Skip to content

Pauli Rate Equations

Pauli rate equations are classical master equations for the populations of a quantum system in a preferred basis. They appear when coherences either decay quickly, decouple by a secular approximation, or are intentionally outside the prediction target.

If pn(t)p_n(t) is the probability of occupying state ∣n⟩\lvert n\rangle, the standard form is

p˙n=∑m≠n(Wn←mpm−Wm←npn),Wn←m≥0.\dot p_n = \sum_{m\ne n} \left( W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m - W_{m\leftarrow n}p_n \right), \qquad W_{n\leftarrow m}\ge0.

Here Wn←mW_{n\leftarrow m} is the transition rate from mm to nn. The first term is gain into state nn from other states. The second term is loss out of state nn into other states.

The equation is quantum in origin when the rates come from matrix elements, bath spectra, tunneling amplitudes, or measurement-induced transitions. But the object being evolved is classical: a probability vector, not the full density operator.

Define a column probability vector

p=(p1,…,pN)T.\mathbf p = (p_1,\ldots,p_N)^{\mathsf T}.

The rate equation can be written

p˙=Kp,\dot{\mathbf p} = K\mathbf p,

where, for n≠mn\ne m,

Knm=Wn←m,K_{nm} = W_{n\leftarrow m},

and the diagonal entries are

Knn=−∑m≠nWm←n.K_{nn} = - \sum_{m\ne n} W_{m\leftarrow n}.

With this column convention,

∑nKnm=0\sum_n K_{nm}=0

for every source state mm. Therefore the total probability is conserved:

ddt∑npn=∑n,mKnmpm=0.\frac{d}{dt} \sum_n p_n = \sum_{n,m}K_{nm}p_m = 0.

If pn(0)≥0p_n(0)\ge0 and ∑npn(0)=1\sum_n p_n(0)=1, then the finite-time map

p(t)=eKtp(0),t≥0,\mathbf p(t) = e^{Kt}\mathbf p(0), \qquad t\ge0,

is a stochastic map under the usual finite-dimensional Markov assumptions. In this sense, Pauli rate equations are continuous-time Markov jump processes written in the language of quantum populations.

A simple Lindblad embedding uses jump operators

Ln←m=Wn←m ∣n⟩⟨m∣,n≠m.L_{n\leftarrow m} = \sqrt{W_{n\leftarrow m}}\, \lvert n\rangle\langle m\rvert, \qquad n\ne m.

The density operator obeys

ρ˙=−iℏ[H,ρ]+∑n≠mD[Ln←m]ρ,\dot\rho = - \frac{i}{\hbar}[H,\rho] + \sum_{n\ne m} \mathcal D[L_{n\leftarrow m}]\rho,

with

D[L]ρ=LρL†−12{L†L,ρ}.\mathcal D[L]\rho = L\rho L^\dagger - \frac12\{L^\dagger L,\rho\}.

If HH is diagonal in the {∣n⟩}\{\lvert n\rangle\} basis, the diagonal entries pn=ρnnp_n=\rho_{nn} obey the Pauli rate equation.

To see this, note that

Ln←mρLn←m†=Wn←mρmm∣n⟩⟨n∣.L_{n\leftarrow m}\rho L_{n\leftarrow m}^\dagger = W_{n\leftarrow m} \rho_{mm} \lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert.

This term adds population to nn when the system was in mm. The anticommutator part removes population from the source state mm. Taking the nnnn matrix element gives

ρ˙nn=∑m≠nWn←mρmm−ρnn∑m≠nWm←n.\dot\rho_{nn} = \sum_{m\ne n} W_{n\leftarrow m}\rho_{mm} - \rho_{nn} \sum_{m\ne n} W_{m\leftarrow n}.

That is exactly

p˙n=∑m≠n(Wn←mpm−Wm←npn).\dot p_n = \sum_{m\ne n} \left( W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m - W_{m\leftarrow n}p_n \right).

The same jump embedding also predicts coherence decay. For n≠mn\ne m, define the total rate out of state nn by

Γnout=∑r≠nWr←n.\Gamma_n^{\mathrm{out}} = \sum_{r\ne n} W_{r\leftarrow n}.

