# Driving Interactions Efficiently in a Composite Few-Body System

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Model

## 3. Shortcut to Adiabaticity

## 4. Three Identical Particles

## 5. Driving in the Presence of Weak Fixed Interactions

## 6. Driving in the Presence of Strong Fixed Interactions

## 7. Conclusions & Outlook

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## Appendix A. Accuracy of the Ansatz

**Figure A1.**Fidelity between instantaneous ground state obtained with exact diagonalization of the Hamiltonian and the interpolatory ansatz as a function of $g/{g}_{f}$. Panel (

**a**) is the fidelity for three identical particles, while panel (

**b**) shows the fidelity for system and impurity driving. The final interactions chosen are ${g}_{f}=1$ (blue lines), ${g}_{f}=5$ (red lines), and ${g}_{f}=40$ (black lines).

## References

- Lukin, M.D. Colloquium: Trapping and manipulating photon states in atomic ensembles. Rev. Mod. Phys.
**2003**, 75, 457–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Thompson, J.D.; Tiecke, T.G.; Zibrov, A.S.; Vuletić, V.; Lukin, M.D. Coherence and Raman Sideband Cooling of a Single Atom in an Optical Tweezer. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2013**, 110, 133001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Levine, H.; Keesling, A.; Omran, A.; Bernien, H.; Schwartz, S.; Zibrov, A.S.; Endres, M.; Greiner, M.; Vuletić, V.; Lukin, M.D. High-Fidelity Control and Entanglement of Rydberg-Atom Qubits. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2018**, 121, 123603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Werschnik, J.; Gross, E.K.U. Quantum optimal control theory. J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.
**2007**, 40, R175–R211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Van Frank, S.; Bonneau, M.; Schmiedmayer, J.; Hild, S.; Gross, C.; Cheneau, M.; Bloch, I.; Pichler, T.; Negretti, A.; Calarco, T.; et al. Optimal control of complex atomic quantum systems. Sci. Rep.
**2016**, 6, 34187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, X.; Pęcak, D.; Sowiński, T.; Sherson, J.; Nielsen, A.E.B. Global optimization for quantum dynamics of few-fermion systems. Phys. Rev. A
**2018**, 97, 033602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Torrontegui, E.; Ibáñez, S.; Martínez-Garaot, S.; Modugno, M.; del Campo, A.; Guéry-Odelin, D.; Ruschhaupt, A.; Chen, X.; Muga, J.G. Chapter 2—Shortcuts to Adiabaticity. In Advances in Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics; Arimondo, E., Berman, P.R., Lin, C.C., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013; Volume 62, pp. 117–169. [Google Scholar]
- Del Campo, A. Shortcuts to Adiabaticity by Counterdiabatic Driving. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2013**, 111, 100502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Cui, Y.Y.; Chen, X.; Muga, J.G. Transient Particle Energies in Shortcuts to Adiabatic Expansions of Harmonic Traps. J. Phys. Chem. A
**2016**, 120, 2962–2969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sels, D.; Polkovnikov, A. Minimizing irreversible losses in quantum systems by local counterdiabatic driving. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
**2017**, 114, E3909–E3916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Guéry-Odelin, D.; Ruschhaupt, A.; Kiely, A.; Torrontegui, E.; Martínez-Garaot, S.; Muga, J.G. Shortcuts to adiabaticity: Concepts, methods, and applications. arXiv
**2019**, arXiv:1904.08448. [Google Scholar] - Schaff, J.F.; Song, X.L.; Vignolo, P.; Labeyrie, G. Fast optimal transition between two equilibrium states. Phys. Rev. A
**2010**, 82, 033430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Schaff, J.F.; Song, X.L.; Capuzzi, P.; Vignolo, P.; Labeyrie, G. Shortcut to adiabaticity for an interacting Bose-Einstein condensate. Europhys. Lett.
**2011**, 93, 23001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Schaff, J.F.; Capuzzi, P.; Labeyrie, G.; Vignolo, P. Shortcuts to adiabaticity for trapped ultracold gases. New J. Phys.
**2011**, 13, 113017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Rohringer, W.; Fischer, D.; Steiner, F.; Mazets, I.E.; Schmiedmayer, J.; Trupke, M. Non-equilibrium scale invariance and shortcuts to adiabaticity in a one-dimensional Bose gas. Sci. Rep.
**2015**, 5, 9820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Deng, S.; Diao, P.; Yu, Q.; del Campo, A.; Wu, H. Shortcuts to adiabaticity in the strongly coupled regime: Nonadiabatic control of a unitary Fermi gas. Phys. Rev. A
**2018**, 97, 013628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Diao, P.; Deng, S.; Li, F.; Yu, S.; Chenu, A.; del Campo, A.; Wu, H. Shortcuts to adiabaticity in Fermi gases. New J. Phys.
**2018**, 20, 105004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Pérez-García, V.M.; Michinel, H.; Cirac, J.I.; Lewenstein, M.; Zoller, P. Low Energy Excitations of a Bose-Einstein Condensate: A Time-Dependent Variational Analysis. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**1996**, 77, 5320–5323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Li, J.; Sun, K.; Chen, X. Shortcut to adiabatic control of soliton matter waves by tunable interaction. Sci. Rep.
**2016**, 6, 38258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Li, J.; Fogarty, T.; Campbell, S.; Chen, X.; Busch, T. An efficient nonlinear Feshbach engine. New J. Phys.
**2018**, 20, 015005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fogarty, T.; Ruks, L.; Li, J.; Busch, T. Fast control of interactions in an ultracold two atom system: Managing correlations and irreversibility. SciPost Phys.
**2019**, 6, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Hall, D.S.; Matthews, M.R.; Ensher, J.R.; Wieman, C.E.; Cornell, E.A. Dynamics of Component Separation in a Binary Mixture of Bose-Einstein Condensates. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**1998**, 81, 1539–1542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Mishra, T.; Pai, R.V.; Das, B.P. Phase separation in a two-species Bose mixture. Phys. Rev. A
**2007**, 76, 013604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - García-March, M.A.; Juliá-Díaz, B.; Astrakharchik, G.E.; Busch, T.; Boronat, J.; Polls, A. Quantum correlations and spatial localization in one-dimensional ultracold bosonic mixtures. New J. Phys.
**2014**, 16, 103004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Lee, K.L.; Jørgensen, N.B.; Liu, I.K.; Wacker, L.; Arlt, J.J.; Proukakis, N.P. Phase separation and dynamics of two-component Bose-Einstein condensates. Phys. Rev. A
**2016**, 94, 013602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Köhler, T.; Góral, K.; Julienne, P.S. Production of cold molecules via magnetically tunable Feshbach resonances. Rev. Mod. Phys.
**2006**, 78, 1311–1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Chin, C.; Grimm, R.; Julienne, P.; Tiesinga, E. Feshbach resonances in ultracold gases. Rev. Mod. Phys.
**2010**, 82, 1225–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Olshanii, M. Atomic Scattering in the Presence of an External Confinement and a Gas of Impenetrable Bosons. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**1998**, 81, 938–941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Zinner, N.T.; Volosniev, A.G.; Fedorov, D.V.; Jensen, A.S.; Valiente, M. Fractional energy states of strongly interacting bosons in one dimension. EPL (Europhys. Lett.)
**2014**, 107, 60003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zinner, N.T. Strongly interacting mesoscopic systems of anyons in one dimension. Phys. Rev. A
**2015**, 92, 063634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - García-March, M.A.; Juliá-Díaz, B.; Astrakharchik, G.E.; Boronat, J.; Polls, A. Distinguishability, degeneracy, and correlations in three harmonically trapped bosons in one dimension. Phys. Rev. A
**2014**, 90, 063605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Garcia-March, M.A.; Juliá-Díaz, B.; Astrakharchik, G.E.; Busch, T.; Boronat, J.; Polls, A. Sharp crossover from composite fermionization to phase separation in microscopic mixtures of ultracold bosons. Phys. Rev. A
**2013**, 88, 063604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cazalilla, M.A.; Ho, A.F. Instabilities in Binary Mixtures of One-Dimensional Quantum Degenerate Gases. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2003**, 91, 150403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Alon, O.E.; Streltsov, A.I.; Cederbaum, L.S. Demixing of Bosonic Mixtures in Optical Lattices from Macroscopic to Microscopic Scales. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2006**, 97, 230403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Zöllner, S.; Meyer, H.D.; Schmelcher, P. Composite fermionization of one-dimensional Bose-Bose mixtures. Phys. Rev. A
**2008**, 78, 013629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - García-March, M.Á.; Fogarty, T.; Campbell, S.; Busch, T.; Paternostro, M. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics of harmonically trapped bosons. New J. Phys.
**2016**, 18, 103035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Deffner, S.; Jarzynski, C.; del Campo, A. Classical and Quantum Shortcuts to Adiabaticity for Scale-Invariant Driving. Phys. Rev. X
**2014**, 4, 021013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Andersen, M.E.S.; Dehkharghani, A.S.; Volosniev, A.G.; Lindgren, E.J.; Zinner, N.T. An interpolatory ansatz captures the physics of one-dimensional confined Fermi systems. Sci. Rep.
**2016**, 6, 28362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Pęcak, D.; Dehkharghani, A.S.; Zinner, N.T.; Sowiński, T. Four fermions in a one-dimensional harmonic trap: Accuracy of a variational-ansatz approach. Phys. Rev. A
**2017**, 95, 053632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Harshman, N.L. Symmetries of three harmonically trapped particles in one dimension. Phys. Rev. A
**2012**, 86, 052122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Harshman, N.L. One-Dimensional Traps, Two-Body Interactions, Few-Body Symmetries: I. One, Two, and Three Particles. Few-Body Sys.
**2016**, 57, 11–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kinoshita, T.; Wenger, T.; Weiss, D.S. Observation of a One-Dimensional Tonks-Girardeau Gas. Science
**2004**, 305, 1125–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Minguzzi, A.; Gangardt, D.M. Exact Coherent States of a Harmonically Confined Tonks-Girardeau Gas. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2005**, 94, 240404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Haller, E.; Gustavsson, M.; Mark, M.J.; Danzl, J.G.; Hart, R.; Pupillo, G.; Nägerl, H.C. Realization of an Excited, Strongly Correlated Quantum Gas Phase. Science
**2009**, 325, 1224–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Kormos, M.; Collura, M.; Calabrese, P. Analytic results for a quantum quench from free to hard-core one-dimensional bosons. Phys. Rev. A
**2014**, 89, 013609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kehrberger, L.M.A.; Bolsinger, V.J.; Schmelcher, P. Quantum dynamics of two trapped bosons following infinite interaction quenches. Phys. Rev. A
**2018**, 97, 013606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Nicklas, E.; Karl, M.; Höfer, M.; Johnson, A.; Muessel, W.; Strobel, H.; Tomkovič, J.; Gasenzer, T.; Oberthaler, M.K. Observation of scaling in the dynamics of a strongly quenched quantum gas. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**2015**, 115, 245301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bisset, R.; Wilson, R.; Ticknor, C. Scaling of fluctuations in a trapped binary condensate. Phys. Rev. A
**2015**, 91, 053613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mistakidis, S.I.; Katsimiga, G.C.; Kevrekidis, P.G.; Schmelcher, P. Correlation effects in the quench-induced phase separation dynamics of a two species ultracold quantum gas. New J. Phys.
**2018**, 20, 043052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pflanzer, A.C.; Zöllner, S.; Schmelcher, P. Material-barrier tunnelling in one-dimensional few-boson mixtures. J. Phys. B At. Mol. Opt. Phys.
**2009**, 42, 231002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pflanzer, A.C.; Zöllner, S.; Schmelcher, P. Interspecies tunneling in one-dimensional Bose mixtures. Phys. Rev. A
**2010**, 81, 023612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Martínez-Garaot, S.; Palmero, M.; Muga, J.G.; Guéry-Odelin, D. Fast driving between arbitrary states of a quantum particle by trap deformation. Phys. Rev. A
**2016**, 94, 063418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Zenesini, A.; Lignier, H.; Sias, C.; Morsch, O.; Ciampini, D.; Arimondo, E. Tunneling control and localization for Bose-Einstein condensates in a frequency modulated optical lattice. Laser Phys.
**2010**, 20, 1182–1189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Wu, J.H.; Qi, R.; Ji, A.C.; Liu, W.M. Quantum tunneling of ultracold atoms in optical traps. Front. Phys.
**2014**, 9, 137–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Goold, J.; Fogarty, T.; Lo Gullo, N.; Paternostro, M.; Busch, T. Orthogonality catastrophe as a consequence of qubit embedding in an ultracold Fermi gas. Phys. Rev. A
**2011**, 84, 063632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Knap, M.; Shashi, A.; Nishida, Y.; Imambekov, A.; Abanin, D.A.; Demler, E. Time-Dependent Impurity in Ultracold Fermions: Orthogonality Catastrophe and Beyond. Phys. Rev. X
**2012**, 2, 041020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Campbell, S.; García-March, M.A.; Fogarty, T.; Busch, T. Quenching small quantum gases: Genesis of the orthogonality catastrophe. Phys. Rev. A
**2014**, 90, 013617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**(

**a**) Interaction potentials stemming from ${g}^{A}$ (dashed line) and ${g}^{AB}$ (solid lines) in the Jacobi coordinate plane. (

**b**) Examples of different interaction ramps when keeping ${g}^{A}\left(t\right)={g}^{AB}\left(t\right)$, with the reference ramp (blue dotted line) and the shortcut to adiabaticity (STA) ramp at ${t}_{f}=1.5$ (black solid line) and ${t}_{f}=10$ (red solid line).

**Figure 2.**(

**a**) Initial state in the relative $\{X,Y\}$ coordinate plane. Target states at (

**b**) ${g}_{f}=1$, (

**c**) ${g}_{f}=5$, and (

**d**) ${g}_{f}=40$. (

**e**) $\langle {W}_{irr}\rangle $ for three indistinguishable particles as a function of the ramp time ${t}_{f}$ for the STA (solid lines) and reference ramp (dotted lines). The final interactions are ${g}_{f}=1$ (blue lines), ${g}_{f}=5$ (red lines), and ${g}_{f}=40$ (black lines). Inset shows $\langle {W}_{irr}\rangle $ versus final interaction strength ${g}_{f}$ at ${t}_{f}=10$.

**Figure 3.**Target one-body density matrices (OBDMs, (white contour lines) on top of final OBDMs for three identical particles at ${t}_{f}=10$. Panels (

**a**–

**c**) correspond to the STA, while panels (

**d**–

**f**) correspond to the reference pulse. Panels (

**a**) and (

**d**) are for ${g}_{f}=1$, (

**b**) and (

**e**) for ${g}_{f}=5$, and (

**c**) and (

**f**) for ${g}_{f}=40$.

**Figure 4.**(

**a**) Initial state with ${g}^{AB}=1$ and ${g}_{i}^{A}=0$ and (

**b**–

**d**) target states for ${g}_{f}^{A}=\{1,5,40\}$. This case is referred to as system driving. (

**e**) Initial state with ${g}^{A}=1$ and ${g}_{i}^{AB}=0$ and (

**f**–

**h**) target states for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=\{1,5,40\}$. This case is referred to as impurity driving.

**Figure 5.**(

**a**) $\langle {W}_{irr}\rangle $ after driving the system interactions in the presence of a weak fixed impurity interaction ${g}^{AB}=1$. System interactions are driven to ${g}_{f}^{A}=1$ (blue lines), ${g}_{f}^{A}=5$ (red lines), and ${g}_{f}^{A}=40$ (black lines), with the solid lines showing the result of the STA and the dotted lines showing the result of the reference ramp. (

**b**) Impurity driving in the presence of weak fixed system interactions ${g}_{A}=1$, with final impurity interactions ${g}_{f}^{AB}=1$ (blue lines), ${g}_{f}^{AB}=5$ (red lines), and ${g}_{f}^{AB}=40$ (black lines). Insets show $\langle {W}_{irr}\rangle $ as a function of ${g}_{f}^{A}$ and ${g}_{f}^{AB}$, respectively, at ${t}_{f}=10$.

**Figure 6.**Panels (

**a**–

**f**): Target states (white contour lines) on top of final states (at ${t}_{f}=10$) for driving system interactions between A atoms in the presence of a fixed impurity interaction ${g}^{AB}=1$. Panels with index ($-1$) correspond to ${\rho}^{A}({x}_{1},{x}_{1}^{\prime})={\rho}^{A}({x}_{2},{x}_{2}^{\prime})$ while panels with index ($-2$) show ${\rho}^{B}({x}_{3},{x}_{3}^{\prime})$. Panels (

**a**–

**c**) show the STA final states while panels (

**d**–

**f**) show the final states for the reference pulse, where panels (

**a**) and (

**d**) are for ${g}_{f}^{A}=1$, (

**b**) and (

**e**) are for ${g}_{f}^{A}=5$, and (

**c**) and (

**f**) are for ${g}_{f}^{A}=40$. Panels (

**g**–

**l**): Target states (white contour lines) on top of final states (at ${t}_{f}=10$) for driving impurity interactions in the presence of a fixed interactions between the A atoms ${g}^{A}=1$. Panels (

**g**) and (

**j**) are for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=1$, (

**h**) and (

**k**) are for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=5$, and (

**i**) and (

**l**) are for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=40$.

**Figure 7.**Left panel: driving the interactions of the system when the impurity interaction is fixed at ${g}^{AB}=20$. (

**a**) Initial state with ${g}^{A}=0$, (

**b**) target state at ${g}_{f}^{A}=1$, (

**c**) ${g}_{f}^{A}=5$, and (

**d**) ${g}_{f}^{A}=40$. Right panel: driving the interaction with the impurity when the system interactions are fixed at ${g}^{A}=20$. (

**e**) Initial state with ${g}^{AB}=0$, (

**f**) target state at ${g}_{f}^{AB}=1$, (

**g**) ${g}_{f}^{AB}=5$, and (

**h**) ${g}_{f}^{AB}=40$.

**Figure 8.**(

**a**) $\langle {W}_{irr}\rangle $ after driving the system interactions in the presence of a strong fixed impurity interaction ${g}^{AB}=20$. System interactions are driven to ${g}_{f}^{A}=1$ (blue lines), ${g}_{f}^{A}=5$ (red lines), and ${g}_{f}^{A}=40$ (black lines), with the solid lines showing the result of the STA and the dotted lines showing the result of the reference ramp. (

**b**) Impurity driving in the presence of strong fixed system interactions ${g}^{A}=20$, with final impurity interactions ${g}_{f}^{AB}=1$ (blue lines), ${g}_{f}^{AB}=5$ (red lines), and ${g}_{f}^{AB}=40$ (black lines). Insets show $\langle {W}_{irr}\rangle $ as a function of ${g}_{f}^{A}$ and ${g}_{f}^{AB}$, respectively, at ${t}_{f}=10$.

**Figure 9.**Panels (

**a**–

**f**): Target states (white contour lines) on top of final states (at ${t}_{f}=10$) for driving system interactions between A atoms in the presence of a fixed impurity interaction ${g}^{AB}=20$. Panels with index ($-1$) correspond to ${\rho}^{A}({x}_{1},{x}_{1}^{\prime})={\rho}^{A}({x}_{2},{x}_{2}^{\prime})$, while panels with index ($-2$) show ${\rho}^{B}({x}_{3},{x}_{3}^{\prime})$. Panels (

**a**–

**c**) show the STA final states, while panels (

**d**–

**f**) show the final states for the reference pulse, where panels (

**a**) and (

**d**) are for ${g}_{f}^{A}=1$, (

**b**) and (

**e**) are for ${g}_{f}^{A}=5$, and (

**c**) and (

**f**) are for ${g}_{f}^{A}=40$. Panels (

**g**–

**l**): Target states (white contour lines) on top of final states (at ${t}_{f}=10$) for driving impurity interactions in the presence of a fixed interactions between the A atoms ${g}^{A}=20$. Panels (

**g**) and (

**j**) are for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=1$, (

**h**) and (

**k**) are for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=5$, and (

**i**) and (

**l**) are for ${g}_{f}^{AB}=40$.

**Figure 10.**(

**a,d**) Kinetic energy, (

**b,e**) potential trap energy, and (

**c,f**) interaction energy as a function of ${t}_{f}$ after using the STA (black solid line) and reference (orange solid line), with the adiabatic energies shown as the thin dotted line. (

**a–c**) show the result of driving the system to ${g}_{f}^{A}=40$, while (

**d–f**) show the result of driving the impurity to ${g}_{f}^{AB}=40$. Note the different scales on the subplots.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Kahan, A.; Fogarty, T.; Li, J.; Busch, T.
Driving Interactions Efficiently in a Composite Few-Body System. *Universe* **2019**, *5*, 207.
https://doi.org/10.3390/universe5100207

**AMA Style**

Kahan A, Fogarty T, Li J, Busch T.
Driving Interactions Efficiently in a Composite Few-Body System. *Universe*. 2019; 5(10):207.
https://doi.org/10.3390/universe5100207

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Kahan, Alan, Thomás Fogarty, Jing Li, and Thomas Busch.
2019. "Driving Interactions Efficiently in a Composite Few-Body System" *Universe* 5, no. 10: 207.
https://doi.org/10.3390/universe5100207