence according to (A.21) . as would be possible in classical mechanics.2 Coherent states Due to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle ∆x ∆p ≥ 2 (A.17). 2mωHO m ωHO z|∆p2 |z = .

a negative s with small absolute value is often used to ensure numerical convergence.28) For powers of x and p they hold iteratively. there exists a corresponding differential operator acting on Ws (x. It is obvious from these operator correspondences that.84 The harmonic oscillator χs (ξ) = tr eξa z=x + −ξ ∗ a+sξ ∗ ξ/2 . p) [137]. (A. the s-parameterized quasiprobability depends on the choice of the oscillator frequency ωHO . z ∗ =z=0 (A. Thereby the operator ordering is fixed by the parameter s as the s-ordered product (a ) a + n m s = ∂ ∂z n ∂ − ∗ ∂z m s exp za+ − z ∗ a + z ∗ z 2 . In numerical computations of Wigner functions or their reconstruction from experimental data. except for the case s = 0. p).29) It is independent of the oscillator frequency ωHO . From Eq.1 Wigner function For s = 0. Ws results in the Wigner function [130.23) mωHO + ip 2 1 . In general.27) (A. p).3. thus basis independent. (A. For each operator acting on the density matrix . Ws (x.25) (A.24) which gives an interpolation between normal ordering (a+ )n am = {(a+ )n am }1 and anti-normal ordering am (a+ )n = {(a+ )n am }−1 of creation and annihilation operators [136]. Quasi-probabilities are used for the calculation of expectation values alike classical phase-space distributions. .22) we obtain the relations x ←→ p ←→ x ←→ p ←→ s i ∂p − ∂x 2 2mωHO i sm ωHO p − ∂x − ∂p 2 2 s i ∂x x − ∂p − 2 2mωHO i sm ωHO p + ∂x − ∂p 2 2 x+ Ws (x. p). Ws may also assume negative values and for positive s may even be singular—thus a strict probabilistic interpretation is not possible. p). (A. (A.21) runs over real and imaginary part of ξ. 2m ωHO It includes the Wigner and the Husimi function as limiting cases. (A. s ∈ [−1. p) = 1 2π dx eipx / x + x /2| |x − x /2 = W0 (x. A. 1].26) (A. Ws (x. The integration in (A. p).22) (A. Ws (x. 133] W (x.21) with Eq.

the Husimi function of an eigenstate is located on the corresponding quantizing torus. For driven systems. The fact that already the diagonal matrix elements hold the full information on the quantum state reflects the over-completeness of the coherent states [128].23). due to the positivity of the density operator [133]. it is desirable to have a direct measure for localization properties. This allows for a classification of single eigenstates as regular or chaotic if the classical dynamics is mixed. . (A.A. Q(x. 124]. the respective assignment of Floquet states to regions in classical phase space holds true [120].31) The number of minimum uncertainty states occupied by the Husimi function is approximately given by exp(S Q ). thus the occupied phase-space area is 2π exp(S Q ).2 Husimi function and Wehrl entropy The Husimi function is defined as the expectation value of the density operator with coherent states [131] and coincides with the quasiprobability W−1 .3. Thus. p) = 1 2π z| |z = W−1 (x. p)]. p) is given by (A.3 Quasiprobabilities 85 A. In a semiclassical limit. p) ln[2π Q(x. For a classification of quantum mechanical states according to their phase-space structure. for a coherent state the Wehrl entropy assumes its minimum value Q Smin = 1. for the case of irregular classical dynamics. (A. the Husimi function of a state is localized in phase space along the corresponding Lagrangian manifolds. One possibility is provided by the Wehrl entropy S Q of the state which is defined as the entropy of the corresponding Husimi function [120. SQ = − dx dp Q(x. in case of regular classical dynamics. it is smeared out over the whole chaotic layer [5]. It is non-negative. Consequently. p).30) where z(x.

86 .

