SciPost Submission Page
(Non) equilibrium dynamics: a (broken) symmetry of the Keldysh generating functional
by Camille Aron, Giulio Biroli, Leticia F. Cugliandolo
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
Authors (as registered SciPost users):  Camille Aron 
Submission information  

Preprint Link:  http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.10800v2 (pdf) 
Date submitted:  20170719 02:00 
Submitted by:  Aron, Camille 
Submitted to:  SciPost Physics 
Ontological classification  

Academic field:  Physics 
Specialties: 

Approach:  Theoretical 
Abstract
We unveil the universal (modelindependent) symmetry satisfied by SchwingerKeldysh quantum field theories whenever they describe equilibrium dynamics. This is made possible by a generalization of the SchwingerKeldysh pathintegral formalism in which the physical time can be reparametrized to arbitrary contours in the complex plane. Strong relations between correlation functions, such as the fluctuationdissipation theorems, are derived as immediate consequences of this symmetry of equilibrium. In this view, quantum nonequilibrium dynamics  e.g. when driving with a timedependent potential  are seen as symmetrybreaking processes. The symmetrybreaking terms of the action are identified as a measure of irreversibility, defined at the level of a single quantum trajectory. Moreover, they are shown to obey quantum fluctuation theorems. These results extend stochastic thermodynamics to the quantum realm.
Current status:
Submission & Refereeing History
You are currently on this page
Reports on this Submission
Anonymous Report 2 on 2017103 (Invited Report)
 Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:1705.10800v2, delivered 20171003, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.254
Strengths
1Innovative formalism
2Detailed discussion of the latter
3 Interesting results on the characterisation of irreversibility
Weaknesses
1 Hard to read
2 Too technical for nonexperts.
Report
The manuscript by C. Aron et al. presents a generalization of the standard SchwingerKeldysh field theoretic formalism which involves a reparametrization of Keldysh contours (including the equilibrium branches) to generic contours in the complex plane. While similar analytic continuations have been historically used for example to derive various relations among Green’s functions and their convolutions, this idea is here exploited to its full power to derive universal symmetry relations satisfied by equilibrium theories and how taking the system out of equilibrium breaks them.
I think that overall the content of the paper and its results are very interesting and the paper should be published with minor revisions.
In particular, the paper is extremely technical and its style makes it at the moment hardly readable to nonexperts. It took me some time to navigate through it and digest its various parts. In particular the main physical result, which is in my opinion contained in Eq.(88)(91) (and the following fluctuation theorems), is very interesting. It is however only briefly announced in Sec.1.3 (referring to Eq.(102) though a lot of physics is contained much before that) as a “general expression for entropy production”, and later on as a “quantum generalisation of dissipated work” ( introduction of Sec.4), while it is very hard to see either one or the other in the concrete expressions, apart of course for the “slow” limit Eq.(95). The physical meaning of $\Sigma$ is still obscure the connection with other quantities and their fluctuation theorems appears unclear (e.g. Physical Review E 75, 050102(R) (2007) and generalisations).
In order to make the paper more readable, I would suggest to significantly revise the section 1.3 about “Main Results” which is now just an extended summary of the paper focusing for the greatest part on the formalism. I would suggest to rather put significant stress on the section on non equilibrium dynamics and on $S^{irr}$ or $\Sigma$ discussing its context, why it is important (including references), clarifying its physical meaning or at least its meaning in the various limits in some detail.
Requested changes
1 Revision of Sec.1.3 as detailed in my report
Anonymous Report 1 on 2017730 (Invited Report)
 Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:1705.10800v2, delivered 20170730, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.200
Strengths
1 very clear and precise derivations;
2 effort in making a technical, hard topic understandable to the readers.
Weaknesses
1 lacking of a concrete (even simple) application to a model of interest.
Report
This work extends previous lore on symmetry properties exhibited by the Keldysh action for systems at thermodynamic equilibrium. The topic has a long tradition, as also pointed out by the authors, and its main practical importance stands in the fact that nonequilibrium conditions break this symmetry and novel symmetrybreaking terms appearing in the action can help in enlarging physical insight.
This is achieved by the authors, extending to timedependent quantum systems preexistent expertise on the subject.
A nice feature of the work is its readability by fieldtheoretical experts that are not familiar with Keldysh formalism: the authors have done some effort in making their derivations clear stepbystep. This, however, has the downside that the community of quantum thermodynamics (which should be one of the main beneficiary of their findings) might have an hard time in understanding the core results. In view of this, and of the fact that ultimately such technical works should always present a spectrum of interesting applications, I would recommend the authors to go after the following suggestions:
1) a summary on physical findings and outreach of applications should be substantially enlarged in the introduction;
2) they should find and add to the manuscript a concrete application of Eqs. (929394), even a simple one (for example: one body, quantum, coupled to a thermal bath and to a timedependent external field), where the predictions of their main results can become of relevance for the debate (in the quantum thermodynamics community) concerning a proper, suitable definition of work and produced entropy in nonequilibrium settings.
This would help their work and their results to be easier spread and employed by the communities of interest.
Finally, as a speculative point, one might wonder whether the equilibrium symmetry can be spontaneously broken in some particular circumstances. This comes naturally to the mind after reading their work, since they realise an explicit breaking by adding an external timedependent drive. Do the authors have some insight in this direction? Would they like to add some comments in the conclusions about it?
Minor observations:
 in (15) the ‘;’ should be a typo;
 what do the authors mean by ‘thermal rotation’ in section 2.3?
 in 3.2 they mention the ‘thermofield’ formalism, which is always contrasted with the Keldysh one. Since the authors show an understanding about the differences between the two, they have a chance to clarify for the community this point, which to my understanding has not been yet well inspected; for instance, they can contextualise it, when they compare their main finding in the two formalisms (between Eqs. 42 and 43).
Requested changes
1 extend summary on physical contents;
2 provide a workable, interesting example.