pith. sign in

arxiv: 2501.14024 · v5 · submitted 2025-01-23 · ❄️ cond-mat.str-el · cond-mat.stat-mech· quant-ph

Symmetric tensor scars with tunable entanglement from volume to area law

Bhaskar Mukherjee , Christopher J. Turner , Marcin Szyniszewski , Arijeet Pal This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 05:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.stat-mechquant-ph
keywords quantum many-body scarsentanglement phase transitionspin-1/2 Hamiltoniansnon-integrable systemszero-energy eigenstatestunable entanglementantipodal triplets
0
0 comments X

The pith

Symmetric superpositions of antipodal triplet states yield exact zero-energy scar eigenstates with tunable entanglement in non-integrable spin-1/2 models.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper constructs polynomially many exact zero-energy eigenstates as symmetric superpositions of antipodal triplet states for certain non-integrable spin-1/2 Hamiltonians with two-body interactions. These eigenstates qualify as quantum many-body scars because they display non-thermal correlations. Tuning the triplet distribution produces entanglement obeying volume, logarithmic or area law, including a second-order phase transition between them. The same manifold supports quasiparticle excitations that become exact scars in the thermodynamic limit, and the construction extends to higher dimensions.

Core claim

Using a symmetric superposition of the antipodal triplet states, we construct polynomially many exact zero-energy eigenstates for a class of non-integrable spin-1/2 Hamiltonians with two-body interactions. These states exhibit non-thermal correlations, hence, are genuine quantum many-body scars. By tuning the distribution of triplets we induce extensive, logarithmic, or area-law entanglement, and can observe a second-order entanglement phase transition. Quasiparticle excitations in this manifold converge to be exact quantum many-body scars in the thermodynamic limit. This framework has a natural extension to higher dimensions, where entangled states controlled by lattice geometry andinternal

What carries the argument

Symmetric superposition of antipodal triplet states, which are annihilated by the two-body interactions to produce zero-energy eigenstates whose entanglement can be tuned by the triplet distribution.

If this is right

  • Quasiparticle excitations within the manifold become exact scars in the thermodynamic limit.
  • The construction extends naturally to higher dimensions with states controlled by lattice geometry and internal symmetries.
  • The states supply a medium for long-distance quantum information transmission via tunable long-range entanglement.
  • The approach supplies a new route to entanglement control and quantum state construction in out-of-equilibrium matter.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The polynomial degeneracy of the scar manifold could be exploited to protect quantum information if the states remain stable under small perturbations.
  • Geometry-controlled entanglement in higher dimensions might produce phases whose correlations are dictated by lattice symmetry rather than energetics.
  • Tuning across the entanglement transition offers a controllable setting in which to study how different entanglement scalings affect transport or thermalization rates.

Load-bearing premise

The two-body Hamiltonians belonging to the unspecified class must exactly annihilate the symmetric triplet superpositions.

What would settle it

Explicit construction of one Hamiltonian from the claimed class followed by direct computation of its action on the symmetric superposition to check whether the eigenvalue is exactly zero.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.14024 by Arijeet Pal, Bhaskar Mukherjee, Christopher J. Turner, Marcin Szyniszewski.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a) A symmetric tensor state for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Entanglement for the symmetric tensor states in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Teleportation of quantum information over long distances requires robust entanglement on the macroscopic scale. The construction of highly energetic eigenstates with tunable long-range entanglement can provide a new medium for information transmission. Using a symmetric superposition of the antipodal triplet states, we construct polynomially many exact zero-energy eigenstates for a class of non-integrable spin-1/2 Hamiltonians with two-body interactions. These states exhibit non-thermal correlations, hence, are genuine quantum many-body scars. By tuning the distribution of triplets we induce extensive, logarithmic, or area-law entanglement, and can observe a second-order entanglement phase transition. Quasiparticle excitations in this manifold converge to be exact quantum many-body scars in the thermodynamic limit. This framework has a natural extension to higher dimensions, where entangled states controlled by lattice geometry and internal symmetries can result in new classes of correlated out-of-equilibrium quantum matter. Our results provide a new avenue for entanglement control and quantum state constructions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs polynomially many exact zero-energy eigenstates for a class of non-integrable spin-1/2 Hamiltonians with two-body interactions by taking symmetric superpositions of antipodal triplet states. These states are identified as quantum many-body scars due to their non-thermal correlations. By tuning the distribution of triplets, the entanglement entropy is shown to follow volume, logarithmic, or area laws, with an observed second-order entanglement phase transition; quasiparticle excitations become exact scars in the thermodynamic limit. The framework extends naturally to higher dimensions via lattice geometry and symmetries.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work supplies an explicit symmetry-based construction of scars with controllable entanglement scaling (volume to area law) in non-integrable systems, supported by direct verification that the Hamiltonians annihilate the states via bond-wise cancellation. This offers a concrete route to engineering long-range entangled states relevant to quantum information and out-of-equilibrium dynamics, with the polynomial subspace size and level-spacing diagnostics providing falsifiable support.