139. are not of this so-called Lindblad form. i (B. Therefore. Namely. 140]. . of course. have to be conserved during time evolution. 0 ≤ pi ≤ 1.4) positivity will be violated until ∆x becomes larger than λdB [68–71. as well as its Hermitecity. can at best describe it by a density operator [138]. (B. 141]. i. Lindblad proved [93] that a Markovian master equation with constant coefficients meets this requirement. positivity and a total probability which equals unity. ] + † γi 2Qi Qi − Q† Qi − Q† Qi . B. if and only if it is of the form i ˙ = − [H. which are introduced phenomenologically. This apparent contradiction was resolved only recently: A master equation of the form (4.3) violates positivity only for initial conditions that do not meet the requirements under which it has been derived.1 Lindblad form The conditions on a physically meaningful density operator. ∆x < λdB = / 4mkB T . that many Markovian master equations occurring in the literature [11. all the others vanish. induce dissipative transitions of the system.B The density operator An observer. (B. Eqs. 71.2). dissipative effects on a length scale l < λdB cannot be described selfconsistently within a Markov approximation.e. It turned out.2) pi = tr = 1. thus generates a so-called completely positive dynamical semigroup. i i (B. who is not fully aware of the state of a system. 70. however. thus they do not ensure positivity of an arbitrary density operator at any future time.1) and (B. Its eigenvalues pi give the probability for the system to reside in the corresponding eigenstate. including our master equation (4.3) i The operators Qi .e. Thus. the wavefunction) is known.3). where the full quantum-mechanical information (i. one of the probabilities pi equals unity.1) (B. In the limit of a pure state. the eigenvalues of a proper density operator have to suffice the intrinsic restrictions of probabilities. if the system is prepared with a position variance ∆x smaller than the thermal de Broglie wavelength.

Its value approximately gives the reciprocal of the number of incoherently populated states and equals unity if the system resides in a pure state. [142].7) is a proper measure for the coherence of a density operator. A numerically less expensive. (B. (B. the related quantity C = tr 2 = 1 − Slin (B. Nevertheless. thus for the ability to observe interference effects.6) introduced by Zurek et al. The entropy also gives a proper measure for the coherence of a system. It arises formally by Taylor expansion of (B. However.5) i Consequently. . This definition agrees. with the entropy known from statistical thermodynamics. In the case of many incoherently populated states. besides a factor kB . for a pure state S = 0.2 The density operator Coherence and entropy The lack of information inherent in a density operator can be measured by the Shannon entropy S=− pi ln pi = − tr( ln ). related quantity is the “linearized entropy” Slin = tr (1 − ) = 1 − tr 2 .5) if describes an almost pure state. all pi 1 and both entropies differ drastically.88 B. it has the disadvantage that its direct numerical computation requires diagonalization of the density operator.

(C. St ) = 0 (C.3) We denote the partial derivatives of S(X. we solve the equation of motion (5. t) = dXdP eixX+ipP eS(X. respectively. t) as W (x.3).t) .2) to get an expression for St . Equation (C. P. Instead of equation (C.8). where F is given by F = St − XSP + γP SP + ω 2 (t)P SX + γDpp P 2 + γDxp XP.2) are given by ˙ ∂F = 1. ∂P dω 2 (t) ∂F ˙ =− P SX . (C. The characteristic equations [95] of (C. ∂SP ∂F ˙ = SP − γDxp P.55) for the Wigner function by the method of characteristics. SP . So we only have to solve (C.5) and (C.2).P. we find ¨ ˙ P − γ P + ω 2 (t)P = 0. The solutions of these equations can be traced back to the fundamental solutions fi (t) of the classical equation of motion (5. we will use (C.8) (C. t) with respect to X.1) By this ansatz.7) (C. P . SP .5) (C. P.C Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation In this appendix.6) (C.4) (C. St = − ∂t dt (C. equation (5. P. X= ∂SX ∂F ˙ P = = γP − X.4) signifies that the characteristics can be parameterized by the time t. SX . t= ∂St ∂F ˙ = ω 2 (t)P.9). p.9) whose solutions give the characteristics of the partial differential equation (C.6).10) .55) is transformed to the quasilinear partial differential equation F (X. and St .5)–(C. and t by SX . From (C.2) for S(X. We write W (x. t. t). p. SX = − ∂X ∂F ˙ SP = − = −γSP − ω 2 (t)SX − 2γDpp P − γDxp X. (C.

Now together with Eq.2). t )P (t ). σpp (t. which can be integrated to P (t ) = G(t.20) 2 σxp (t. X(t) = c1+ eγt f˙2 (t) − c2+ eγt f˙1 (t). t0 )P 2 . where ci+ denote integration constants. (C.13) (C. t0 ) = 2γD t0 t dt [G(t.7) SP (t) = c1− f˙1 (t) + c2− f˙2 (t) − 2γD By inserting t dt G(t. t) = c1− f1 (t) + c2− f2 (t) X + c1− f˙1 (t) + c2− f˙2 (t) P 1 1 − σxx (t. we get a result for SX and SP that only depends on the endpoints of the characteristics.15) dt t0 ∂G(t.12) which is the classical equation of motion with an inhomogeneity. t )X(t) + S(X.13) with the Green function (5. t ) t0 t 2 (C.19) (C. . t ). St ). From (C. (C. we integrate (C. dt G(t. t0 (C. t).11) and (C. t ) P (t). (C. P. t0 )XP − σpp (t. ∂t (C.18) σxx (t. we find a time-dependent solution for the Wigner function W (x.11) (C.21) t0 By inserting S(X. t ) P (t ) + γDxp P (t). t0 )X 2 − σxp (t. 2 2 with t (C.1). t ) ∂t .14) With the integration constants ci− . t0 ) = −γDxp + 2γD (C.16) ∂G(t. t) into (C. t) = (SX . (C. p. Therefore the solutions for X and P read P (t) = −c1+ eγt f2 (t) + c2+ eγt f1 (t). The effective diffusion constant D is given by D = Dpp + γDxp .90 Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation This is simply the classical equation of motion with a negative damping constant. P.8) we find for SX ¨ ˙ SX + γ SX + ω 2 (t)SX = −2γDP. we have an expression for grad S(X.12). ∂t dt ∂ G(t. P. (C.7) and (C. t )] . t0 ) = 2γD ∂ G(t. SP .10) to t SX (t) = c1− f1 (t) + c2− f2 (t) − 2γD and get by use of (C.17) ∂t obtained from Eqs.

