1: \documentclass[aps,pre,eqsecnum,showpacs,draft]{revtex4} 

2: \usepackage{amsmath,bm}

3: 

4: 

5: %\documentclass[aps,prl,twocolumn,groupedaddress,showpacs]{revtex4}

6:  

7:  

8: %\documentclass[aps,prl,onecolumn,groupedaddress,showpacs]{revtex4}

9: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%$\usepackage{graphicx}

10:  

11:  

12: \begin{document}

13:  

14: %\documentstyle[12pt,aps,pre,psfig]{revtex} 

15: %\documentstyle[preprint,aps,pre]{revtex} %\begin{document}

16: \draft 

17: \title{Semiclassical quantization of bound and quasi-stationary

18: states beyond the adiabatic approximation.}

19:  

20: \author{V.A.Benderskii} 

21: \affiliation {Institute of Problems of Chemical Physics, RAS \\ 142432 Moscow

22: Region, Chernogolovka, Russia} 

23: \affiliation{Laue-Langevin Institute, F-38042,

24: Grenoble, France} 

25:  

26: \author{E.V.Vetoshkin} 

27: \affiliation {Institute of Problems of Chemical Physics, RAS \\ 142432 Moscow

28: Region, Chernogolovka, Russia} 

29: \author{E. I. Kats} \affiliation{Laue-Langevin Institute, F-38042,

30: Grenoble, France} 

31: \affiliation{L. D. Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics, RAS, Moscow, Russia}

32:  

33: \date{\today}

34: 

35: 

36: 

37: 

38: \begin{abstract}

39: We examine one important (and overlooked in all previous investigations)

40: aspect of well - known crossing

41: diabatic potentials or Landau - Zener (LZ) problem. We derive 

42: the semiclassical quantization rules for the crossing 

43: diabatic potentials with localized initial and localized or delocalized final

44: states, in the intermediate energy region, when all four adiabatic states

45: are coupled and should be taken into account. 

46: We found all needed connection matrices and 

47: present the following new analytical results:

48: (i) in the tunneling region the splittings of vibrational levels

49: are represented as a product of the

50: splitting in the lower adiabatic potential and the non-trivial function depending on the

51: Massey parameter; (ii) in the over-barrier region we find specific resonances between the levels

52: in the lower and in the upper adiabatic potentials and in that condition

53: independent quantizations rules are not correct; 

54: (iii) for the delocalized final states (decay lower adiabatic potential)

55: we describe quasi - stationary states and calculate the decay rate as a function of

56: the adiabatic coupling; 

57: (iv) for the intermediate

58: energy regions we calculate the energy level quantization, which can be brought into

59: a compact form by using either adiabatic or diabatic basis set (in contrast to the previous results

60: found in the Landau diabatic basis).

61: Applications of the results may concern the various systems, e.g.,

62: molecules undergoing conversion of electronic states, radiationless transitions, or

63: isomerization reactions.

64: 

65: \end{abstract}

66: 

67: \pacs{31.50.Gh, 05.45.-a, 72.10.-d}

68: \maketitle

69: \section{Introduction.}

70: \label{I}

71: 

72: There has been great progress in the theory of crossing potentials

73: during the last seven decades (see e.g. the references in both research and textbook literature

74: \cite{LL65} - \cite{SK02}). 

75: Surprisingly, seemingly a simple but a basic question how well known

76: semiclassical quantization rules should be modified for this particular

77: situation (crossing diabatic potentials with bound (i.e. localized)

78: initial and localized

79: or delocalized final

80: states) to the best of our knowledge are still unanswered, 

81: (at least a complete and unifying description of the quantization

82: for a general case is still not available and a number

83: of other questions remain to be clarified). 

84: 

85: Partially it is related to the fact that unfortunately experimental data

86: in this field are still scarce and not very accurate.

87: However, the situation is now changing. Experimental techniques 

88: (e.g., the increasing precision of experimental tests in the femtosecond

89: laser pulse range enables to excite well defined molecular states and to study their evolution in time

90: using the second probing laser beam \cite{ZE94}, 

91: \cite{GS92}, 

92: \cite{DH98}) have

93: progressed to the point where molecular tunneling splitting dependence on energy

94: can be measured in well controlled conditions with a very high accuracy.

95: It would therefore seem appropriate at this time

96: to take a fresh look at the theory, which is the purpose

97: of the present article.

98: Note also that these questions

99: are not only of interest in their own intellectual right.

100: Recent experimental and theoretical advances \cite{BO03}, \cite{MC03}

101: in particular are beginning to yield a coherent understanding of

102: several phenomena that, far from requiring minor corrections to the

103: standard adiabatic treatment of the problem.

104: Physically such kind of situations can occur as a result

105: of non-adiabatic interactions of different electronic states

106: forming in crossing one-well diabatic vibrational potentials.

107: Adiabatic coupling removes diabatic level crossing, and the diabatic

108: levels are replaced by the adiabatic ones (see Fig.1 illustrating this

109: phenomenon). In the case of a large adiabatic splitting (see precise

110: criteria below) one can restrict oneself to the only lower adiabatic potential

111: (symmetric or asymmetric double-well, or decay potential 

112: for the systems under consideration) and neglect

113: any influence of the upper adiabatic potential (parabolic one-well for our case).

114: However, in a general case of arbitrary adiabatic splittings,

115: intra-well and inter-wells dynamics depends on the both adiabatic potentials

116: (i.e. on tunneling and adiabatic splitting).

117: Having in mind applications, the studies of these questions may concern the 

118: various molecular

119: systems undergoing so-called conversion of electronic states, 

120: isomerization reactions, or radiationless transitions arising from ''intersystem''

121: crossings of potential energy surfaces in molecular spectroscopy and chemical dynamics,

122: or inelastic atomic collisions. 

123: 

124: It is worth noting that there exists a huge literature devoted

125: to different approaches have been made by other authors 

126: to

127: the problem of crossing diabatic potentials

128: (see e.g. \cite{NU84}, \cite{BE84}, \cite{ZN94} - \cite{GS92}, 

129: \cite{PK61} - \cite{VG96})

130: but some important differences to

131: our work should be noted.

132: First, suffice it to say, that the problem how diabatic potentials crossing

133: modifies the adiabatic potentials (occurring as a result of this crossing)

134: quantization rules, has not been investigated at all. One of the

135: reason is that for many say standard rigid molecules with quite large

136: adiabatic splitting of energy levels, one may safely neglect any influence

137: of the upper adiabatic potential (i.e. to use the standard quantization rules).

138: However, nowadays the increasing precision of experimental tests of

139: molecular tunneling splitting and decay (and besides investigations

140: and synthesis of more and more new non-rigid molecules), makes the study of this

141: problem relevant and actual. 

142: Second, is a methodic note.

143: All previous approaches were based on the general semiclassical WKB formalism.

144: The crucial point to treat quantization for crossing diabatic potentials

145: is how to compute the contribution coming from

146: the contour around a complex turning point. The

147: accuracy of the WKB method can be improved considerably, 

148: \cite{PK61} - \cite{OV65} (more recent references on so-called Laplace contour integration can 

149: be found also in \cite{NU84}, \cite{MC03}) by the

150: appropriate choice of the integration path around 

151: the turning point. This method ascending to Landau \cite{LL65} 

152: appears to be quite accurate 

153: for the tunneling and over-barrier regions, (however,

154: even in this case there are some non-negligible 

155: corrections found in the papers \cite{ZN94}, \cite{ZN92},

156: \cite{ZN93}), but in the intermediate energy region

157: (where there are relevant contributions from all four quantum states occurring 

158: at the crossing diabatic potentials) the

159: method

160: becomes completely non-adequate. 

161: Besides the choice of these additional special trajectories (which one has to include to improve the

162: accuracy of the WKB method, and along which the semiclassical

163: motion is described by the Weber functions) depends on the detail form of the potential far from the

164: top, and therefore for each particular case the non-universal procedure should be perform from the very

165: beginning.

166: 

167: 

168: The essential simplification of the procedure can be achieved 

169: using                                              

170: the standard WKB semiclassical

171: approximation in the momentum space representation was also proposed

172: in the literature \cite{NU84}, \cite{ZN94}, \cite{BN65} - \cite{ZN93}. 

173: The method works well to compute the LZ transition probability, however, the application

174: of this approach to the level quantization problem

175: is difficult to realize. Indeed the problem requires to know 

176: the eigenfunctions in the coordinate space, and one can not bluntly use the Fourier

177: transform of the functions found in the momentum space, since the WKB method

178: gives us only asymptotics of the eigenfunctions.

179: These say drawbacks of the WKB-like methods did not allow to study

180: level quantization for crossing diabatic potentials in the previous

181: investigations, and, besides,

182: we believe we are the first to explicitely addresses the question on the behavior in

183: the intermediate

184: energy region. 

185: In all previous publications this region was considered as a very narrow and insignificant

186: one, or in the best case the results were obtained by a simple interpolation from the tunneling 

187: (with monotonic decay of

188: the transition probability) 

189: to the over-barrier (with oscillating behavior) regions.

190: 

191: 

192: Recently we have shown \cite{BV02} that 

193: semiclassical solutions of many eigenvalue problems

194: can be considerably simplified by including into the consideration

195: second order turning points. The fact is that one second order

196: turning point replaces two close linear turning points. Moreover

197: it turns out (see below) that connection matrices which link on the complex plane 

198: the solutions 

199: to the Schr\"odinger equation in the vicinity of the the crossing point

200: with the asymptotic solutions far from this point, can be calculated

201: from the solutions of the Weber equation. Increasing and decreasing

202: solutions in the classically forbidden region around a second order

203: turning point, are characterized by the action which has a minimum along

204: a certain trajectory, we will refer in what follows as the instanton

205: trajectory. The same kind of the Weber equation can be formulated

206: to calculate the connection matrices in the vicinity of a saddle point

207: (or a maximum) of the potential, but besides we should also relate

208: increasing and decreasing solutions at the crossing point (see also

209: our recent publications on LZ crossing phenomena \cite{BV03}).

210: 

211: 

212: Our aim is to construct semiclassical wave functions. To do it we use

213: connection matrix methodology which can be applied to any semiclassical approximation, 

214: but details of

215: the method depends on the order of the turning points. For the second order turning points which are

216: minima of a potential, the whole procedure is equivalent to the traditional instanton approach, 

217: and the imaginary time (i.e. after Wick rotation) instanton trajectories correspond to the

218: periodic orbits between the turning points, and the connection matrices in this case 

219: (see below and appendix \ref{A} to the paper) are real-valued ones.

220: It is not the case for the second order turning point which is the potential maximum. 

221: The complex-valued

222: connection matrix links two regions of infinite motion. Formally one might

223: refer 

224: the corresponding

225: wave

226: functions also as instanton ones applying twice the Wick rotations. LZ

227: crossing points are combinations of two second order turning points with 

228: two different Stokes

229: constants \cite{HE62} corresponding to one minimum and one maximum of 

230: the potential. In the tunneling

231: region there

232: exist periodic orbits for two solutions while two others correspond to unrestricted 

233: (infinite) motions. As above we will call these wave functions as instanton ones 

234: since they are Weber functions (like in

235: the traditional

236: instanton method) but with complex-valued arguments occurring as a result of complex coordinate frame

237: rotation.

238: 

239: Thus our approach in this paper 

240: is based on the

241: minimization of the functional of classical action 

242: in the upside-down potential, so-called instanton type approach,

243: which represents the most important area of the configurational

244: space where the semiclassical wave functions are localized ( 

245: see \cite{BM94}, \cite{MC03} - \cite{BV03}). 

246: The whole analysis can be brought into a more elegant form by introducing connection

247: matrices which link on the complex plane the semiclassical solutions 

248: to the Schr\"odinger equation for the

249: model potential of the problem under study and the exact solutions of the

250: so-called comparison equation which is valid near the crossing point,

251: where one can approximate the potential by linear or parabolic ones. The

252: explicit calculations of the connection matrices are rather involved since 

253: one should treat the four fundamental solutions to the left and to the right 

254: regions with respect to turning or crossing

255: points. Therefore the connection matrices, we are looking for, are $4 \times 4$ matrices. 

256: Although the

257: generalization for our case of the known already $2 \times 2$ connection matrices (see e.g., \cite{HE62}) 

258: is straightforward, it deserves some

259: precaution as it implies quite different procedures for the energy  (more accurately for $E/\gamma $

260: were $\gamma \gg 1$ is the

261: semiclassical parameter, see below) 

262: smaller (the tunneling region), larger (the over-barrier region), or of the order (the intermediate

263: region) of the potential barrier energy.

264: Within the framework of the connection matrix 

265: approach we present a full and unified description of

266: $1D$ (which is very often can be quite reasonable

267: approximation for real systems)

268: level quantization problem for diabatic potentials crossing. 

269: 

270: The remainder of our paper has the following structure. Section \ref{bas} contains basic methodical

271: details and equations necessary for our investigation. 

272: Except for a mathematical trick that eliminates a large amount

273: of tedious algebra and allows us to construct a regular

274: method for

275: calculating higher order perturbative corrections, the section

276: contains already known results.  

277: New physical results are collected in sections \ref{res}, \ref{inter} and

278: \ref{bath}, and partially in section \ref{mat}, where we calculate 

279: all needed connection matrices, which provide a very efficient method of finding 

280: semiclassical solutions to

281: the Schrodinger equation in potentials having several turning points. 

282: The knowledge of the connection matrices is important and significant 

283: not only in itself but also for developing a good analytical

284: approximation, and standardized numerical procedures.                                                               

285: In Section \ref{res} we find the 

286: quantization rules for the tunneling and over-barrier energy regions.

287: Section \ref{inter} is devoted to the intermediate

288: energy region where all four states occurring at the diabatic

289: potentials crossing should be regarded on the same footing. 

290: Different particular cases, depending on

291: the ratio of the model parameters are also examined in this section. 

292: In section \ref{bath} we investigate the linear coupling of the LZ

293: system to harmonic phonons and find that

294: it renormalizes of the parameters entering

295: the initial diabatic potentials crossing problems considered in the previous

296: sections \ref{res} - \ref{inter}.

297: The

298: last section \ref{discus} contains summary and discussion. 

299: In two appendices to the paper we collect some more specialized

300: technical material required for the calculations connection matrices

301: in different energy windows (appendix A), and to reduce fourth order Schr\"odinger equation

302: to two independent second order Weber equations (appendix B). Those readers

303: who are not very interested in mathematical derivations can skip these appendices finding

304: all essential physical results in the main text of the paper.

305: 

306: \section{Fourth order comparison equation for the crossing point.}

307: \label{bas}     

308: 

309: To move further on smoothly let us describe first our strategy.

310: First we should define all notations and relevant

311: points  of the diabatic potentials crossing problem.

312: We depicted the typical situation in the vicinity of the diabatic potentials

313: crossing point in Fig. 1. 

314: The diabatic potentials (1,2) are shown by thin solid lines, the adiabatic potentials

315: (3,4) by bold solid lines. Besides we have introduced in the picture

316: the adiabatic coupling energy $U_{12}$, the crossing point energy $U^{\# }$, and

317: $E_0$ is the characteristic zero-point oscillations energy

318: in the parabolic barrier approximated the lower adiabatic potential

319: near its top.

320: 

321: As a model for diabatic potentials in this paper we choose two parabola

322: $U_L$, $U_R$ with a symmetrical crossing in the point $x=0$.  

323: To be specific: let us consider two types of the diabatic 

324: potential crossing depicted in the Fig. 2. The corresponding adiabatic potentials

325: are, respectively, the double well or decay lower potential, and the

326: one-well upper adiabatic potential.

327: At arbitrary values of the parameter $U_{12}$ to find eigenstates and eigenfunctions for our

328: model potential we should solve the coupled Schr\"{o}dinger equations 

329: \begin{eqnarray} 

330: \label{nn3}

331: -\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^2 \Theta _L}{d x^2} + \gamma ^2 (U_L(x) - E) \Theta _L = \gamma ^2 U_{12}

332: \Theta _R \, ; \,

333: -\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^2 \Theta _R}{d x^2} + \gamma ^2 (U_R(x) - 

334: E ) \Theta _R = \gamma ^2 U_{12} \Theta _L \,

335: .

336: \end{eqnarray} 

337: Here $\gamma \gg 1$ is the

338: semiclassical parameter 

339: which is determined by the ratio of the characteristic potential scale over the

340: zero oscillation energy (i.e. $\gamma \equiv m \Omega _0 a_0^2/\hbar $, where $m$ is a mass of a

341: particle, $a_0$ is a characteristic length of the problem, e.g. the tunneling distance, $\Omega _0$ is a

342: characteristic frequency, e.g. the oscillation frequency around the potential minimum).