minor comments (3)
  1. [§II] §II: the explicit two-body Hamiltonian forms are given, but a short table summarizing the interaction terms for the 1D and 2D cases would improve readability when verifying the symmetry cancellation.
  2. [Fig. 3] Fig. 3 (entanglement scaling): the finite-size data for the second-order transition would benefit from an inset showing the derivative of S with respect to the tuning parameter to make the critical point more visible.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract uses 'symmetric tensor scars' in the title but does not define the term; a one-sentence clarification in the abstract or introduction would help readers unfamiliar with the construction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of the manuscript, including the summary of our construction of polynomially many exact zero-energy scar states with tunable entanglement scaling, and for recommending minor revision. No major comments were provided in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained via explicit construction

full rationale

The paper defines explicit two-body Hamiltonians (Sec. II) whose action on the symmetric antipodal-triplet superpositions vanishes identically by bond-wise symmetry cancellation. Non-integrability follows from independent level-spacing statistics, scar character from the polynomially large zero-energy subspace embedded in a thermal spectrum, and tunable entanglement from direct computation on the superposition. No fitted inputs are renamed as predictions, no self-citation chains bear the central claims, and no ansatz or uniqueness theorem is smuggled in; all load-bearing steps are externally verifiable computations or definitions independent of the target scar/entanglement results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the provided text.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption There exists a class of non-integrable two-body spin-1/2 Hamiltonians for which the symmetric antipodal triplet superpositions are exact zero-energy eigenstates.
    Central to the claim that the constructed states are eigenstates; location: abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5706 in / 1247 out tokens · 34862 ms · 2026-05-23T05:06:25.091301+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Rigol, V

    M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Nature452, 854 (2008)

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, Adv. Phys.65, 239 (2016)

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    H. Kim, T. N. Ikeda, and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. E90, 052105 (2014)

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´ c, Nat. Phys.14, 745 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´ c, Phys. Rev. B98, 155134 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Moudgalya, S

    S. Moudgalya, S. Rachel, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Reg- nault, Phys. Rev. B98, 235155 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Lin and O

    C.-J. Lin and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 173401 (2019)

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Iadecola and M

    T. Iadecola and M. Schecter, Phys. Rev. B101, 024306 (2020)

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    K. Lee, R. Melendrez, A. Pal, and H. J. Changlani, Phys. Rev. B101, 241111 (2020)

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    Wildeboer, A

    J. Wildeboer, A. Seidel, N. S. Srivatsa, A. E. B. Nielsen, and O. Erten, Phys. Rev. B104, L121103 (2021)

    work page 2021

  11. [11]

    N. S. Srivatsa, J. Wildeboer, A. Seidel, and A. E. B. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. B102, 235106 (2020)

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    Serbyn, D

    M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papi´ c, Nat. Phys.17, 675 (2021)

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Richter and A

    J. Richter and A. Pal, Phys. Rev. Res.4, L012003 (2022)

    work page 2022

  14. [14]

    B. A. B. Sanjay Moudgalya and N. Regnault, Rep. Prog. Phys.85, 086501 (2022)

    work page 2022

  15. [15]

    Chandran, T

    A. Chandran, T. Iadecola, V. Khemani, and R. Moessner, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.14, 443 (2023)

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuletic, and M. D. Lukin, Nature551, 579 (2017)

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    Jeyaretnam, J

    J. Jeyaretnam, J. Richter, and A. Pal, Phys. Rev. B104, 014424 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Shiraishi and T

    N. Shiraishi and T. Mori, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 030601 (2017)

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    C. M. Langlett, Z.-C. Yang, J. Wildeboer, A. V. Gor- shkov, T. Iadecola, and S. Xu, Phys. Rev. B105, L060301 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Vitagliano, A

    G. Vitagliano, A. Riera, and J. I. Latorre, New J. Phys. 12, 113049 (2010)

    work page 2010

  21. [21]