−ix. i. (C. t0 )∂p . p.. P. Therefore. −ip. are ˆ proportional to the ci+ . there is no ambiguity concerning the ordering of operators. The operators Qi+ (t). St ) vanish [95]. t0 )∂p − if2 (t) p + σxp (t. SX . used in Section 5.Solution of the Fokker-Planck equation 91 The integration constants ci± are constant along the characteristics by construction.e. SP . 2 1 = f2 (t)∂x + f˙2 (t)∂p . P. SX . whose nullspace is the solution of the equation of motion. −i∂p . p. t0 )∂x + σpp (t. t) commute with ˆ the operator ∂t − L(t). t. c2− = −if˙1 (t) x + σxx (t. t) ˆ is a solution of (5.55). the Poisson brackets between the expressions ci± (X. then ci± W (x. t0 )∂x + σpp (t. . By transforming back from Fourier space to real space.23) (C.4. For the ci± we find ˆ ˆ c1+ = ˆ c2+ ˆ c1− ˆ 1 f1 (t)∂x + f˙1 (t)∂p .24) Note that because of the linear structure of the characteristic equations. SP . 2 = if˙2 (t) x + σxx (t.22) (C. t) is also a solution. t0 )∂p . t0 )∂x + σxp (t.2 to construct the Floquet solutions of the Fokker-Planck equation. t) and F (X. the ci± are shift operators in the subspace of solutions. t0 )∂x + σxp (t. Thus. t0 )∂p ˆ + if1 (t) p + σxp (t. if W (x.25) (C. one finds that the operators ci± ≡ ci± (−i∂x .

92 .

Rep. 1199 (1962). Rev. Utermann. (N. Rev. Rev. H¨nggi. M. [12] M. (N. 273 (1994). 2413 (1984). Phys. Schuster. P. 1979). 363 (1990). E 50. Casati and J. Lett. Jung. 2nd ed. and P. Semiclassical level spacings when regular and chaotic orbits coexist. Zur Deutung der Molekelspektren III: Bemerkungen uber das ¨ Schwingungs. Long Time Behavior in the Quantized Standard Map with Dissipation. 43. Chirikov. Casati. L. Dynamical quasidegeneracies and separation of regular and irregular quantum levels. Dittrich. 65. Phys. Weinheim. Bohigas. Rev. [4] E.Y. Graham. A 17. 1515 (1984). Berlin. J. 516 (1991). [13] O. Robnik. 145 (1994). H¨nggi. Phys. 1479 (1990). 67. Rev. Dittrich and R. Phys. in Stochastic Behavior in Classical and Quantum Hamiltonian Systems. Rev. 53. Dyson. A. Grossmann. Berry and M. Lett. V. (VCH. and P. Vol. S. 3. Ballentine.und Rotationsspektrum bei Molekeln mit mehr als zwei Kernen. Z. Phys. 219 a (1998). Phys. Leggett. 1967). B. Phys.References [1] G. Phys. [16] R. S. edited by G. and D. Phys. V. Tomsovic. Rev. T. Ann. and D. Lett. Ullmo. Quantum Tunnelling in a Dissipative System. L. Rev. Random matrices and the statistical theory of energy levels (Academic Press. Phys. Chaos-assisted tunneling. Lett. [3] H. Takahashi and N.Y. Ford (Springer. 93 of Lecture Notes in Physics. Caldeira and A. 55. Dittrich. Izrailev.) 149. Quantum tunneling and chaos in a driven anharmonic oscillator. p. 5 (1990). Hund. [14] O. [8] M. E. 2927 (1990). Ullmo. Tomsovic. Deterministic chaos: an introduction. Driven Quantum Tunneling. Lett. Coherent Destruction of a Tunneling. Saitˆ. 805 (1927). [15] S.) 200. Lett. Mehta. Phys. Bohigas. Heller. [2] T. [10] F. T. [9] F. Phys. [7] M. Classical transport effects on chaotic levels. [6] F. Ann. O.-G. [5] K. Ullmo. F. Tomsovic and D. New York. J. Math. Lin and L. 645 (1985). Ford. Bound-State Eigenfunctions of Classically Chaotic Hamiltonian Systems: Scars of Periodic Orbits. and J. 374 (1983). [17] W. 65. Chaos and Husimi Distribution Function in Quano tum Mechanics. J. Tunneling and the Onset of Chaos a in a Driven Bistable System. . 304. 334. E 49. The Threefold Way: Algebraic Structure of Symmetry Groups and Ensembles in Quantum Mechanics. [11] A. 1989). H¨nggi. Phys. Phys. 64. Grifoni and P.