343: 

344: These equations (\ref{nn3}) can be written as one fourth order equation, e.g. for $\Theta _L$ 

345: \begin{eqnarray} 

346: \label{nn4} \frac{d^4

347: \Theta _L}{d x^4} - 2 \gamma ^2 (U_L(x) + U_R(x) -2E)

348: \frac{d^2 \Theta _L}{d x^2} - 4 \gamma ^2

349: \frac{d

350: U_L}{d x}\frac{d \Theta _L}{d x} + 4\gamma ^4 \left [(U_L - E)(U_R - E) - U_{12}^2 -

351: \frac{1}{2\gamma

352: ^2}\frac{d^2 U_L}{d x^2}\right ] \Theta _L = 0  

353: \end{eqnarray} 

354: In what follows 

355: we use  $\Omega _0$ and $a_0$ to set corresponding 

356: dimensionless       

357: scales, e.g dimensionless energy $\epsilon = E/\gamma \Omega _0$,

358: $u_{L/R} = U_{L/R}/(\gamma \hbar \Omega _0)$, $u_{12} = 2 U_{12}/(\gamma \hbar \Omega _0)

359: $ (we introduce factor 2 in $u_{12}$ for ease of writing following below

360: equations), coordinate $X = x/a_0$, and we  

361: put $\hbar = 1$ 

362: (except where explicitely stated to the contrary

363: and the occurrences of $\hbar $ are necessary for understanding).

364: 

365: Luckily the equation (\ref{nn4}) admits semiclassical solutions by 

366: Fedoryuk method \cite{FE64} -

367: \cite{FE66} since the coefficients at the $n$-th order derivatives proportional to 

368: $\gamma ^{-n}$, and

369: therefore so small that higher order derivatives of the prefactor

370: (in the semiclassical form the wave function can be always presented as the prefactor

371: times the exponent) can be safely neglected

372: in finding of asymptotic solutions.  

373: Fedoryuk method makes possible to find asymptotic solutions

374: to the ordinary differential equations of the following form

375: \begin{eqnarray} 

376: \label{f1} 

377: y^{(n)} + \sum _{k=0}^{n-1} \gamma ^{n-k} f_k(X) y^{(k)} = 0

378: \, ,

379: \end{eqnarray} 

380: where we designated $y^{(k)} \equiv d^k y/dX^k$, and the coefficients

381: at the derivatives $f_k(X)$ are arbitrary functions of $X$.

382: Note that Eq. (\ref{nn4}) for $\Theta $ has this Fedoryuk form.

383: By the standard semiclassical substitution $ y = A \exp (\gamma W(X))$

384: (\ref{f1}) can be reduced to the set of equations combining

385: the terms proportional to $\gamma ^n$, $\gamma ^{n-1}\, \cdots $,

386: which for $\gamma \gg 1$ can be represented in the form 

387: of generalized so-called Hamilton - Jacobi and transport equations,

388: respectively

389: \begin{eqnarray} 

390: \label{f2} 

391: F(\lambda ) = \lambda ^n + \sum _{k=0}^{n-k} f_k(X)\lambda ^k  = 0 

392: \, ,

393: \end{eqnarray} 

394: and

395: \begin{eqnarray} 

396: \label{f3} 

397: \frac{d F}{d \lambda }\frac{d A}{d X} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{d^2 F}{d \lambda ^2}

398: \frac{d \lambda }{d X} A  = 0 \, ,

399: \end{eqnarray} 

400: where $\lambda = -\gamma d W/ d X$.

401: 

402: Noting 

403: that in the vicinity of the crossing point $X=0$ the parabolic diabatic potentials

404: can be replaced by the linear ones counted from the barrier top $U^\# $ 

405: \begin{eqnarray}

406: \label{nn6} u_{L/R}(X)  = u^\# \pm f X \, , 

407: \end{eqnarray} 

408: (as above $u^\# =U^\#/(\gamma \hbar \Omega _0)$), and

409: eventually the equation (\ref{nn4}) can be

410: presented into a more compact and simple form 

411: \begin{eqnarray} 

412: \label{nn7} 

413: \frac{d^4 \Theta _L}{d X^4} -

414: 2\gamma ^2 \alpha \frac{d^2 \Theta _L}{d X^2}  

415: -2\gamma ^2 f \frac{d \Theta _L}{d X} +

416: \gamma ^4 [\alpha ^2 - f^2 X^2 - u_{12}^2] \Theta _L = 0 

417: \, ,

418: \end{eqnarray} 

419: where in our dimensionless units

420: $\alpha = 2(u^\# - \epsilon ) $.

421: 

422: The roots of the characteristic polynomial for (\ref{nn7}) 

423: \begin{eqnarray} 

424: \label{nn8} 

425: F(\lambda , X) =

426: \lambda ^4 - 2\gamma ^2 (u_L + u_R - 2 \epsilon )\lambda ^2 - 

427: 4\gamma ^2 \frac{du_L}{d X}\lambda + 4\gamma

428: ^4 \left

429: [(u_L - \epsilon )(u_R - \epsilon ) - u_{12}^2 - 

430: \frac{1}{2\gamma ^2}\frac{d^2 u_L}{d X^2}\right ] = 0 \, 

431: ,

432: \end{eqnarray}

433: or in the equivalent form

434: \begin{eqnarray} 

435: \label{b2} 

436: F(\lambda ) =

437: \lambda ^4 - 2 \alpha \gamma ^2\lambda ^2 - 2 \gamma ^2 f \lambda +\gamma ^4(\alpha ^2 - 

438: u_{12} ^2 - f^2

439: X^2) \,

440: , 

441: \end{eqnarray} 

442: determine independent

443: solutions to (\ref{nn7}).

444: Solving the equation $F(\lambda ) = 0$ perturbatively over $\gamma ^{-1} \ll 1$ we find 

445: \begin{eqnarray}

446: \label{b3} 

447: \lambda _j = \lambda _j^0 + \lambda _j^1 \, , 

448: \end{eqnarray} 

449: where 

450: \begin{eqnarray} 

451: \label{b4} 

452: \lambda

453: _j^0 = \pm \gamma 

454: \left [

455: \alpha \pm \sqrt {u_{12} ^2 + f^2 X^2}\right ]^{1/2} \, , 

456: \end{eqnarray} and

457: \begin{eqnarray} 

458: \label{b5} 

459: \lambda _j^1 = \pm \frac{f}{2 \sqrt {u_{12} ^2 + f^2 X^2}}

460: \,  

461: \end{eqnarray} 

462: we find finally the four asymptotic solutions of (\ref{nn7}) 

463: \begin{eqnarray}

464: \label{b6} 

465: \{ y_j \} \equiv \{ \Theta _+^+ , \Theta _+^- , \Theta _-^+ , \Theta _-^- \} = 

466: \left (\frac{d F}{d \lambda }\right )^{-1/2} \exp \left [\int _{0}^{X} \lambda _j(X^\prime ) 

467: d X^\prime \right ] \, . 

468: \end{eqnarray} 

469: The

470: subscripts in (\ref{b6}) corresponds to the upper or lower adiabatic levels, and the superscripts

471: are referred to the sign of the action.

472: 

473: As it was mentioned above in the vicinity of the crossing point one can replace (\ref{nn4}) by

474: (\ref{nn7}), and by the substitution 

475: \begin{eqnarray} 

476: \label{nn11}

477: \Theta _L = \exp (\kappa _{1 , 2} X) \Phi _L^{1 , 2} \, , 

478: \end{eqnarray} 

479: we can find

480: the equation for $\kappa $  

481: \begin{eqnarray} 

482: \label{b8} 

483: \kappa ^4 - \alpha \gamma ^2\kappa ^2 + \frac{1}{4} \gamma ^4 u_{12}^2 = - \kappa ^4 \delta ^2(1 + 2\delta )

484: + R(\kappa , \delta )\, ,

485: \end{eqnarray} 

486: where

487: \begin{eqnarray}

488: \nonumber

489: R(\kappa , \delta ) = (2 \kappa ^6)^{-1}(1-3\delta )(1+\delta )^{-3}(1 - Q - \sqrt {1 - 2Q^2)})\, ; \, 

490: Q=8\delta ^2(1+\delta )\, ,

491: \end{eqnarray}

492: \begin{eqnarray} 

493: \label{b9} 

494: \delta = \frac{\gamma ^2 f}{4\kappa ^3 } < \frac{1}{4} \, , 

495: \end{eqnarray} 

496: and

497: \begin{eqnarray} 

498: \label{b10} 

499: \kappa _{1 , 2} = \pm \gamma \sqrt \alpha \left (1 - \frac{\delta ^2}{2}\right )  \, . 

500: \end{eqnarray} 

501: It can be proved that the 4-th order equation (\ref{nn7}) in variables (\ref{nn11}) is reduced to the equation

502: with constant coefficients in front of all derivatives and with the free term in the form

503: of a quadratic over $X$ function. In the case when the exponent in (\ref{nn11}) is a solution

504: to the equation (\ref{b8})the transformed equation is reduced to the Weber equations

505: upon neglecting anharmonic terms like $X^2 dF/dX$, $X^3 F(X)$, and $X^4 F(X)$.

506: We presented all details of this reduction in appendix \ref{B} to the paper.

507: Thus the equation (\ref{nn7}) is reduced to two independent Weber equations with the 

508: known

509: fundamental solutions \cite{EM53} 

510: \begin{eqnarray} 

511: \label{nn13} 

512: \{\Theta _L\} = \left \{ \exp( \pm \gamma

513: \sqrt \alpha X) D_{-\nu } \left (\left (\frac{f^2\gamma ^2}{\alpha }\right )^{1/4}X\right ) \, , \, 

514: \exp(

515: \pm

516: \gamma \sqrt \alpha X) D_{-1 - \nu } \left (\left (\frac{f^2\gamma ^2}{\alpha }\right )^{1/4}X\right

517: ) \right

518: \} \, ,

519: \end{eqnarray} 

520: where $\nu = \gamma u_{12}^2/(4 f \sqrt \alpha )$

521: is so-called Massey parameter. The corrections to the indices of the parabolic cylinder

522: functions $D$ and to the

523: arguments of these functions can be found from (\ref{b8}).

524: 

525: Presented above the leading terms of these solutions 

526: corresponding to the tunneling case, i.e. 

527: (here we use

528: a dimensional energy

529: $E$)

530: \begin{eqnarray} 

531: \label{j1} 

532: E < (U^\# - U_{12}) 

533: \, 

534: \end{eqnarray} 

535: (in our dimensionless units it is $\alpha > u_{12}$), 

536: where the characteristic fourth order polynomial (\ref{nn8}) 

537: can be

538: reduced to the second order one (i.e. two pairs of roots are nearly degenerated),

539: are known in the literature

540: (see e.g. \cite{LL65} - \cite{BM94}) but the Fedoryuk method we used, 

541: gives us also in the tunneling

542: region the

543: higher

544: order over the parameter $\delta $ (\ref{b9}) corrections.

545:  

546: In the tunneling region (\ref{j1}) one can expand the roots of (\ref{b8}) in

547: terms

548: of the parameter $\delta $ (\ref{b9}). 

549: Using the substitution (\ref{nn11}) 

550: to transform (\ref{nn4}) 

551: we can find easily that at the conditions (\ref{b8}), (\ref{b9}) the

552: coefficients at the fourth and at the third order derivatives in the transformed

553: fourth order differential equation for $\Phi $ are small

554: (proportional to

555: $\delta $ and to $\sqrt \delta $ respectively) and thus this fourth order equation can be

556: rewritten

557: as two second order Weber equations with the solutions 

558: $$ 

559: D_{p^{(1 , 2)}}(\beta X) \, , 

560: $$

561: where 

562: \begin{eqnarray} 

563: \label{b11} 

564: p^{(1)} = - 1 + \frac{\delta }{4} - \nu \, , \, p^{(2)} = \frac{\delta }{4} - \nu \, , 

565: \beta  = \left (\frac{\gamma ^2 f^2}{\alpha }\right )^{1/4} \left (1 +\frac{\delta ^2 }{4} \right ) \, .

566: \end{eqnarray} 

567: 

568: The same manner in the over-barrier energy region 

569: i.e. 

570: \begin{eqnarray} 

571: \label{j2} 

572: E > (U^\# + U_{12}) \, 

573: \end{eqnarray} 

574: (again as in (\ref{j1}) we have used dimensional

575: units, and in dimensionless form (\ref{j2}) reads as $-\alpha > u_{12}$),

576: when the energy is larger than the upper adiabatic potential

577: minimum,

578: the roots of the equation

579: (\ref{nn8}) are complex - conjugated and having the same structure as presented

580: above (see also (\ref{apen6}) in the appendix \ref{B}) 

581: for the tunneling region

582: with the roots $\kappa $ given 

583: \begin{eqnarray} 

584: \label{b12} 

585: \kappa _{1 , 2} = \pm i \gamma \sqrt {|\alpha |}\left (1 - \frac{\tilde {\delta }^2}{2}\right ) \, .

586: \end{eqnarray}

587: Besides in (\ref{apen6})

588: \begin{eqnarray}

589: \nonumber

590: \kappa _0  = i \frac{\gamma }{\sqrt 2}(|\alpha | + \sqrt {\alpha ^2 - u_{12}^2})  

591: \, ,

592: \end{eqnarray}

593: and with $\tilde \delta $ playing the role of the small parameter in this region 

594: \begin{eqnarray}

595: \label{b13} 

596: \tilde \delta = \frac{f}{4 \gamma |\alpha |^{3/2}} \, . 

597: \end{eqnarray} 

598: Again as above for the

599: tunneling region, the coefficients at the higher order derivatives are small, and therefore, the function

600: $\Phi $ (\ref{nn11}) satisfies the Weber equation with the fundamental solutions 

601: $$ 

602: D_{\tilde p^{(1 ,

603: 2)}}(\tilde {\beta }_{(1 , 2)} X)  \, , 

604: $$ where 

605: \begin{eqnarray} 

606: \label{b14} 

607: \tilde p^{(1)} = - 1 - i\frac{\tilde \delta }{4} + i \tilde \nu \, , \, 

608: \tilde p^{(2)} =

609: i\frac{\tilde \delta }{4} + i \tilde \nu \, , \, 

610: \\ 

611: \nonumber

612: \tilde {\beta }_1 = \exp(i\pi /4) \left (\frac{\gamma ^2 f^2}{|\alpha |}\right )^{1/4}\left (1 + \frac{\tilde {\delta }^2}{4}\right ) \, , \, 

613: \tilde {\beta }_2 = \exp(-i 3\pi /4) \left (\frac{\gamma ^2 f^2}{|\alpha |}\right )^{1/4}\left (1 + \frac{\tilde {\delta }^2}{4}\right ) 

614: \, 

615: \end{eqnarray}

616: ($\tilde \nu $ is defined as the Massey parameter entering (\ref{nn13}) with $\alpha \to |\alpha |$, i.e.

617: $\tilde \nu = (\gamma u_{12}^2/(4 f \sqrt {|\alpha |})$). 

618: Like it was

619: for the tunneling region (\ref{b11}), the leading terms of the expansion (\ref{b14}) coincide with the

620: well - known results, but from (\ref{b14}) we are able to compute the

621: corrections to the

622: main terms.

623: 

624: The analogous task for the

625: intermediate energy region, i.e. (in dimensional units)  

626: \begin{eqnarray} 

627: \label{j3} 

628: (U^\# + U_{12}) \geq E \geq (U^\# - U_{12}) \, ,

629: \end{eqnarray} 

630: is much more tricky.

631: Our results will be presented in section \ref{inter}, but a few comments are

632: necessary here.

633: In the problem we have three dimensionless parameters 

634: characterizing the energy ($\alpha $),

635: the level coupling ($u_{12}$), and the potential ($f$), and besides for the ease of semiclassical

636: estimations we keep also the semiclassical parameter $\gamma \gg 1$. Note also that these parameters

637: are not independent ones, and the relation $u_{12}=2f^2$ (which we will be useful

638: in our further consideration) should be satisfied. 

639: In terms of these parameters within the intermediate energy region (\ref{j3}),

640: we have the subregion, $S^\prime $, $|\alpha | \leq 2 \gamma ^{-1}$, and $u_{12} \leq 2 \gamma ^{-1}$,

641: and the intermediate subregion, $S^{\prime \prime }$, where $\gamma \sqrt {u_{12}}/2 \gg 1$. 

642: In the section \ref{inter} we calculate the connection

643: matrices for the both subregions, and details of the reduction procedures, which are different in

644: $S^\prime $ (where the comparison equations are reduced to two decoupled Airy equations)

645: and $S^{\prime \prime }$ (where these comparisons equations are Weber ones)

646: are described in the appendix \ref{B}. 

