1:
2: \documentstyle[prl,aps,multicol]{revtex}
3: %\documentstyle[12pt]{article}
4: \input{epsf}
5: \begin{document}
6: \draft
7: \title{Quantum Fractal Fluctuations}
8: \author{Giuliano Benenti$^{(a,b)}$, Giulio Casati$^{(a,b,c)}$,
9: Italo Guarneri$^{(a,b,d)}$, and Marcello Terraneo$^{(a,b)}$}
10: \address{$^{(a)}$International Center for the Study of Dynamical
11: Systems,}
12: \address{
13: Universit\`a degli Studi dell'Insubria, Via Valleggio 11,
14: 22100 Como, Italy}
15: \address{$^{(b)}$Istituto Nazionale per la Fisica della Materia,
16: Unit\`a di Milano, Via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy}
17: \address{$^{(c)}$Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare,
18: Sezione di Milano, Via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy}
19: \address{$^{(d)}$Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare,
20: Sezione di Pavia, Via Bassi 6, 27100 Pavia, Italy}
21: \date{\today}
22: \maketitle
23:
24: \begin{abstract}
25: We numerically analyse quantum survival probability fluctuations
26: in an open, classically chaotic system. In a quasi-classical regime, and in
27: the presence of classical mixed phase space, such fluctuations are
28: believed to exhibit a fractal pattern, on the grounds of semiclassical
29: arguments.
30: In contrast, we work in a classical regime of complete chaoticity,
31: and in a deep quantum regime of strong localization. We provide
32: evidence that fluctuations are still fractal, due to
33: the slow, purely quantum algebraic decay in time produced by
34: dynamical localization.
35: Such findings considerably enlarge the scope of the existing theory.
36:
37: \end{abstract}
38: \pacs{PACS numbers: 05.45.Df, 05.40.-a, 05.45.Mt}
39: %05.45.Df - Fractal
40: %05.40.-a - Fluctuation phenomena, random processes, noise, and
41: %Brownian motion
42: %05.45.Mt - Semiclassical chaos ("quantum chaos")
43:
44: \begin{multicols}{2}
45: \narrowtext
46:
47: The study of mesoscopic conductance fluctuations has gained important
48: insights from the analysis of the underlying classical dynamics
49: \cite{jal}.
50: In particular, it has been found that some statistical properties
51: of quantum fluctuations are semiclassically
52: determined by the classical law which rules the decay in time of the
53: survival probability inside the open
54: chaotic system\cite{smila}. Building on this general relation, it was eventually
55: predicted that, if the classical decay law is algebraic, due to
56: the presence of residual stable islands in the classical phase space,
57: then the quantum fluctuation pattern should display a fractal structure
58: with a fractal dimension directly related to the classical decay exponent
59: \cite{ketz}.
60: Such fractal structure of quantum
61: fluctuations has been interpreted as a quantal manifestation of
62: classical fractality associated with hierarchical
63: structures of surviving stable islands.
64: This theoretical prediction has received experimental support\cite{expe},
65: and has
66: been numerically confirmed on a dissipative model system,
67: where coupling to continuum is simulated by complete absorption of that part of the
68: wave packets which propagates outside the interaction region\cite{casa,spain}.
69:
70: In such a theoretical frame, quasi-classicality of the quantum dynamics
71: appears essential in order that slow classical decay be quantally
72: reproduced over sufficiently long time scales. In contrast, in a deep quantum
73: regime, localization effects would become dominant, rapidly effacing any
74: memory of the underlying classical dynamics.
75:
76: In this Letter we provide evidence that fractality of quantum fluctuations
77: nevertheless survives even in such strongly non-classical
78: situations. In the model systems presently to be described, the classical
79: phase space has no
80: significant stable islands, the classical motion is diffusive, and
81: the classical decay is exponential; therefore, in the quantum weakly
82: localized regime, one observes non-fractal, Lorentz-correlated
83: conductance fluctuations\cite{borgo}. In contrast, we work in a
84: strongly
85: localized regime, and observe fractal fluctuations, apparently unrelated to
86: any classical phase-space structure. Decisive in this respect is the fact
87: that the {\it quantum} decay, albeit highly non-classical, is algebraic
88: due to purely quantum localization effects, as
89: recently predicted\cite{dima,hatom}. As a matter of fact, we find that
90: the fractal dimension of quantum fluctuations is connected to the algebraic
91: decay exponent in exactly the same way predicted by the semiclassical theory
92: \cite{ketz,casa}.
