Interaction of One-Dimensional Quantum Droplets with Potential Wells and Barriers

Argha Debnath,1 Ayan Khan,1, ∗ and Boris Malomed2, 3

1
Department of Physics, School of Engineering and Applied Sciences,
Bennett University, Greater Noida, UP-201310, India
2
Department of Physical Electronics, School of Electrical Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv 69978, Israel
3
Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica, Chile
We address static and dynamical properties of one-dimensional (1D) quantum droplets (QDs)
under the action of local potentials in the form of narrow wells and barriers. The QDs are governed
arXiv:2302.13367v1 [cond-mat.quant-gas] 26 Feb 2023

by the 1D Gross-Pitaevskii equation including the mean-field cubic repulsive term and the beyond-
mean-field attractive quadratic one. In the case of the well represented by the delta-functional
potential, three exact stable solutions are found for localized states pinned to the well. The Thomas-
Fermi approximation for the well and the adiabatic approximation for the collision of the QD
with the barrier are developed too. Collisions of incident QDs with the wells and barriers are
analyzed in detail by means of systematic simulations. Outcomes, such as fission of the moving QD
into transmitted, reflected, and trapped fragments, are identified in relevant parameter planes. In
particular, a counter-intuitive effect of partial or full rebound of the incident QD from the potential
well is studied in detail and qualitatively explained.

I. INTRODUCTION moving QDs, which was realized experimentally (in the

Quantum droplets (QDs) in binary Bose-Einstein
condensates (BECs) originate from the interplay of
the mean-field (MF) interactions and Lee-Huang-Yang
(LHY) corrections to them, induced by quantum fluc-
tuations [1]. As first demonstrated by Petrov [2], this
setting is modeled by the modified Gross-Pitaevskii equa-
tion (GPE) which includes the MF self-attractive cubic
term and the repulsive LHY quartic one. This predic-
tion was followed by the creation of QDs in binary ho-
moatomic [3–6] and heteroatomic [7] BECs, as well as
in dipolar condensates [8, 9]. Actually, QDs represent a
new quantum state of matter, see review [10, 11].
The dimensional reduction 3D → 2D and 3D → 1D
for BEC under the action of a tight confining potential
essentially changes the form of the effective GPE [12–15].
In contrast with the 3D setting, in the 1D limit the LHY
term has the self-attraction sign, and is quadratic, rather
than quartic [12]. However, it is also possible to extend
the 3D framework in quasi-one-dimensional (Q1D) ge-
ometry by tuning the transverse confinement suitably.
In this situation, the repulsive quartic LHY contribution
prevails to support the droplet formation in both homo-
geneous and inhomogeneous systems [16, 17].
On the contrary, in the 1D system the residual self-
repulsive MF term competes with the quadratic self-
attraction, making it possible to create broad QD states
with the equilibrium density in their inner quasi-flat parts
[18, 19]. The fact that the density cannot exceed the equi-
librium value implies that the quantum matter filling the
QDs is an incompressible liquid, therefore localized states
are named “droplets”.
A natural extension to understand the droplets is to
study its dynamics and possibility of collisions between
∗ ayan.khan@bennett.edu.in
3D geometry) in Ref. [6]. In the 1D setting, simulations
of the corresponding GPE with the cubic-quadratic non-
linearity demonstrate that the collision between slowly
moving droplets with zero phase difference between them
leads to their merger into a single one, in an excited
(breathing) state, while the collision between QDs with
phase difference π ends up with quasi-elastic rebound
[18]. Collisions with large velocities tend to exhibit quasi-
elastic outcomes, i.e., passage of the QDs through each
other, similar to collisions between usual matter-wave
solitons [20].
Another physically relevant problem is the consider-
ation of collisions of an incident QD with a local at-
tractive or repulsive defect, which may be represented
by a localized potential well or barrier, respectively. In
the experiment, such defects can be created by narrow
red- or blue-detuned laser beams illuminating the con-
densate [21]. For moving solitons this problem was con-
sidered, in various forms, in the framework of the nonlin-
ear Schrödinger equation (NLSE) [22–29]. In BEC, colli-
sions of matter-wave solitons with barriers were studied
both theoretically [30–33] and experimentally [21]. In
particular, much interest was drawn to the use of nar-
row potential barriers as splitters in the design of soliton
interferometers [34–39].
In this work, we aim to study scattering of QDs on
potential wells and barriers in the framework of the
one-dimensional LHY-corrected GPE with the cubic-
quadratic nonlinearity. The corresponding model is for-
mulated in Section II. Analytical results obtained for
the model are collected in Section III. In particular, we
consider quiescent QDs trapped in potential wells. For
the well represented by the delta-functional potential we
present three exact stable solutions for localized states
pinned to the narrow well. The Thomas-Fermi and adia-
batic approximations are considered too, for pinned and
moving QDs, respectively. Collisions of moving QDs with
 2

the barrier or well or studied by means of systematic

simulations in Section IV. The outcome of the collisions
is quantified by computing shares of the initial norm in
the transmitted, reflected and trapped waves (trapping
takes place in the case of the potential well). We also
plot maps, in the plane of the norm and velocity of the
incident QD, for values of the maximum strength of the
potential well admitting full transmission, and minimum
strength required for complete reflection. The paper is
concluded by Section V.