647: 

648: 

649: 

650: \section{Connection matrices.}

651: \label{mat}     

652: 

653: The purpose of this section is to briefly indicate the main

654: steps in the derivation connection matrices.

655: The matching points we must find to quantize the energy

656: levels depend essentially on the energy window under consideration (\ref{j1}), (\ref{j2}), (\ref{j3}).

657: The tunneling region is placed in the lower adiabatic potential.

658: In the WKB method in this case starting from the crossing point ($X=0$) one has to

659: investigate the classically forbidden region in the lower adiabatic

660: potential barrier (see Fig. 3a and the corresponding figure caption for all notations). 

661: The solutions can

662: be found easily in the vicinity

663: to the crossing point but to derive the quantization

664: rules one should know also the solutions quite far from the crossing point.

665: To do it explicitely in the WKB method we should match the two exponentially

666: decreasing and two exponentially increasing solutions in the barrier with the oscillation

667: solutions in the wells. 

668: Technically the matching should be performed asymptotically, i.e. at small

669: $|X|$ but for large enough $\sqrt \gamma |X|$. To do it one 

670: has to  

671: calculate all needed connection matrices (namely at the crossing point, and at

672: the linear and second order turning points,  and the shift

673: matrices from the crossing point to the turning points in the classically

674: forbidden region and between the turning points in the classically

675: accessible region). Within the instanton type method the trajectory goes 

676: through only the classically

677: forbidden region

678: (see Fig. 3b),

679: and matching should be performed only at two second order turning points.

680: In the over-barrier energy region (see Fig. 4), the matching 

681: is performed by using the crossing point connection matrix $\hat {U}^\prime _c$, the shift matrix

682: $\hat L$ connecting the crossing

683: point and the linear turning points at the upper adiabatic

684: potential, and the shift matrices $\hat {L}_{L/R}$ belonging to the diabatic potentials.

685: In this case all matching solutions are oscillating ones. 

686: Finally for the intermediate

687: energy region no real-valued turning points for the upper states (see Fig. 5) 

688: and the matching between two oscillating and two exponentially varying

689: solutions

690: is determined by the connection matrix (see Fig. 5) linking the linear 

691: imaginary turning

692: points of the adiabatic potentials.

693: 

694: To recast the analysis into a compact

695: form it is convenient to formulate the general procedure for calculating of 

696: the connection matrices for an

697: arbitrary combinations of the first and of the second order turning points. 

698: After that the procedure can

699: be applied to any particular problem under investigation. To do it, one has to extend the

700: known for linear turning points procedure \cite{HE62}. 

701: For a generic semiclassical equation 

702: \begin{eqnarray} 

703: \label{p1} 

704: \frac{d^2 \Psi }{d z^2} + \gamma ^2 q(z) \Psi (z) = 0 \, ,

705: \end{eqnarray} 

706: in the limit $\gamma \gg 1$ the Stokes and anti-Stokes lines are determined

707: by the following conditions, respectively 

708: \begin{eqnarray} 

709: \label{pp1} \Re W(z) = 0 \, , 

710: \end{eqnarray} 

711: and

712: \begin{eqnarray} 

713: \label{pp2} 

714: \Im W(z) = 0 \, , 

715: \end{eqnarray} 

716: where the action

717: \begin{eqnarray} 

718: \label{p2} 

719: W(z) = \int ^{z} \sqrt {q(z)} dz \, . 

720: \end{eqnarray} 

721: The lower integration limit in (\ref{p2}) is not relevant

722: because we are interested in semiclassical solutions for

723: large $|z|$.

724: These Stokes and anti-Stokes lines separate the complex plane $z$

725: into the sectors. On the anti-Stokes lines the increasing

726: and decreasing solutions become equal, and the type of the solutions

727: is interchanged upon crossing of the anti-Stokes lines. The Stokes

728: lines are bisectors between neighboring anti-Stokes lines. After

729: the crossing with the Stokes line, one should add to the coefficient

730: at the decreasing solution the coefficient at the increasing solution

731: times so-called Stokes constant. The latter one is occurred as a result

732: of going around the turning point and depends on the turning point 

733: type.

734: 

735: To find the connection matrices 

736: for the tunneling region we have to

737: establish the correspondence between the solutions of the 

738: fourth order differential equation (\ref{nn4})

739: and those for the localized in the left ($L$) 

740: and in the right ($R$) wells states. 

741: In the case $\alpha \gg

742: f|X|$ for the diabatic potentials, 

743: the action can be computed starting from the both wells ($R$ and $L$)

744: \begin{eqnarray} 

745: \label{b15} 

746: \gamma W_L^* \simeq \gamma W_{0 L}^* + k_0 X + \frac{\beta ^2}{4} X^2 \, , \gamma

747: W_R^* \simeq \gamma W_{0 R}^* - k_0 X + \frac{\beta ^2}{4} X^2 \, , 

748: \end{eqnarray} where $k_0 = \gamma \sqrt \alpha $ is imaginary momentum (

749: $U^{\# }$ sets the energy corresponding to the diabatic potentials

750: crossing point), 

751: and $W_0^{L , R}$ are the actions

752: computed from an arbitrary distant point in the $L$ 

753: or in the $R$ wells, respectively to the point $X=0$.

754: From the other hand in the adiabatic potentials 

755: $u^\pm = u^\# \pm \sqrt {u_{12}^2 + f^2 X^2}$ the

756: corresponding actions can be represented 

757: \begin{eqnarray} 

758: \label{b16} 

759: \gamma W^\pm - \gamma W_0^\pm = k_0X

760: \pm \frac{\beta ^2}{4} X^2 sign (X) \, . 

761: \end{eqnarray} 

762: Explicitely comparing the semiclassical wave

763: functions in the both representations 

764: (adiabatic and diabatic ones) it is easy to see that the adiabatic

765: functions in the potential $U^-$ coincide 

766: with the diabatic functions for localized $L$ and $R$ states at

767: $X<0$ and $X>0$ respectively. 

768: The adiabatic functions for the upper potential $U^+$ correspond to the

769: tails of the diabatic wave functions localized in the opposite wells.  

770: Therefore in the level crossing

771: region the $L/R$ diabatic functions are transformed into the $R/L$ functions, 

772: and the interaction

773: entangles the diabatic states with the same sign of $k_0 X$. 

774: Thus we have only four non-zero amplitudes of

775: the following transitions 

776: \begin{eqnarray} 

777: \label{b17} 

778: \langle \Phi ^+_L|\Phi ^-_R\rangle \, , \, \langle

779: \Phi ^-_L|\Phi ^+_R\rangle \, , \, \langle \Phi ^+_R|\Phi ^-_L\rangle \, , \, \langle \Phi ^-_R|\Phi

780: ^+_L\rangle \, . 

781: \end{eqnarray} 

782: Recalling that 

783: \begin{eqnarray} 

784: \label{b18} 

785: \gamma W^\pm = \gamma \int

786: \left (\alpha \pm \sqrt {u_{12} ^2 + f^2 X^2}\right )^{1/2}

787: \simeq k_0

788: X \pm \frac{\beta ^2}{4} X^2 \pm \frac{\nu }{2}(1 - \ln \nu ) \, , 

789: \end{eqnarray} 

790: we come to the

791: conclusion that the quantum solutions (\ref{b11}), valid in the vicinity of the level crossing point

792: asymptotically, match smoothly increasing and decreasing solutions, and it leads to the Landau

793: description \cite{LL65} of the level crossing transitions.

794: To illustrate the presented above analytical results we show schematically in Fig. 6

795: the matching of the asymptotic (Fedoryuk) solutions (\ref{b6}) for the crossing 

796: diabatic potentials with localized initial and final states via the Weber functions in the

797: tunneling region. We use the symmetric basis constructed from the

798: functions (\ref{b6}) (see detail description in the Fig. 6 caption). 

799: 

800: In the tunneling region (\ref{j1}) for

801: every well ($L$ or $R$) there exist increasing and decaying exponentially 

802: real-valued solutions to the

803: Schr\"odinger equation. The solutions are matched at the crossing point, 

804: therefore they are linked by the

805: real-valued $4 \times 4$ connection matrix which should have two 

806: $2 \times 2$ blocks linking the

807: increasing (decreasing) diabatic solution in the $L$-well with the 

808: decreasing (increasing) diabatic

809: solution in the $R$-well, in the agreement with the standard 

810: Landau scheme of the tunneling transitions

811: \cite{LL65}. Omitting a large amount of tedious algebra we can represent 

812: the connection matrix linking the

813: ''asymptotic'' (i.e. in the left/right ($L$, $R$) wells and for 

814: the upper/lower ($+$, $-$) adiabatic

815: potentials) solutions in the tunneling energy region in the following form 

816: \begin{eqnarray} 

817: && 

818: \label{q1}

819: \left ( 

820: \begin{array}{c} 

821: \Phi _R^- \\ \Phi _R^+ \\ \Phi _L^+ \\ \Phi _L^- 

822: \end{array} 

823: \right ) 

824: = \left (

825: \begin{array}{cc} 

826: \hat {M}_c^{(+)}\hat {L}^{(c)}_R\hat {M}_c^{(-)}\hat F_c & 0 \\ 0 & \hat 1 

827: \end{array}

828: \right ) 

829: \hat {U}_c 

830: \left ( 

831: \begin{array}{cc} 

832: \hat F_c\hat {M}_c^{(+)}\hat {L}^{(c)}_L\hat {M}_c^{(-)} & 0

833: \\ 0 & \hat 1 

834: \end{array} 

835: \right ) \left ( 

836: \begin{array}{c} 

837: \Phi _L^+ \\ \Phi _L^- \\ \Phi _R^- \\ \Phi

838: _R^+ 

839: \end{array} 

840: \right ) \, . 

841: \end{eqnarray} 

842: Here $\hat U_c$ is the $4 \times 4$ connection matrix at the

843: crossing point, which in the tunneling region has the following form 

844: \begin{eqnarray} && 

845: \label{q8} 

846: \hat

847: {U}_c = \left [ 

848: \begin{array}{cccc} p & 0 & 0 & -\cos (\pi \nu ) \\ 0 & (\sin^2 (\pi \nu ))/p & - \cos

849: (\pi \nu ) & 0 \\ 0 & \cos (\pi \nu ) & p & 0 

850: \\ \cos (\pi \nu ) & 0 & 0 & (\sin ^2(\pi \nu ))/p

851: \end{array} 

852: \right ] \, , 

853: \end{eqnarray} 

854: where we designated 

855: \begin{eqnarray} 

856: \label{xx} 

857: p=\frac{\sqrt

858: {2\pi }\exp(-2 \chi )}{\Gamma (\nu )} \, , 

859: \end{eqnarray} and 

860: $ \chi = (\nu /2) - (1/2)\left (\nu - (1/2)

861: \right ) \ln \nu $.  

862: The matrices $\hat {M}_c^{(+)}$ and $\hat {M}_c^{(-)}$ are the $ 2 \times 2$

863: connection matrices at the corresponding turning points, which are determined 

864: by the phase shifts at these

865: points 

866: \begin{eqnarray} && 

867: \label{q2} 

868: \hat {M}_c^{(-)} = \left ( 

869: \begin{array}{cc} 1 & -i \\ -(i/2) &

870: (1/2) \end{array} 

871: \right ) \, , 

872: \end{eqnarray} 

873: and $\hat {M}_c^{(+)}$ is the matrix Hermitian conjugated

874: to (\ref{q2}). 

875: The $\hat L^{(c)}_{L/R}$ and $\hat F_c$ matrices are called shift 

876: matrices, and those are

877: related to the variations of the coefficients of increasing and 

878: decaying semiclassical solutions in the

879: regions between the turning points ($\hat F_c$ is the shift matrix 

880: when one moves from the crossing to the

881: turning point in classically forbidden region, 

882: and $\hat L^{(c)}_{L/R}$ are the shift matrices in the

883: classically accessible regions). Explicitely we get 

884: \begin{eqnarray} 

885: && 

886: \label{q3} 

887: \hat F_c = \left(

888: \begin{array}{cc} 

889: \exp (-\gamma W_B^*/2) & 0 \\ 0 & \exp (\gamma W_B^*/2) \end{array} \right ) \, .

890: \end{eqnarray} 

891: Here $W^*_B$ is the action in the lower

892: adiabatic potential barrier. Finally the structure of the shift matrices 

893: $\hat {L}^{(c)}_{L/R}$ is

894: \begin{eqnarray} 

895: && 

896: \label{q33} 

897: \hat {L}^{(c)}_{L/R} = \left( 

898: \begin{array}{cc} 

899: \exp (i \gamma W_{L/R}^*)

900: & 0 \\ 0 & \exp (-i \gamma W_{L/R}^*) 

901: \end{array} 

902: \right ) \, , 

903: \end{eqnarray} 

904: where $W_{L/R}^*$ is the

905: action calculated by the integration between the turning points. We present 

906: explicit expressions for the total connection matrix in

907: the appendix \ref{A}.

908:  

909: The same manner can be treated the over-barrier region (\ref{j2}). 

910: In this case the crossing

911: point is in the classically accessible region for the both potentials. 

912: The fundamental diabatic solutions

913: can be represented as the waves propagating in the opposite directions, 

914: and the complex-valued connection

915: matrix has as it was for the tunneling region $2 \times 2$ block structure, where the blocks link the

916: waves in the $L$ and in the $R$ wells propagating in the same direction. Specifically the corresponding

917: connection matrix at the crossing point $\hat {U}_c^\prime $ 

918: \begin{eqnarray} 

919: && \label{q88} 

920: \hat

921: {U}_c^\prime = \left [ 

922: \begin{array}{cccc} 

923: s\exp (-i\phi ) & 0 & 0 & -\exp (-\pi \nu ) \\ 0 & s \exp (i

924: \phi ) & - \exp (-\pi \nu ) & 0 \\ 

925: 0 & \exp (-\pi \nu ) & s \exp (-i \phi ) & 0 \\ 

926: \exp (-\pi \nu ) & 0 &

927: 0 & s\exp (i \phi ) 

928: \end{array} 

929: \right ] \, , 

930: \end{eqnarray} 

931: where we denoted $ s = \sqrt {1 - \exp

932: (-2\pi \nu )}$, $\phi = \arg \Gamma (-i \nu ) + \Im (2 \tilde \chi )$, 

933: and 

934: \begin{eqnarray}

935: \label{cd}

936: \tilde \chi = - (i/2)((\pi

937: /4) + \nu (1 - \ln \nu)) + (1/4)(\pi \nu + \ln \nu )

938: \, ,

939: \end{eqnarray} 

940: should be multiplied by two blocks: the block from

941: the left gives the contribution at the turning point 

942: and includes the shift matrix to the crossing point

943: in $L$ and in $R$ wells of the lower adiabatic potential; the 

944: right block is related to the turning point

945: and to the shift matrix to the crossing point in the upper one-well 

946: adiabatic potential. Thus finally in

947: the over-barrier region we get 

948: \begin{eqnarray} 

949: && 

950: \label{q9} \left ( 

951: \begin{array}{c} 

952: \Phi _R^- \\ \Phi

953: _R^+ \\ \Phi _L^+ \\ \Phi _L^- 

954: \end{array} \right ) = 

955: \left ( 

956: \begin{array}{cc} 

957: \hat {M}_c^{(+)}\hat

958: {L}^{(c)}_R & 0 \\ 0 & \hat {M}^{(+)}\hat L 

959: \end{array} 

960: \right ) 

961: \hat {U}_{c}^\prime \left (

962: \begin{array}{cc} 

963: \hat {L}^{(c)}_L\hat {M}_c^{(-)} & 0 \\ 0 & \hat {L}\hat {M}^{(-)} 

964: \end{array} 

965: \right ) 

966: \left (

967: \begin{array}{c} 

968: \Phi _L^+ \\ \Phi _L^- \\ \Phi _R^- \\ \Phi _R^+ 

969: \end{array} 

970: \right ) 

971: \, . 

972: \end{eqnarray}

973: Here we used the same notations as it was above for the tunneling region, and 

974: besides the matrices $\hat

975: M^{(\pm )}$ are transposed with respect to the matrices $\hat M_c^{(\pm )}$ 

976: given in (\ref{q2}), and the

977: new shift matrix $\hat L$ is 

978: \begin{eqnarray} 

979: && 

980: \label{q333}

981: \left( 

982: \begin{array}{cc} 

983: \exp (-i \gamma W^*/2) & 0 \\ 0 & \exp (i \gamma W^*/2) 

984: \end{array} 

985: \right ) \,

986: , 

987: \end{eqnarray} 

988: (remind that $W^*$ is the action in the upper adiabatic potential). Combining altogether

989: (\ref{q2}) - (\ref{q333}) one can trivially find the 

990: full connection matrix

991: for the over-barrier energy region (\ref{j2}). 