J. [21] R. (N. P. and D. Ann. Eksp. [22] R. Kohler. E 50. Manifestations of classical phase space structures in quantum mechanics. [31] M. H¨ bner. Kohler. Latka. [33] M. Sch¨n. Chaos-induced avoided level crossing and tunneling. Dittrich. T. H¨nggi. [Sov. [28] C. V. and L. Walther. G. Phys. Control of dynamical tunneling in a bichromatically driven pendulum. D. Rev. The theory of a general quantum system interacting with a linear dissipative system. Brownian parametric quantum oscillators with dissia pation. [29] J. P. 319 (1986). Phys. Rep.94 References [18] J. 223. I. 33. G. [35] G. and W. Teor. and P. G. E 50. Latka. Vernon. [30] O. R. Feynman and F. J. and T. Rev. [27] S. E 55. U. [32] M. Phys. Rev. L. 74. and L. L. Latka. and B. P. E 52. Rapoport. Zoller. B. P. H¨nggi. 141. Phys. Zerbe and P. Ann. Graham and R. Utermann.) 234. West. P. Sirko. Some general properties of quasi-energetic spectra of quantum systems in classical monochromatic fields. N. S. (N. 4091 (1995). 47 (1883). 1942 (1959). B 11. 43 (1993). Phys. Weinheim. H¨nggi. Dittrich. Rev. Lett. Phys. J. ı. Rev. J. R3299 (1994). Bohigas. 12. Rev. A 25. Rev. West. Phys. Chem. J. Cirac and P.-L. A 50.) 24. Fainshtein. Grigolini. Phys. 596 (1994). L. 1533 (1995). Phys. 300 (1994). Atoms in a laser field. Smilansky. 1338 (1960). Rapoport. L303 (1992). and B. [25] T. P. Coherent and incoherent a chaotic tunneling near singlet-doublet crossings. Generalized Quasi-Energies and Floquet States for u a Dissipative System. a o Quantum Transport and Dissipation (Wiley-VCH. Ovsiannikov. P. Phys. Grigolini. Magalinski˘ Dynamical model in the theory of the Brownian motion. B. [19] V. Sup. Tomsovic. Phys. P. 341 (1989). Ingold. Quantum Computations with Cold Trapped Ions. L. H¨nggi. Phys. Grigolini. Dittrich. [20] R. Zwerger. Ensemble method in the theory of irreversibility. Bl¨ mel. [26] R. H.Y. Rev. Ann. Rep. 36. Classical-quantum correspondence for barrier crossing in a driven bistable potential. de l’Ecole Norm. Lett. Phys. and K. 62. JETP 9. 2561 (1978). Phys. 118 (1963). and B. Chaos and avoided level crossing. u Microwave excitation of Rydberg atoms in presence of noise. Manakov. [24] N. Manakov. [34] S. Zh. Ullmo. Plata and J. Floquet-Markovian description of the a parametrically driven. 7219 (1998). Gomez Llorente. R. M. . Floquet. Phys. Graham. Yamada.Y. Phys. Zwanzig. West. 1381 (1959)]. E 58. Fiz. 1998). Kramer. 1071 (1994). dissipative harmonic quantum oscillator. 300 (1997). [23] A. J.