II. THE MODEL FIG. 1. Spatial density distributions, |ψ(x)|2 , as given by the
QD solution (7), for different values of norm (9), which are
indicated in the figure.
In this section we plan to summarize the theoretical
model in 1D. We start from the binary BEC with equal
self-repulsion coefficients in both components, g11 = Stationary solutions for QDs with chemical potential
g22 = g > 0, and equal numbers of atoms in them. This µ < 0, produced by Eq. (3), are looked for in the usual
setting makes it possible to consider the symmetric con- form,
figuration, with equal MF wave functions of the compo-
nents, ψ1 = ψ2 ≡ ψ. Then, defining a small difference be- ψ (x, t) = exp (−iµt) φ(x) , (5)
tween the inter-component attraction strength (g12 < 0)
where real stationary wave function φ(x) > 0 satisfies the
and intra-component self-repulsion, δg = g + g12 > 0,
equation
with δg  g, one can derive the effective 1D GPE in-
cluding the beyond-MF correction (the quadratic term) 1 d2 φ
as [12]: µφ = − + f (x)φ + φ3 − φ2 . (6)
2 dx2
√ In particular, the free-space version of Eq. (6), with
2 2
∂ψ h̄ ∂ ψ 2m 3/2 f (x) = 0, gives rise to the known family of exact QD
ih̄ =− + f (x)ψ + δg|ψ|2 ψ − g |ψ|ψ, solutions [12],
∂t 2m ∂x2 πh̄
(1)
where f (x) represents an external potential, and m is the 3µ
atomic mass. φ(x) = − p √
, (7)
Equation (1) determines characteristic units of length, 1+ 1 + 9µ/2 cosh −2µx
x0 , time, t0 , energy, E0 , and wave function, where µ < 0 is the chemical potential, which takes values
in a finite bandgap,
√
πh̄2 δg π 2 h̄3 δg 0 < −µ < 2/9. (8)
x0 = √ , t0 = ,
2mg 3/2 2mg 3
√ The norm of the soliton (7) is [12]
h̄2 h̄ 2m 3/2
E0 = 2 = , ψ0 = g , (2)
mx0 t0 πh̄δg +∞
" p ! #
3 −µ/2 + 1
Z
2 4 p
N= |ψ(x)| dx = ln p − 3 −µ/2 .
which suggests rescaling t ≡ t0 t̃, x ≡ x0 x̃, ψ ≡ ψ0 ψ̃, −∞ 3 1 + 9µ/2
f 0 (x) ≡ f˜(x̃)/E0 . In this notation, Eq. (1) is cast in the (9)
normalized form (where the tildes are omitted): Note that the dependence N (µ), as given by Eq. (9), sat-
isfies the celebrated Vakhitov-Kolokolov (VK) criterion,
∂ψ 1 ∂2ψ dN/dµ < 0, (10)
i =− + f (x)ψ + |ψ|2 ψ − |ψ|ψ, (3)
∂t 2 ∂x2
which is a necessary condition for the stability of localized
with Hamiltonian (energy), states supported by any self-attractive nonlinearity [40–
Z +∞ "  2 42].
1  ∂ψ  In the limit of µ → −0, the QD state (7) is similar to
E= + f (x)|ψ(x)|2
−∞ 2  ∂x  traditional solitons dominated by the quadratic nonlin-
2 1
 earity, such as ones produced by the Korteweg – de Vries
3 4
− |ψ(x)| + |ψ(x)| dx ≡ Ekin + Eint , (4) equation [43, 44],
3 2
3µ
which includes the kinetic, alias gradient (first), and in- φ(x) ≈ − p . (11)
2
teraction (potential) terms. cosh −µ/2x
 3

In the opposite limit, µ → −2/9 [see Eq. (8)], Eq. (7)

produces quasi-flat droplets (“puddles”, in terms of Ref.
[18]), with the nearly constant inner density,

φ2 (x) ≤ nmax = 4/9, (12)

and a logarithmically large width,

L ≈ (3/2) ln [1/ (1 + 9µ/2)] . (13)

Exactly at the border of the bandgap (8), µ = −2/9, QD

(7) carries over into the front solutions,

2/3
φfront (x; µ = −2/9) = , (14)
1 + exp (±2x/3)

which connect the zero state and the constant-amplitude

(alias continuous-wave, CW) one,

ψCW = (2/3) exp((2/9)it). (15)

In fact, the front solutions (14) represent boundaries of

a very broad flat-top QD.
Density profiles of the QD solution (7) with different
values of N are plotted in Fig. 1(a). In the figure, the
profiles corresponding to N = 20, 30, and 40 clearly ex-
hibit the flat-top shape. In agreement with the prediction
of the VK criterion, all the QDs (7) are stable solutions
of Eq. (3).
The Galilean invariance of Eq. (3) [with f (x) = 0]
makes it possible to set the QD in motion by application
of the boost (kick) to them with arbitrary parameter k,
which determines the velocity of the moving mode:

ψ (x, t) = exp ikx − i k 2 /2 t ψ (x − kt, t) .



(16)

The effective mass of the moving QD coincides with its

norm N , i.e., its kinetic energy is

Ekin = N k 2 /2 .


(17)

This result is used below to predict the threshold of the
rebound of the moving QD from a potential barrier, see
Eq. (40).
III. ANALYTICAL RESULTS
A. Localized modes pinned to narrow potential
wells: exact solutions
The discussion on the homogeneous solution allows us
to move forward and consider a situation where an ex-
ternal potential (f (x) 6= 0). Our primary objective is to
understand what happens to a QD when it encounters
responds to a potential well/barrier as described in Fig.
3.
However, if the width of the potential well is much
smaller than the size of the QD (which naturally happens
FIG. 2. Comparison between typical examples of analytical
solutions (blue solid lines), given, respectively, by Eqs. (21),
(22) and (29), (30), and their counterparts (red bar lines) pro-
duced by the numerical solution of Eq. (6) [with the Gaussian
potential (20) approximation the delta-function] is depicted in
(a) and (b). The respective values of ε in (a) and (b) are 0.2
and 0.3. It is seen that the analytical and numerical solutions
are indistinguishable. (c) The continuous dependence Nε (µ),
as produced by the analytical solutions given, severally, by
Eqs. (21) and (22) at µ > −2/9, and by Eqs. (29) and (30)
at µ < −2/9, for ε = 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 (red, green, and orange
lines, respectively). The vertical blue dashed line indicates the
boundary between the two analytical solutions, µ = −2/9. At
µ < −2/9, the curves are extended very close to the right edge
of interval (31), −µ = 2/9 + ε2 /2, beyond which solution (29)
does not exist. Counterparts of these curves produced by the
numerical solution (not shown here) are virtually identical to
the analytical ones.