93: It therefore appears that the quantum
94: fluctuation pattern bears the same relation to the {\it quantum}
95: probability decay, which was originally predicted by semiclassical arguments,
96: even though such decay is not by any means quasi-classical.
97:
98: We consider the kicked rotator model \cite{fishman} with absorbing boundary
99: conditions. Classical dynamics is described by the standard map:
100: \begin{equation}
101: \label{clrot}
102: \bar{I} = I + k \sin \theta, \quad
103: \bar{\theta} = \theta + T \bar{I},
104: \end{equation}
105: with absorption for $\bar{I} < 0 $ and for $\bar{I} > N$.
106: Classical dynamics only depends on the scaling parameter $K=kT$.
107: The corresponding quantum map is obtained by the substitution $ I \to
108: \hbar \hat{n} = -i \hbar \partial / \partial \theta$.
109: We denote $\psi_t$ the state vector immediately before
110: the $t-$th kick, $T$ the kicking period, and we set $\hbar=1$.
111: Throughout this Letter, we will treat the kick counter
112: $t$ as a discrete time variable in units of $T$.
113: The discrete-time evolution from
114: time $t$ to time $t+1$ is described in the classical case by
115: (\ref{clrot}) and in the quantum case by :
116: \begin{equation}
117: \label{rot}
118: {\psi_{t+1}}=\hat{P}\tilde\psi_{t+1}=\hat{P}e^{-iT(\hat{n}+\phi)^2/2}
119: e^{-ik\cos\hat{\theta}}\psi_t.
120: \end{equation}
121: The state
122: $\tilde\psi_{t+1}$ is obtained from $\psi_{t}$ by means of the unitary
123: one-period propagator of the kicked rotor. The operator
124: $\hat{P}$ then projects $\tilde\psi_{t+1}$ over states in a fixed
125: interval of $n$ values ($0 \le n \le N$), so it describes complete
126: deletion (absorption) of the
127: part of the wave packet which propagates outside the given interval.
128: The parameter $\phi$ can be interpreted as an
129: Aharonov-Bohm flux
130: through the ring parametrized by the coordinate $\theta$.
131:
132: We consider the case $K=kT=7$, $k=5$, with
133: absorption for $n< 0$ and $n>N=250$. With such parameter values,
134: the classical phase space has no
135: significant island of stability \cite{note}. We consider a statistical
136: ensemble of orbits starting at $t=0$ with $I=0$ and randomly
137: distributed phases $\theta$. The survival probability
138: $P(t)$ is the fraction of the ensemble which hasn't been absorbed
139: at time $t$; equivalently, $P(t)$ is the integrated distribution of
140: exit times of orbits in the ensemble.
141:
142: \begin{figure}
143: \centerline{\epsfxsize=7.2cm\epsffile{fig1.eps}}
144: \caption{Classical (dashed line) and quantum (thick solid line) survival
145: probability for the kicked rotator model with $K=7$, $k=5$, $\phi=0$.
146: The evolution starts at $n_0=0$ and the probability is absorbed for
147: $n< 0$ and $n>250$. The thin solid line has slope one.
148: Here and in the following figures the logarithms are decimal.
149: }
150: \label{fig1}
151: \end{figure}
152:
153: \vskip -0.5cm
154: \begin{figure}
155: \centerline{\epsfxsize=7.5cm\epsffile{fig2.eps}}
156: \caption{Survival probability vs flux $\phi$ at fixed time
157: $t=10^3$ (above) and $t=10^4$ (below), with parameter values as
158: in Fig.\ref{fig1}.