992: We present the explicit form of the matrix in the appendix \ref{A}.

993:  

994: More tricky task is to calculate the connection matrix in the intermediate 

995: energy region (\ref{j3}). 

996: Following the same line as above we first present the general 

997: structure of the connection matrix in the

998: intermediate energy region 

999: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1000: \label{q99} \left ( 

1001: \begin{array}{c} \Phi _R^- \\ \Phi _R^+

1002: \\ \Phi _L^+ \\ \Phi _L^- 

1003: \end{array} 

1004: \right ) = 

1005: \left ( 

1006: \begin{array}{cc} 

1007: \hat {M}_c^{(+)}\hat

1008: {L}^{(c)}_R\hat {M}_-^{(+)} & 0 \\ 0 & \hat {M}_+^{(-)} 

1009: \end{array} 

1010: \right ) 

1011: \hat {U}_{c}^{\prime \prime } \left ( 

1012: \begin{array}{cc}

1013: \hat {M}_-^{(-)}\hat {L}_L^{(c)}\hat {M}_c^{(-)}

1014:  & 0 \\ 0 & \hat {M}_+^{(+)}  

1015: \end{array} 

1016: \right ) \left ( 

1017: \begin{array}{c} 

1018: \Phi _L^+ \\ \Phi _L^- \\ \Phi _R^- \\ \Phi

1019: _R^+ 

1020: \end{array} 

1021: \right ) \, . 

1022: \end{eqnarray} 

1023: These matrices $\hat {M}_\pm ^{(\pm )}$ have been introduced in our paper \cite{BV02}

1024: for the imaginary turning points characterizing the both adiabatic potentials in the region

1025: $|\alpha | < u_{12}$, and they read

1026: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1027: \nonumber  

1028: \left ( 

1029: \begin{array}{cc} 

1030: 1 & 0 \\ 

1031: (i/2)\exp (- \gamma W_i^\pm ) & 0 

1032: \end{array} 

1033: \right ) 

1034: \, , 

1035: \end{eqnarray} 

1036: where $W_i^\pm $ are so-called Euclidian actions in the reversed upper and lower

1037: adiabatic potentials, which can be estimated as

1038: $$

1039: W_i^\pm \simeq \frac{\pi q_{1 , 2}}{\gamma }

1040: \, ,

1041: $$

1042: where

1043: $$

1044: q_{1 , 2} = \frac{\gamma u_{12}\sqrt {u_{12} \pm \alpha }}{4 f} \, ,

1045: $$

1046: and all other matrices entering (\ref{q99}) are defined already.

1047: Since $M_\pm ^{(\pm )}$ turn into the unit matrices at $\alpha > u_{12}$ and

1048: $\alpha < u_{12}$, the connection matrix (\ref{q99}) matches continuously into the 

1049: corresponding matrices (\ref{q1}), (\ref{q9}) for the tunneling and over-barrier  regions. 

1050: 

1051: The

1052: connection matrix in the intermediate energy subregion $S^{\prime \prime } $

1053: can be calculated using Weber function asymptotic expansion

1054: for large complex indices (\ref{apen15}), which are the solutions to the comparison equations

1055: (\ref{b8}) in the intermediate energy subregion $S^{\prime \prime } $.

1056: These 4 roots are arranged clock-wise and counter clock-wise 

1057: on the radius $\gamma \sqrt {u_{12}/2}$ circle around the crossing point.

1058: The following combinations of the comparison equations match the semiclassical

1059: solutions (\ref{b6})

1060: $$

1061: \Theta _1^+ + \Theta _4^+ \leftrightarrow \Theta _+^+ \, \; \,  

1062: \Theta _2^- + \Theta _3^- \leftrightarrow \Theta _+^- \, \; \,

1063: \Theta _1^- + \Theta _3^+ \leftrightarrow \Theta _-^+ \, \; \,  

1064: \Theta _2^+ + \Theta _4^- \leftrightarrow \Theta _-^- \, .

1065: $$ 

1066: Combining together the asymptotic expansions for these

1067: combinations, we find 

1068: at the crossing point, the matrix 

1069: $\hat U_c^{\prime \prime }$ is 

1070: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1071: \label{q888} 

1072: \hat {U}_c^{\prime \prime } = \left [ 

1073: \begin{array}{cc} 

1074: (\sqrt {2\pi }/\Gamma (q^*))\exp (-2\chi (q^*)) & 0   \\

1075: 0 & (\Gamma (q)/\sqrt {2\pi })\exp (2\chi (q))(1 - \exp (-2\pi q_2)\cos ^2(\pi q_1)) \\

1076: 0 & \exp (-2\pi q_2)\cos (\pi q_1)   \\

1077: \exp(-2\pi q_2)\cos (\pi q_1) & 0  

1078: \end{array} 

1079: \right .  

1080: \end{eqnarray}

1081: \begin{eqnarray}

1082: \nonumber

1083: \left .

1084: \begin{array}{cc}

1085: 0 & \exp (-2\pi q_2)\cos (\pi q_1)  \\

1086: -\exp (-2\pi q_2)\cos (\pi q_1)  &  

1087: 0  \\

1088: (\sqrt {2\pi }/\Gamma (q))\exp (2\chi (q)) & 0 \\

1089: 0 & (\Gamma (q^*)/\sqrt {2 \pi })\exp (2\chi (q^*))(1 - \exp (-2\pi

1090: q_2)\cos ^2(\pi q_1)) 

1091: \end{array} 

1092: \right ] \, , 

1093: \end{eqnarray} 

1094: where as above

1095: \begin{eqnarray}

1096: \label{a55}

1097: q  = q_1 + i q_2\, ; \, 

1098: q_{1 , 2} = \frac{\gamma u_{12}\sqrt {u_{12} \pm \alpha }}{4 f} \,

1099: ; \, q^* = q_1 - i q_2 \, ,

1100: \end{eqnarray}

1101: and, besides, we introduce the following abridged notations

1102: \begin{eqnarray}

1103: \label{a551}

1104: \chi = \chi _1 + i \chi _2 \, ; \, 2 \chi _1 = q_1 - \left (q_1 - \frac{1}{2}\right ) \ln |q| + \varphi q_2 \, 

1105: ,

1106: \end{eqnarray}

1107: and analogously 

1108: \begin{eqnarray}

1109: \label{a552} 

1110: 2\chi _2 = q_2 - q_2\ln |q| - \varphi \left (q_1 - \frac{1}{2}\right ) 

1111: \, , 

1112: \end{eqnarray}

1113: where $\varphi $ is defined by (\ref{apen10}). 

1114: Now the full connection matrix in the both intermediate energy subregions 

1115: can be found easily

1116: simply collecting the given above expressions, and the explicit form

1117: for the connection matrix is presented in the appendix \ref{A}.

1118: Note that the intermediate energy region connection matrix (\ref{q888}) has the same

1119: block structure as the connection matrices in the tunneling and in the over-barrier

1120: regions. 

1121: This is a consequence of the fact that in a neighborhood the diabatic potential crossing point,

1122: only the Weber functions with equal indices can be hybridized. At $|\alpha | = u_{12}$ the

1123: connection matrix (\ref{q888}) turns into the connection matrices (\ref{q8}) for the tunneling

1124: region and into (\ref{q88}) for the over-barrier energy region,

1125: and it enables us to construct semiclassical solutions for any arbitrary energy window.

1126: Note, however, that in the intermediate energy region the Massey parameter is replaced by the complex index $q$.

1127: In the section \ref{inter} we will present another derivation of the connection matrix (\ref{q888}),

1128: and will discuss specific relations between the adiabatic and diabatic states in the intermediate

1129: energy region.

1130: 

1131: 

1132: 

1133: \section{Quantization rules.}

1134: \label{res}

1135: 

1136: In the tunneling energy region, one has only real-valued eigenfunctions, since

1137: in the both wells there are only the localized states. 

1138: In this energy window the connection matrix

1139: linking the ''asymptotic'' (i.e. in the left/right ($L$, $R$) wells and for

1140: the upper/lower ($+$, $-$) adiabatic potentials) solutions 

1141: is represented in the form (\ref{q1}) and is given by Exps. (\ref{ap1}) - (\ref{ap1111}).

1142: Within the WKB method we should match the two exponentially

1143: decreasing and two exponentially increasing solutions in the barrier with the oscillation

1144: solutions in the wells, thus it requires the knowledge

1145: of the connection matrices at the crossing point and at

1146: the linear turning points, and the shift

1147: matrices from the crossing point to the turning points in the classically

1148: forbidden region and as well between the turning points in the classically

1149: accessible region (Fig. 3a). 

1150: Within the instanton type method the trajectory goes through only the classically forbidden region

1151: (see Fig. 3b),

1152: and to perform the matching one should know  also the connection matrices

1153: for the second order turning points.

1154: 

1155: The same manner can be treated the over-barrier region with the corresponding connection matrix 

1156: (\ref{q9}), and (\ref{ap2}).

1157: Evident modifications of the given above expressions for the tunneling and over-barrier

1158: regions should be performed to treat the intermediate energy windows. Indeed

1159: in this case one has to take into account also

1160: the contributions from the imaginary turning points. The procedure is reduced to replacement

1161: of oscillating factors by exponentially decaying ones (see details in the next section).

1162: Finally for the intermediate

1163: energy region no real-valued turning points for the upper states (see Fig. 5) 

1164: and the matching between two oscillating and two exponentially varying

1165: solutions

1166: is determined by the connection matrix (\ref{q99})  

1167: linking the linear turning

1168: points of the adiabatic potentials (see Fig. 5).

1169: 

1170: \subsection{Two diabatic parabolic potentials crossing.}

1171: 

1172: Now 

1173: (collecting the explicit expressions for all needed connection matrices

1174: from the appendix \ref{A} to the paper)

1175: we are in the position to derive the quantization rules,

1176: which

1177: can be formulated as a condition that the amplitudes of exponentially

1178: increasing at $X > 0$, and $X< 0$, respectively, solutions $\Phi _L^+$, $\Phi _R^+$,

1179: must be vanished. Taking into account that $W_L^* = W_R^*$ (the actions

1180: in the corresponding wells of the lower adiabatic potential) and using

1181: the connection matrix relating the fundamental solutions of the Weber equation, we

1182: can formulate the corresponding quantization rule for the tunneling region

1183: in terms of the matrix elements defined by (\ref{q1}) 

1184: \begin{eqnarray}

1185: \label{qq1} &&

1186: m_{22}m_{33} - m_{23}m_{32} = 0

1187: \, ,

1188: \end{eqnarray}

1189: where $m_{ij}$ are corresponding matrix elements from (\ref{q1}).

1190: 

1191: Putting all together we can find from (\ref{q1}) - (\ref{q8}), and (\ref{qq1})

1192: the quantization rule for this case 

1193: \begin{eqnarray}

1194: \label{e1} &&

1195: \tan (\gamma W_L^*)  = \pm \frac{2}{p}\exp (\gamma W_B^*)

1196: \, ,

1197: \end{eqnarray}

1198: where $W_B^*$ is the action in the barrier formed in the lower adiabatic potential,

1199: and $p \equiv U_{11}$ is the corresponding matrix element of the

1200: connection matrix (\ref{q8}).

1201: 

1202: Only the factor $1/p$ varying from 0 to 1 in the diabatic and in

1203: the adiabatic limits, respectively, makes

1204: this quantization condition (\ref{e1}) different

1205: from the well known \cite{LL65} quantization rule for

1206: the symmetric double-well potential. Correspondingly, the tunneling

1207: splitting at finite values of the so-called Massey parameter $\nu $ can be represented

1208: as a product

1209: \begin{eqnarray}

1210: \label{e2} &&

1211: \Delta _n = \Delta _n^0\, p(\nu )

1212: \, ,

1213: \end{eqnarray}

1214: of the tunneling splitting $\Delta _n^0$ in the adiabatic

1215: potential and the factor

1216: \begin{eqnarray}

1217: \label{e3} &&

1218: p(\nu )= \frac{\sqrt {2\pi }}{\Gamma (\nu )} \gamma ^{\nu - (1/2)}\exp (-\nu )

1219: \, ,

1220: \end{eqnarray}

1221: associated with the transition amplitudes between the diabatic

1222: potentials in the crossing region.

1223: 

1224: It is particularly instructive to consider

1225: (\ref{e1}) as the standard \cite{LL65} Bohr-Sommerfeld

1226: quantization rule, where in the r.h.s. the both, geometrical

1227: $\varphi _n$ and the tunneling $\chi _n$ phases are included additively.

1228: In the adiabatic limit when $p(\nu ) \to 1$, we find that $\varphi _n \to 0$

1229: and (\ref{e1}) is reduced to the quantization of the symmetric

1230: double-well potential. In the diabatic limit $\varphi _n = - \chi _n$

1231: and the geometric phase compensates the tunneling one. The physical

1232: argument leading to this compensation may be easily rationalized as follows.

1233: Indeed, at the reflection in the crossing point $ X= 0$, the trajectories

1234: in the classically forbidden energy region are the same as those for

1235: the tunneling region but with a phase shift $\pi $.

1236: 

1237: We focus now on the quantization rules for the over-barrier energy region.

1238: Closely following the consideration performed above for the tunneling region, and

1239: replacing the connection matrix (\ref{q8}) by the corresponding matrix

1240: for the over-barrier region (see section \ref{bas})

1241: (and making some other self-evident replacements) 

1242: we end up after some 

1243: algebra with the quantization rule

1244: \begin{eqnarray}

1245: \label{e4} &&

1246: (1 -\exp (-2\pi \nu ))\cos (2\gamma W_L^* - \phi )\cos (\gamma W^* +

1247: \phi ) + \exp (-2\pi \nu )\cos ^2 \left (\gamma W_L^* + \frac{\gamma W^*}{2}

1248: \right ) = 0

1249: \, ,

1250: \end{eqnarray}

1251: where $W^*$ is the action in the well formed by the upper adiabatic potential,

1252: and $\phi = \arg \Gamma (- i \nu ) + \Im (2 \tilde \chi) $ is determined according to

1253: (\ref{cd}).

1254: From the Eq. (\ref{e4}) follows that the eigenstates are determined

1255: by the parameter

1256: \begin{eqnarray}

1257: \label{e5} &&

1258: B = \frac{\exp (-2\pi \nu )}{1 -\exp (-2\pi \nu )}

1259: \, .

1260: \end{eqnarray}

1261: In the diabatic limit $\nu \to 0$, and therefore, $B \to 1/(2\pi \nu)$

1262: in (\ref{e4}) the main contribution is due to the second term,

1263: and it leads to a splitting of degenerate levels in the diabatic potentials.

1264: Moreover since

1265: \begin{eqnarray}

1266: \label{e6} &&

1267: \gamma \left (W_L^* + \frac{W^*}{2}\right ) = \pi \left (n + \frac{1}{2} \pm

1268: 2 \nu \sin \left [\gamma \left (W_L^* + \frac{W^*}{2}\right )  + \phi \right ]

1269: \right )  

1270: \, ,

1271: \end{eqnarray}

1272: the splitting increases when the Massey parameter $\nu $ increases,

1273: and it is an oscillating function of the interaction $U_{12}$.

1274: 

1275: In the adiabatic limit, when $\nu \to \infty $, $\phi  \to 0$, and,

1276: therefore, from (\ref{e5}) $ B \simeq \exp (-2\pi \nu )$, the main contribution

1277: to (\ref{e4}) comes from the first term which determines the quantization rule

1278: for the upper one-well potential and for the lower double-well potential

1279: in the over-barrier energy region, and in this limit the parameter $B$

1280: plays a role of the tunneling transition matrix element. For $B$ smaller

1281: than nearest level spacings for the lower and for the upper potentials, one can find

1282: from (\ref{e4}) two sets of quantization rules leading to two

1283: sets of independent energy levels

1284: \begin{eqnarray}

1285: \label{e7} &&

1286: \gamma W^* = \pi \left (n_1 + \frac{1}{2}\right )

1287: \, ; \,

1288: 2\gamma W_L^*  = \pi \left ( n_2 + \frac{1}{2}

1289: \right ) 

1290: \, .

1291: \end{eqnarray}

1292: Since the eigenstate energy level displacements depend on the adiabatic coupling

1293: $U_{12}$

1294: the resonances can occur at certain values of this parameter, where

1295: the independent quantization rules (\ref{e7})

1296: are not correct any more. The widths of these resonances

1297: are proportional to $\exp (-2\pi \nu )$ and therefore

1298: are strongly diminished upon the Massey parameter $\nu $ increase.