FIG. 3. A schematic representation of a flat-top QD colliding
with a rectangular potential well with width 2a and depth V0 .
in the case if the flat-top QDs), potential (41) may be
naturally approximated by the delta-function,
f (x) = fε (x) = −εδ(x),
with strength
ε ≡ −2aV0 .
The same potential (18) with ε < 0 represents a nar-
row potential barrier, such as the one used as the soliton
splitter in interferometers [34–38].
The exact analytical solutions for nonlinear modes
pinned to the delta-functional potential well described in
Eq. (18), are produced below. We also substantiate these
analytical results numerically as described in Fig. 2(a,b).
The computational counterparts are provided by the nu-
merical solution of Eq. (6) where the delta-functional is
approximated by means of the standard Gaussian,
 2
1 x
δ̃(x) = √ exp − 2 , (20)
πσ σ potential well in the framework of the linear Schrödinger
with small width such that σ = 0.03 [45].
The exact solutions of Eq. (6) for QDs pinned to the
delta-functional potential well (18). First, in the interval
(8) of the values of µ, the pinned mode can be constructed
as a direct extension of its free-space counterpart, given
by Eq. (7), viz.,
3µ
φε (x, µ) = − p √
1+ 1 + 9µ/2 cosh −2µ (|x| + ξ)
where the positive “lost length” is
r "p # QDs is stable, according to the above-mentioned VK cri-
2 ε2 + (1 + 9µ/2) (−2µ − ε2 ) + ε
2ξ = − ln p √
.
µ 1 + 9µ/2 −2µ − ε
(22)
It is seen from Eq. (22) that the exact solutions for the
pinned states exists in the following interval of values of
the chemical potential,
ε2 /2 < −µ < 2/9,
4
which is reduced in comparison to the bandgap men-
tioned in Eq. (8). Thus it follows from Eq. (23) that the
pinned states of the QDs exist only if the delta-functional
pinning potential is not too strong, viz.,
ε < εmax = 2/3. (24)
A majority of numerical results are reported below for
ε ≡ −V0 < 2/3, i.e., condition (24) holds for them.
In the limit case of µ = −2/9, the exact solution for the
pinned QD, given by Eqs. (21) and (22) takes a simple
but nontrivial form:
2/3
φε (x, µ = −2/9) = −1 . (25)
1 + ε (2/3 − ε) exp (2|x|/3)
Note that, while the exact solution in Eq. (7) with µ =
−2/9 degenerates into the CW state as noted in Eq. (15)
with the divergent norm, solution (25) with the same µ
(18) remains a localized one, with a final norm [defined as in
Eq. (9)]
   
4 2 2
(19) Nε (µ = −2/9) = ln −2 −ε . (26)
3 3ε 3
In the opposite limit corresponding to the left edge of
interval (23),
µ → µ0 ≡ −ε2 /2, (27)
the solution given by Eqs. (21) and (22) degenerates into
φε (x; µ = −ε2 /2) = A exp (−ε|x|) , (28)
where A is an arbitrary infinitesimal amplitude. This
limit form of the solution is tantamount to the commonly
known bound state maintained by the delta-functional
equation.
A typical example of the exact solution produced by
Eqs. (21) and (22) is displayed in Fig. 2(a), where it is
compared with its counterpart produced by a numerical
solution of Eq. (6) with the potential well taken as per
Eqs. (41) and (19). It is seen that the analytical and
numerical solutions are virtually identical ones.
The comparison of the value of the norm given by Eq.
, (26) and the infinitesimal norm at µ = −ε2 /2 correspond-
ing to Eq. (28) suggests that the dependence Nε (µ) is
(21) monotonously decreasing. This feature, which is corrob-
orated by Fig. 2(c), suggests that the family of pinned
terion (10). [40–42]. Their stability is indeed corrobo-
rated by direct simulations of Eq. (3) (not shown here in
detail, as results of the simulations are straightforward).
In the presence of the attractive δ-functional potential,
it is possible to find another exact solution for pinned
QDs in the region of µ < −2/9, where free-space solitons
(7) do not exist. In the case when ε satisfies the condition
(23) (24), this region extends the existence interval (8). The

corresponding exact solution, which has no counterparts
in the free space, is
3µ
φ̃ε (x) = − p √ 
1 + −(1 + 9µ/2) sinh −2µ (|x| + η)
(29)
[cf. expression (7) for the solution constructed above],
the positive “lost length” is
r "p #
2 ε2 − (1 + 9µ/2) (ε2 + 2µ) + ε
2η = − ln p √
, (30)
µ − (1 + 9µ/2) −2µ − ε
cf. Eq. (22). Expression (29) is relevant if it yields real
values of η. This condition holds in the following finite
interval of values of the chemical potential,
2/9 ≤ −µ ≤ 2/9 + ε2 /2. (31)
It is a straightforward annex to interval (23) in which the
above solution (21) exists. As well as the latter solution,
the one given by Eqs. (29) and (30) satisfies the VK
stability criterion (10), as shown in Fig. 2(c). Note that,
in the limit of µ + 2/9 → −0, solution (29) takes the
same form (25) to which the above solution (21) amounts
at µ + 2/9 → +0, hence solution (29) provides smooth
continuation of (21) across the point of µ + 2/9 = 0 [see
an illustration in Fig. 2(c)].
The exact solution (29) can also be constructed in the
region of
ε > 2/3, (32)
i.e., outside of the region (24). In this case, expression
(30) is replaced by
" p # This crude analysis predicts, in a quantitative form, that
1 ε − ε2 − (1 + 9µ/2) (ε2 + 2µ)
η=√ ln p √ , (33)
−2µ


