Arxiv:1802.05931V1 [Quant-Ph]

Home , Diffusion Monte Carlo

arXiv:1802.05931v1 [quant-ph] 16 Feb 2018 tcatclysml ytmpoete,bt tzr and [ to zero temperature at tools finite both election properties, the system sample been stochastically have approaches Carlo Monte nw spoetrMneCro(M)[ (PMC) Carlo Monte projector as known decimation [ spatial matrix. hoc density ad the an for on protocol relies recently was which – method proposed, renormalization space approach corner renormalization the – spatial damping a uni- effective Furthermore, the the to to terms. and adds dynamics that Hamiltonian process tary stochastic a (MCWF) onto Function teraction Wave Carlo Monte [ the i.e product [ method, matrix ansatz the (MPS) on state based renormal- approach variational matrix alent [ density technique accurate the (DMRG) highly group via ization systems obtained one-dimensional were of results case the in dissipative [ of transitions nonequilibrium multitude phase a including to phenomena, rise coher- gives novel the dynamics incoherent between and competition steady ent the nonequilibrium con- a Here, external into (NESS). stationary it state of drives typically case the – the Liouville-von-Neumann ditions of in the – evolution by which time incoherent governed equation The or then is coherent channels. system of output exter- form an and to the input coupling in the environment is systems nal these of feature mon teto nrcn er,det h rgesi sev- in [ progress circuits superconducting the and gases, ions, to atomic trapped increasing ultracold due including areas, attracted years, experimental eral has recent systems in quantum attention open body ldol o ml ytmszs hl eea studies several [ While approximations mean-field numer- to sizes. restricted the system han- been small of have be for can spite only modeling in dled numerical and the rep- improvements, challenge, systems ous major The body a many resents super-operator. open the of Liouvillian with description associated the theoretical solution of reached, integrate the eigenvalue is find can null state can one one stationary First, second, the or until evolution ways. time different the two in tained 15 o lsd aitna ytm,vrosquantum various systems, Hamiltonian closed, For h td ftennqiiru yaiso many- of dynamics nonequilibrium the of study The eeal,tesed tt est arxcnb ob- be can matrix density state steady the Generally, , 16 rvndsiaieqatmMneCromto o pnqu open for method Carlo Monte quantum driven-dissipative A ,cnb sdwihurvl h ytmbt in- system-bath the unravels which used be can ], 1 nttt fPyis cl oyehiu Fédéral Lau Polytechnique de Ecole Physics, of Institute isptv w-iesoa Y pnmdlo lattice. on model spin of a efficiency XYZ the two-dimensional technique demonstrate dissipative initiator we Finally, introduce error. n and statistical the theory, on underlying observables density of m the the estimates The of providing thus evolution algorithm, systems. time Liouville-von-Neumann quantum the open of driven-dissipative of modeling edvlpara-ieFl ofiuainItrcinQuant Interaction Configuration Full real-time a develop We .INTRODUCTION I. 5 , 19 6 13 , ]. 20 , 14 .Acaso ehd generally methods of class A ]. .Atraiey stochastic a Alternatively, ]. 17 10 , – 18 lxnr Nagy Alexandra 12 ]. ,adteequiv- the and ], 21 1 – uhas such – ] 4 .Acom- A ]. 7 – 9 1 ], n icnoSavona Vincenzo and rbe [ problem [ (DMC) Carlo Monte diffusion r ope audwt eaiera at[ part real super-operator negative Liouvillian with case, valued the complex Liouvillian of are the eigenvalues In the where dominate. smallest-real- the will with part-eigenvalue eigenstate the in limit, that long-time fact, the the is Schrödinger equation imaginary-time epnst h ulegnau ouin–t h NESS the to – solution eigenvalue null [Table the to responds problem sign the alleviate significantly which [ to introduced proven was rad- protocol has a although sampling GFMC, different fea- and ically has DMC it with common temperature, in zero tures for [ technique systems projector correlated a As strongly other [ of introduced simulations simulation been chemistry has quantum (FCIQMC) for In- Carlo Configuration size. computa- Monte Full system called a teraction the approach in novel with results a exponentially Recently, which growing problem cost sign tional the from suf- fer may methods imaginary-time PMC the However, stochas- of Schrödinger evolution by equation. time temperature the zero sampling tically at properties [ state (GFMC) ground Carlo Monte tion optto ewe h oeetadichrn dynam- incoherent and coherent a this the non-trivial of between the of competition example from an resulting study transition as The phase interest dissipative attracted recently environment. has dissipative model interact- a Hamiltonian with lattice XYZ ing spin Heisenberg use two-dimensional the dimen- the a by demonstrate the simulate governed to we to order DDQMC, In bound of network system. not the tensor is of to sionality applicability contrary its trun- and not methods, sam- Hilbert-space does method it the matrix The density cate but wavefunction. complex-valued FCIQMC, the the of of of instead features elements the the ples of DDQMC driven- many (DDQMC). call shares Carlo we Monte which quantum systems, dissipative quantum open to proach sign same the matrix of elements density be possess valued to only. to problem complex expected sign be the the cannot as expect NESS. relevant, we the however, highly of case simulation this the In to techniques Carlo Monte 26 an EF) H11,Luan,Switzerland Lausanne, CH-1015, (EPFL), sanne uulfaueo h iuila yaisadthe and dynamics Liouvillian the of feature mutual A , nti ae,w eeo eltm CQCap- FCIQMC real-time a develop we paper, this In 30 u prahb pligi otedriven- the to it applying by approach our neulbimsed tt.W present We state. steady on-equilibrium I , diprac apigt euethe reduce to sampling importance nd .I ol hrfr entrlt pl projector apply to natural be therefore would It ]. 31 arx hnst asvl parallel massively a to thanks matrix, 32 .Nvrhls,tesg rbe sNP-hard is problem sign the Nevertheless, ]. to nbe tcatcsampling stochastic enables ethod mMneCroapoc o the for approach Carlo Monte um ,n sntcmltl ovdb FCIQMC. by solved completely not is ],and 1 24 nu systems antum 22 nbe oeigthe modeling enables – ] , 23 n re’ func- Green’s and ] 25 – 28 n o the for and ] 33 ,ti cor- this ], 29 , 30 ]. 2

