Global geometric entanglement in transverse-field XY spin chains: finite and infinite systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The entanglement in quantum XY spin chains of arbitrary length is investigated via the geometric measure of entanglement. The emergence of entanglement is explained intuitively from the perspective of perturbations. The model is solved exactly and the energy spectrum is determined and analyzed in particular for the lowest two levels for both finite and infinite systems. The overlaps for these two levels are calculated analytically for arbitrary number of spins. The entanglement is hence obtained by maximizing over a single parameter. The corresponding ground-state entanglement surface is then determined over the entire phase diagram, and its behavior can be used to delineate the boundaries in the phase diagram. For example, the field-derivative of the entanglement becomes singular along the critical line. The form of the divergence is derived analytically and it turns out to be dictated by the universality class controlling the quantum phase transition. The behavior of the entanglement near criticality can be understood via a scaling hypothesis, analogous to that for free energies. The entanglement density vanishes along the so-called disorder line in the phase diagram, the ground space is doubly degenerate and spanned by two product states. The entanglement for the superposition of the lowest two states is also calculated. The exact value of the entanglement depends on the specific form of superposition. However, in the thermodynamic limit the entanglement density turns out to be independent of the superposition. This proves that the entanglement density is insensitive to whether the ground state is chosen to be the spontaneously $Z_2$ symmetry broken one or not. The finite-size scaling of entanglement at critical points is also investigated from two different view points. First, the maximum in the field-derivative of the entanglement density is computed and fitted to a logarithmic dependence of the system size, thereby deducing the correlation length exponent for the Ising class using only the behavior of entanglement. Second, the entanglement density itself is shown to possess a correction term inversely proportional to the system size, with the coefficient being universal (but with different values for the ground state and the first excited state, respectively).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".