Abnormal behavior of the Liouville-von-Neuman equation

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter freude3
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Behavior
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the behavior of the Liouville-von-Neumann equation in the context of time-dependent dynamics of an electron in coherently coupled states, specifically addressing the occurrence of negative values in the diagonal elements of the density matrix during numerical simulations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant reports unexpected negative values for diagonal elements of the density matrix while solving the Liouville-von-Neumann equations, questioning the interpretation of this behavior.
  • Another participant expresses concern over the implications of negative probabilities and suggests providing additional details for further assistance.
  • A different participant suggests that the issue may stem from the numerical method used, recommending a smaller step size and a recheck of the code.
  • The original poster acknowledges using a Runge-Kutta solver and questions whether the introduction of a constant dephasing time could lead to violations of causality, as it is not derived from the density matrix formalism.
  • Further advice is given to test the numerical method with simpler cases, such as pure states and incoherent mixtures, to ensure the algorithm's correctness before reintroducing dephasing effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the source of the problem, with some attributing it to the numerical method and others to the artificial introduction of dephasing time. No consensus is reached on the exact cause of the negative values in the density matrix.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the numerical approach, including the dependence on the chosen dephasing parameter and the need for careful validation against known cases. Specific assumptions about the behavior of the density matrix and the numerical method remain unresolved.

freude3
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,
I am trying to solve time-dependent Liouville-von-Neumann equations for the dynamics of an electron traveling between several coherently coupled states with constant dephasing time. I was very surprised receiving negative values for diagonal elements of the density matrix in some time intervals. Did anybody face this problem? How could I interpret such a strange behaviour of the Liouville-Neumann equation?
Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That sounds bad to me i.e. negative probability. Perhaps you can post some additional details of your equation and problem and we can help further.
 
You're propagating the density matrix in time, right? Using Runge-Kutta or some such thing? These are clearly unphysical results so something is likely wrong with your numerical method. Try a smaller step size and recheck your code.
 
Thanks all for replies. Einstein Mcfly, you are right. Indeed, I am using Runge-Kutta solver. However, It seems, the numerical procedure is working correct. Could the problem be in the constant dephasing time which I have added artificiallyv (it is not following from the density matrix formalism)? Could such an approximation lead to some violation of the causality?
 
freude3 said:
Thanks all for replies. Einstein Mcfly, you are right. Indeed, I am using Runge-Kutta solver. However, It seems, the numerical procedure is working correct. Could the problem be in the constant dephasing time which I have added artificiallyv (it is not following from the density matrix formalism)? Could such an approximation lead to some violation of the causality?

Set the dephasing parameter to zero and check the simple cases. Start with a pure state and propagate in time and see to it that nothing happens (norms preserved, no population moves etc). Then create an incoherent mixture between two states and see that those populations don't change. Then, try a coherent superposition between two with a pi/2 phase difference and see that the populations oscillate sinusoidally. Then try for a three state coherent superposition and such. Try all of these simple cases before you rest assured that your basic algorithm is working properly. Then, turn on dephasing and make sure it's only acting on the coherences. Start with a small parameter and check the populations and such. Also, work out by hand the exact equations of motion for a two or three or four state system for all of the populations and coherences and check that that's exactly what's happening in your code. This is tedious, but I've found it to be the best (and sometimes only) way to debug complicated code. Working with cases that you know the answer to will also allow you to determine what step size you have to use to get physical results.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 102 ·
4
Replies
102
Views
18K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
13K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K