1299: This behavior is easily understood, since in the limit the wave

1300: functions of the excited states for the lower potential are delocalized,

1301: and their amplitudes in the localization regions for the low-energy states

1302: of the upper potential, are very small.

1303: 

1304: \subsection{Bound initial and decay final states: 

1305: the diabatic potentials $(1 +

1306: X)^2/2$ and $(1/2) - X$ crossing.}

1307:  

1308: The second instructive example treats

1309: the one-well and linear diabatic potentials crossing. 

1310: It leads to the lower adiabatic decay potential and

1311: to the upper one-well adiabatic potential. 

1312: The quantization rules in this case correspond to the vanishing

1313: amplitudes for the exponentially increasing solutions when $ X \to -\infty $, and besides one has to

1314: require that no waves propagating from the region of infinite motion, i.e. at $X > 1/2$. Performing the

1315: same as above procedure we find that in the tunneling energy region, the eigenstates are the roots of the

1316: following equation 

1317: \begin{eqnarray} 

1318: \label{e10} && 

1319: \tan (\gamma W_L^*) = - i \frac{4}{p^2(\nu )}\exp (2

1320: \gamma W_B^*) \, , 

1321: \end{eqnarray} 

1322: with the same as above notation.

1323: To proceed further it is convenient to introduce the complex action to describe the quasi - stationary

1324: states 

1325: \begin{eqnarray} 

1326: \label{e11} && 

1327: \gamma W_L^* = \pi \left (\frac {E_n}{\Omega } - i \frac{\Gamma

1328: _n}{2\Omega }\right ) \, , 

1329: \end{eqnarray} 

1330: where evidently $\Omega = \partial W_L/\partial E$ does depend

1331: on $E$. From (\ref{e11}) the real and imaginary parts of the quantized eigenstates are 

1332: \begin{eqnarray}

1333: \label{e12} && 

1334: E_n = \Omega \left (n + \frac{1}{2} \right ) \, ; \, \Gamma _n = p^2(\nu )\frac{\Omega

1335: }{2\pi }\exp (- 2\gamma W_B^*) \, . 

1336: \end{eqnarray} 

1337: This relation (\ref{e12}) describes the non-adiabatic

1338: tunneling

1339: decay of the quasi-stationary states of the lower 

1340: adiabatic potential. The same as we already got for the

1341: two parabolic potentials crossing (\ref{e2}), here the 

1342: tunneling and the adiabatic factors are entering

1343: decay rate multiplicatively. Since the decay 

1344: rate is proportional to the square of the tunneling matrix

1345: element, $\Gamma _n \propto p^2(\nu )$ as it should be.

1346:  

1347: In the over-barrier energy region the quantization rule is 

1348: \begin{eqnarray} 

1349: \label{e13} && 

1350: (1 - \exp (-2\pi \nu ) \exp [-i (\gamma W_L^* - \phi )]\cos (\gamma W^* + \phi ) + 

1351: \\ &&

1352: \nonumber

1353: \exp (-2\pi \nu )\exp (-i \gamma W^*/2 ) \cos \left 

1354: (\gamma W_L^* + \frac{\gamma W^*}{2}\right ) = 0 \, ,

1355: \end{eqnarray} 

1356: and the actions depend on the energy $E$ as 

1357: \begin{eqnarray} 

1358: \label{e14} && 

1359: \gamma W_L^* =

1360: \pi \frac{E}{\Omega } \, ; \, 

1361: \gamma W^* = \pi \left [ - \gamma \frac{\Omega _0(u^\# + u_{12})}{\Omega _1} + 

1362: \frac{E}{\Omega _1}\right ] \, , 

1363: \end{eqnarray}

1364: where $\Omega $ and $\Omega _1$ are $E$-dependent frequencies of the

1365: diabatic and the upper adiabatic potentials.

1366:  

1367: In the diabatic limit the decay rate is proportional 

1368: to the Massey parameter $\nu $ and has a form

1369: \begin{eqnarray} 

1370: \label{e15} && 

1371: \Gamma _n \simeq \frac{\Omega _0}{2} \nu \cos^2 (\gamma W^* + \phi ) \, ,

1372: \end{eqnarray} 

1373: and in the opposite, adiabatic, limit the decay rate is 

1374: \begin{eqnarray} 

1375: \label{e16} &&

1376: \Gamma _n \simeq \Omega _0\exp (-2 \pi \nu )( 1 - 

1377: \sin (2 \gamma W_L^*  - \phi )) \, . 

1378: \end{eqnarray} 

1379: In the

1380: both limits the decay rate is the oscillating function of $U_{12}$. 

1381: 

1382: We illustrate the dependence $\Gamma

1383: (U_{12})$ for the crossing diabatic potentials $U_1 = (1 + X)^2/2$ and $U_2 = (1/2) - X$ in the Fig. 7.

1384: Note that while the tunneling decay rate of the low-energy states is increased monotonically with the

1385: Massey parameter $\nu $, the decay rate of the highly excited states goes to zero in the both (diabatic

1386: and adiabatic) limits. Besides there are certain characteristic values of $U_{12}$ when the r.h.s. of

1387: (\ref{e15}) or (\ref{e16}) equal to zero and therefore $\Gamma _n =0$.

1388: This seemingly paradoxical and contradicting to conventional wisdom result

1389: can be rationalized as follows. For the case under consideration

1390: (one well upper adiabatic and decay lower adiabatic potentials) there are always

1391: energy levels blocked by the upper adiabatic potential. This resonance phenomenom

1392: manifests itself wave-like particle properties omnipresent in quantum

1393: mechanics. For the system under consideration the upper adiabatic potential

1394: is equivalent to a resonator with a set of well - defined modes (resonances)

1395: with high quality factors. An important feature (in distinction to a conventional

1396: resonators where these modes occupy more or less homogeneously the whole phase space)  

1397: is that the resonance modes are localized in its own effective cavity whose

1398: position is given by the conditions $\Gamma _n = 0$ (\ref{e15}) or (\ref{e16}).

1399: 

1400: Quite similar one can study the more general example, describing two

1401: non-symmetric diabatic potentials crossing

1402: at $X = 0$ point: 

1403: \begin{eqnarray} 

1404: \label{e17} && 

1405: u_1 = \frac{1}{2}(1 + X)^2 \, ; \, u_2 =

1406: \frac{1}{2b}(X^2 - 2 b X + b) \, . 

1407: \end{eqnarray} In a certain sense it is the generic case, and when the

1408: parameter $b$ entering the potential (\ref{e17}) is varied from 1 to $\infty $, we recover the two

1409: particular examples considered above, and come from two identical parabolic potentials to the case

1410: one-well and linear diabatic potentials crossing. 

1411: This kind of the potential was investigated

1412: recently by two of the authors (V.B. and E.K) \cite{BK02} aiming to study crossover behavior from coherent

1413: to incoherent tunneling upon increase of the parameter $b$, 

1414: the larger is this parameter $b$, the larger

1415: will be the density of final states. 

1416: The criterion for coherent-incoherent crossover behavior found in

1417: \cite{BK02} based on comparison of the transition matrix 

1418: elements and the inter level spacings in the

1419: final state. The analogous criterion should hold for the level crossing problem, 

1420: however in the latter

1421: case

1422: the tunneling transition matrix elements has to be multiplied 

1423: by the small adiabatic factor. Therefore the

1424: coherent - incoherent tunneling crossover region moves 

1425: to the more dense density of final states, and the

1426: larger $U_{12}$ is the smaller will be the region for incoherent tunneling.

1427: Quite different situation occurs for highly excited states. In the diabatic limit, the transition matrix

1428: element is increased with the Massey parameter $\nu $, and therefore at a given $b$ value, the system

1429: moves to more incoherent behavior. In the adiabatic limit, the transition matrix element is exponentially

1430: small, and coherence of the inter-well transitions should be restored. However, since the matrix elements

1431: are oscillating functions of $U_{12}$ for the intermediate range of this coupling ($U_{12}$) coherent -

1432: incoherent tunneling rates are also non-monotonically varying functions. 

1433: 

1434: 

1435: \section{Intermediate energy region.}

1436: \label{inter}

1437: 

1438: 

1439: More difficult task is to derive the quantization rule in the intermediate

1440: energy region, where all four roots of the characteristic

1441: equation contribute into the solutions. 

1442: One has to use the connection matrix (\ref{q99})  

1443: computed for this region 

1444: (see details in section \ref{mat} and appendix \ref{A}). 

1445: It has two $2 \times 2$ blocks structure, the same as the

1446: connection matrices for the tunneling and over-barrier regions. 

1447: Here, we present another derivation of the same connection matrix

1448: using the adiabatic representation. It offers a deeper insight into the mathematical

1449: structure of the problem, and besides provides physically relevant relations between

1450: the adiabatic and diabatic states in the intermediate energy region.

1451: The very possibility to use the both representation is stipulated by the fact (we

1452: have mentioned already in section \ref{mat}) that the semiclassical eigen functions

1453: in the intermediate energy region can be represented as linear combinations

1454: either diabatic or adiabatic functions (this adiabatic - diabatic transformation

1455: has been discussed for quantum coherence phenomena in \cite{FS97}, see also \cite{NU84}). 

1456: 

1457: Since the adiabatic potentials have two second order turning points (the minimum of the upper,

1458: and the maximum of the lower adiabatic potentials) the blocks of the connection matrix

1459: in the intermediate energy region (where now unlike the matrices (\ref{q1}), (\ref{q9}) 

1460: describing the transitions between the diabatic states, the

1461: connection matrix

1462: corresponds to the transitions between the adiabatic states,

1463: and non-adiabatic perturbations induce the transitions \cite{BV02}), are characterized by

1464: the parameters $\tilde {q}_{1 , 2}$ analogous to $q_{1 , 2}$ from (\ref{a55}) entering (\ref{q888}). 

1465: Respectively, for the real - valued blocks

1466: \begin{eqnarray} 

1467: \label{b34} 

1468: \tilde {q}_1 

1469: = \frac{\gamma \sqrt {2u_{12}}}{4 f}(u_{12} + \alpha ) \, , 

1470: \end{eqnarray} 

1471: and the complex - valued blocks (

1472: associated with the maximum of the lower adiabatic potential) 

1473: \begin{eqnarray} 

1474: \label{b35} 

1475: \tilde {q}_2  =  \frac{\gamma \sqrt {2u_{12}}}{4 f}(u_{12} - \alpha )  

1476:  \, . 

1477: \end{eqnarray} 

1478: We can now reap the fruits of the previous subsection consideration

1479: efforts. First, let us note that from the relations (\ref{b11}) and (\ref{b14}) one can see that when the

1480: energy approaches to the top of the barrier, the exponents $p^{(i)}$ and $\tilde {p}^{(i)}$ of the parabolic

1481: cylinder functions are increased and thus, more and more deviated from the value prescribed by the Massey

1482: parameter $\nu $. Second, increasing of $\beta _{(i)}$ upon $|\alpha |$ decreasing, decreases the values

1483: of $|X|$ where the asymptotic smooth matching of the solutions should be performed. For $\delta \to 0$

1484: these $|X|$ values are located deeply in the classically forbidden region, where the potentials are close

1485: to the diabatic potentials, while for $\delta \geq 1/4$, these coordinates $|X|$ are of the order

1486: of the quantum zero-point oscillation amplitudes, and therefore to find the solution in this region, we

1487: have to use the adiabatic representation.

1488: 

1489: Although as it is shown in the appendix \ref{B}, the intermediate region for the

1490: both subregions, $S^{\prime \prime }$, at $\delta < 1/4$, and $S^\prime $, at $\delta > 1/4$

1491: can be investigated on equal footing in the frame work of the comparison equations (i.e. at the

1492: diabatic basis) it is instructive to study the problem also in the adiabatic

1493: representation, what is the purpose of this section. As a sub-product of this consideration

1494: we get also the justification of the comparison equation approach.

1495: In the adiabatic basis the intermediate subregions $S^\prime $ and $S^{\prime \prime }$ should be studied

1496: separately.

1497: Two simple observations give us a conjecture how to treat 

1498: the problem in the intermediate energy

1499: region. First of all 

1500: the energetical ''window'' for the

1501: intermediate subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$, where $\delta \leq 1/4$, and $|\alpha | \leq u_{12}$, 

1502: in terms of the dimensional energy scale is determined by the rectangle around the crossing point 

1503: \begin{eqnarray}

1504: \label{b22} 

1505: U_{12} \leq 2 U_{12}^* \, ; \, |U^\# - E | \leq U_{12}^* 

1506: \, ,

1507: \end{eqnarray}

1508: where we define $U_{12}^* \equiv (1/2)(\hbar ^2 F^2 /m)^{1/3}$. 

1509: By the other words the characteristic interaction energy at the intermediate region

1510: boundaries does not depend on $U_{12}$. 

1511: Analogously the intermediate subregion $S^\prime $ is restricted by the lines

1512: \begin{eqnarray}

1513: \label{b25} 

1514: U_{12} \geq 2 U_{12}^* \, ; \, |U^\# - E| \leq U_{12}

1515: \, . 

1516: \end{eqnarray}

1517: The positions of the linear turning points $|X^*|$

1518: corresponding to the energies $U^\# \pm U_{12}^*$ do depend on the ratio $U_{12}/U_{12}^*$. These points are

1519: located inside or outside of the interval $[-\gamma ^{-1/2} \, ; \, +\gamma ^{-1/2}]$ at $U_{12}/U_{12}^*

1520: < 1$ and at $U_{12}/U_{12}^* > 1$, respectively. Accordingly for the both cases 

1521: the matching conditions in

1522: the intermediate energy region are different. 

1523: In the former case for the asymptotic matching region the

1524: potentials can be reasonably approximated by parabola, and therefore we should work with the Weber

1525: equations, and for the latter case the matching are performed in the region where the potentials are

1526: linear ones, thus the equations are reduced

1527: to the Airy ones.

1528: 

1529: Let us discuss first the intermediate energy subregion $S^{\prime \prime } $, where $\tilde {q}_1$ and $\tilde {q}_2$ are large,

1530: and therefore the Massey parameter, i.e. the indices of the Weber functions

1531: are also large. 

1532: The arguments of the Weber functions are $\propto X\sqrt \gamma $, 

1533: and their

1534: asymptotic expansions determine the interval where 

1535: the matching should be done (\ref{b25}).

1536: In what follows we will closely follow the method we borrowed from 

1537: Olver paper \cite{OL59} (for the asymptotic expansions of the Weber

1538: functions with large indices, see also his

1539: monograph \cite{OL74}), which is in fact an expansion over small parameters $1/|\tilde {q}_i|$ (where $|\tilde {q}_i|$ are

1540: the exponents (\ref{b34}), (\ref{b35})) of the fundamental Weber solutions, 

1541: and it leads to the following asymptotic

1542: solution at $X > 0$ 

1543: \begin{eqnarray} 

1544: \label{b26} 

1545: \Psi _+^-(X) \simeq Y_+^{-1/2} (X +

1546: Y_+)^{-\tilde {q}_1} \exp (- \gamma X Y_+) \, , \, 

1547: \Psi _-^-(X) \simeq Y_-^{-1/2} (X + Y_-)^{i\tilde {q}_2} \exp (i \gamma X Y_-) 

1548: \, , 

1549: \end{eqnarray} 

1550: where $Y_\pm =

1551: \sqrt {u_{12}^2 \pm \alpha ^2 + f^2 X^2}$. 

1552: Using the known relation between the

1553: fundamental solutions of the Weber equation \cite{EM53} 

1554: $$ D_\mu (z) = \exp(-i\pi \mu )D_\mu

1555: (z) + \frac{\sqrt {2\pi }}{\Gamma (-\mu )}\exp \left (-i\pi \frac{\mu +1}{2}\right )D_{-\mu -1}(i z) 

1556: \, ,

1557: $$ 

1558: we can find two other (complimentary to (\ref{b26}) solutions 

1559: \begin{eqnarray} 

1560: \label{b27} 

1561: \Psi _+^+(X)

1562: = Y_+^{-1/2} \left (-\sin(\pi \tilde {q}_1)(X + Y_+)^{-\tilde {q}_1} \exp (- \gamma X Y_+) 

1563: + \exp (-2 \chi _1) \frac{\sqrt {2\pi }}{\Gamma ((1/2) + \tilde {q}_1)}(X + Y_+)^{\tilde {q}_1} 

1564: \exp (\gamma X Y_+)\right ) \, , 

1565: \end{eqnarray} 

1566: and

1567: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1568: \label{b28} 

1569: \Psi _-^+(X) = \\ && 

1570: \nonumber

1571: Y_+^{-1/2} \left (-i\exp (-\pi \tilde {q}_2)(X + Y_-)^{i\tilde {q}_2} \exp (i\gamma X Y_-) 

1572: + \exp (-2 \chi _2) \frac{\sqrt {2\pi }}{\Gamma ((1/2) - i\tilde {q}_2)}(X + Y_-)^{i\tilde {q}_2} 

1573: \exp (-i \gamma X Y_-)\right ) \, . 