Closed system Open system System Hamiltonian Liouvillian operator H = H† L Imaginary-time Real-time Dynamics ψ˙(τ)= −(Hˆ − E0)ψ(τ) ρˆ˙(t)= Lρˆ

Ground state Nonequilibrium steady state Long-time −τ(Hˆ −E0) τ→∞ Lt t→∞ limit e : ψin −−−−→ ψ0 e : ρin −−−→ ρss

Table I. A parallel is drawn between the imaginary-time evolution of closed hamiltonian systems and the real-time evolution of the quantum master equation for open quantum systems. In the case of open systems we assume, here and throughout this work, that a unique steady state exists. ics [18, 34]. The single-site Gutzwiller mean-field study the general solution of the equation is of the system predicts a phase transition from a paramag- ˆ netic phase to a magnetically ordered one [35, 36], while a |ψ(τ)i = e−Hτ |ψ(τ = 0)i . (2) recent analysis showed that this transition should survive in 2D and disappear in case of one-dimensional lattices Once expanded onto the basis spanned by the eigenvec- [37]. tors of the Hamiltonian {|φii}, the wavefunction results The paper is organized as follows. In Section II we give in a sum of exponentially decaying terms. In order to an overview of the original FCIQMC algorithm, setting prevent the ground state component from decaying in the basis to the formulation of DDQMC in Section III. the infinite time limit, a constant energy shift E0 can be In Section IV the initiator approach and the importance introduced, where E0 is the ground state energy. Since sampling are introduced. The method is then applied to the value of E0 is unknown in advance, one solves the the XYZ Heisenberg lattice in Section V and the results equation with an arbitrary shift S are compared to those obtained by an optimized exact di- agonalization method and by quantum trajectories. We |ψ˙ i = −(Hˆ − S1)|ψi . (3) finally discuss the effectiveness of the approach and offer some concluding remarks. During the simulated time evolution the value of the S is slowly adjusted in order to maintain a constant nor- malization and – at convergence – provides an estimate of the actual ground state energy E0. II. OVERVIEW OF THE FCIQMC FCIQMC stochastically samples the first order Euler ALGORITHM approximation of eq. (3). Furthermore, the algorithm works on a discrete basis set {|φii}, and the Hamilto- nian and the wavefunction are projected onto the space We begin by giving a short overview of the FCIQMC spanned by the basis elements method. For a more complete derivation readers are referred to Refs. [25, 26, 31, 38, 39]. In general, PMC methods are stochastic implementations of the power τ method which aims at computing the expectation val- ψ(τ)= ci |φii . (4) i ues of operators on the dominant eigenstate of the pro- X jector. They prove to be particularly useful when the The evolution of the expansion coefficients is then gov- Hilbert-space is so large that the storage of matrix and erned by vector representations becomes computationally unfeasible. PMC techniques get around this memory limitation by storing at any instant in time only a random sample c(τ+∆τ) = [1 − ∆τ(H − S)]cτ − ∆τ H cτ , (5) of vector and matrix elements. The expectation values i ii i ij j j6=i are then computed as time averages. In common with X PMC, FCIQMC also performs the long-time integration where H = hφ |Hˆ |φ i. of the imaginary-time Schrödinger equation. However, ij i j In order to stochastically represent eq. (5), we intro- unlike PMC, this is achieved with a completely different duce a fundamental unit called walker. Each walker has sampling strategy. a sign (q = ±1), and contributes to sampling the ampli- Consider the imaginary-time Schrödinger equation (we + tude of one of the |φii basis states. Let ni be the number assume here and in what follows ~ = 1) − of walkers with positive sign on a given state and ni that of walkers with negative sign. Then the amplitude of a |ψ˙ i = −Hˆ |ψi , (1) basis state in the expansion is proportional to the net 3