For a diagonal Hamiltonian,

H=∑nEn∣n⟩⟨n∣,H = \sum_n E_n \lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert,

the off-diagonal entry ρnm\rho_{nm} obeys

ρ˙nm=−iωnmρnm−12(Γnout+Γmout)ρnm,\dot\rho_{nm} = - i\omega_{nm}\rho_{nm} - \frac12 \left( \Gamma_n^{\mathrm{out}} + \Gamma_m^{\mathrm{out}} \right) \rho_{nm},

where

ωnm=En−Emℏ.\omega_{nm} = \frac{E_n-E_m}{\hbar}.

Additional dephasing channels can damp ρnm\rho_{nm} faster. The important lesson is that a population rate equation does not uniquely specify the coherence dynamics. Many different quantum generators can produce the same equation for {pn}\{p_n\} while differing on off-diagonal density-matrix elements.

Therefore a Pauli rate equation is enough only when the prediction target is population dynamics. It is not enough for Ramsey fringes, quantum beats, interference, coherent transport, entanglement, or measurement backaction.

In a weak-coupling open-system derivation, one often starts from

H=HS+HB+HI,HI=∑αAα⊗Bα.H = H_S+H_B+H_I, \qquad H_I = \sum_\alpha A_\alpha\otimes B_\alpha.

Let

HS=∑nEn∣n⟩⟨n∣H_S = \sum_n E_n \lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert

for simplicity. After Born, Markov, and secular approximations, the master equation separates into Bohr-frequency blocks. Populations in the energy basis then obey a Pauli equation.

For a transition m→nm\to n, define

ωmn=Em−Enℏ.\omega_{mn} = \frac{E_m-E_n}{\hbar}.

With the convention used in Secular Approximation, positive ωmn\omega_{mn} means the system loses energy. A typical weak-coupling rate has the schematic form

Wn←m=∑α,βγαβ(ωmn)⟨n∣Aβ∣m⟩⟨m∣Aα∣n⟩,W_{n\leftarrow m} = \sum_{\alpha,\beta} \gamma_{\alpha\beta}(\omega_{mn}) \langle n\rvert A_\beta\lvert m\rangle \langle m\rvert A_\alpha\lvert n\rangle,

where γαβ(ω)\gamma_{\alpha\beta}(\omega) is built from bath correlation spectra. The exact index order depends on Fourier-transform and coupling-operator conventions, so the reliable rule is: rates sample the bath spectrum at the transition frequency and are weighted by system matrix elements connecting the two levels.

The secular approximation is what makes the population block close. A nonsecular Redfield Equation can couple populations to coherences, especially near degeneracies or in systems with coherent transport.

If the bath is a single equilibrium reservoir and the weak-coupling thermal assumptions hold, the rates satisfy detailed balance with respect to the Gibbs distribution

pnβ=e−βEnZ.p_n^\beta = \frac{e^{-\beta E_n}}{Z}.

The population detailed-balance condition is

Wn←mpmβ=Wm←npnβ.W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m^\beta = W_{m\leftarrow n}p_n^\beta.

Equivalently,

Wn←mWm←n=e−β(En−Em).\frac{W_{n\leftarrow m}} {W_{m\leftarrow n}} = e^{-\beta(E_n-E_m)}.

Transitions that raise the system energy are Boltzmann suppressed relative to the reverse transition. This is the population-level form of the thermal consistency discussed in Detailed Balance and Thermal Master Equations.

For nonequilibrium reservoirs, such as biased leads, driven baths, or multiple temperatures, detailed balance may be replaced by local balance relations or may fail entirely. The rate equation can still be a valid Markov model, but its steady state is then generally not a Gibbs state.

Let ∣g⟩\lvert g\rangle and ∣e⟩\lvert e\rangle be ground and excited states. Write

Γ↓=Wg←e,Γ↑=We←g.\Gamma_\downarrow = W_{g\leftarrow e}, \qquad \Gamma_\uparrow = W_{e\leftarrow g}.

The excited-state population obeys

p˙e=−Γ↓pe+Γ↑pg,pg=1−pe.\dot p_e = - \Gamma_\downarrow p_e + \Gamma_\uparrow p_g, \qquad p_g=1-p_e.

Equivalently,

p˙e=−(Γ↓+Γ↑)pe+Γ↑.\dot p_e = - (\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow)p_e + \Gamma_\uparrow.

The steady state is

pess=Γ↑Γ↑+Γ↓,pgss=Γ↓Γ↑+Γ↓.p_e^{\mathrm{ss}} = \frac{\Gamma_\uparrow} {\Gamma_\uparrow+\Gamma_\downarrow}, \qquad p_g^{\mathrm{ss}} = \frac{\Gamma_\downarrow} {\Gamma_\uparrow+\Gamma_\downarrow}.