− (1 + 9µ/2) −2µ − ε
and the solution exists in the same interval of the chem-
ical potential as given by Eq. (31), while it has no coun-
terpart at −µ < 2/9. Indeed, in the limit of µ+2/9 → −0
Eqs. (29) and (33) demonstrate that the solution degen-
erates into φ = 0 [on the contrary to the nonzero solution
(25), into which solution (21) carries over in the limit of
µ + 2/9 → +0], thus providing the natural continuity
with the absence of the pinned solution at µ > −2/9 in
the region (32). On the other hand, point (27), where
solution (21) vanishes, as shown above [see Eq. (28)], is
now an internal point of interval (31), due to condition
(32). At this point, the present solution takes a relatively
simple form,
φε (x; µ = −ε2 /2)
3ε2 /2
= p .
1 + 9ε2 /4 − 1 sinh [ε|x| + (1/2) ln (9ε2 /4 − 1)]
(34)
The family of the exact solutions produced by Eqs.
(29) and (33) also satisfies the VK criterion; in particular,
5
the norm decreases from a finite value, corresponding to
solution (34), at µ = −ε2 /2 to N = 0 at µ = −2/9. The
compliance of the present family with the VK criterion
implies its stability.
B. The Thomas-Fermi (TF) approximation for
pinned state
A specific analytical approximation for solutions to Eq.
(6) with the deep potential well (41), i.e., with large −V0
and µ < 0, is provided by the TF approximation, which
neglects the derivative (kinetic-energy) term:

q
 1 + 1 − (V0 − µ), at |x| < a,
2 4q
φTF (x) = (35)
1 1
+ 4 + µ, at |x| > a

2
[in fact, the solution (35) at |x| > a is relevant for the
flat-top QD, with µ ≈ −2/9, the nearly constant solution
around the potential well being close to the CW back-
ground (15)]. Then, for a small perturbation δφ added
to φTF (x), the linearization of the nonlinear term in Eq.
(6) produces, in the lowest approximation with respect
to the fact that −V0 > 0 is a large parameter, an effec-
tive term in the GPE, +3εδ(x) · δφ, where ε is defined as
per Eq. (19), and δ(x) is introduced in the same approx-
imation as in Eq. (18). Then, the combination of this
term and one corresponding to Eq. (18) gives rise to an
effective repulsive potential,
feffective (x) = +2ε(x). (36)
the collision of a flat-top QD with the deep potential well
may lead, instead of the naturally expected passage, to
the counterintuitive outcome in the form of rebound. This
possibility is indeed demonstrated by numerical results
reported below. It is relevant to mention that reflection
of incident wave packets from a potential well is a well-
known quantum effect, which was also elaborated in the
framework of the MF theory [24, 25].
C. The interaction of the moving QD with a
narrow potential barrier
As mentioned above, collisions of moving matter-wave
packets with narrow potential barriers is a problem of
high relevance for the design of soliton interferometers
[34–38]. In the present context, treating the repulsive
delta-functional potential (18) as a perturbation [46]
makes it possible to predict the threshold value kthr of ve-
locity k [see Eq. (16)] which separates the rebound and
passage of the incoming QD. In the adiabatic approxi-
mation, which neglects deformation of the QD under the
action of the barrier, an effective potential of the inter-
action of the QD with the barrier can be found, in the
 6

the QD due to its interaction with the local potential) as

Z +∞
2
Ueff (Ξ) = −ε δ(x) |ψ (x − Ξ)| dx
−∞
9εµ2
= −h
i2 ,
p √
1 + 1 + 9µ/2 cosh −2µΞ
(37)
where Ξ(t) is the coordinate of the center of the mov-
ing QD. Obviously, the height of the effective potential
barrier (37) is

9εµ2
Umax =  p 2 , (38)
1 + 1 + 9µ/2
FIG. 4. The plot of the spatiotemporal evolution of the den-
sity, |ψ (x, t)|2 , presents an example of the full passage of the hence the comparison of this expression with the QD’s
incident QD through the potential well (41), for parameters kinetic energy (17) predicts the threshold value as
indicated in the figure.
2 18εµ2
kthr =  p 2 , (39)
N (µ) 1 + 1 + 9µ/2

where N (µ) is to be taken as per Eq. (9). The incident

QD with k < kthr or k > kthr is expected, respectively,
to bounce back or pass over the barrier.
In the limit case of flat-top QDs, which correspond to
µ close to −2/9 [see Eq. (8)], Eqs. (38) and (39) take a
simplified form:
4 2 8ε
Umax ≈ ε, kthr ≈ . (40)
9 9N
It may also be relevant to consider shuttle motion of the
QD in a cavity formed by two narrow barriers, sepa-
rated by a large distance L. The period of the motion
with velocity k is T = 2L/k, hence the largest shut-
tle frequency which can be maintained by the cavity is
ωmax = πkthr /L.

IV. NUMERICAL ANALYSIS

In this section we aim to study the dynamics of QDs

while subjected to a potential well/barrier. For this pur-
pose we perform the numerical simulation of Eq. (3) us-
ing the split-step method based on the fast-Fourier trans-
form. In the numerical simulations, the local potential in
Eq. (3) was taken as a rectangular one as described in
FIG. 5. (a) An example of the partial transmission of the
incident QD through the potential well (41) with depth V0 =
Fig.3,
−0.14. A very small share of the wave function is trapped 
in the well. (b) The temporal evolution of the transmitted,
V0 , for − a < x < +a,
f (x) = (41)
trapped and reflected shares, defined as per Eqs. (43). 0, for |x| > a.