159: }
160: \label{fig2}
161: \end{figure}
162:
163: The classical decay of $P(t)$ is well described
164: by a diffusion process, practically insensitive to the chosen
165: value of $\phi$. As
166: shown in Fig.\ref{fig1}, after a diffusion time
167: $t_D\approx N^2/D\propto N^2/k^2$ ($D$ diffusion rate),
168: the survival probability exponentially decays with time:
169: $P(t)\propto\exp(-\gamma t)$, with
170: $\gamma\approx 1/t_D\approx 2.2\times 10^{-3}$. In contrast, quantum dynamics
171: is strongly localized, as the localization length $\ell\approx k^2$
172: is much less than the ``sample size'' $N$. Such strong localization
173: causes a slow decay of the quantum survival probability $P_{\phi}(t)$
174: The latter is
175: defined as the total probability on states $0<n<250$ at time $t$,
176: given that at $t=0$ the state was $n_0=0$. After the ``Heisenberg time''
177: $t_H
178: $, it
179: decays proportional to $1/t$ up to a time $t_{max}\sim\exp(2N/{\ell})$
180: \cite{dima}, as shown in
181: Fig.\ref{fig1} (in this case, $t_{max}\sim 5\times 10^8$).
182:
183: Though the exponent $1$ of algebraic quantum decay is independent
184: of the value of $\phi$, the quantum survival probability
185: $P_{\phi}(t)$ at a fixed
186: time $t$ is sensitively dependent on $\phi$. The fluctuation pattern
187: exhibited by
188: the graph of
189: $P_{\phi}(t)$ versus $\phi$ at fixed $t$ (two examples are given
190: in Fig.\ref{fig2})
191: is precisely the object of our analysis, at values of $t$ up to
192: $10^4$, and for $10^4$ values of $\phi$ in the interval
193: $[0,0.1]$.
194: First we have computed autocorrelation functions:
195: \begin{equation}
196: \label{corr0}
197: C(\delta\phi)=<P_\phi(t)P_{\phi+\delta\phi}(t)>_{\phi}.
198: \end{equation}
199: Such correlations play a key role in the existing semiclassical theory of
200: fractal fluctuations, which consists of three steps:
201:
202: \noindent
203: (i) correlation functions are related
204: via Fourier transform
205: to the classical decay of the canonical variable
206: conjugate to $\phi$\cite{smila,casa}, notably, to the
207: function
208: $P_{cl}(\Theta)$ yielding the probability distribution of the angle $\Theta$ accumulated
209: by the rotor at the time of exit from the finite sample (``accumulated''
210: means multiples of $2\pi$ included). In particular, if
211: $P_{cl}(\Theta)$ decays as $\Theta^{-\alpha}$ at large
212: $\Theta$, then
213: \begin{equation}
214: \label{corr}
215: C(\delta\phi)\sim C(0)-\hbox{const}|\delta\phi|^\alpha
216: \end{equation}
217: at small $\delta\phi$.
218:
219: \noindent
220: (ii) It is physically intuitive, and
221: numerically confirmed \cite{casa}, that the decay exponent $\alpha$
222: coincides with the decay exponent of the classical survival probability.
223:
224: \noindent
225: (iii) a signal-theoretic argument \cite{mandelbrot}
226: allows to conclude from (i) and (ii)
227: that the
228: fluctuation graph has a fractal dimension given by
229: \begin{equation}
230: \label{frac}
231: D=2-\frac{\alpha}{2} \quad (\hbox{for }\alpha\leq 2),
232: \end{equation}
233: where $\alpha$ is the time decay exponent of the classical survival
234: probability.
235: Step (iii) actually invokes certain statistical properties of
236: fluctuations, which were assumed to be ensured by the chaotic nature
237: of classical dynamics\cite{ketz1}.
238:
239: In our case, semiclassical arguments are invalid,
240: because of strong quantum localization. In addition, there is no
241: classical decay exponent $\alpha$, because classical
242: decay is exponential. So the above theory doesn't apply; still,
243: numerical results to be described below demonstrate that (i), (ii)
244: and (iii) are
245: still legitimate in our
246: highly non semiclassical case, too, provided one replaces the classical
247: distribution functions $P(t)$,$P_{cl}(\Theta)$ by the corresponding
248: quantum distributions $P_{\phi}(t)$,$P_q(\Theta)$, and
249: $\alpha$ by the exponent of the {\it quantum} algebraic decay.