+ − walker number residing there: ci ∝ ni − ni . Starting III. DRIVEN-DISSIPATIVE QUANTUM from an initial distribution, the walkers evolve following MONTE CARLO a set of rules designed to sample the time evolution of eq. (5) over a time step. This dynamics is then iterated We describe now how the dynamics of open quantum until convergence is reached. systems following the Liouville-von-Neumann equation We point out here, that this approach sets an up- can be cast into a Monte Carlo algorithm. per bound to the time step. Since the initial state is driven into the dominant eigenstate of the projector, the solution will converge to the ground state only if A. Theory |1 − ∆τ(Ei − S)| ≤ 1 for all eigenvalues Ei. This corresponds to the requirement ∆τ ≤ 1/∆, where ∆ is the The general problem we aim to solve is that of quantum full spectral width of the Hamiltonian under considera- system with several degrees of freedom, in the presence of tion. external driving ﬁelds and Markovian coupling to the en- The rules for evolving the walker population can be vironment. The evolution of the steady matrixρ ˆ is then summarized as follows. At each time step we loop over governed by the Liouville-von-Neumann master equation the entire walker population and perform the following [40] operations:

(i) Spawning: For a walker residing on site i a con- dρˆ = L(ˆρ)= −i[H,ˆ ρˆ]+ L (ˆρ) . (7) nected site j is chosen randomly and a spawning dt i i event is made possible with a probability p(j|i) ∝ X |H |∆τ (connected sites are linked by non-zero ji The dissipative part of the dynamics is described by off-diagonal Hamiltonian elements Hij ). If the at- tempt is successful, walkers are born at site j with sign q = sign(H )q . If p(j|i) > 1 then the cor- γ j ji i L (ˆρ)= − i Fˆ†Fˆ , ρˆ − 2Fˆ ρˆFˆ† , (8) responding integer number of walkers are realized i 2 i i i i i i deterministically, and the fractional part stochasti- X X hn o i cally [25]. where Fî are the jump operators, characterizing the tran- (ii) Clone/Death: For each walker on a given site, a sitions induced by the environment, and γi are the corre- death event is sampled with probability sponding transition rates. Contrary to the Hamiltonian, the Liouville superoperator is not hermitian. Dissipa- tive systems evolve under a one parameter semi-group Lt pdeath(i) = ∆τ(Hii − S) . (6) (e ,t > 0), generated by the Liouvillian, resulting in a time evolution which is no longer unitary. Due to its If pdeath > 0, the walker is removed from the pop- non-hermiticity, L has complex eigenvalues with negative ulation. If pdeath < 0, a walker of opposite sign real part. It can be shown that the density matrix, under is created. In case |pdeath| > 1, the integer part very general assumptions will evolve into an asymptotic of pdeath is realized deterministically, and the frac- steady state, corresponding to the zero eigenvalue of L tional part stochastically. [33]. By introducing an additional shift into eq. (7) for a (iii) Annihilation: pairs of walkers of opposite sign re- diagonal population control, siding on the same basis state are annihilated. Therefore, at the end of each time step, each state dρˆ = L(ˆρ) − Sρˆ = L(ˆρ) . (9) is solely occupied by walkers having the same sign. dt One of the most significant advantages of FCIQMC is Eq. (9) can be stochastically samplede similarly to the due to the aforementioned annihilation procedure. This Hamiltonian case and the NESS is obtained as a Monte step does not alter the evolution of the ground state, but Carlo average of the long time limit. As in the case of was shown to be crucial in systems with sign problem [26]. FCIQMC, we take the first-order Euler approximation, The sign problem in FCIQMC simulation is manifested as the fast growth of an unphysical solution dominating ρˆ(t + ∆t)=ˆρ(t)+ L(ˆρ) · ∆t , (10) the ground-state result. The annihilation procedure can suppress this growth and allow the simulation to con- and we introduce a set of walkerse which now sample the verge to the physical solution, but only if a minimal and amplitudes of basis operators |φiihφj |, from now on re- system-dependent walker population is present. Hence- ferred as “configurations”. forth, building on the massively parallel nature of the The stochastic sampling of the unnormalized density method, a computationally efficient implementation can matrix gives access to the expectation value of any quan- offer an insight into the study of systems with severe sign tum mechanical observable. The expectation value of problem. observable Oˆ at a given instant in time is computed by 4