The potential landscape can be both well or barrier based

on the sign of V0 . V0 < 0 describes potential well while
V0 > 0 is a barrier.
The numerical results are reported for the width of
adiabatic approximation (which neglects deformation of the potential well a = 0.5, which is small in comparison
 7

with other length scales, such as the width of the incident

QDs, and justifies the use of the approximation (18). In
this case, Eq. (19) yields ε = −V0 . Here, we apply zero
boundary condition corresponding to an infinitely deep
potential box while occupying a broad spatial domain,
|x| < L = 200. The initial wave function was taken as

ψ(x, t = 0) = exp(ikx)φ(x − xinit ), (42)

where φ(x) is the stationary solution (7) for the QD, k

is the kick which sets the QD in motion, and xinit is its
initial position.

A. Moving droplets

It is natural to expect that the travelling droplets can

manifest different characteristics while subjected to an
inhomogeneous potential landscape. These droplets can
be transmitted or reflected or even can be trapped based
on the initial kick (k) or the strength of the potential.
The transmitted, trapped, and reflected components
of the wave function, can be noted as,
Z L
Ntrans = dx|ψ(x, t)|2 ,
a FIG. 6. (a) An example of the partial transmission and partial
Z +a
reflection of the incident QD colliding with the potential well
Ntrap = dx|ψ(x, t)|2 , (41), whose depth is V0 = −0.248. (b) The temporal evolution
−a
Z−a
of the transmitted, trapped and reflected norms as defined in
Nref = dx|ψ(x, t)|2 , (43) Eq. (43).
−L

which are subject to the obvious constraint, Ntrans +

Ntrap + Nref = N throughout the dynamics.
At this stage we check the effect of the potential
strength with fixed k and N . However we will report the
role of the initial velocity and the norm in the later stages.
We start our numerical calculation with xinit = 65,
moving with velocity k towards the local potential bar-
rier/well defined by Eq. (41) with the width scaled to be
a = 0.5.
At the beginning, we present characteristic results ob-
tained for the total norm N = 40 and velocity k = 0.1.
This relatively low collision velocity is appropriate for
producing nontrivial results, while the fast moving QD
simply passes the barrier/well, or elastically bounces
back from a very tall barrier. Conclusions valid for
generic values of the N and k are formulated below.
Figure 4 presents an example of the total transmission
of the QD through the potential well (41) with depth
V0 = −0.13. Yellow lines in the density plot indicate
excitations inside of the QD generated by the collision
with the well (intrinsic excitation modes in quasi-1D QDs
were studied in Ref. [19]).
A trapped fraction of the wave field appears for a larger
depth of the potential well. As an example, Fig. 5 shows
the transmission with partial capture of the wave func-
tion at V0 = −0.14. Further increase of −V0 causes par-
tial reflection of the QD from the potential well, which is
in qualitative agreement with the above prediction, see
Eq. (36). The obvious fact that the trapped share re-
mains very small, as seen, e.g., in Fig. 6 at V0 = −0.248
and in other figures displayed above, has a simple ex-
planation. Indeed, the trapped mode maintained by the
narrow potential well is narrow itself in comparison to
the incident flat-top QD, its norm also being relatively
small. A characteristic example of this feature is pre-
sented by solution (25) with norm (26) for µ = −2/9,
while the QD’s norm diverges at µ = −2/9.
Further increase of the depth of the potential well leads
to a regime in which the incident QD splits in three dif-
ferent parts, viz., the transmitted, reflected, and (small)
trapped wave packets. Figures 7 and 9 display examples
of this outcome of the collisions for depths V0 = −0.30
and V0 = −0.31, respectively. The former case is addi-
tionally illustrated in Fig. 8 by a set of snapshots of the
density profiles. It is seen that all the three packets are
produced by the collision is in excited states, and a small
change of V0 , from −0.30 to −0.31, leads to a conspicu-
ous change of the dynamical picture. In terms of energy,
these collisions are considered in the next subsection.
In accordance with the above qualitative analysis,
based on the TF approximation and Eq. (36), nearly
full reflection of the incident QD is observed at larger
values of the well’s depth −V0 , as illustrated in Figs. 10

FIG. 7. (a) The splitting of the QD impinging onto poten-
tial well (41), with depth V0 = −0.3, into the transmitted,
trapped and reflected parts are depicted. (b) The time evo-
lution of the norms of the transmitted, trapped and reflected
waves are plotted. (c) The figure magnifies the the evolution
of the norm corresponding to the trapped wave [described by
the orange line in (b)].
for V0 = −0.55. A very small trapped component is ob-
served too, while transmission ceases to exist.
Besides the collision, splitting of the 1D QD into two
or several fragments can also be caused by imprinting
sufficiently small intrinsic excitation onto it [18].
B. Analysis of energy in the trapping process
To consider the role of energy in the trapping dynam-
ics for the attractive potential, we use Eq. (4) for the
system’s Hamiltonian, and address the case when the in-
cident QD splits in three fragments, as shown in Figs. 7
8
FIG. 8. Snapshots of the QD colliding with the potential
well of depth V0 = −0.3 at (a) t = 100, (b) t = 300, (c)
t = 800. Over the time the incident QD splits into a larger
reflected part and a smaller transmitted one, along with a
narrow trapped mode [as described in (c)].
(recall it corresponds to the collision of the QD with the
potential well (41) of depth −V0 = 0.3. The results will
help to understand the situation in the general case as
well.
In Fig. 11 we have plotted the variation of kinetic
and interaction energies in this case, which naturally
demonstrates, for the flat-top QD, the domination of
the negative potential energy, which saturates around
−8.6, over the kinetic energy, which takes values around
0.20. Further, Fig. 12 demonstrates that kinetic energies
of the transmitted part and reflected wave packets are
nearly equal, while their velocities and masses (norms)
are widely different, as seen in Fig. 7. Simultaneously,
the kinetic energy of the trapped packet oscillates around
0.006, indicating the presence of low-frequency excita-
tions in it. On the other hand, the absolute values of the
 9