The nonzero relaxation eigenvalue is

λ1=−(Γ↓+Γ↑),\lambda_1 = - (\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow),

so the population relaxation time is

τrel=1Γ↓+Γ↑.\tau_{\mathrm{rel}} = \frac{1} {\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow}.

At zero temperature, Γ↑=0\Gamma_\uparrow=0 and the steady state is the ground state. At finite temperature, detailed balance gives

Γ↑Γ↓=e−β(Ee−Eg).\frac{\Gamma_\uparrow} {\Gamma_\downarrow} = e^{-\beta(E_e-E_g)}.

For many states, it is helpful to think of a directed graph:

  • vertices are basis states;
  • directed edges are nonzero rates Wn←mW_{n\leftarrow m};
  • total outgoing rates set residence times;
  • closed communicating classes determine long-time support;
  • absorbing states are states or subspaces with no outgoing transitions.

If the graph is irreducible and finite, the rate matrix has a unique stationary distribution with strictly positive entries. If the graph has disconnected components or absorbing states, there can be multiple stationary distributions or memory of the initial component.

This graph language is often the fastest way to diagnose a rate equation before doing algebra. It also explains why a population equation can have multiple fixed points even when every listed transition rate is nonnegative.

Relation to Steady States and Liouvillian Modes

Section titled “Relation to Steady States and Liouvillian Modes”

The rate matrix KK is the population-sector generator. Its zero eigenvectors are stationary population distributions:

Kpss=0.K\mathbf p_{\mathrm{ss}}=0.

Nonzero eigenvalues determine relaxation modes:

p(t)=pss+∑acaeλatva.\mathbf p(t) = \mathbf p_{\mathrm{ss}} + \sum_a c_a e^{\lambda_a t}\mathbf v_a.

For a stable finite Markov process, the nonzero eigenvalues have negative real parts. Complex eigenvalues can appear in irreversible cyclic networks, producing damped oscillatory population modes even though no quantum coherence is being tracked.

In a full Lindblad model, these population modes are part of the Liouvillian spectrum. The coherence modes may decay on different time scales. The general language of fixed points, gaps, and metastability is collected in Steady States and Relaxation, and numerical checks are described in Solving Lindblad Equations.

Pauli rate equations are useful when the basis states are long-lived alternatives and transitions are incoherent on the time scale of interest. Typical uses include:

  • spontaneous emission and thermal excitation when only populations are observed;
  • sequential tunneling through Coulomb-blockaded charge states;
  • incoherent hopping between localized states;
  • laser and pumping models where coherences have been adiabatically eliminated;
  • chemical and molecular population transfer after fast dephasing;
  • coarse-grained measurement records that count jumps between classical outcomes.

For mesoscopic conductors, the same structure appears with reservoir occupation factors and chemical potentials; see Mesoscopic Transport.

Treating population dynamics as the full quantum state

Section titled “Treating population dynamics as the full quantum state”

A rate equation does not predict phases or coherences. If an observable has off-diagonal matrix elements in the chosen basis, the rate equation is not enough.

The variables pnp_n are populations in a declared basis. Energy eigenstates, localized sites, charge states, dressed states, and measurement pointer states can give different rate equations.

When two Bohr frequencies are separated by a scale comparable to the relaxation rate, coherences may affect populations. Blindly dropping them can remove quantum beats, dark states, or interference-assisted transport.

A rate equation can have a stationary distribution without satisfying detailed balance. Equilibrium thermal interpretation requires the appropriate Gibbs or grand-canonical balance relations.

Forgetting that rates may be time dependent

Section titled “Forgetting that rates may be time dependent”

The matrix KK above is time independent. Driven systems, quenches, feedback, or aging reservoirs may require K(t)K(t), and then the simple semigroup formula eKte^{Kt} no longer applies.

Inferring a unique Lindblad equation from populations alone

Section titled “Inferring a unique Lindblad equation from populations alone”

The same Wn←mW_{n\leftarrow m} can be embedded in different quantum generators with different dephasing, Hamiltonian, and unraveling structure. Population data alone usually do not identify the full open-system model.

  1. Trace conservation. Starting from
p˙n=∑m≠n(Wn←mpm−Wm←npn),\dot p_n = \sum_{m\ne n} \left( W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m - W_{m\leftarrow n}p_n \right),

show that ∑npn\sum_n p_n is constant.