makes the extra memory allocation negligible (for an occupied site i it is necessary to store all the possible con- Tr[Oˆρˆ(t)] ρij (t)Oji hOî(t)= = i,j . (11) nected states with the corresponding probabilities). Ef- Tr[ˆρ(t)] P i ρii(t) ficient algorithms for binomial and multinomial random number generation are also present in the literature [41– Once the simulation has asymptoticallyP approached 43]. the steady state – i.e. the shift S reached the steady state eigenvalue of the Liouvillian, S = 0 – the numerator and the denominator can be averaged sep- C. Algorithm arately over a sufficiently large number of iteration steps. The dynamics of the walker population is determined by a set of rules designed to stochastically sample B. Multinomial formalism eq. (10). However, the elements of the density matrix are complex valued. Similarly to [29], we can sample a complex density matrix with two types of walkers, re- The original FCIQMC sampling protocol was de- spectively for the real and imaginary parts. If the density scribed, e.g. in Ref. [25]. Here we developed a variant matrix is expressed in vectorized form, the shifted Liou- which optimizes the computational cost of the evolution villian superoperator can be expressed im matrix form generated by off-diagonal Hamiltonian elements. In the using Kronecker products as [44] followings we will refer to this variant as multinomial formalism. In the original scheme, in order to perform the stochas- L = − i(1 ⊗ Hˆ − Hˆ T ⊗ 1) − S · 1 ⊗ 1 tical evolution induced by the off-diagonal Hij elements γ (15) + i (2Fˆ∗ ⊗ Fˆ − 1 ⊗ Fˆ†Fˆ − FˆT Fˆ∗ ⊗ 1) . in eq. (5), the algorithm requires a loop over the entire e 2 i i i i i i i walker population at each time step. This method be- X comes computationally heavy as the walker population Then eq. (9) can be written in the form of increases. Here we introduce an alternative strategy for the dρij ij lm spawning generation. Let p(j|i) be the probability of = L ρij + L ρlm , (16) dt ij ij choosing the j-th child starting from site i l,m=6 i,j X lm e e where Lij are the matrix elements of the superoperator. |H |∆τ |H |∆τ p(j|i)= ji = ji . (12) Here ρij represents the now complex valued population k |Hki|∆τ Ptot on a givene configuration |φiihφj |. For the sampling protocol we use the multinomial for- i Then the number ofP actual spawning events Nsp occur- malism, introduced in Sec. IIIB. Let us refer to this ring for Ni walkers residing on site i is determined by a scheme as a function stochastic process following a binomial distribution Multinomial lm Mlm = (Aij ) , (17)

i Ni! N i which returns randomly drawn number of walkers i sp Ni−Nsp f(Nsp; Ni, Ptot)= i i Ptot (1 − p) . spawned from configuration ij to lm given the matrix el- Nsp!(Ni − Nsp)! (13) ement connecting them. At each time step, we loop over Then the N i walkers are divided into groups the list of currently occupied configurations and perform sp the following steps: {M1 ...Ml}, where l is the number of states connected to the starting one by a non-zero Hamiltonian element. (i) Spawning: Consider the complex walker popula- For each group, Mj children are spawned to the j-th site tion residing on ρij and perform spawning to all with sign qj = sign(Hji)qi. The set of integers {Mj} is the connected configurations. The real (ℜ) and drawn randomly following the multinomial distribution lm imaginary (ℑ) parts of Lij are considered in turn and two spawning attempts are realized respec- i tively for real and imaginarye parents. The number fM (M1 ...Ml; Nsp,p(1|i) ...p(l|i)) = of walkers spawned to each ρlm are determined by N i ! (14) = sp p(1|i)M1 ×···× p(l|i)Ml . the multinomial formalism. M1!···Ml!

Therefore, in each time step we perform a loop over For real parents the currently populated basis states rather than the whole walker population. In systems with local coupling N ℜ = Multinomial(ℜ(Llm)) the Hamiltonian is represented by a highly sparse ma- lm ij (18) lm trix, and a computationally eﬀective state representation " sign = sign(ℜ(ρij )ℜ(Lij )) e e 5