FIG. 9. (a) The partial reflection at V0 = −0.31, with a

very small packet trapped in the well. (b) The variation of
the transmitted, trapped and reflected norms are noted which
clearly indicates a predominantly reflection of the waves.

negative interaction (potential) energy in the reflected

wave function is larger by a factor ' 3 than in the trans-
mitted one, due to the obvious fact that the norm of the
reflected packet is essentially larger in Fig. 7.
Due to the small values of the kinetic and interaction
energies in the trapped wave are difficult to discern in
Figs. 11 and 12, they are displayed in detail in Fig. 13.
As said above, persistent oscillations of the energies in-
dicate that the trapped wave packet was created in the
excited state. The ratio of the absolute values of the
interaction and kinetic energies for this state is ' 30,
which is comparable to the same ratios for the reflected
and transmitted packets in Figs. 11 and 12.

C. Effects of the norm (number of particles) and

velocity on scattering of the quantum droplets
FIG. 10. (a) A reasonably deep potential well with depth
As mentioned earlier, the collision of the QD with a V0 = −0.55 leads to nearly total reflection of the QD. (b)-
sufficiently deep potential well tends to make the reflec- (d): Snapshots of the density profile at different times which
tion (rather than the naively expected transmission) a clearly substantiates the observation of (a). However, a very
dominant feature of the interaction [as predicted, in par- small fraction of trapped states can also be viewed from (a)
ticular, by Eq. (36)]. For this reason, it is interesting to and (d).
identify the largest well’s depth, −V0 , which still admits
the full transmission (passage) of the incident QD. Figure
14(a) presents a heatmap for such values of −V0 as a func-
tion of the droplet’s norm (scaled number of particles),

FIG. 11. The time dependence of (a) the kinetic (gradient)
and (b) interaction (potential) energies in the case corre-
sponding to Fig. 7. The widely different vertical scales in
both the panels are noteworthy (though expected).
FIG. 12. The time dependence of (a) the kinetic (gradient)
and (b) interaction (potential) energies of the transmitted,
trapped and reflected wave packets corresponding to Fig. 7.
The green, blue and red lines describes the reflected, trans-
mitted and trapped waves respectively.
10
FIG. 13. The time dependence of (a) the kinetic (gradient)
and (b) interaction (potential) energies of the trapped state
created by the collison of the incident QD with the narrow
potential well, in the case shown in Fig. 7.
N , and speed, k. It is clearly seen that a maximum value
of the so defined depth is achieved for moderate values of
the norm, around N ' 25. This fact may be understood
because the norm should be relatively large to consider
the interaction with the potential well as a relatively weak
perturbation, which cannot produce a conspicuous effect
(such as the reflection) and, on the other hand, if the
norm is too large, it will switch on the TF effect which
gives rise to the effective repulsive potential, as per Eq.
(36). As for the effect of the velocity k, it may be ex-
plained in a coarse approximation, by noting that, unless
the collision is very slow, it excites the above-mentioned
intrinsic oscillations in the trapped wave packet, which
impedes the straightforward transmission.
The above-mentioned counter-intuitive result, namely,
the full rebound of the incident QD from the deep narrow
potential well, deserves a detailed consideration too. The
result is summarized in the Fig. 14(b), which presents, in
the plane of (N, k), a heatmap of the minimum (thresh-
old) value of the well’s depth −V0 above which the full
rebound takes place. The asymptotic independence of
the threshold on N is explained by the fact that the out-
come of the collision of the incident flat-top QD with the
narrow potential well is determined by the interaction
of the well with the front (14) separating the zero and
flat-top [near-CW, see Eq. (15)] levels of the density,
irrespective of the width of the QD pattern.
Finally, we have performed the numerical analysis of

FIG. 14. (a) The pseudo-color map (heatmap) of the max-
imum value of the potential-well’s depth −V0 which admits
the full transmission (passage) of the incident QD, as a func-
tion of the QD’s norm N and velocity k. (b) The heatmap
of the minimum (threshold) value of −V0 which provides the
counter-intuitive outcome of the collision, viz., full rebound of
the QD from the narrow potential well.
the interaction of the incident QDs with the narrow bar-
rier, which is represented by the narrow potential (41)
with V0 > 0. The results are summarized in Fig. 15,
in which panel (a) and (b) display, respectively, the
heatmaps, in the (N, k) plane, for the maximum value
of V0 which admits the full transmission of the incident
QD, and the minimum (threshold) one above which the
total reflection occurs. In the above-mentioned adiabatic
approximation, which neglects deformation of the QD
colliding with the potential barrier [46], both values of V0
would be equal. The strong difference between the left
and right panels of Fig. 15 implies that the deformation,
including fission of the incident QD into the transmitted
and reflected fragments, is a conspicuous effect. Never-
theless, Eqs. (39) and (40) make it possible to explain
qualitative features observed in the right panel of Fig. 15.
In particular, this is the growth of the threshold value of
V0 with the increase of k at fixed N .
11
FIG. 15. (a) The variation of the maximum total transmission
potential strength with the change of k and N for a potential
barrier is depicted here. (b) The figure described the corre-
sponding variation of the minimum total reflection potential
strength with the change of k and N .
V. CONCLUSION
Using the known one-dimensional GPE (Gross-
Pitaevskii equation) with the cubic self-repulsion and
quadratic attraction induced by quantum fluctuations,
we have studied in detail the static and dynamic solutions
for QDs (quantum droplets) interacting with narrow po-
tential wells and barriers. In the case of the potential
well represented by the delta-functional potential, three
different stable solutions for QDs pinned by the delta-
functional potential are found in the exact form. The
TF (Thomas-Fermi) approximation for the narrow rect-
angular well, and the adiabatic approximation for the
collision of the QD with the potential barrier are elabo-
rated too. Collisions of moving QDs with the well or bar-
rier are systematically studied by means of direct GPE
simulations. The results are reported by means of dia-
grams which represent outcomes of the collisions, includ-
ing the splitting of the incident QD into transmitted and
reflected fragments, as well as a small trapped one, are
identified in the plane of the QD’s norm and velocity.
In particular, a counter-intuitive outcome in the form of