Solution

Sum over nn:

∑np˙n=∑n,m:n≠mWn←mpm−∑n,m:n≠mWm←npn.\sum_n\dot p_n = \sum_{n,m:n\ne m} W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m - \sum_{n,m:n\ne m} W_{m\leftarrow n}p_n.

In the second double sum, exchange the dummy labels mm and nn. It becomes

∑m,n:m≠nWn←mpm,\sum_{m,n:m\ne n} W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m,

which is identical to the first double sum. The difference is zero, so total probability is conserved.

  1. Two-state solution. Solve
p˙e=−(Γ↓+Γ↑)pe+Γ↑\dot p_e = - (\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow)p_e + \Gamma_\uparrow

for pe(t)p_e(t).

Solution

The steady state is

pess=Γ↑Γ↓+Γ↑.p_e^{\mathrm{ss}} = \frac{\Gamma_\uparrow} {\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow}.

Subtract it:

ddt(pe−pess)=−(Γ↓+Γ↑)(pe−pess).\frac{d}{dt} \left( p_e-p_e^{\mathrm{ss}} \right) = - (\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow) \left( p_e-p_e^{\mathrm{ss}} \right).

Thus

pe(t)=pess+[pe(0)−pess]e−(Γ↓+Γ↑)t.p_e(t) = p_e^{\mathrm{ss}} + \left[ p_e(0)-p_e^{\mathrm{ss}} \right] e^{-(\Gamma_\downarrow+\Gamma_\uparrow)t}.
  1. Gibbs detailed balance. Suppose
Wn←mWm←n=e−β(En−Em)\frac{W_{n\leftarrow m}} {W_{m\leftarrow n}} = e^{-\beta(E_n-E_m)}

for every connected pair. Show that pnβ∝e−βEnp_n^\beta\propto e^{-\beta E_n} is stationary.

Solution

For the Gibbs distribution,

pnβpmβ=e−β(En−Em).\frac{p_n^\beta}{p_m^\beta} = e^{-\beta(E_n-E_m)}.

The assumed rate relation gives

Wn←mpmβ=Wm←npnβ.W_{n\leftarrow m}p_m^\beta = W_{m\leftarrow n}p_n^\beta.

Therefore each gain term is paired with an equal loss term. In the rate equation for each nn, all terms cancel pairwise, so p˙n=0\dot p_n=0.

  1. Lindblad embedding. For
Ln←m=Wn←m ∣n⟩⟨m∣,L_{n\leftarrow m} = \sqrt{W_{n\leftarrow m}}\, \lvert n\rangle\langle m\rvert,

show that the jump term contributes Wn←mρmmW_{n\leftarrow m}\rho_{mm} to ρ˙nn\dot\rho_{nn}.

Solution

Compute

Ln←mρLn←m†=Wn←m∣n⟩⟨m∣ρ∣m⟩⟨n∣.L_{n\leftarrow m}\rho L_{n\leftarrow m}^\dagger = W_{n\leftarrow m} \lvert n\rangle\langle m\rvert \rho \lvert m\rangle\langle n\rvert.

Since

⟨m∣ρ∣m⟩=ρmm,\langle m\rvert\rho\lvert m\rangle = \rho_{mm},

this equals

Wn←mρmm∣n⟩⟨n∣.W_{n\leftarrow m}\rho_{mm} \lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert.

Taking the nnnn matrix element gives Wn←mρmmW_{n\leftarrow m}\rho_{mm}.

  1. Same populations, different coherences. Add a pure-dephasing term
γϕD[∣n⟩⟨n∣]ρ\gamma_\phi\mathcal D[ \lvert n\rangle\langle n\rvert ]\rho

to the Lindblad embedding for one state nn. Does it change the Pauli rate equation for the populations?

Solution

No. A diagonal projector dephasing term leaves all diagonal density-matrix entries unchanged, so it does not alter any pk=ρkkp_k=\rho_{kk} equation.

It does, however, change coherences involving ∣n⟩\lvert n\rangle. This illustrates why the population rate equation does not uniquely determine the full quantum master equation.

  • N. G. van Kampen, Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry, 3rd ed., North-Holland (2007).
  • H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems, Oxford University Press (2002).
  • C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise, 3rd ed., Springer (2004).
  • R. Alicki and K. Lendi, Quantum Dynamical Semigroups and Applications, Springer (2007).
  • C. W. Gardiner, Handbook of Stochastic Methods, 3rd ed., Springer (2004).