Effective three-body interactions for bosons in a double-well confinement
Jacek Dobrzyniecki, Xikun Li, Anne E. B. Nielsen, Tomasz Sowi\'nski

TL;DR
This paper introduces effective three-body interaction terms into the two-mode model for bosons in a double-well potential, extending its validity by accounting for virtual transitions to higher energy states, and demonstrates improved accuracy in dynamic predictions.
Contribution
It proposes adding on-site and tunneling three-body interaction terms to the two-mode Hamiltonian, optimizing their strengths to better capture system dynamics.
Findings
The extended model accurately reproduces dynamics where the standard two-mode model fails.
Optimal three-body interaction strengths depend on initial states and system parameters.
The approach improves modeling of bosonic systems in double-well potentials.
Abstract
When describing the low-energy physics of bosons in a double-well potential with a high barrier between the wells and sufficiently weak atom-atom interactions, one can to a good approximation ignore the high energy states and thereby obtain an effective two-mode model. Here, we show that the regime in which the two-mode model is valid can be extended by adding an on-site three-body interaction term and a three-body interaction-induced tunneling term to the two-mode Hamiltonian. These terms effectively account for virtual transitions to the higher energy states. We determine appropriate strengths of the three-body terms by an optimization of the minimal value of the wave function overlap within a certain time window. Considering different initial states with three or four atoms, we find that the resulting model accurately captures the dynamics of the system for parameters where the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