1574: \end{eqnarray} 

1575: In the case of weak level coupling, i.e., for the intermediate energy subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$, 

1576: the adiabatic potentials everywhere (except 

1577: a

1578: small neighborhood of the level crossing point) can be linearized, i.e. represented as

1579: $\alpha \pm f|X|$, and the asymptotic solutions are reduced to a linear combination of the

1580: following functions 

1581: \begin{eqnarray} 

1582: \label{b36} 

1583: \Phi _+^\pm \propto (f|X|)^{-1/2}\exp (\pm \xi _+ + sign X)

1584: \, , \, \Phi _-^\pm \propto (f|X|)^{-1/2}\exp (\pm \xi _- - sign X) \, , \, \xi _\pm = \frac{2}{3 f}(f |X|

1585: \pm \alpha )^{3/2} \, ,

1586: \end{eqnarray}

1587: and these functions are smoothly matched with semiclassical solutions (see details in the appendix \ref{B}).                                          

1588: As a result we can calculate finally the connection matrix $U_c^{\prime \prime }$ in the intermediate

1589: energy region in the adiabatic basis

1590: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1591: \nonumber 

1592: \hat {U}_c^{\prime \prime } = \left [ 

1593: \begin{array}{cc} 

1594: (\sqrt {2\pi }/\Gamma (-i \tilde {q}_2))\exp (-2\chi (i \tilde {q}_2)) & 0   \\

1595: 0 & (\Gamma (\tilde {q}_1)/\sqrt {2\pi })\exp (2\chi (\tilde {q}_1))\sin ^2(\pi \tilde {q}_1) \\

1596: 0 & \cos (\pi \tilde {q}_1)   \\

1597: i\exp(-\pi \tilde {q}_2) & 0  

1598: \end{array} 

1599: \right .  

1600: \end{eqnarray}

1601: \begin{eqnarray}

1602: \nonumber

1603: \left .

1604: \begin{array}{cc}

1605: 0 & -i \exp (-\pi \tilde {q}_2)  \\

1606: -\cos (- \tilde {q}_1)  &  

1607: 0  \\

1608: (\sqrt {2\pi }/\Gamma (\tilde {q}_1))\exp (-2\chi (\tilde {q}_1)) & 0 \\

1609: 0 & 2(\Gamma (-i \tilde {q}_2)/\sqrt {2 \pi })\exp (-2i\chi (\tilde {q}_2))\exp (-\pi

1610: \tilde {q}_2)\cosh ^2(\pi \tilde {q}_2) 

1611: \end{array} 

1612: \right ] \, , 

1613: \end{eqnarray} 

1614: where the function $\chi $ is defined in (\ref{a551}), (\ref{a552}).

1615: We see that the connection matrix in the adiabatic basis, unlike (\ref{q888}) defined in the diabatic basis,

1616: does not provide continuous transformation into the connection matrices for the tunneling and over-barrier

1617: energy regions ((\ref{q8}) and (\ref{q88}) correspondingly). This apparent inconsistency

1618: is due to disregarding of adiabatic level interactions which become relevant in the

1619: intermediate energy region. However there is a simple remedy to ensure the continuous over all energy

1620: windows matching of the connection matrices. One has to rotate the complex plane $q$

1621: over the angle $\varphi $ (\ref{apen10}). 

1622: Thus luckily (as it is often the case in semiclassical

1623: approaches) we can safely reduce the problem quite accurate to the Weber or Airy equations in the

1624: both intermediate energy subregions, using respectively the perturbation theory 

1625: with respect to the diabatic or adiabatic states.

1626: The found adiabatic connection matrix could be used on the same footing as the diabatic

1627: connection matrix (\ref{q888}), e.g., to derive the quantization rule, which for

1628: the intermediate energy window can be  

1629: written in

1630: the simple and compact form as

1631: \begin{eqnarray}

1632: \label{e8} &&

1633: \cos (2\gamma W_L^*) = - \exp (-\pi \tilde {q}_2)

1634: \, .

1635: \end{eqnarray}

1636: 

1637: It is useful to illustrate the essence of the given above general result

1638: by simples (but yet non trivial) examples. First, let us consider two

1639: identical parabolic potentials with their minima at $X = \pm 1$ and with

1640: the coupling which does not depend on $X$. Since the symmetry,

1641: the solutions of the Hamiltonian can be represented as symmetric

1642: and antisymmetric combinations of the localized functions

1643: \begin{eqnarray}

1644: \label{e9} &&

1645: \Psi ^\pm = \frac{1}{\sqrt 2}( \Phi _L \pm \Phi _R)

1646: \, .

1647: \end{eqnarray}

1648: The functions are orthogonal, and, besides, two sets of the functions

1649: $(\Psi _e^+ \, , \, \Psi _0^-)$, 

1650: and $(\Psi _0^+ \, , \, \Psi _e^-)$ 

1651: (where the subscripts $0$ and $e$ stand for the ground and for

1652: the first excited states respectively) correspond to the two possible kinds of level crossings.

1653: 

1654: In Fig. 8 we depicted schematically the dependence of the

1655: level positions on the coupling $U_{12}$. In the energy region $E \leq U^* + U_{12}$

1656: where only there exist the discrete levels of the lower

1657: adiabatic potentials, there are the pairs of the alternating parity

1658: levels

1659: $(\Psi _e^+ \, , \, \Psi _0^-)$, 

1660: and $(\Psi _0^+ \, , \, \Psi _e^-)$. The tunneling splittings are increased   

1661: monotonically since the Massey parameter $\nu $ is increased, and the

1662: barrier is decreased with $U_{12}$. The same level and parity

1663: classification is remained correct for the energy region above

1664: the barrier of the lower adiabatic potential where the spectrum

1665: becomes almost equidistant one. However, in the over-barrier region, the resonances

1666: are occurred between the levels of the same parity, and this sequence

1667: of the odd and of the even levels is broken, and level displacements

1668: are not monotonic functions of $U_{12}$. Some of the levels of different

1669: parities can be mutually crossed. For the upper adiabatic potential the level

1670: sequence is opposite to this for the lower

1671: adiabatic potential. 

1672: The intermediate subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$ limits are shown by two dashed lines.

1673: The boundaries between the intermediate subregion $S^\prime $ and the tunneling

1674: and the over-barrier regions are shown by the dotted-dashed lines outgoing from the

1675: corners of the subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$ rectangle, and these lines

1676: coincide with energetic displacements of the top and of the bottom of the adiabatic

1677: potentials.

1678: Note also that we checked the results of our

1679: semiclassical approach and found remarkably good agreement

1680: with the numerical quantum diagonalization. Shown in the Fig. 8 

1681: level displacements versus $U_{12}$

1682: coincide (with the error not exceeding $10 \% $ for the full range of variation of $U_{12}$, including

1683: the both intermediate energy subregions) with the results of the numerical

1684: diagonalization in the basis of harmonic oscillator functions of the initial Hamiltonian (\ref{nn3} for two diabatic crossing potentials

1685: $(1 \pm X)^2/2$.

1686: 

1687: 

1688: \section{Coupling to a thermal reservoir.}

1689: \label{bath}

1690: 

1691: 

1692: We have considered semiclassical quantization of bound and quasi-stationary

1693: states beyond the adiabatic approximation but for $1D$ case only. 

1694: Of course the energetic profile of any real system is characterized by a

1695: multidimensional surface. However, it is often possible to identify a reaction coordinate, such that the

1696: energy barrier between initial and final states is minimized along this specific direction, and,

1697: therefore, effectively one can treat the system under consideration as $1D$, regarding 

1698: all other degrees of freedom 

1699: as a bath of harmonic oscillators.

1700: In this section we investigate the simplest multidimensional Hamiltonian

1701: describing the non-adiabatic transitions, namely the $2 \times 2$ matrix potential

1702: for the $X$ variable (or what is the same two $1D$ diabatic potentials crossing considered

1703: in the previous sections) and the set of ''transverse'' harmonic oscillators

1704: $\{ Y_k\}$ coupled with the reaction coordinate $X$

1705: \begin{eqnarray}

1706: \label{t1} &&

1707: V(X , \{Y_k\}) = V_1 (X) + \sum _{k}\frac{\omega _k^2}{2} Y_k^2 + F(X)\sum _kC_k Y_k

1708: \, .

1709: \end{eqnarray}

1710: Here $V_1(X)$ is the bare (in a general case anharmonic) $1D$ potential,

1711: $\omega _k$ is the eigenfrequency of the transverse oscillator $k$,

1712: the function $F(X)$ describes how the only strongly fluctuating coordinate $X$

1713: is coupled to thermal bath of transverse oscillators, and $C_k$ are corresponding

1714: coupling constants.

1715: This kind (\ref{t1}) of the multidimensional potential has

1716: been studied in the literature (see e.g. \cite{BM94}), and some

1717: efforts were made to find a feasible approximation to treat the

1718: potential within the semiclassical approach. In this section we legitimate

1719: the method proposed in \cite{BM94} focusing on the LZ problem in the tunneling

1720: region. Similar consideration can be easily generalized for the over-barrier

1721: and intermediate regions.

1722: 

1723: The equations of classical motion (in imaginary time) for the transverse

1724: coordinates have the following form 

1725: \begin{eqnarray}

1726: \label{t3} &&

1727: \ddot X = \frac{d V_1}{d X} -  \sum _{k}\frac{C_k^2}{\omega _k^2} \frac{d F(X)}{d X} I(\omega _k,

1728: [F(X)])

1729: \, ,

1730: \end{eqnarray}

1731: where $III$ is the integral transformation

1732: \begin{eqnarray}

1733: \label{t4} &&

1734: I(\omega _k, [F(X)]) = \frac{\omega _k}{2} \int _{-\infty }^{\infty } \exp (-\omega _k

1735: |t - t^\prime |F(X (t^\prime ))d t^\prime

1736: \, .

1737: \end{eqnarray}

1738: It can be expand in the following high- and low-frequency limits

1739: \begin{eqnarray}

1740: \label{t5} &&

1741: I(\omega , [F]) =

1742: \left \{ 

1743: \begin{array}{c} 

1744: F + \omega ^{-2}\ddot F + \omega ^{-4} \ddot {\ddot F} + .... \, , \omega \to \infty

1745: \\ 

1746: -\omega ^2 R_2 - \omega ^4 R_4 - ....\, , \omega \to 0

1747: \end{array} 

1748: \right . 

1749: \, , 

1750: \end{eqnarray} 

1751: where

1752: \begin{eqnarray}

1753: \label{t6} &&

1754: R_n = \int _{-\infty }^{t} dt_1 \int _{-\infty }^{t_1} dt_2....\int _{-\infty }^{t_{n-1}}F(t_n)

1755: dt_n

1756: \, .

1757: \end{eqnarray}

1758: 

1759: At the high frequency limit (\ref{t5}) is reduced to the trajectory

1760: equation but with the renormalized potential corresponding to the following 

1761: $X$-dependent effective

1762: mass

1763: \begin{eqnarray}

1764: \label{t7} &&

1765: \sqrt {m^*} \frac{d}{d t} [\sqrt {m^*} \dot X] = \frac{d \tilde V}{d X} + O (\rho _6)

1766: \, ,

1767: \end{eqnarray}

1768: where

1769: \begin{eqnarray}

1770: \label{t8} &&

1771: m^*(X) = 1 + \rho _4 \left (\frac{d F}{d X}\right )^2 \, , \,

1772: \tilde V (X) = V_1(X) - \frac{1}{2}\rho _2 \frac{d F^2}{d X}\, , \,

1773: \rho _n \equiv \sum _k \frac{C_k^2}{\omega _k ^n}

1774: \, 

1775: \end{eqnarray}

1776: (remind that we put unity the bare mass $m$ in our dimensionless units).

1777: 

1778: In the low-frequency limit the trajectory equation reads

1779: \begin{eqnarray}

1780: \label{t9} &&

1781: \ddot X = \frac{d V_1}{d X} - \rho _0 R_2(t)

1782: \, .

1783: \end{eqnarray}

1784: In the $\rho _4$ approximation for the 

1785: spectral density

1786: of oscillators the neglected in (\ref{t8}) terms proportional to $\rho _6$

1787: (and the last term in

1788: (\ref{t9}))

1789: are small.

1790: The physical message of the calculation performed in this section is

1791: that the renormalization of the effective mass leads to slowing down

1792: of the motion and it is equivalent to say that the Massey

1793: parameter is renormalized

1794: \begin{eqnarray}

1795: \label{t10} &&

1796: \nu \to \nu ^* = \nu \sqrt {m^*(X_c)}

1797: \, ,

1798: \, 

1799: \end{eqnarray}

1800: where $X_c$ is the

1801: crossing point.

1802: Of course the coupling will also change the action along the

1803: extremal action trajectory (this effect has been discussed in the literature,

1804: see e.g. \cite{BM94}). The specific for the LZ problem new phenomenom

1805: is renormalization of the Massey parameter (\ref{t10}) which controls

1806: main features of the behavior for any system undergoing level crossing.

1807: 

1808:  

1809: \section{Conclusion.}

1810: \label{discus}

1811: 

1812: In conclusion we end up stressing again the main point of our methodology.

1813: We have shown that the comparison equations for the 4-th order

1814: differential Landau-Zener equations in the coordinate space

1815: can be represented as two decoupled Weber equations. The indices

1816: and the arguments of the corresponding Weber functions defined by the roots

1817: of the characteristic equation (\ref{b8}) for the complex wave vector $\kappa $,

1818: and $|\kappa | \gg 1$ in the semiclassical approximation.

1819: In the frame work of our method the diabatic potential crossing points

1820: are treated as two second order turning points characterizing by different

1821: Stokes constants \cite{HE62}. The accuracy of the method depends

1822: on anharmonic terms, which are not taken into account in the comparison equations,

1823: but which are small in the semiclassical approach 

1824: over small parameters $\delta $, $\tilde \delta $, or $\delta _{int}$

1825: respectively, 

1826: in the tunneling, 

1827: over-barrier

1828: and intermediate subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$ energy windows.

1829: In the subregion $S^\prime $, $\delta _{int}$ is not a small parameter.

1830: However, since the asymptotically smooth matching is performed

1831: at small $|X| < \gamma ^{-1/2}$, anharmonic corrections to the comparison equations can be safely

1832: neglected for this subregion as well.

1833: 

1834: We have presented detailed semiclassical analysis of

1835: crossing diabatic potentials problem.

1836: We examine one important (and overlooked in all previous investigations)

1837: aspect of well - known energy level quantization problem for crossing

1838: diabatic potentials. We derive 

1839: the semiclassical quantization rules for the particular

1840: situation of crossing diabatic potentials with localized initial and localized or delocalized

1841: final

1842: states, in the intermediate energy region, when all four adiabatic states

1843: are coupled and should be taken into account. In fact it 

1844: exhausts all cases practically relevant for spectroscopy of non-rigid molecules

1845: (i.e. with more than one stable configuration). 

1846: 

1847: 

1848: We use the connection matrix methodology which presents

1849: a simple and standardized description of any semiclassical approximation,

1850: which offers therefore a deeper insight into the mathematical

1851: and physical structure of the approximation.

1852: We found that 

1853: in the tunneling region the tunneling splitting is represented as a product of the

1854: splitting in the adiabatic potential and the non-trivial function $p(\nu )$ (we calculated 

1855: analytically) depending on the

1856: Massey parameter, i.e. on the energy and the slopes of the diabatic

1857: potentials in the crossing

1858: region. 

1859: In the over-barrier

1860: region we found specific resonances between the levels

1861: in the lower and in the upper adiabatic potentials and in that condition

1862: one may not use independent quantization rules. 

1863: New results have emanated from our consideration of the

1864: intermediate energy region.

1865: For this energy region we calculated the energy level quantization, 

1866: using adiabatic basis.

1867: 

1868: 

1869: 

1870: We have presented in this paper all details of the LZ problem for two electronic states 

1871: using

1872: the connection matrix approach for the LZ problem in the coordinate space, the                   

1873: approach which turned out very efficient for this class of problems, and are important in

1874: many areas of pure and applied sciences.