250: In order to compute $P_q(\Theta)$ we perform a lifting of our model
251: (\ref{rot}), that is, we translate the
252: model (\ref{rot}) of a kicked particle on a circle into the model of a
253: kicked particle on the line, described by the coordinate $\Theta$. To simulate
254: the corresponding dynamics we restrict $\Theta$ inside a large, yet finite
255: box, with periodic boundary conditions.
256: At every
257: evolution step $t$ we compute the function $|\psi_t(\Theta)-
258: \tilde\psi_t(\Theta)|^2$, which yields the probability loss occurring at
259: time $t$ and position $\Theta$ due to absorption.
260: Summing this quantity over $t$ gives the
261: total probability lost at position $\Theta$, that is, the probability
262: distribution of the angle accumulated at the exit time. The corresponding
263: integrated distribution is shown
264: in Fig.\ref{fig3} and displays a decay $\propto \Theta^{-1}$.
265: The faster decay
266: in the rightmost part of Fig.\ref{fig3} is due to the finite total time
267: and to the finite $\Theta-$box used in the integration. Thus, at any given
268: time $t$, the distribution of accumulated exit angles up to that time
269: can be assumed to decay proportional to $\Theta^{-1}$ in a range
270: $\Theta_{min}<\Theta<\Theta_{max,t}$, with $\Theta_{max,t}$ increasing with
271: $t$ as long as $t<t_{max}$.
272: One can estimate $\Theta_{min}$ as the angle accumulated until
273: the time $t_H\approx\ell$.
274: This gives
275: $\Theta_{min}\sim \int_0^{t_H T} \sqrt{(D/T) \tau} d \tau
276: \sim (2/3)t_H^{2}T$.
277: Assuming a maximal momentum
278: $\sim\ell$ for the rotor started at $n_0=0$,
279: a rough estimate for $\Theta_{max,t}$ is provided by $\ell tT$
280: ($\Theta_{min}\sim 2 \times 10^2$ and $\Theta_{max,t}\approx
281: 2.1\times 10^4$ for the case of Fig.3).
282:
283: \begin{figure}
284: \centerline{\epsfxsize=7.2cm\epsffile{fig3.eps}}
285: \caption{Quantum integrated distribution of the accumulated angle $\Theta$
286: at the exit time, computed over a total time $t=600$, parameter
287: values as in Fig.\ref{fig1}. The straight line has slope one.
288: }
289: \label{fig3}
290: \end{figure}
291:
292:
293:
294: Numerically computed correlations (\ref{corr0}) shown in the inset of
295: Fig.\ref{fig4},
296: at two different times, indicate
297: that relation (\ref{corr}) is still valid in our
298: strongly localized case\cite{borgo1}.
299: We have computed the fractal dimensions
300: of the corresponding graphs of $P_{\phi}(t)$ versus $\phi$ shown
301: in Fig.\ref{fig2} using the box-counting algorithm described in
302: \cite{expe,casa}. The results are presented in
303: Fig.\ref{fig4} and demonstrate that the graph
304: has a fractal dimension
305: $\approx 1.5$ over a significant range of $\delta\phi$ scales,
306: as predicted by equation (\ref{frac}).
307: This range roughly lies in between scales
308: $\delta\phi_{min,t}$,
309: $\delta\phi_{max}$. The latter scale is inverse to
310: $\Theta_{min}$. The former scale can be estimated
311: by $\Theta_{max,t}^{-1}$ (hence it decreases as $t$ increases),
312: as long as it remains above a minimal $\delta\phi_0\sim
313: 2\pi/(N^2T)$ scale. This scale is imposed
314: by the finiteness of the sample, and can be explained as follows.
315: The evolution operator (\ref{rot}) has complex eigenvalues inside the unit
316: circle. Varying $\phi$ causes these eigenvalues to move, and their maximal
317: shift under a change $\delta\phi$ is estimated by $TN\delta\phi$.
318: Any time one moving eigenvalue comes close to the unit circle, a local maximum in the graph of $P_{\phi}(t)$
319: vs $\phi$ appears. The number of peaks produced by a single moving
320: eigenvalue as $\phi$ changes from $0$ to $1$ is at most $\sim TN/(2\pi)$.