the reflection of the QD by the potential well is identi-
fied and qualitatively explained. In the general case, the
transmitted, reflected and trapped wave packets emerge
in excited states, featuring intrinsic oscillations.
As mentioned earlier, the collisional dynamics of mat-
ter wave solitons are well studied in literature. After the
experimental advent of the QDs it is natural curiosity to
investigate the response of these QDs against an obstacle.
Here, we have tried to fill this void through this system-
atic study of the QDs against potential well/barrier. We
expect our theoretical observations will complement the
future experiments and open up new avenues in the con-
[1] T. D. Lee, K. Huang, C. N. Yang, Eigenvalues and eigen-
functions of a bose system of hard spheres and its low-
temperature properties, Physical Review 106 (6) (1957)
1135.
[2] D. Petrov, Quantum mechanical stabilization of a
collapsing bose-bose mixture, Physical review letters
115 (15) (2015) 155302.
[3] C. Cabrera, L. Tanzi, J. Sanz, B. Naylor, P. Thomas,
P. Cheiney, L. Tarruell, Quantum liquid droplets in a
mixture of bose-einstein condensates, Science 359 (6373)
(2018) 301–304.
[4] P. Cheiney, C. Cabrera, J. Sanz, B. Naylor, L. Tanzi,
L. Tarruell, Bright soliton to quantum droplet transition
in a mixture of bose-einstein condensates, Physical re-
view letters 120 (13) (2018) 135301.
[5] G. Semeghini, G. Ferioli, L. Masi, C. Mazzinghi, L. Wol-
swijk, F. Minardi, M. Modugno, G. Modugno, M. Ingus-
cio, M. Fattori, Self-bound quantum droplets of atomic
mixtures in free space, Physical review letters 120 (23)
(2018) 235301.
[6] G. Ferioli, G. Semeghini, L. Masi, G. Giusti, G. Mod-
ugno, M. Inguscio, A. Gallemı́, A. Recati, M. Fattori,
Collisions of self-bound quantum droplets, Physical re-
view letters 122 (9) (2019) 090401.
[7] C. D’Errico, A. Burchianti, M. Prevedelli, L. Salas-
nich, F. Ancilotto, M. Modugno, F. Minardi, C. Fort,
Observation of quantum droplets in a heteronuclear
bosonic mixture, Phys. Rev. Res. 1 (2019) 033155.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.1.033155.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/
PhysRevResearch.1.033155
[8] M. Schmitt, M. Wenzel, F. Böttcher, I. Ferrier-Barbut,
T. Pfau, Self-bound droplets of a dilute magnetic quan-
tum liquid, Nature 539 (7628) (2016) 259–262.
[9] L. Chomaz, S. Baier, D. Petter, M. Mark, F. Wächtler,
L. Santos, F. Ferlaino, Quantum-fluctuation-driven
crossover from a dilute bose-einstein condensate to a
macrodroplet in a dipolar quantum fluid, Physical Re-
view X 6 (4) (2016) 041039.
[10] Z.-H. Luo, W. Pang, B. Liu, Y.-Y. Li, B. A. Malomed, A
new form of liquid matter: Quantum droplets, Frontiers
of Physics 16 (2021) 1–21.
[11] A. Khan, A. Debnath, Quantum droplet in lower dimen-
sions, Frontiers in Physics (2022) 534.
[12] D. Petrov, G. Astrakharchik, Ultradilute low-
dimensional liquids, Physical review letters 117 (10)
12
text of matter wave interferometry.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The work of B.A.M. was supported, in part, by the Is-
rael Science Foundation through grant No. 1695/22. AK
thanks Department of Science and Technology (DST), In-
dia for the support provided through the project number
CRG/2019/000108.
(2016) 100401.
[13] T. Ilg, J. Kumlin, L. Santos, D. S. Petrov, H. P. Büchler,
Dimensional crossover for the beyond-mean-field correc-
tion in bose gases, Physical Review A 98 (5) (2018)
051604.
[14] P. Zin, M. Pylak, M. Gajda, Revisiting a stability prob-
lem of two-component quantum droplets, Physical Re-
view A 103 (1) (2021) 013312.
[15] M. Edmonds, T. Bland, N. Parker, Quantum droplets of
quasi-one-dimensional dipolar bose–einstein condensates,
Journal of Physics Communications 4 (12) (2020) 125008.
[16] A. Debnath, A. Khan, Investigation of quantum droplets:
An analytical approach, Ann. Phys. (Berlin) 533 (2021)
2000549.
[17] A. Debnath, A. Khan, S. Basu, Dropleton-soliton
crossover mediated via trap modulation, Physics Letters
A 439 (2022) 128137.
[18] G. Astrakharchik, B. A. Malomed, Dynamics of one-
dimensional quantum droplets, Physical Review A 98 (1)
(2018) 013631.
[19] M. Tylutki, G. E. Astrakharchik, B. A. Malomed, D. S.
Petrov, Collective excitations of a one-dimensional quan-
tum droplet, Physical Review A 101 (5) (2020) 051601.
[20] N. Parker, A. Martin, S. Cornish, C. Adams, Collisions
of bright solitary matter waves, Journal of Physics B:
Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 41 (4) (2008)
045303.
[21] A. Marchant, T. Billam, M. Yu, A. Rakonjac, J. Helm,
J. Polo, C. Weiss, S. Gardiner, S. Cornish, Quantum re-
flection of bright solitary matter waves from a narrow
attractive potential, Physical Review A 93 (2) (2016)
021604.
[22] H. Sakaguchi, M. Tamura, Scattering and trapping of
nonlinear schrödinger solitons in external potentials,
Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 73 (3) (2004)
503–506.
[23] R. H. Goodman, P. J. Holmes, M. I. Weinstein, Strong
nls soliton–defect interactions, Physica D: Nonlinear Phe-
nomena 192 (3-4) (2004) 215–248.
[24] C. Lee, J. Brand, Enhanced quantum reflection of
matter-wave solitons, Europhysics Letters 73 (3) (2005)
321.
[25] T. Ernst, J. Brand, Resonant trapping in the transport of
a matter-wave soliton through a quantum well, Physical
Review A 81 (3) (2010) 033614.