0.5 N ℑ = Multinomial(ℑ(Llm)) lm ij (19) lm " sign = sign(ℜ(ρij )ℑ(Lij )) e 0.45 and for imaginary parent walkerse 0.4

ℜ Multinomial lm Nlm = (ℑ(Lij )) (20) 0.35 lm " sign = −sign(ℑ(ρij )ℑ(Lij )) e e 0.3 N ℑ = Multinomial(ℜ(Llm)) lm ij (21) lm 0.25 " sign = sign(ℑ(ρij )ℜ(Lij )) e 0 200 400 600 800 1000 ℜ ℑ where Nlm and Nlm are thee number of real and imaginary walkers being spawned to configuration FIG. 1. The initiator approach used to extrapolate the My magnetization in case of the 4×4 dissipative XYZ Heisenberg- ρlm and ’sign’ indicates the sign of the progeny. model. Parameters of the model: Jx/γ = 0.225, Jy/γ = (ii) Clone/Death: This step is required as a real (imag- 0.335, Jz/γ = 0.25, h = 0.1, θ = 0. Parameters of the simula- 6 inary) walker can produce an imaginary (real) tion: p = 2.5, with a population of 10 walkers. The straight walker on the same configuration. The spawn- line is a linear extrapolation of the lowest initiator values. ing occurs on-site with a population determined by the binomial distribution. The real and imaginary ij parts of Lij are considered in turn and two spawning attempts are realized respectively for the real and imaginarye population. IV. INITIATOR APPROACH & IMPORTANCE (iii) Annihilation: on a given site the real and imagi- SAMPLING nary population are considered in turn, and pairs of walkers having opposite signs are removed from the simulation. The algorithm described in Section III allows the Unlike in FCIQMC, here the target value of the diagonal stochastical sampling of the steady state density matrix shift S is known. In the infinite time limit the mas- of open quantum systems whose dynamics follows the ter equation is assumed to drive the density matrix into Liouville-von-Neumann equation. However, with the in- the steady state, which by definition belongs to the zero crease in the number of configurations, the walker pop- eigenvalue of the Lindbladian. Therefore, the time evolu- ulation tends to become dilute, resulting in a situation tion of the shift S will indicate if convergence is reached where the simulation contains only a few walkers per ba- and one can start gathering statistics on the observables. sis operator. This leads to an increased statistical error As before, the shift is slowly adjusted in order to main- thus reducing dramatically the accuracy of the sampling. tain a constant walker population. Since estimators for In order to address this issue one needs to increase the most operators of interest only receive contributions from walker number in the system which – with large system walkers on or near the diagonal elements, we chose to sizes – becomes computationally unfeasible. control the amount of population distributed along the In order to overcome this issue two different methods diagonal of the density matrix. The value of the shift were introduced: initiator approach and importance sam- is then adjusted according to the familiar shift-update pling. Each of the techniques reduces the minimal re- algorithm implemented in FCIQMC [25] calculations quired walker population by decreasing the number of simultaneously occupied configurations, however the strat- δ N (t) egy of selecting the configurations to be sampled is fun- S(t)= S(t − ∆t)+ log w , (22) ∆t N (t − ∆t) damentally different. The initiator approach allows the w significant configurations to emerge naturally during the where δ is a damping parameter, and Nw is the total simulation, whilst importance sampling gives the possi- weight of real walkers residing on diagonal density matrix bility to drive the walker population to a selected subset elements. The method does not have a built-in constraint of presumably relevant configurations. on the diagonal elements being real. The value of the These methods can improve the sampling quality with imaginary part fluctuates around zero and its expectation great success, however, they have to be applied carefully, value naturally vanishes during the simulation. as both introduce a bias on the result. 6

A. Initiator approach 10 6 4.5

Our initiator approach is based on an FCIQMC adap- 4 tation detailed in [28]. For the newly spawned walkers an additional survival criteria is introduced which can dra- 3.5 matically reduce the population required to reach con- 3 vergence. Some of the basis operators are tagged as 2.5 ’initiator’ which have the ability to spawn progeny onto unoccupied basis states. However, progeny of the non- 2 initiator states can only survive if they spawn to basis 1.5 operators which were previously occupied or to diagonal elements. All the diagonal basis operators are initiators 1 by deﬁnition, and during the simulation a basis element 0.5 DDQMC + initiator + importance s. might become initiator, if its population exceeds a preset DDQMC 0 value (Ilimit). 0 1 2 3 4 This method results in a series of systematically im- 10 4 provable approximations which will tend to the original algorithm in three limits:

FIG. 2. The amount of simultaneously occupied density (i) with decreasing Ilimit every basis element will become initiator. All the progeny survives regardless matrix elements, with and without using the initiator approach and importance sampling in the case of the 4 × 4 XYZ of the parent state, which is equivalent to the orig- Heisenberg lattice. Parameters of the model: Jx/γ = 0.225, inal method; Jy/γ = 0.225, Jz/γ = 0.25, h = 0.1, θ = 0. Parameters of the 8 simulation: p = 1.5, Ilimit = 25; 75 with a population of 10 (ii) with increasing total population all basis element walkers. will acquire walkers, therefore, all spawned children will survive regardless of the ﬂag of the parent state; The time evolution of the importance-sampled density matrix then becomes (iii) extending the initiator space by deﬁnition will result again in all the basis operators becoming ini-

tiators, consequently all progeny will survive. dρij ij lm 1 = Lij ρij + wij Lij ρlm , (24) dt wlm l,m=6 i,j Setting an initiator limit, introduces a dynamical trun- e X cation on the available basis operators, leading to a bi- e e e e which is fully analogous to eq. (16) and can be simulated ased result. In order to compute the unbiased expecta- by the DDQMC method. The expectation value of an tion values, we progressively decrease the initiator limit observable Oˆ is thus in different simulations and fit the estimated expecta- ρeij tion values, thus extrapolating the value in the limit ij w Oji hOî = ij . (25) Ilimit → 0 (Figure 1). P i ρii In this work we introduce aP single importance sampling e B. Importance sampling parameter p > 0, and give all the off-diagonal elements −p a weight wij = e . Meanwhile the diagonal coefficients We start by identifying the basis elements whose sam- are not altered. This strategy focuses on sampling the pling needs to be improved. Then a straightforward way diagonal density matrix elements and gives an easy ac- to do so is by reducing the probability of spawning out cess to tune the strength of the importance sampling. these configurations. Walkers that do reside on unessen- Fig. 2 shows the amount of simultaneously occupied tial elements are given a correspondingly larger weight, density matrix elements before and after using the ini- hence the expectation values of the observables will be tiator approach and importance sampling given the XYZ unchanged. We define the following simple importance Heisenberg lattice model that we describe later. sampling procedure. The evolution of the density matrix in the DDQMC formalism follows eq. (16). In order to associate weights V. RESULTS to the matrix elements depending on their importance we multiply them a factor wij In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of DDQMC, we simulated the two-dimensional spin-1/2 XYZ Heisen- berg lattice in the presence of a dissipating channel which ρij → ρij = wij ρij . (23) tends to relax each spin into the |sz = −1/2i state.