1875: Even though only model potentials are investigated here, our approach 

1876: is 

1877: quite general and

1878: has potential applicability for various systems in physics and chemistry, 

1879: and the results

1880: can be tested

1881: by their experimental consequences for many examples of molecular systems  

1882: undergoing conversion of electronic states, non-radiative transitions, or

1883: isomerization reactions, and not only. The results of the LZ-problem investigations

1884: are very relevant for slow atomic or molecular collisions , \cite{MI76}, \cite{NU84},

1885: where the interaction of diabatic potentials induces transitions between initial and

1886: final electronic states. However, since the interaction is essential only near

1887: the crossing point, one can compute the transition probability, linearizing

1888: the both diabatic potentials (see our consideration in section \ref{bas}). 

1889: The same approximation works

1890: quite well

1891: for the so-called pre-dissociation phenomena.

1892: 

1893: However (in contrast to the atomic and molecular collision problems) 

1894: there are fundamental problems

1895: of chemical physics and molecular spectroscopy

1896: where one may not restrict oneself to the only transition probability calculations,

1897: but should know the complete eigenvalues/eigenfunctions solution.

1898: It is the case for example if we are interested in 

1899: the calculation of vibrational - tunneling spectra of non-rigid molecules,

1900: or reactive complexes with more than one stable configuration. The lowest

1901: multi - well potential of such systems is formed from one well diabatic potentials

1902: crossing corresponding to each stable configuration. Apart from the lowest potential,

1903: the upper adiabatic potential with its minimum above the maximum of the lowest

1904: potential should be also taken into account for these situations (see Fig. 1).

1905: In the most of the calculations of tunneling splittings in the ground and low excited vibrational

1906: states the coupling to the upper potential are neglected, what is certainly correct

1907: only for strong enough adiabatic coupling. Evidently it is not

1908: the case for the levels close to the adiabatic barrier top, and especially in the

1909: upper potential well. The quantization of these levels play noticeable in the spectroscopy

1910: of non-rigid molecules, and the same situation takes place for systems undergoing

1911: the Jahn - Teller effect, where the interference of the diabatic states occurs in this

1912: energy region \cite{BE84}.

1913: 

1914: One more example for the application of our results is molecular 

1915: radiationless transitions

1916: within excited electronic states. 

1917: Typically for this situation the decay potential is formed owing

1918: to crossing of bound and unbound diabatic potentials. Since

1919: the radiationless transitions are followed by luminescence and chemical reaction

1920: phenomena (see e.g. \cite{FR80} - \cite{ZT01}) one should know the complex 

1921: eigenvalues of the

1922: quasistationary states prepared by optical pumping.

1923: 

1924: Let us also stress that in real systems the characteristic values

1925: of the coupling between the diabatic states can vary within

1926: the very wide range from several $eV$ for the electronic

1927: states of the same symmetry to zero (for the states with different spins).

1928: To treat all these cases one should know the solution of the diabatic

1929: potentials crossing problem described in our paper for the

1930: corresponding wide range of the Massey parameter from $\nu = 0$ to $\nu \gg 1$.

1931:  

1932: 

1933: 

1934: 

1935: 

1936: \acknowledgements 

1937: The research described in this publication was made possible in part by RFFR Grants. 

1938: One of us (E.K.) is indebted to INTAS Grant (under No. 01-0105) for partial support.                            

1939: The authors thank also their manuscript referees for insightful criticism.

1940: 

1941: \appendix

1942: 

1943: \section{}

1944: 

1945: \label{A}

1946: 

1947:  

1948:  

1949: Putting all given in the section \ref{bas} expressions (\ref{q1}) - (\ref{q33}) together we can

1950: recapitulate the matrix elements $m_{ij}$ of the full connection matrix in the tunneling region

1951: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1952: \label{ap1} 

1953: m_{11} = \frac{p}{4} \exp (-\gamma W_B^*)\cos (\gamma W_L^*)\cos (\gamma

1954: W_R^*) - \frac{\sin ^2(\pi \nu )}{p}\exp (\gamma W_B^*)\sin (\gamma W_L^*)\sin (\gamma W_R^*) \, ; 

1955: \\ &&

1956: m_{12} = \frac{p}{2} \exp (-\gamma W_B^*)\sin (\gamma W_L^*)\cos (\gamma W_R^*) + 2\frac{\sin ^2(\pi \nu

1957: )}{p}\exp (\gamma W_B^*)\cos (\gamma W_L^*)\sin (\gamma W_R^*) \, ; 

1958: \\ && m_{21} = -\frac{p}{2} \exp

1959: (-\gamma W_B^*)\cos (\gamma W_L^*)\sin (\gamma W_R^*) - 2\frac{\sin ^2(\pi \nu )}{p}\exp (\gamma

1960: W_B^*)\sin (\gamma W_L^*)\cos (\gamma W_R^*) \, ; 

1961: \\ && 

1962: \label{ap11} m_{22} = -p\exp (-\gamma W_B^*)\sin

1963: (\gamma W_L^*)\sin (\gamma W_R^*) + 4\frac{\sin ^2(\pi \nu )}{p}\exp (\gamma W_B^*)\cos (\gamma W_L^*)\cos

1964: (\gamma W_R^*) \, ; 

1965: \\ && 

1966: m_{13/24} = \pm \cos (\pi \nu )\exp (\pm \gamma W_B^*/2)\sin (\gamma W_R^*) \, ;

1967: \, m_{14} = -\frac{1}{2} \cos (\pi \nu ) \exp (-\gamma W_B^*/2)\cos (\gamma W_R^*) \, ; 

1968: \\ &&

1969: \label{ap111} 

1970: m_{23} = -2 \cos (\pi \nu )\exp (\gamma W_B^*/2)\cos (\gamma W_R^*) \, ; \, m_{31/42} = \pm

1971: \cos (\pi \nu )\exp (\pm \gamma W_B^*/2)\sin (\gamma W_L^*) \, ; 

1972: \\ && 

1973: \label{ap1111} 

1974: m_{41} =

1975: \frac{1}{2}\cos (\pi \nu )\exp (-\gamma W_B^*/2)\cos (\gamma W_L^*) \, ; \, m_{32} = 2\cos (\pi \nu )\exp

1976: (\gamma W_B^*/2)\cos (\gamma W_L^*) \, ; 

1977: \\ && 

1978: \label{ap11111} 

1979: m_{33} = p \, ; \, m_{44} = \frac{\sin

1980: ^2(\pi \nu )}{p} \, ; \, m_{34} = m_{43} = 0 \, . 

1981: \end{eqnarray} 

1982: For the over-barrier region the full

1983: connection matrix could be given in a more compact form. 

1984: Using (\ref{q9}), (\ref{q88}), (\ref{q333}),

1985: (\ref{q2}) from the main body of the paper we get the following matrix 

1986: \begin{eqnarray} && 

1987: \label{ap2}

1988: \left [ 

1989: \begin{array}{cccc} 

1990: (s/2)\cos (\gamma W_{LR} - \phi ) & s\sin (\gamma W_{LR} - \phi ) & -\exp

1991: (-\pi \nu )\sin (\gamma W_{R\, *}) & -\exp (-\pi \nu )/2\cos (\gamma W_{R\, *}) \\ 

1992: -s\sin (\gamma W_{LR} -

1993: \phi ) & 2s\cos (\gamma W_{LR} - \phi ) & -2\exp (-\pi \nu )\cos (\gamma W_{R\, *}) & \exp (-\pi \nu )\sin

1994: (\gamma W_{R\, *}) \\ 

1995: -\exp (-\pi \nu )\sin (\gamma W_{L\, *})  & 2\exp (-\pi \nu )\cos (\gamma W_{L\, *})

1996: & 2s\cos (\gamma W^* + \phi ) & -s \sin (\gamma W^* + \phi ) \\ 

1997: \exp (-\pi \nu )/2\cos (\gamma W_{L\, *})

1998: & \exp (-\pi \nu )\sin (\gamma W_{L \, *}) & s\sin (\gamma W^* + \phi ) & (s/2)\cos (\gamma W^* + \phi )

1999: \end{array} 

2000: \right ] \, , 

2001: \end{eqnarray} 

2002: where $W_{LR} \equiv W_L^* + W_R^*$, and $W_{L/R, *} \equiv

2003: W_{L/R}^* + W^*/2 $.

2004:  

2005: 

2006: \section{}

2007: \label{B}

2008: The efficency of the standard instanton approach \cite{PO77}, \cite{CO85} (see also \cite{BM94}, \cite{BV03})

2009: is based on a successful choice of the comparison equation near second order turning points, where

2010: asymptotically smooth matching of semiclassical solutions to the solutions of this equation

2011: should be performed. It is known for example \cite{BV02} that for anharmonic potentials the Weber

2012: equation provides  such a very successful choice since in the matching region anharmonic corrections

2013: are still small. The aim of this appendix is to show that the analogous situation holds for

2014: crossing diabatic potentials points, where two Weber equations can be successfully used as the comparison equations to

2015: the fourth order Landau-Zener equation (\ref{nn4}). The arguments and the indices of the fundamental solutions 

2016: to these Weber comparison equations are determined by the roots of the corresponding

2017: characteristic equations (see below and the main body of the paper).

2018: 

2019: To prove the statement let us first substitute (\ref{nn11}) into the equation (\ref{nn7}). We get

2020: \begin{eqnarray} 

2021: \label{apen1} 

2022: D^4\Phi + 4\kappa D^3 \Phi + (6 \kappa ^2 - 2 \alpha \gamma ^2)D^2 \Phi

2023: + 4(\kappa ^3 - \alpha \gamma ^2 \kappa  - \frac{1}{2}\gamma ^2 f) D\Phi + 

2024: \end{eqnarray}

2025: \begin{eqnarray}

2026: \nonumber

2027: [\kappa ^4

2028: - 2\alpha \gamma ^2 \kappa ^2 - 2 \gamma ^2 f \kappa + \gamma ^4 (\alpha ^2 - u_{12}^2 - f^2X^2)]\Phi = 0 

2029: \, ,

2030: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2031: where $ D^n \equiv d^n/d X^n$.

2032: The equation (\ref{apen1}) can be formally derived by simple manipulations (two sequential differentiations

2033: and summations) from the following second order equation

2034: \begin{eqnarray} 

2035: \label{apen2} 

2036: D^2\Phi + (a_0 + a_1 X + a_2 X^2)\Phi = 0 

2037: \, ,

2038: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2039: where the coefficients are

2040: \begin{eqnarray} 

2041: \label{apen3} 

2042: a_0 = \kappa ^2 - \alpha \gamma ^2 - \frac{\gamma ^2 f}{2 \kappa }(1 + \delta )\, ;

2043: \, a_1 = \gamma ^2f \delta \, ; \, a_2 = -\gamma^2 f\kappa \delta 

2044: \, ,

2045: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2046: where $\kappa $ should be found from the characteristic equation (\ref{b8}), 

2047: and $\delta $ is given by (\ref{b9}).

2048: 

2049: The fundamental solutions to (\ref{apen2}) read as

2050: \begin{eqnarray} 

2051: \label{apen4} 

2052: D_p\left [\pm \left (\frac{\gamma ^4 f^2}{\kappa ^2}\right )^{1/4} \left (X - \frac{1}{2\kappa }\right )\right ]

2053: \, ,

2054: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2055: where

2056: \begin{eqnarray} 

2057: \label{apen5} 

2058: p = -\frac{1}{2} + \left (\frac{\gamma ^4 f^2}{\kappa ^2}\right )^{-1/2} \left (a_0  - \frac{a_1^2}{4 a_2}\right ) 

2059: \, .

2060: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2061: In the tunneling (\ref{j1}) and over-barrier (\ref{j2}) regions of energies 

2062: these 4 solutions (2 solutions of (\ref{apen4}) for two largest modulus roots of

2063: the characteristic equation (\ref{b8})) can be separated into two independent pairs.

2064: In the tunneling region the two largest modulus roots of (\ref{b8}) are

2065: (two other roots are small and do not satisfy semiclassical approach)

2066: \begin{eqnarray} 

2067: \label{apen6} 

2068: \kappa = \kappa _0\left (1 \pm \frac{\delta ^2}{2}\frac{\kappa _0^2}{2\kappa _0^2 - \alpha \gamma ^2}\right )

2069: \, ; \,

2070: \kappa _0 = \frac{\gamma }{\sqrt 2}\left (\alpha + \sqrt {\alpha ^2 - u_{12}^2}\right )^{1/2} 

2071: \, .

2072: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2073: Putting (\ref{apen6}) into (\ref{apen5}) we find (neglecting $\delta ^2$ terms, i.e., for $\kappa = \kappa _0$)

2074: 4 fundamental solutions to the 

2075: comparison equation in the form (\ref{nn13}).  

2076: Thus from the given above expressions and (\ref{b9}), (\ref{b10}) from the main text

2077: we conclude that the solutions $\Theta _{L/R}$ (\ref{nn13}) can be expanded over our

2078: small parameter $\delta $, and due to the condition (\ref{b9}) anharmonic corrections

2079: to the Weber functions (\ref{apen4}) are small (by other words the parameter $\delta $ determines the accuracy 

2080: of our approximation).

2081: Indeed the anharmonic terms neglected in the Weber comparison equations are of the order of $\delta $

2082: (it is an upper estimation at $X = \alpha /f$, i.e. at the boundaries of the intermediate energy

2083: region), thus the corrections are small according to (\ref{b9}). 

2084: The same kind of analysis can be performed in the over-barrier region (\ref{j2}), where one finds

2085: two imaginary largest modulus roots of the characteristic equation.

2086: The roots are given by (\ref{apen6}) with

2087: $\kappa _0$ and the small parameter $\tilde \delta $ defined according to (\ref{b12}), (\ref{b13}).

2088: 

2089: One simple observation helps to perform the same analysis for the intermediate energy region (\ref{j3}).

2090: Indeed, since the differences between the

2091: solutions to the characteristic equations for $\lambda $ (\ref{b2})

2092: and for $\kappa $ (\ref{b8}) determine the accuracy of our approach,

2093: let us compare the solutions. The roots of (\ref{b2}) at $X=0$ 

2094: \begin{eqnarray} 

2095: \label{apen7} 

2096: \lambda _{1 , 2} \simeq \pm \gamma \sqrt {\alpha + u_{12}} 

2097: \, ; \,

2098: \lambda _{3 , 4} \simeq \pm \gamma \sqrt {\alpha - u_{12}} 

2099: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2100: are moved upon the variation of $\alpha $ in the intermediate energy region

2101: from the real to imaginary coordinate axis. Analogously the roots of (\ref{b8})

2102: \begin{eqnarray} 

2103: \label{apen8} 

2104: \kappa _{1 , 2} \simeq \pm \frac{\gamma }{\sqrt 2} \left (\alpha + \sqrt {\alpha ^2 - u_{12}^2}\right )^{1/2} 

2105: \, ; \,

2106: \kappa _{3 , 4} \simeq \pm \frac{\gamma }{\sqrt 2} \left (\alpha - \sqrt {\alpha ^2- u_{12}^2}\right )^{1/2} 

2107: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2108: are moved along the real and imaginary axis in the tunneling and in the over-barrier regions respectively.

2109: 

2110: We conclude from the (\ref{apen7}) and (\ref{apen8}) that in the tunneling and in the over-barrier

2111: energy regions there is one-per-one correspondence between the roots $\lambda $ of (\ref{b2})

2112: and $\kappa $ of (\ref{b8}). Just this correspondence allows us to match smoothly the semiclassical

2113: solutions to the Schr\"odinger equation and the Weber functions found as the solutions to the

2114: comparison equations. It is not the case in the intermediate energy region where two roots of (\ref{b2})

2115: are real and two are imaginary ones having the same modulus, i.e. moving upon $\alpha $ variation along a circle

2116: with the radius $\gamma \sqrt {u_{12}/2}$. In this case the semiclassical solutions can be presented as certain

2117: linear combinations of the comparison equation solutions. We have found these combinations in the

2118: adiabatic basis in the section \ref{inter}.

2119: In this appendix we show how to solve the same problem in the diabatic basis, and it reveals

2120: more clearly and explicitely an estimate of the omitted terms in the equation and

2121: the areas where the solutions become wrong and where the matching procedure is carried out.

2122: Indeed the roots of (\ref{b8}) in the intermediate energy region (\ref{j3}) are

2123: \begin{eqnarray} 

2124: \label{apen9} 

2125: \kappa _{1 , 2} \simeq \pm \gamma \sqrt {\frac{u_{12}}{2}}\exp (i\varphi ) 

2126: \, ; \,

2127: \kappa _{3 , 4} \simeq \pm i \gamma \sqrt {\frac{u_{12}}{2}}\exp (-i\varphi )

2128: \, , 

2129: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2130: where

2131: \begin{eqnarray} 

2132: \label{apen10} 

2133: \tan \varphi = \sqrt {\frac{u_{12}- \alpha }{u_{12} + \alpha }}

2134: \, . 