[26] L. D. Carr, R. R. Miller, D. R. Bolton, S. A. Strong, Non-
linear scattering of a bose-einstein condensate on a rect-
angular barrier, Physical Review A 86 (2) (2012) 023621.
[27] C.-H. Wang, T.-M. Hong, R.-K. Lee, D.-W. Wang,
Particle-wave duality in quantum tunneling of a bright
soliton, Optics Express 20 (20) (2012) 22675–22682.
[28] A. Harel, B. A. Malomed, Interactions of spatial solitons
with fused couplers, Physical Review A 89 (4) (2014)
043809.
[29] L. Al Sakkaf, U. Al Khawaja, Reflectionless potentials
and resonant scattering of flat-top and thin-top soli-
tons, Phys. Rev. E 107 (2023) 014202. doi:10.1103/
PhysRevE.107.014202.
URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevE.
107.014202
[30] J. L. Helm, T. P. Billam, S. A. Gardiner, Bright matter-
wave soliton collisions at narrow barriers, Physical Re-
view A 85 (5) (2012) 053621.
[31] B. Gertjerenken, T. P. Billam, L. Khaykovich, C. Weiss,
Scattering bright solitons: Quantum versus mean-field
behavior, Physical Review A 86 (3) (2012) 033608.
[32] S.-C. Li, F.-Q. Dou, Matter-wave interactions in two-
component bose-einstein condensates, Europhysics Let-
ters 111 (3) (2015) 30005.
[33] C. L. Grimshaw, S. A. Gardiner, B. A. Malomed, Split-
ting of two-component solitary waves from collisions with
narrow potential barriers, Physical Review A 101 (4)
(2020) 043623.
[34] A. Martin, J. Ruostekoski, Quantum dynamics of atomic
bright solitons under splitting and recollision, and impli-
cations for interferometry, New Journal of physics 14 (4)
(2012) 043040.
[35] J. Polo, V. Ahufinger, Soliton-based matter-wave inter-
ferometer, Physical Review A 88 (5) (2013) 053628.
[36] J. Helm, S. Rooney, C. Weiss, S. Gardiner, Splitting
bright matter-wave solitons on narrow potential barri-
ers: Quantum to classical transition and applications to
13
interferometry, Physical Review A 89 (3) (2014) 033610.
[37] O. J. Wales, A. Rakonjac, T. P. Billam, J. L. Helm,
S. A. Gardiner, S. L. Cornish, Splitting and recombi-
nation of bright-solitary-matter waves, Communications
Physics 3 (1) (2020) 51.
[38] C. L. Grimshaw, T. P. Billam, S. A. Gardiner, Soliton
interferometry with very narrow barriers obtained from
spatially dependent dressed states, Physical Review Let-
ters 129 (4) (2022) 040401.
[39] H. Sakaguchi, B. A. Malomed, Matter-wave soliton inter-
ferometer based on a nonlinear splitter, New Journal of
Physics 18 (2) (2016) 025020.
[40] N. Vakhitov, A. Kolokolov, Stability criterion for solitary
waves, Izv Vyssh Uchebn Zaved Radiofiz 16 (2) (1973)
1020–1026.
[41] L. Bergé, Wave collapse in physics: principles and appli-
cations to light and plasma waves, Physics reports 303 (5-
6) (1998) 259–370.
[42] G. Fibich, The nonlinear Schrödinger equation: singular
solutions and optical collapse, Vol. 192, Springer, 2015.
[43] D. J. Korteweg, G. De Vries, Xli. on the change of form
of long waves advancing in a rectangular canal, and on
a new type of long stationary waves, The London, Edin-
burgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal
of Science 39 (240) (1895) 422–443.
[44] S. Novikov, S. V. Manakov, L. P. Pitaevskii, V. E.
Zakharov, Theory of solitons: the inverse scattering
method, Springer Science & Business Media, 1984.
[45] L. Wang, B. A. Malomed, Z. Yan, Attraction centers and
parity-time-symmetric delta-functional dipoles in critical
and supercritical self-focusing media, Physical Review E
99 (5) (2019) 052206.
[46] Y. S. Kivshar, B. A. Malomed, Dynamics of solitons in
nearly integrable systems, Reviews of Modern Physics
61 (4) (1989) 763.