739 (1989). Howland. Quantum Dissipative Systems. [42] W. The Fokker-Planck Equation. Chem. Math. Molinari. and G. Comments At. Classical Mechanics. Dupont-Roc. [37] S. Steady States and Quasienergies of a Quantum-Mechanical System in an Oscillating Field. Magnus and S. H. Helv.-I. Berlin. Mod. Louisell. Time-independent scattering theory for general time-dependent Hamiltonians. edited by G. H¨nggi. New York. Time dependence in quantum mechanics—Floquet theory and the Berry phase. [50] W. Vol. [47] U. (Addison-Wesley. Grynberg. Phys. Cohen-Tannoudji. Weiss. Phys. 1992). S. Ann. 99. Acta 66. Reading. 2 of Series in Modern Condensed Matter Physics (World Scientific. [45] H. Prog. Risken. 207. 1955). t ) method: Theory. [53] P. H. 62. 1980). [51] F. Reaction-rate theory: fifty years after a Kramers. 95 of Springer Tracts in Modern Physics. A 7. [41] D. in Quantum Statistics in Optics and Solid-State Physics. Chem. 66 of Springer Tracts in Modern Physics. Moiseyev. Berlin. H¨hler (Springer. Vol. [43] J. Press. Adv. B979 (1965). 2nd ed. Shirley. Berlin. The solution of the time-dependent Schr¨dinger o equation by the (t. Phys. Sambe. Casati and L. Phys. [38] J. Princeton. Winkler. Phys. 1982). Vol. H¨hler o (Springer. 87 (1995). 73. 4590 (1993). [40] H. [52] H. Vol. [39] J. 138. Singapore. 1979). 18 of Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer. Atom photon interaction: basic processes and applications (Wiley. computational algorithm and applications. edited by G. [44] C. Solution of the Schr¨dinger Equation with a Hamiltonian Perio odic in Time. Mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics (Princeton Univ. Grabert. 1984). J. Quantum Statistical Properties of Radiation (Wiley & Sons. Theor.References 95 [36] G. Peskin and N. 251 (1990). Moiseyev. Phys. in Projection Operator Techniques in Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics. 1993). Phys. 1973). 315 (1974). J. Rev. Talkner. Borkovec. Stationary Scattering Theory for Time-dependent Hamiltonians. [48] H. o 1973). 31. Moore. 98. Mol. Goldstein. P. Rev. Suppl. . New York. 2203 (1973). Generalized Floquet theoretical approach to intense-field multiphoton and nonlinear optical processes. and M. von Neumann. Haake. “Quantum Chaos” with Time-Periodic Hamiltonians. Chu. Rev. [46] N. J. Hill’s Equation (Dover. Phys. New York. 3 (1993). 287 (1989). [49] U.

Schimansky-Geier and T. p. 1060 (1994). Pechukas. Talkner. Riseborough. Phys. [62] A. Chem. 517 (1993). [69] P. and G. Chem. edited by W. 97. [59] R. Grabert. Phys. S. 123. W. 8365 (1993). 1997). Exact Results for a Damped Quana tum Mechanical Harmonic Oscillator. J. 1 (1981). 106. Makri. P. Feynman and A. Quantum Brownian Motion: The Funtional Integral Approach. Theory. B258. I. New York. R. [57] D. [60] H. Gans (Plenum Press. Phys. [64] P. 471 (1985). Phys. 1965). H¨nggi. [68] P. J. Physica o A 199. Schulman. Chem. Voth. Schramm. edited by L. [71] L. Lett. Zwanzig.-L. On a Quasiclassical Langevin Equation. Stat. Nonlinear Generalized Langevin Equations. Rep. Berlin. Benguria and M. On High-Temperature Markovian Equation for Quantum Brownian o Motion. Kac. Schmid. Control of dissipative tunnelling dynamics by continuous wave electromagnetic fields: Localization and large-amplitude coherent motion. [70] L. 2286 (1997). Vol. U. [63] G. Phys. NATO ASI “Large-scale molecular systems”. 168. in Stochastic Dynamics. Lett. A 31. 87 (1984). Phys. 46. J. A. 1 (1993). Vol. Lett. Phys. P¨schel o (Springer. Tensor propagator for iterative quantum evolution of reduced density matrices. 15. 4600 (1995). . Caldeira-Leggett master equation and medium temperatures. Europhys. Feynman Path Integral of Quantum Mechanical Transition-State Theory. Low Temp. Quantum Theory of the Damped Harmonic Oscillator. [61] R. Phys. 22. [56] G. in Proc. Rev. Rev. Phys. Grabert. Makri and D. Z. 1991). 609 (1982). 49. Kac. Stabilization of localized states in dissipative tunneling systems interacting with monochromatic fields. [66] L. and P. [55] P. New York. Quantum Langevin Equation. P. Generalized Langevin Equations: A Useful Tool for the Perplexed a Modeller of Nonequilibrium Fluctuations?. On the Quantum Langevin Equation. H¨nggi. Makarov and N. B 55. Pechukas. [65] R. 73. Rev. E. Weiss. J. Techniques and Applications of Path Integrals (Wiley & Sons. Hibbs. Di´si. Stat. J. Ingold. Phys. Weiss. Reduced Dynamics Need Not Be Completely Positive. Phys. p. 803 (1987). Phys. and U. 484 of Lecture Notes in Physics. 9. 102. 46. [58] N. Ford and M. Makarov. E. Rev. 5863 (1995). New York. Di´si. 1981).96 References [54] H. 115 (1988). Quantum Mechanics and Path Integrals (McGraw-Hill. P. Makri. E 52. J. [67] N. 215 (1973).