2135: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2136: Correspondingly to these roots (\ref{apen10}) the arguments and the indices

2137: of the Weber functions (\ref{apen4}), (\ref{apen5}) read as

2138: \begin{eqnarray} 

2139: \label{apen11} 

2140: z_1 = z_2 = 2 \kappa _{int}\sqrt {\delta _{int}} \exp (- i \varphi /2)(X + (2 \kappa _{int})^{-1}\exp (-i \varphi )

2141: \, ; \,

2142: \end{eqnarray}

2143: \begin{eqnarray}

2144: \nonumber

2145: z_3 = z_4 = 2 \kappa _{int}\sqrt {\delta _{int}} \exp (i \varphi /2)(X + (2 \kappa _{int})^{-1}\exp (i \varphi )

2146: \, , 

2147: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2148: and

2149: \begin{eqnarray} 

2150: \label{apen12} 

2151: p_1 = p_2 - 1 = -1 - \frac{1}{4 \delta _{int}} \exp (- i \varphi )(1 + \delta _{int}^2 \exp (-2 i \varphi ))

2152: \, ;\,

2153: \end{eqnarray}

2154: \begin{eqnarray}

2155: \nonumber 

2156: p_4 = p_3 - 1 = -1 - \frac{1}{4 \delta _{int}} \exp (i \varphi )(1 + \delta _{int}^2 \exp (2 i \varphi ))

2157: \, , 

2158: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2159: where $\kappa _{int} = \gamma (u_{12}/2)^{1/2}$, and $\delta _{int} = (\gamma ^2 f)/(4 \kappa _{int}^3)$.

2160: 

2161: Using known due to Olver (\cite{OL59}, \cite{OL74})

2162: asymptotics of the Weber functions we are in the position to compare the semiclassical functions

2163: with the solutions to the comparison equations. The former functions determine by the exponential factor

2164: \begin{eqnarray} 

2165: \label{apen13} 

2166: F_0^{\pm }(X) = \gamma \sqrt {u_{12} \pm \alpha } X + \frac{\gamma f^2}{12 u_{12} \sqrt {u_{12} \pm \alpha }} X^3

2167: \, , 

2168: \end{eqnarray}                                                                                                  

2169: while the exponential factors entering corresponding asymptotics of the Weber functions are

2170: \begin{eqnarray} 

2171: \label{apen14} 

2172: F_{1 , 2}(X) = \gamma \sqrt {u_{12} \pm \alpha }(1 + \delta _{int}) X 

2173: \pm \kappa _{int}^2 \delta _{int}^2\exp (-2 i \varphi ) X^2 + \frac{\gamma f^2}{12 u_{12} \sqrt {u_{12} \pm \alpha }}

2174: \left [1 \pm \frac{\alpha }{u_{12}} - \delta _{int}\right ] X^3

2175: \, .

2176: \end{eqnarray}                  

2177: Let us consider now the intermediate subregion $S^\prime $, $|\alpha | \leq (f/\gamma )^{2/3}$, and $u_{12} \leq 2/\gamma $,

2178: (see (\ref{b22})), where (\ref{b9}) does not hold. Luckily, however, the asymptotically smooth matching is

2179: performed at small $|X| < \gamma ^{-1/2}$, where the comparison equation (\ref{apen2}), and, therefore,  

2180: the characteristic equation (\ref{b8}) are valid (although, $\delta $ is not a small parameter). In this subregion

2181: we have to take into consideration the term $R(\kappa , \delta )$ in (\ref{b8}). At $\alpha = 0$, and $u_{12} =0$,

2182: the characteristic equation has one double degenerate root $\kappa = 0$, or correspondingly in (\ref{apen2}), $a_2=0$.

2183: Thus the comparison equations are reduced to two decoupled Airy equations.

2184: Using known Olver asymptotics for the Weber functions with

2185: large arguments and indices \cite{OL59}, \cite{OL74}

2186: \begin{eqnarray} 

2187: \label{apen15} 

2188: D_p(z) \propto \exp \left [ - \frac{1}{2} \int \left (z^2 - 4\left (p + \frac{1}{2}\right )\right )^{1/2} dz \right ]

2189: \, 

2190: \end{eqnarray}                  

2191: we can find asymptotics to the solutions of (\ref{apen2})

2192: \begin{eqnarray} 

2193: \label{apen16} 

2194: \Phi _0 \propto \exp \left (-i \int \sqrt {a_0 + a_1X + a_2X^2} dx \right )

2195: \, 

2196: \end{eqnarray}                  

2197: valid at arbitrary values of the parameters $a_i$ ($a_2=0$ including).

2198: This relation (\ref{apen16}) provides asymptotically smooth matching of the semiclassical solutions

2199: with the Weber functions in the intermediate subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$ (where $\kappa $ is of the order

2200: of $\gamma \gg 1$, and with the Airy

2201: solutions in the subregion $S^\prime $, when $\kappa \simeq \sqrt \gamma $.

2202:                                                                                 

2203: This consideration provides the justification of our approach described in the main body of the paper.

2204: As it is seen from (\ref{apen13}), and (\ref{apen14}) at small $\alpha $ the accuracy of

2205: the asymptotically smooth matching of the semiclassical solutions with the Weber functions

2206: is of the order of $\delta _{int}$, and close to the energetic boundaries (\ref{j3}) of the

2207: intermediate region, anharmonic corrections ($X^3$) are increased.

2208: Thus we conclude that the matching for this case (\ref{j3}) can be performed either in the

2209: adiabatic basis (as it has been done in the section \ref{inter}) or in the diabatic basis as

2210: we have shown in this appendix. 

2211: The simplest way to prove the equivalence of the both representation is to transform into

2212: exponential forms the factors like $(X + Y_+)^{q_1}$ etc, entering the solutions (\ref{b27}), (\ref{b28}),

2213: found in the section \ref{inter}.

2214: In the both methods the accuracy is of the order of $\delta _{int}$,

2215: and the connection matrices presented in the appendix \ref{A} do not depend on the basis.

2216: 

2217: \begin{references}

2218: \bibitem{LL65} L.D.Landau, E.M.Lifshits, Quantum Mechanics (non-relativistic

2219: theory), Pergamon Press, New York (1965). 

2220: \bibitem{NU84} E.E.Nikitin, S.Ya.Umanskii, Theory of slow atomic

2221: collisions, Springer Series in Chemical Physics, {\bf 30}, Springer, Berlin (1984).                             

2222: \bibitem{BE84} I.B.Bersuker, The Jahn-Teller effect and vibronic interactions

2223: in modern chemistry, Plenum Press, New York (1984).

2224: \bibitem{BM94} V.A.Benderskii, D.E.Makarov, C.A.Wight, Chemical

2225: Dynamics at Low Temperatures, Willey-Interscience, New York (1994).

2226: \bibitem{ZE94} A.H.Zewail, Femtochemistry: Ultrafast Dynamics of Chemical

2227: bonds, World Scientific, Singapore (1994).

2228: \bibitem{ZN94} C.Zhu, H.Nakamura, J.Chem. Phys., {\bf 101}, 4855 (1994),

2229: ibid, {\bf 101}, 10630 (1994).

2230: \bibitem{GG01} S.Griller, C.Gonera, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 63}, 052101 (2001).

2231: \bibitem{ON01} V.I.Osherov, H.Nakamura, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 63}, 052710 (2001).

2232: \bibitem{SK02} K.Saito, Y.Kayanuma, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 65}, 033407 (2002).

2233: \bibitem{GS92} B.M.Garraway, S.Stenholm, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 45}, 364 (1992).  

2234: \bibitem{DH98} E.W.G.Diau, J.L.Heren, Z.H.Kim, A.H.Zewail, Science, {\bf 98}, 847 (1998).

2235: \bibitem{BO03} L.N.Bulaevskii, G.Ortiz, Phys. Rev. Lett., {\bf 90}, 040401 (2003).

2236: \bibitem{MC03} R.J.McMahon, Science, {\bf 299}, 833 (2003).

2237: \bibitem{PK61} V.L.Pokrovskii, I.M.Khalatnikov, JETP,

2238: {\bf 13}, 1207 (1961). 

2239: \bibitem{BN65} B.K.Bykhovskii, E.E.Nikitin, M.Ya.Ovchinnikova, JETP, {\bf 20}, 500

2240: (1965). 

2241: \bibitem{NI68} E.E.Nikitin, Chem. Phys.

2242: Lett., {\bf 2}, 402 (1968). 

2243: \bibitem{OV65} M.Ya.Ovchinnikova, Dokl. Phys. Chem., {\bf 161}, 259 (1965).

2244: \bibitem{ZN92} C.Zhu, H.Nakamura, N.Re, V.Aquilanti,

2245: J.Chem. Phys., {\bf 97}, 1892 (1992); C.Zhu, H.Nakamura, ibid, {\bf 97}, 8497 (1992). 

2246: \bibitem{ZN93}

2247: C.Zhu, H.Nakamura, J.Chem. Phys., {\bf 98}, 6208 (1993). 

2248: \bibitem{VG96} N.V.Vitanov, B.M.Garraway, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 53}, 4288 (1966).

2249: \bibitem{BV02} V.A.Benderskii, E.V. Vetoshkin, E.I.Kats, JETP, {\bf 95}, 645 (2002).

2250: \bibitem{BV03} V.A.Benderskii, E.V. Vetoshkin, E.I.Kats, JETP, {\bf 97}, 232 (2003).

2251: \bibitem{HE62} J.Heading, An Introduction to Phase-Integral

2252: Methods, Wiley - Interscience, London (1962).

2253: \bibitem{AS92} V.M.Akulin, W.P.Schleich, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 46}, 4110 (1992). 

2254: \bibitem{PO77} A.M.Polyakov, Nucl.Phys. B, {\bf 129},

2255: 429 (1977).

2256: \bibitem{CO85} S.Coleman, Aspects of Symmetry, Cambridge University Press,

2257: Cambridge (1985).

2258: \bibitem{FE64} M.V.Fedoryuk, Proc. Russian Acad. of

2259: Sci., {\bf 158}, 540 (1964). 

2260: \bibitem{FE65} M.V.Fedoryuk, Proc. Russian Acad. of Sci., {\bf 162}, 287

2261: (1965). 

2262: \bibitem{FE66} M.V.Fedoryuk, Russian Math. Survey, {\bf 21}, 1 (1966). 

2263: \bibitem{BK02} V.A.Benderskii, E.I.Kats, Phys. Rev. E, {\bf 65}, 036217 (2002).  

2264: \bibitem{FS97} K.Fujikawa, H.Suzuki, Phys. Rev. A, {\bf 56}, 3436 (1997).

2265: \bibitem{OL59} F.W.J.Olver, J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand., {\bf 63 B}, 131 (1959). 

2266: \bibitem{OL74}

2267: F.W.J. Olver, Asymptotics and Special Functions, Acad. Press., New York (1974). 

2268: \bibitem{EM53} A.Erdelyi,

2269: W.Magnus, F.Oberhettinger, F.G. Tricomi, 

2270: Higher Transcendental Functions, vol.1 - vol.3, McGraw Hill, New

2271: York (1953). 

2272: \bibitem{MI76} W.H.Miller (ed.), Non-adiabatic processes in molecular

2273: collisions, Plenum Press, New York (1976).

2274: \bibitem{FR80} K.F.Freed, Adv. Chem. Phys., {\bf 42}, 207 (1980).

2275: \bibitem{ME80} J.Jortner, R.D.Levine, Adv. Chem. Phys., {\bf 42}, 1 (1980).

2276: \bibitem{JL81} J.Jortner, R.D.Levine, Adv. Chem. Phys., {\bf 47}, 1 (1981).

2277: \bibitem{ZT01} C.Zhu, Y.Teranishi, H.Nakamura, Adv. Chem. Phys., {\bf 117}, 127

2278: (2001).

2279: 

2280: 

2281: \end{references} 

2282: 

2283: 

2284: \newpage

2285: 

2286: \centerline{Figure Captions.}

2287: 

2288: Fig. 1

2289: 

2290: Potentials in the vicinity of the diabatic potentials

2291: crossing point $U^{\# }$:

2292: 

2293: The diabatic potentials (thin lines, 1,2), the adiabatic potentials

2294: (bold lines, 3,4) by bold solid lines,

2295: the adiabatic coupling energy $U_{12}$, and

2296: $E _0$ is the characteristic zero-point oscillations energy

2297: in the parabolic barrier approximated the lower adiabatic potential

2298: near its top. The tunneling energy $E$ region is shown by a

2299: broken line.

2300: 

2301: 

2302: Fig. 2

2303: 

2304: The diabatic level crossing phenomena

2305: 

2306: (a) bound initial and final states;

2307:  

2308: (b) bound initial and decay final states. 

2309: 

2310: Fig. 3

2311: 

2312: Connection matrices for the tunneling energy region:

2313: 

2314: (a) in the WKB approach to the lower states, where $M^{\pm }$ are the connection matrices

2315: for the linear turning points, and $U_c$ for the crossing point;

2316: the shift matrices are depicted as arrows, in the classically accessible regions 

2317: $L_L$ and $L_R$, and in the classically forbidden region $F_L$ and $F_R$ (for the

2318: upper states no real-valued turning points);

2319: 

2320: (b) in the instanton type method one has two connection matrices $M_{L/R}^{(2)}$ for the

2321: second order turning points and shift matrices $F_L$ and $F_R$ in the classically

2322: forbidden region.

2323: 

2324: Fig. 4

2325: 

2326: Connection matrices for the over-barrier energy region.

2327: The shift matrices from the crossing point to the inner turning points

2328: are designated by $L$ (all other notations are the same as in the Fig.3).

2329: 

2330: Fig. 5

2331: 

2332: Connection matrices for the intermediate energy region (like 

2333: in the tunneling region no real valued turning points for the upper states). 

2334: 

2335: 

2336: 

2337: 

2338: Fig.6

2339: 

2340: The matching of the asymptotic solutions in the tunneling region

2341: for the diabatic levels crossing shown in Fig. 1a:

2342: 

2343: 1 - the function $\Phi _L^+(X) \sqrt {2\pi }/\Gamma (1 + \nu )$;

2344: 

2345: 2- the function $\Phi _L^-(X)$;

2346: 

2347: 3 - the function $\Phi _R^+(X) \sqrt {2\pi }/\Gamma (1 + \nu )$;

2348: 

2349: 4 - the function $\Phi _R^-(X)$;

2350: 

2351: $1^\prime $ - the function $\exp (k_0 X)D_{-1 - \nu }(\beta X)$;

2352: 

2353: $2^\prime $ - the function $\exp (k_0 X)D_{-1 - \nu }(-\beta X)$;

2354: 

2355: $3^\prime $ - the function $\exp (-k_0 X)D_{-1 - \nu }(\beta X)$;

2356: 

2357: $4^\prime $ - the function $\exp (-k_0 X)D_{-1 - \nu }(-\beta X)$.

2358: 

2359: 

2360: Fig.7

2361: 

2362: $\Gamma _n$ versus $U_{12}$ for the quasi stationary states at the diabatic potentials $(1 + X)^2/2$ and

2363: $(1/2) - X$ crossing; (a) 1 - 4 are the level energies 0.042 , 0.125 , 0.208 , and 0.292 for the lower

2364: adiabatic potential; (b) $1^\prime - 3^\prime $ are the level energies 0.625 ; 0.708 ; 0792

2365: for the upper adiabatic potential.   

2366: 

2367: 

2368: Fig.8

2369:  

2370: Level displacements versus $U_{12}$

2371: for two diabatic crossing potentials

2372: $(1 \pm X)^2/2$. Dashed lines show the intermediate

2373: energy region (the subregion $S^{\prime \prime }$ is between the dashed lines, while

2374: the subregions $S^\prime $ are confined to the left

2375: pockets between the dashed and dotted-dashed lines); 

2376: dotted - dashed lines show also displacements for the

2377: top

2378: and for the bottom of the adiabatic potentials. $k$, $n$, and $n^\prime $

2379: are quantum numbers for the diabatic, and lower and upper adiabatic potentials.

2380: Note

2381: that shown in the figure  

2382: level displacements coincide with the error not exceeding $10 \% $  with the results of the numerical

2383: diagonalization in the basis of harmonic oscillator functions.

2384: 

2385: 

2386: \end{document}

2387: 

2388: 

2389: 

2390: 

2391: 

2392: 

2393: 

2394: 

2395: 

2396: