相关论文: Reply to: ``Comment on `Polynomial-Time Simulation…

Comment on "Classifying Novel Phases of Spinor Atoms", Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 180412 (2006) by R. Barnett, A. Turner and E. Demler

We reply to comment on recent paper by Pieplow and Henkel (New J. Phys. 15 (2013) 023027) and our results made by Volokitin and Persson (arXiv: 1405.2525)

This is a Comment on the Article ``Aging, phase ordering and conformal invariance'' by M.Henkel, M.Pleimling, C.Godr\`eche and J.M.Luck [Phys.Rev.Lett. 87, 265701 (2001)].

We reply to the comments on our previous paper Physical Review Letters, Vol. 129, 087001 (2022), raised by Th\'eo S\'epulcre, Serge Florens, and Izak Snyman in arXiv:2210.00742.

The original version of the paper was published in Contemporary Mathematics 378 ``Groups, Languages, Algorithms''; 2005, pp. 319-348. This is a modified version with Appendix that holds a corrected formulation of Proposition 4.1.

This is a reply to the comment from E. Amselem et al. on our paper (Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 150401 (2012), arXiv:1207.0059).

This is a reply to the comment by J. L. Alonso et al. (arXiv:1302.6146; to appear in J. Chem. Phys) on our paper A. Abedi, N. T. Maitra, and E. K. U. Gross, J. Chem. Phys. 137, 22A530 (2012) [arXiv: 1208.4388]

We propose a polynomial-time algorithm for simulation of the class of pairing Hamiltonians, e.g., the BCS Hamiltonian, on an NMR quantum computer. The algorithm adiabatically finds the low-lying spectrum in the vicinity of the gap between…

E. M. Chudnovsky has recently posted on the ArXive his Reply (arXiv:0805.2918) to my Comment (Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 199703 (2008)) on his recent Letter (E. M. Chudnovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 206601 (2007)). In order to avoid possible…

Comment on PRL v. 86, p. 5084 (2001) [cond-mat/0101016]. We point out that the authors' simulations are consistent with the known theory of steady-state solutions in this system.

Reply to Comment quant-ph/0506207 by J.G.Brankov et al.

Revised version to be published in the Proceedings of the Encuentros Relativistas Espa\~noles, September, 2000 [ http://hades.eis.uva.es/EREs2000 ]

Two contributions to the discussion of Fearnhead P. and D. Prangle (2012). Constructing summary statistics for approximate Bayesian computation: Semi-automatic approx- imate Bayesian computation, J. Roy. Statist. Soc. B, 74 (3).

Erroneous statements on the mathematical and physical properties of the double-Kerr solution made in a recent paper (Class. Quantum Grav. 21 (2004) 2723) are commented.

A Comment on the Letter by Victor Gurarie and Alexander E. Lobkovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 178301 (2002). The authors of the Letter offer a Reply.

This reply addresses concerns expressed in a comment (arXiv:2508.16689v1) on arXiv:submit/6841332 [physics.gen-ph] 29 Sep 2025 the paper given in the title (arXiv:2501.02022v2), hereafter referred to as the paper.

Rejoinder: Monitoring Networked Applications With Incremental Quantile Estimation [arXiv:0708.0302]

In a recent interesting article A. Heuer, G. Pieplow, and R. Menzel discuss a quantum-eraser experiment to investigate the complementarity of wave-like and particle-like behavior of photons. I would like to draw your attention to the fact…

In the paper are proved theorems, which amplify the results of my paper "On the difference equation of Poincare type (Part 3)", Max-Plank-Institut fuer Mathematik, Bonn, Preprint Series, 2004, 09, 1-34.

It is shown that the title Comment by W. Szczepanik, M. Dulak, and T. A. Wesolowski [Int. J. Quantum Chem. 106 (2006)] is unsatisfactory.