321: As there are $N$ eigenvalues, the total number of peaks is $\sim
322: TN^2/(2\pi)$, with an average $\phi-$ spacing $\sim \delta\phi_0=
323: (2\pi)/(N^2T)$.
324: As the fractal structure of the graph is due to the superposition of many
325: tiny peaks originated in this way, no fractality can
326: be expected below the $\delta\phi_0$ scale.
327:
328:
329: \begin{figure}
330: \centerline{\epsfxsize=7.5cm\epsffile{fig4.eps}}
331: \caption{Fractal analysis for the kicked rotator model, with
332: parameter values as in Fig.\ref{fig1}. The graph of $P_{\phi}(t)$
333: vs $\phi$ was covered by boxes of side $\delta\phi$, and the largest
334: excursion of $P_\phi(t)$ in each strip was recorded; summing over all
335: strips and dividing the result by $\delta\phi$, we obtained $N(\delta\phi)$.
336: Data are shown for $t=10^3$ (circles)
337: and $t=10^4$ (diamonds). The straight lines correspond
338: to the fractal dimension $D=1.5$ expected for $\alpha=1$.
339: The inset shows the correlation function $C(\delta\phi)$ at the
340: same times. The straight lines correspond to
341: $1-C(\delta\phi)/C(0)\propto |\delta\phi|^\alpha$, with $\alpha=1$.
342: }
343: \label{fig4}
344: \end{figure}
345:
346: Further confirmation for the validity of the above illustrated scenario was
347: obtained
348: by analyzing the following variant of the basic model (\ref{rot}):
349: \begin{equation}
350: \label{disc}
351: \psi_{t+1}=\hat{P} e^{-iT(\hat{n}+\phi)^2/2}
352: e^{-ik|\cos\hat{\theta}|}\psi_t.
353: \end{equation}
354: which differs from (\ref{rot}) because the kicking potential has now a
355: discontinuous derivative. Localization is in this case algebraic,
356: as eigenfunctions decay like $1/n^2$. The argument used to predict
357: the $t^{-1}$ decay of the survival probability in the case of
358: exponential localization \cite{dima}
359: yields an
360: asymptotic decay $\propto t^{-3/4}$. The numerical analysis
361: illustrated above for the case of exponential localization was replicated
362: for this model, too, yielding the results shown in Fig.\ref{fig5}.
363: Fractal analysis of the fluctuation graph yields good agreement
364: over a broad range with the theoretical $D$
365: value of $13/8$ predicted using equation (\ref{frac}) and
366: the decay exponent $\alpha=3/4$.
367:
368: \begin{figure}
369: \centerline{\epsfxsize=7.5cm\epsffile{fig5.eps}}
370: \caption{
371: Same as in Fig.\ref{fig1} (upper inset) and Fig.\ref{fig4}
372: but for the discontinuous map (\ref{disc}).
373: The straight lines correspond to a power law decay of the
374: quantum survival probability with $\alpha=3/4$ (upper inset),
375: a correlation function $C(\delta\phi)\propto |\delta\phi|^{\alpha}$
376: (lower inset) and a fractal dimension $D=2-\alpha/2=13/8$.
377: The $x$-axis in the lower inset is the same as in the
378: main figure.
379: }
380: \label{fig5}
381: \end{figure}
382:
383: In conclusion, we have provided numerical evidence for fractal fluctuations
384: of the quantum survival probability in a classically chaotic system
385: in the regime of strong localization, and in the absence of significant
386: classical critical structures.
387: Whereas the original theory \cite{ketz} predicted fractal {\it conductance}
388: fluctuations, our present results are about fluctuations
389: of a different quantity, namely {\it survival probability}.
390: As both quantities ultimately reflect the fluctuations of the
391: scattering matrix, their fluctuations should be similar in nature. As a
392: matter of fact, the very same semiclassical arguments used to predict
393: conductance fluctuations could be adapted to the survival
394: probability, too \cite{casa}. The main difference is that a scan of $P_{\phi}(t)$
395: at finite however large $t$ cannot achieve the $\phi-$resolution
396: exhibited by conductance at fixed (quasi-)energy. On account of
397: the effect of increasing $t$ reported earlier in this Letter, such
398: coarsening is unlikely to ``fractalize'' otherwise non-fractal
399: fluctuation patterns.