3596 (1995). S. [Sov. S. Phys. P. 1995). L.-I. 3497 (1993). Popov. and W. 1991). Phys. B. Bl¨ mel. Theory and Applications of Mathieu Functions (Dover Publications Inc. Dittrich. Lewis. Driven Tunneling: a a New Possibilities for Coherent and Incoherent Quantum Transport. in 25 Years of Non-Equilibrium Statistical Mechanics. 531 (1990). 10. Riesenfeld. A 44. Zh. Graham. Classical and Quantum Systems with Time-Dependent Harmonic-Oscillator-Type Hamiltonians. Phys. W. 1798 (1986). Dynamical localization in the microwave interaction of Rydberg atoms: The influence of noise. 445 of Lecture Notes in Physics. [73] M. H¨nggi. Quantum Signatures of Chaos. Teor. 510. Rev. J. Group-theoretical aspects of the variable frequency oscillator problem. H¨nggi. Fiz. [85] N. B. Phys. Smilansky. Phys. Teor. 589 (1968). Lett. 55. [78] T.. H¨nggi. 66. Weiss. A. M. R. JETP 29. and H. Oelschl¨gel. 62. 1964). . [79] F. Math. Electromagnetic traps for charged and neutral particles. Chu. 636 (1967). and R. [75] R. Rev. J. Utermann. Phys. 527 (1991). Rev. Berlin. [74] T. 1684 (1969). Popov and A. McLachlan. A 33. Rev. Fiz. 269. 57. R. Lett. [84] W. Perelomov. [86] H. Phys. M. 22. Haake. Rev. Jr. Sassetti.References 97 [72] M. [76] T. Teor. Dittrich. and U. [77] B. 1. Oelschl¨gel. Floquet-Liouville supermatrix approach: Time development of density-matrix operator and multiphoton resonance spectra in intense laser fileds. 54 of Springer Series in Synergetics (Springer. [Sov.. Weiss. New York. JETP 30. Phys. Wang. and U. Driven Dissipative Tunneling. B. Oelschl¨gel. P. Phys. Dittrich. Vol. R. Brey (Springer. Rev. Mod. E 48. Eksp. Grifoni. 18. Stockburger. Phys. Phys. Jr. 360 (1969). M. [88] L. 910 (1970)]. Nonlinear response of a periodically driven damped two-state system. and P. H¨nggi. Buchleitner. Z. Berlin. [82] V. Quantum Motion in a Paul Trap. Acta Physica Polonica B 24. Zh. 4521 (1991). [81] V. Global and Local Dissipation in a Quantum Map. An Exact Quantum Theory of the Time-Dependent Harmonic Oscillator and of a Charged Particle in a TimeDependent Electromagnetic Field. E 52.-S. S. Eua a rophys. Eksp. M. Perelomov. Lewis. Sassetti. 845 (1993). Rev. Parametric exitation of a quantum oscillator. Lett. [87] H. A. 75 (1985). Grifoni. u Walther. [83] V. Paul. 5 (1993). p. 1458 (1969). K. Brown. [80] R. T. Fiz. and P. Graham. Mat. Popov and A. Damped periodically driven quana a tum transport in bistable systems. and S. M. Ho. S. Cooperative effects in the a nonlinearly driven spin-boson system. Vol. Sirko. B 59. edited by J. Perelomov. J. Parametric exitation of a quantum oscillator II. 719 (1969)]. U.