e 7

a) -0.5 2x2 Exact -0.9 2x2 DDQMC 3x3 Exact -0.6 3x3 DDQMC 4x4 MCWF 4x4 DDQMC -0.95 -0.7 Exact DDQMC -1 -0.8 b) -0.9 -0.9

-0.95 -1

0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 -1 0 1 2 3 4 10 4

FIG. 3. The exact and the DDQMC magnetization val- FIG. 4. The magnetization Mz per site as a function of the ues for the 3 × 3 dissipative XYZ Heisenberg lattice with normalized coupling parameter Jy/γ for diﬀerent lattice sizes. periodic boundary condition. The coupling parameters are The other coupling parameters are Jx/γ = 0.225 and Jz/γ = Jx/γ = 0.225, Jy/γ = 0.335 and Jz/γ = 0.25. The diagonal 0.25. The exact (2×2 and 3×3) and numerical (4×4) results population was limited to (a) 504 and (b) 206 walker. are plotted for comparison.

The model follows the Liouville-von-Neumann equa- case of the 4×4 lattice, the magnetization is compared to tion and the Hamiltonian is governed by (~ = 1) those obtained by Monte Carlo wave function technique.

ˆ ˆx ˆx ˆy ˆy ˆz ˆz A. Magnetization in the steady-state H = JxSi Sj + JySi Sj + JzSi Sj (26) hi,ji X The steady-state magnetization per site is defined as dˆρ γ = −i[H,ˆ ρˆ] − Sˆ+Sˆ−, ρˆ − 2Sˆ−ρˆSˆ+ (27) dt 2 j j j j j X hn o i N 1 z Mz = Tr(ˆρσˆ ), (28) ˆα N i where Si are the spin operators matrices acting on the i=1 i-th spin, Jα are the coupling constants between near- X ˆ± est neigbour spins, γ is the dissipation rate, and Sj = where N is the number of lattice sites. ˆx ˆy Figure 3(a) shows the magnetization of the 3 × 3 Sj ± iSj . Recently, the system has attracted significant inter- lattice as a function of the Monte Carlo iteration step 4 est since the competition between the coherent Hamil- with a diagonal population of 50 walkers. The exact tonian dynamics and the incoherent spin flips leads to solution obtained by directly solving the linear system is 6 a dissipative phase transition. Due to the anisotropy, also plotted. Increasing the diagonal population to 20 the Hamiltonian part induces a nonzero spin expectation reduces the statistical error as seen in the corresponding value on the xy plane, while dissipation would drive each result in Fig. 3(b). site to the spin down state. This competition leads to In Fig. 4, we present the magnetization per site Mz as a phase transition from a paramagnetic phase (with no a function of the normalized coupling constant Jy/γ for magnetization in the xy plane) to a magnetically orga- square lattices of different size. The exact and MCWF nized phase (which presents a finite polarization in the solutions are also plotted and are in agreement with the xy plane). Both the Gutzwiller mean-field theory [35– results obtained by the DDQMC algorithm. 37] and the corner space renormalization method [18, 34] predicts this dissipative phase transition. In order to study the model we chose three different B. Angularly-averaged susceptibility lattice sizes: 2 × 2, 3 × 3 and 4 × 4. The first two sizes are small enough to derive an exact numerical solution of Following the scheme presented in [18], we study the the master equation in the steady state, thus allowing a system in the presence of an applied magnetic field in the direct check of the accuracy of our DDQMC results. In xy plane 8