400: In any case,
401: survival probability is a meaningful quantity in a broader class
402: of problems than electronic transport in semiconductor structures.
403: The scenario we have analyzed in this Letter
404: can also be exported to other realistic problems, where 'conductance'
405: is instead a problematic concept. As an example we quote
406: microwave ionization of Rydberg atoms \cite{hatom}. This may open a way for
407: experimental observation of localization-induced fractal fluctuations in
408: atomic physics.
409:
410: Our results show that quantum fluctuations may be fractal even in
411: situations where the existing semiclassical theory does not apply.
412: This does not command a reinterpretation of existing experimental data,
413: which were obtained in situations far from the strongly localized regime
414: considered in this Letter. Nevertheless it signals that the
415: current understanding of the deep quantum mechanisms
416: responsible for fractal fluctuations is still far from complete.
417:
418:
419:
420:
421:
422: Support from the Progetto Avanzato INFM ``Quantum transport
423: and classical chaos'' is gratefully acknowledged.
424:
425: \begin{references}
426: \bibitem{jal} For a review see
427: R.A. Jalabert, {\it The Semiclassical Tool in Mesoscopic
428: Physics}, in {\it New Directions in Quantum Chaos},
429: Proceedings of the International School of Physics
430: ``Enrico Fermi'', Course CXLIII, edited by G.Casati, I.Guarneri,
431: and U.Smilansky (IOS Press, Amsterdam, 2000).
432: \bibitem{smila} R.Bl\"umel and U.Smilansky, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 60},
433: 477 (1988); Physica D {\bf 36}, 111 (1989).
434: \bibitem{ketz} R. Ketzmerick, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 54}, 10841 (1996).
435: \bibitem{expe} H. Hegger, B. Huckestein, K. Hecker, M. Janssen,
436: A. Freimuth, G. Reckziegel, and R. Tuzinski, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 77},
437: 3885 (1996); A.S. Sachrajda, R. Ketzmerick, C. Gould, Y. Feng, P.J. Kelly,
438: A. Delage, and Z. Wasilewski, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 80}, 1948 (1998).
439: \bibitem{casa} G. Casati, I. Guarneri, and G. Maspero, Phys. Rev. Lett.
440: {\bf 84}, 63 (2000).
441: \bibitem{spain} Fractal conductance fluctuations were also numerically exposed
442: in a two-dimensional tight-binding model of a quantum dot:
443: E. Louis and J.A. Verges, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 61}, 13014 (2000).
444: The connection of that model to the semiclassical theory is unclear, though.
445: \bibitem{borgo} F. Borgonovi, I. Guarneri, and L. Rebuzzini, Phys. Rev. Lett.
446: {\bf 72}, 1463 (1994).
447: \bibitem{dima} G. Casati, G. Maspero, and D.L. Shepelyansky,
448: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 82}, 524 (1999).
449: \bibitem{hatom} G. Benenti, G. Casati, G. Maspero, and D.L. Shepelyansky,
450: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 4088 (2000).
451: \bibitem{fishman} For a review see
452: F.M. Izrailev, Phys. Rep. {\bf 196}, 299 (1991).
453: \bibitem{note} Even though accelerator modes are present at $K=7$,
454: they do not significantly affect the transport properties discussed in
455: this Letter.
456: \bibitem{mandelbrot} B.B. Mandelbrot, {\it The Fractal Geometry of
457: Nature} (Freeman, San Francisco, 1982).
458: \bibitem{ketz1} For further refinements of the theory, see
459: L. Hufnagel, R. Ketzmerick, and M. Weiss, cond-mat/0009010.
460: \bibitem{borgo1} A similar behaviour for energy-energy correlations
461: of scattering matrices in a strongly localized regime was first
462: observed by F. Borgonovi and I. Guarneri,
463: Phys. Rev. E {\bf 48}, R2347 (1993).
464:
465: \end{references}
466:
467: \end{multicols}
468:
469: \end{document}
470:
471: