SciPost Submission Page
Quantum quench dynamics of the attractive onedimensional Bose gas via the coordinate Bethe ansatz
by Jan C. Zill, Tod M. Wright, Karen V. Kheruntsyan, Thomas Gasenzer, Matthew J. Davis
This Submission thread is now published as SciPost Phys. 4, 011 (2018)
Submission summary
As Contributors:  Matthew Davis · Thomas Gasenzer 
Arxiv Link:  http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09168v2 (pdf) 
Date accepted:  20171223 
Date submitted:  20171120 01:00 
Submitted by:  Davis, Matthew 
Submitted to:  SciPost Physics 
Academic field:  Physics 
Specialties: 

Approaches:  Theoretical, Computational 
Abstract
We use the coordinate Bethe ansatz to study the LiebLiniger model of a onedimensional gas of bosons on a finitesized ring interacting via an attractive deltafunction potential. We calculate zerotemperature correlation functions for seven particles in the vicinity of the crossover to a localized solitonic state and study the dynamics of a system of four particles quenched to attractive interactions from the idealgas ground state. We determine the time evolution of correlation functions, as well as their temporal averages, and discuss the role of bound states in shaping the postquench correlations and relaxation dynamics.
Ontology / Topics
See full Ontology or Topics database.Published as SciPost Phys. 4, 011 (2018)
Author comments upon resubmission
We appreciate the time and effort the three referees have invested in reading our manuscript, and the resulting suggestions for clarification and improvement. We have made changes in response to the majority of these suggestions, and explained our reasons for not making changes for those that remain in our responses to the reports. We believe that the manuscript has improved as a result.
We apologise for the length of time it has taken us to make the revisions. We hope that our work can now be accepted for publication.
Best regards,
Jan Zill, Tod Wright, Karen Kheruntsyan, Thomas Gasenzer, Matthew Davis.
List of changes
Summary of changes in response to referee reports

(full details in our individual responses to the reports)
+ Expanded the introduction to make a more explicit connection with our earlier work, and more detail about the contribution of this paper relative to others.
+ Added further explanation regarding the hump in momentum distributions for strongly interacting systems in Fig 2(c).
+ Added a summary to the end of section 4 and section 5 to highlight the key results.
+ Added text explaining the reason for the meanfield solution for \gamma = −0.21 in Fig 1(a) being broader than exact solution.
+ Revised the text regarding the k^4 scaling of the momentum in Fig. 2(c).
+ Commented on the more regular nature of $g^3$ relative to $g^2$ in Fig 5.
+ Expanded on the comparison with the ideal gas correlation function in Fig. 11(b).
Additional revisions to the manuscript:

+ Sec. 1: We removed a citation to "G. Dvali et al., Scrambling in the black hole portrait" as upon revisiting this we decided it does not bear on the point we are making in the text.
+ Sec. 3.1: We corrected references to "pink diamonds" in Fig. 1 to "pink triangles".
+ Sec. 4.2, we replaced: "energy difference between the twobody bound state {n_j} = {2,0} and the threebody bound state {n_j} = {1,0}" with "energy difference between the threebody bound state {n_j} = {1,0} and the predominant twobody bound state {n_j} = {2,0}".
+ Sec. 5, below Eq. (14), we added a sentence: "We note that in practice the sum in Eq. (14) runs over a finite set of energy eigenstates with populations C_{lambda_j}^2 exceeding some threshold value." (As although this detail should be clear enough at this point, it should be noted explicitly as in our previous Refs. [32, 33].)
+ Fig. 10, we replaced "strongcoupling thermodynamiclimit prediction for g(2)DE(0)" with the more accurate "strongcoupling (order1/gamma^3) thermodynamiclimit prediction for the stationary value of g(2)(0)".
+ Appendix A: We have slightly reordered the text around equations (15)(17) for clarity and everywhere replaced the symbol theta_0 with a capital Theta.
+ Appendix B: We added citations to references [42,43] for the concept of the string deviations.
+ Appendix B.3, above Eq. (32) we added the words "in the limit of small string deviations" to make this point more clear (and accurate).
+ We also made a few other very minor changes to wording and punctuation throughout the manuscript to make the presentation more clear.
Submission & Refereeing History
Published as SciPost Phys. 4, 011 (2018)
You are currently on this page
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 2 on 20171212 (Invited Report)
 Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:1705.09168v2, delivered 20171212, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.293
Report
I am satisfied with the current version of the paper, I think that the authors made all the possible efforts to improve it and the numerical results presented are the best they can produce. So I recommend this paper for publication in Scipost.
Anonymous Report 1 on 2017126 (Invited Report)
 Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:1705.09168v2, delivered 20171206, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.290
Report
I'm satisfied with the authors' response and changes in the manuscript.