VI. OUTLOOK 7.5 2x2 7 3x3 The DDQMC method presented here, constitutes a ba- 4x4 6.5 sic PMC approach to the non-equilibrium steady state of open quantum systems. As such, it contains only the 6 basic building blocks of the PMC method, and its effec- 5.5 tiveness may be considerably improved by introducing 5 any of the several tools that are common in other PMC 4.5 schemes. Here, we describe as an outlook three such pos- 4 sible improvements. The first possible improvement consists in the imple- 3.5 mentation of a mixed-estimator scheme, in analogy with 3 the one used in projector and diffusion Monte Carlo to 2.5 find the ground state of Hamiltonian systems [19–21]. 2 Here, a possible mixed estimator strategy may consist 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 in formally carrying out an exact real-time evolution, starting from a DDQMC sampled density matrix. More specifically, let us assume that at time t the current DDQMC sample of the density matrix isρ ˆ(t). We can formally apply the exact time evolution for an additional FIG. 5. The angle-averaged susceptibility χav per site as time T and then evaluate the expectation value of an a function of the normalized coupling parameter Jy/γ for ˆ different lattice sizes. The other coupling parameters are observable O at time t + T as Jx/γ = 0.225 and Jz /γ = 0.25. Each point on the plot was Tr(Oeˆ LT ρˆ(t)) Tr(Oeˆ LT ρˆ(t)) determined by 21 simulations, which corresponds to 525 calcu- hOî = = , (33) lations per lattice size. For each point, we considered 3+3+1 Tr(eLT ρˆ(t)) Tr(ˆρ(t)) values of the applied field (3 for each in-plane direction and 1 with no external field), and for each setting an extrapolation where the second equality results from the trace pre- over three different initiator values was carried out. serving character of the time evolution. In the limit T → ∞, Eq. (33) provides the steady-state expectation value independently of the actual value of the density Hˆ = h(cos(θ)ˆσx + sin(θ)ˆσy) . (29) matrixρ ˆ(t), when assuming that a unique steady ext i i state exists. A mixed estimator strategy would then i X consist in building a “trial” observable OˆT which can The linear response is then summarized in the 2 × 2 still be efficiently computed element-wise, and such susceptibility tensor LT that OˆT ≃ OˆH (T ) = Oeˆ . Here, OˆH (t) represents ∂Mα the Heisenberg picture of the observable Oˆ and, for χαβ = , (30) ∂hβ h=0 time-independent Liouvillian maps, it obeys the adjoint ˆ dOH (t) † ˆ quantum master equation = L OH (t)[45]. with α, β = x, y. dt It is convenient to calculate one single quantity, the Hence, the mixed estimator approach in the present angularly-averaged susceptibility case would require the knowledge of an approximate time dependence for OˆH (t), which may be obtained, for instance, from a time-dependent variational principle 2π 1 ∂|M~ (h,θ)| [46, 47] applied to a separable or short-range-correlated χav = dθ , (31) 2π 0 ∂h h=0 ansatz for the observable. Z where A second improvement would consist in using a “guiding density matrix” for the importance sampling. A natural choice for such a guiding density matrix would ∂|M~ (h,θ)| χxx cos(θ)+ χxy sin(θ) again be a variational ansatz, as the variational principle = . (32) for the NESS is now well established [6], and some ∂h h=0 χyx cos(θ)+ χyy sin(θ)! variational approaches have already been developed

For a more complete derivation readers are referred to [48–50].

[18]. In Fig. 5, we present the angularly-averaged sus- Finally, the present scheme is based on the Euler ceptibility χav as a function of the normalized coupling method (10) for the numerical solution of the time- parameter Jy/γ for different lattice sizes. dependent master equation. The Euler method is a first The magnetic susceptibility for the different lattice order method in the time step, and is only stable if sizes exhibits a peak of increasing height which qualita- ∆t is chosen to be smaller than the inverse of the full tively corresponds to the results obtained in [18]. spectral width of the master equation. In PMC, several approaches have been proposed to sample a higher-order 9 discrete-timestep propagator [23], or even the exact tical accuracy and reduce the required walker population. one [51]. While a similar approach would be highly The validity of the method was proven by investigat- beneficial to FCIQMC and DDQMC, the question is ing a dissipative phase transition on the two-dimensional still open, whether higher-order propagators may be Heisenberg-model. The defining feature of DDQMC is efficiently sampled within the spawn-annihilation sam- that it samples the whole density matrix and it does pling protocol characterizing these Monte Carlo methods. not introduce a truncation in Hilbert-space. Experience showed that the applicability of the code does not solely depend on the system size, but also on the correlations characterizing the steady state. The application presented in this work is a proof of principle, demonstrating VII. CONCLUSIONS the possibility to stochastically sample the Liouville-von- Neumann equation in a finite difference approximation. We have introduced a quantum Monte Carlo approach DDQMC holds promise as a powerful tool in the study to open many-body quantum systems, called DDQMC. of open quantum systems. The method is based on the FCIQMC algorithm ex- ploiting the analogy between the long-time dynamics of the Lindbladian master equation and the imaginary-time ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Schrödinger equation. DDQMC allows direct sampling of the steady state density matrices in any discrete basis set, We acknowledge enlightening discussions with Markus and in all cases studied it has proven to be accurate. Holzmann and Eduardo Mascarenhas. We are indebted DDQMC, as FCIQMC, uses an annihilation procedure to Hugo Flayac for having provided the MCWF simula- which helps to alleviate the sign problem. The intro- tions used to benchmark the present results. This work duction of the initiator approach and importance sam- was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation pling can lead to a significant improvement in the statis- through Project No. 200021 162357.

[1] I. Carusotto and C. Ciuti, [18] R. Rota, F. Storme, N. Bartolo, R. Fazio, and C. Ciuti, Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 299 (2013). Phys. Rev. B 95, 134431 (2017). [2] M. J. Hartmann, J. Opt. 18, 104005 (2016). [19] J. Kolorenˇc and L. Mitas, [3] K. Le Hur, L. Henriet, A. Petrescu, Rep. Prog. Phys. 74, 026502 (2011). K. Plekhanov, G. Roux, and M. Schiró, [20] W. M. C. Foulkes, L. Mitas, R. J. Needs, and G. Ra- Comptes Rendus Physique 17, 808 (2016). jagopal, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 33 (2001). [4] C. Noh and D. G. Angelakis, [21] C. J. Umrigar, J. Chem. Phys. 143, 164105 (2015). Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 016401 (2017). [22] I. Kosztin, B. Faber, and K. Schulten, [5] E. M. Kessler, G. Giedke, A. Imamoglu, S. F. Yelin, M. D. American Journal of Physics 64, 633 (1996). Lukin, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A 86, 012116 (2012). [23] C. J. Umrigar, M. P. Nightingale, and K. J. Runge, [6] S. Diehl, A. Micheli, A. Kantian, B. Kraus, H. P. Büchler, The Journal of Chemical Physics 99, 2865 (1993). and P. Zoller, Nat Phys 4, 878 (2008). [24] M. H. Kalos, Phys. Rev. 128, 1791 (1962). [7] F. Nissen, S. Schmidt, M. Biondi, G. Blat- [25] G. H. Booth, A. J. W. Thom, and A. Alavi, ter, H. E. Türeci, and J. Keeling, J Chem Phys 131, 054106 (2009). Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 233603 (2012). [26] J. S. Spencer, N. S. Blunt, and W. M. Foulkes, [8] J. Jin, D. Rossini, R. Fazio, M. Leib, and M. J. Hart- J Chem Phys 136, 054110 (2012). mann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 163605 (2013). [27] G. H. Booth and A. Alavi, [9] A. Tomadin, V. Giovannetti, R. Fazio, D. Gerace, The Journal of Chemical Physics 132, 174104 (2010). I. Carusotto, H. E. Türeci, and A. Imamoglu, [28] D. Cleland, G. H. Booth, and A. Alavi, Phys. Rev. A 81, 061801 (2010). J Chem Phys 132, 041103 (2010). [10] S. R. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863 (1992). [29] G. H. Booth, A. Grüneis, G. Kresse, and A. Alavi, [11] U. Schollwöck, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 259 (2005). Nature 493, 365 (2013). [12] G. De Chiara, M. Rizzi, D. Rossini, and S. Montangero, [30] C. J. Umrigar, J. Toulouse, C. Filippi, S. Sorella, and J. Comput. Theor. Nanosci. 5, 1277 (2008). R. G. Hennig, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 110201 (2007). [13] F. Verstraete, J. I. Cirac, and V. Murg, [31] J. J. Shepherd, G. E. Scuseria, and J. S. Spencer, Adv. Phys. 57, 143 (2008). Phys. Rev. B 90, 155130 (2014). [14] U. Schollwoeck, Ann. Phys. 326, 96 (2011). [32] M. Troyer and U.-J. Wiese, [15] C. W. Gardiner, A. S. Parkins, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 170201 (2005). Phys. Rev. A 46, 4363 (1992). [33] V. V. Albert and L. Jiang, [16] R. Dum, A. S. Parkins, P. Zoller, and C. W. Gardiner, Phys. Rev. A 89, 022118 (2014). Phys. Rev. A 46, 4382 (1992). [34] R. Rota, F. Minganti, A. Biella, and C. Ciuti, [17] S. Finazzi, A. Le Boité, F. Storme, A. Baksic, and arXiv:1712.02716 [cond-mat, physics:quant-ph] (2017), C. Ciuti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 080604 (2015). arXiv: 1712.02716. 10

[35] T. E. Lee, S. Gopalakrishnan, and M. D. Lukin, [45] H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 257204 (2013). Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, [36] W. Casteels, R. M. Wilson, and M. Wouters, New York, 2002). arXiv:1709.00693 [cond-mat, physics:quant-ph] (2017), [46] J. Haegeman, J. I. Cirac, T. J. Osborne, arXiv: 1709.00693. I. Piˇzorn, H. Verschelde, and F. Verstraete, [37] J. Jin, A. Biella, O. Viyuela, L. Mazza, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 070601 (2011). J. Keeling, R. Fazio, and D. Rossini, [47] E. Mascarenhas, arXiv:1712.00987 [quant-ph] (2017), Phys. Rev. X 6, 031011 (2016). arXiv: 1712.00987. [38] G. H. Booth, S. D. Smart, and A. Alavi, [48] H. Weimer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 040402 (2015). Molecular Physics 112, 1855 (2014). [49] E. Mascarenhas, H. Flayac, and V. Savona, [39] N. S. Blunt, T. W. Rogers, J. S. Spencer, and W. M. C. Phys. Rev. A 92, 022116 (2015). Foulkes, Phys. Rev. B 89, 245124 (2014). [50] J. Cui, J. I. Cirac, and M. C. Ba˜nuls, [40] C. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise (Springer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 220601 (2015). Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004). [51] K. E. Schmidt, P. Niyaz, A. Vaught, and M. A. Lee, [41] V. Kachitvichyanukul and B. W. Schmeiser, Phys. Rev. E 71, 016707 (2005). Commun. ACM 31, 216 (1988). [52] L. D. Carr, ed., Understanding Quantum Phase Transi- [42] C. S. Davis, Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 16, 205 (1993). tions, 1st ed. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2010). [43] W. H¨ormann, J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 46, 101 (1993). [53] F. R. Petruzielo, A. A. Holmes, H. J. Changlani, [44] M. Jakob and S. Stenholm, M. P. Nightingale, and C. J. Umrigar, Phys. Rev. A 67, 032111 (2003). Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 230201 (2012).