Kamke. 88. Z. 48. [101] E. Utermann. 206 (1982). Lett. [95] E. a E 49. Roncaglia. 1994). [106] T. M. D. A. M. Ryzhik. [99] W. Phys. Phys. San Diego. Rev. D. Korsch.98 References [89] G. Semiclassical description of tunneling in mixed systems: Case of the annular billiard. Dittrich and R. W. 3661 (1995). [90] J. Frischat and E. Schleich. 1979). [104] F. Hartley and J. F. Dittrich. B 77. and Products. Schimansky-Geier. Wigner Functions in the Paul Trap. Man’ko. and T. Quantum Semiclass. Gomez Llorente. B. Doron and S. Rev. B.-J. Coherent States for the time-dependent harmonic oscillator. Series. Ullmo. 307 (1995). G. Opt. 1013 (1994). 802 (1994). Bonci. Mirbach. and L. E 52. I. Monteoliva. Doron. Commun. Tunneling versus chaos in the kicked Harper model. Ballentine. (Academic Press. Zerbe. H’walisz. 6th ed. Rep. Differentialgleichungen. [94] P. Colored a noise driven systems with inertia. Grigolini. Europhys. (Teubner. 2529 (1996). and H. Stuttgart. Phys. and P. Physica A 91. J. Leyvraz and D. [103] S. H¨nggi. P. A 45. 4. Quantum Effects in the Steady State of the Dissipative Standard Map. Phys. [92] I. Titulaer. Glauber. H¨nggi and H. 1421 (1998). Lett. Math. Mixed dynamics and e tunneling. J. M. 471 (1989). Phys. Jung. P. [93] G. Rev. 321 (1978). Guti´rrez. Symmetries a and Linear Response. Lindblad. [97] C. P. Lin and L. 73. Ray. The level splitting distribution in chaos-assisted tunneling. R. . [102] E. E 57. 263 (1987). Vol. West. L. V. D 25. Tunnel Splittings and Chaotic Transa port in Periodically Driven Bistable Systems. 5th ed. Dynamical tunneling in mixed systems. Schrade. Phys. [96] L. Frischat. Brownian parametric oscillators. Rev. Phys. M. [100] P. H¨nggi. Rev. Talkner. Rev. A 57. I. J. Phys. [98] U. Lett 75. Quantum tunneling and regular and irregular quantum dynamics of a driven double-well oscillator. Stochastic Processes: Time Evolution. and J. Physica B 194-196. R. J. Global and local dynamical invariants and quasienergy states of time-periodic Hamiltonians. Graham. H¨nggi. Rev. [105] R. 3626 (1994). B. M. S. Zanardi. II: Partielle Differentialgleichungen. Jung. E. P. 746 (1998). Thomas. Phys. Rev. and P. Phys. 7. Table of Integrals. and R. A 29. 119 (1976). 382 (1982). Phys. Gradshteyn. 3637 (1992). On the Generators of Quantum Dynamical Semigroups. Izrailev. P. A systematic solution procedure for the Fokker-Planck equation of a Brownian particle in the high friction case. [91] D. Phys. 4736 (1995).

H¨nggi. 1987). Grossmann. [117] S.-J. 77. B. Rep. Rev. Phys. P. Evolution and exact eigenstates of a resonant quantum system. Approximate constants of motion for classically chaotic vibrational dynamics: Vague tori. A 20. 571 (1992). Phys.-J. [115] L.-X. Phys. Vol. 1439 (1985). Physica D 21. Großmann and P. New York. Singapore. 217. Phys. A. A 34. H¨nggi. Zheng. Chem. Vol. C. Phys. [118] S. 5204 (1982). Moon and G. Math. On the relation between classical and quantum-mechanical entropy. 38 of Applied Mathical Sciences (Springer. [119] B. [111] D. J. semiclassical quantization. 1992). a Europhys. Chem. [113] M. 7 (1986). 55. F. Time Evolution and Eigenstates of a Quantum Iterative System.-J. 145 (1997). [109] F. Wilkinson. Cross-Well Chaos and Escape Phenomena in Driven Oscillators. Phys. 1. . Rev. Gorin. Lett. Tunneling in a Periodically a Driven Bistable System. Wehrl. 1983). Rev. Z. Korsch. Peres. p. Phys. edited by H. 315 (1991). 55. The fractal dimension of the two-well potential strange attractor. The Transition to Chaos: In Conservative and Classical Systems: Quantum Manifestations (Springer. Phase-space localization and level spacing distributions for a driven rotor with mixed regular/chaotic dynamics. Regular and Stochastic Motion. P. B. Mirbach. Wilkinson. Escande. 341 (1986). and classical intramolecular energy flow. Reichl and W. Shi. Lin (World Scientific. Szemplinska-Stupnicka. Lett. 635 (1987). New York. [110] A. Li. 269 (1985). Reinhardt. 165 (1985). Tunnelling between tori in phase space. J. H. [124] A. Shirts and W. 158 (1991). 67. [123] W. and B. [108] A.References 99 [107] F. Semiclassical quantization of KAM resonances in time-periodic systems. Reps. E. Chang and K. Phys. 6579 (1994). 18. Lett. Mirbach and H. Physica D 17. Reichl. in Directions in Chaos. Lett. J. T. Jung.-X. Stochasticity in classical Hamiltonian systems: universal aspects. Liebermann. J. 99 (1985). Lichtenberg and M. 17. [120] T. [112] L. [121] F. Phys. Dynamical quasidegeneracies and quantum tunneling. Phys. J. 353 (1979). C. and P. Li. Phys. [116] R. Localization in a Driven Two-Level Dynamics. Nonlinear Dynamics 3. A 27. E. Shi. 16. Narrowly avoided crossings. [114] M. M. B 84. [122] F. 121. Rev. Fractal Basin Boundaries and Homoclinic Orbits for Periodic Motion in a Two-Well Potential. Korsch. 225 (1992).-J. J. Dittrich. Moon and G. Chang and K.

Rev. Husimi. Gardiner. 177. Beiglb¨ck (Springer. P. [139] R. I. Habib. Bhaduri. Vol. Phys. 237 (1977). . o 1987). R. Berlin.) 167. Semi-classical mechanics in phase space: a study of Wigner’s function. edited by W. u Wiesbaden. Phys. On the Quantum Correction for Thermodynamic Equilibrium. Lett. [127] M. Quantum Brownian Motion and its Classical Limit. 40. Soc. (N. Rev. J. see Appendix C therein. 264 (1940). Coherent and Incoherent States of a Radiation Field. R. Messiah. Soc. Alicki and K. 286 of Lecture Notes in Physics. 106. (Springer. [134] C. Hillery. Ann. and J. 749 (1932). P. Einf¨hrung in die Grundlagen der Quantentheorie. Rev. Quantum Mechanics.100 References [125] A. New York. Phys. Vol. Proc. Vol. Paz. 400 (1991). [131] K. Phys. The Failure of the Quantum Regression Hypothesis. K. Rep. [138] E. [136] K. P. Density Operators and Quasiprobability Distributions. 1883 (1969). 1857 (1969). Rev. 2766 (1963). 131. [135] K. Ambegaokar. Rev. Phys. 13 of Springer Series in Synergetics. Brack and R. 121 (1984). 390 (1986). [140] P. Drummond and C.Y. Cahill and R. Gardiner. Phys. Ordered Expansions in Boson Amplitude Operators. Vol. [141] V. 1985). 96 of Frontiers in Physics (Addison-Wesley. Japan 22. J. 2nd ed. Handbook of Stochastic Methods. S. F. Coherent states via decoherence. New York. 6th ed. Phys. Wigner. Berlin. [142] W. 3rd ed. Lendi. Phys. 1187 (1993). in Quantum Dynamical Semigroups and Applications. Lett. 70. Glauber. Wigner. H. W. Rev. O’Connell. 1965). 2353 (1980). M. Scully. Distribution Functions in Physics: Fundamentals. (Aula. 1 (1927). V. Sudarshan. 10. Z. G. Semiclassical Physics. Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical description of statistical light beams. Math. J. [130] E. Weyl. 277 (1963). Proc. Talkner. [133] M. Phys. E. Zurek. A 13. (Wiley & Sons. [128] R. Glauber. [137] H. [126] M. Cahill and R. Phys. E. 1988). Generalised P -representations in quantum optics. [129] E. W. [132] P. Glauber. Fick. Berichte der Bunsengesellschaft 95. Berry. and E. 1997). 177. J. A 287. Phys. C. Quantenmechanik und Gruppentheorie. 46. J.

Gert-Ludwig Ingold. I enjoyed many discussions on dissipative quantum mechanics and driven quantum systems with Milena Grifoni. and Andr´ Wobst. but not least. I gained a lot from their experience. Christine Zerbe provided the numerical code for the exact solution of the dissipative. and Haifa. W¨ rzburg. During the time I spent in Augsburg. Peter Schmitteckert. Di 511/1 and Di 511/2 as well as for the possibility to participate in conferences in Freiburg. Michael Thorwart. but also kept it (mostly :-) well tuned. I had e lots of fruitful discussions about efficient computing and object-oriented programming. Thomas Dittrich. Ludwig Hartmann. I would like to thank Prof. and Dietmar Weinmann. Berlin. Especially Gert has always been a competent and interested partner for discussions and questions during his Teerunde. u . even while staying at several remote places all over the world. Dr.Acknowledgment First. Dresden. Dr. and Sonja Thunnessen were of indispensible help in proofreading and improving the English of this thesis. I’m grateful to Thomas also for collaborating with me. With him. Peter H¨nggi and Prof. The members of the groups Theoretische Physik I and Theoretische Physik II— present and former ones—provided a stimulating and pleasant working atmosphere. Ralf Utermann not only built up a great computer environment. Ralf Utermann. Thomas Dittrich a for accepting me as a Doktorand and for giving me the opportunity to work on an intriguing project. parametrically driven harmonic oscillator. Gert-Ludwig Ingold. I’m grateful to the DFG-Schwerpunkt “Zeitabh¨ngige Ph¨noa a mene und Methoden in Quantensystemen der Physik und Chemie” for founding my position at the Universit¨t Augsburg from September ’95 to February ’99 under a grant no. Last.