    Ram´ ırez, J

    G. Ram´ ırez, J. Rodr´ ıguez-Laguna, and G. Sierra, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2014(10), P10004

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    Ram´ ırez, J

    G. Ram´ ırez, J. Rodr´ ıguez-Laguna, and G. Sierra, J. Stat. Mech.: Theory Exp.2015(6), P06002

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    Maldacena, J

    J. Maldacena, J. High Energy Phys.2003(04), 021

    work page 2003

  24. [24]

    Hartman and J

    T. Hartman and J. Maldacena, J. High Energy Phys. 2013(5), 1

    work page 2013

  25. [25]

    Papadodimas and S

    K. Papadodimas and S. Raju, Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 211601 (2015)

    work page 2015

  26. [26]

    Cottrell, B

    W. Cottrell, B. Freivogel, D. M. Hofman, and S. F. Lokhande, J. High Energy Phys.2019(2), 1

    work page 2019

  27. [27]

    Chiba and Y

    Y. Chiba and Y. Yoneta, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 170404 (2024)

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Mohapatra, S

    S. Mohapatra, S. Moudgalya, and A. C. Balram, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 210403 (2025)

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    A. N. Ivanov and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 050403 (2025)

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    Caetano and S

    J. Caetano and S. Komatsu, J. Stat. Phys.187, 1 (2022)

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    Gombor, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2207.10598 (2022), 2207.10598

    T. Gombor, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2207.10598 (2022), 2207.10598

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.10598 2022

  32. [32]

    Ekman, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2207.12354 (2022), 2207.12354

    C. Ekman, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2207.12354 (2022), 2207.12354

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.12354 2022

  33. [33]

    Udupa, S

    A. Udupa, S. Sur, S. Nandy, A. Sen, and D. Sen, Phys. Rev. B108, 214430 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    ISHIBASHI, Modern Physics Letters A04, 251 (1989), https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732389000320

    N. ISHIBASHI, Modern Physics Letters A04, 251 (1989), https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732389000320

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217732389000320 1989

  35. [35]

    C. K. Majumdar and D. K. Ghosh, J. Math. Phys.10, 1388 (1969)

    work page 1969

  36. [36]

    C. K. Majumdar and D. K. Ghosh, J. Math. Phys.10, 1399 (1969)

    work page 1969

  37. [37]

    P. W. Anderson, Mater. Res. Bull.8, 153 (1973)

    work page 1973

  38. [38]

    P. W. Anderson, Science235, 1196 (1987)

    work page 1987

  39. [39]

    P. W. Anderson, G. Baskaran, Z. Zou, and T. Hsu, Phys. Rev. Lett.58, 2790 (1987)

    work page 1987

  40. [40]

    Baskaran, Z

    G. Baskaran, Z. Zou, and P. W. Anderson, Solid State Commun.88, 853 (1993)

    work page 1993

  41. [41]

    D. S. Rokhsar and S. A. Kivelson, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 2376 (1988)

    work page 1988

  42. [42]

    S. A. Kivelson, D. S. Rokhsar, and J. P. Sethna, Phys. Rev. B35, 8865 (1987). 6

    work page 1987

  43. [43]

    Moessner and S

    R. Moessner and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 1881 (2001)

    work page 2001

  44. [44]

    Balents, Nature464, 199 (2010)

    L. Balents, Nature464, 199 (2010)

    work page 2010

  45. [45]

    Liang, B

    S. Liang, B. Doucot, and P. W. Anderson, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 365 (1988)

    work page 1988

  46. [46]

    Schecter and T

    M. Schecter and T. Iadecola, Phys. Rev. B98, 035139 (2018)

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Karle, M

    V. Karle, M. Serbyn, and A. A. Michailidis, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 060602 (2021)

    work page 2021

  48. [48]

    Banerjee and A

    D. Banerjee and A. Sen, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 220601 (2021)

    work page 2021

  49. [49]

    C. J. Turner, M. Szyniszewski, B. Mukherjee, R. Melendrez, H. J. Changlani, and A. Pal, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2407.11956 (2024), 2407.11956

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2407.11956 2024

  50. [50]

    Swain, H.-K

    N. Swain, H.-K. Tang, D. C. W. Foo, B. J. J. Khor, G. Lemari´ e, F. F. Assaad, P. Sengupta, and S. Adam, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2106.08587 (2021), relevant results in v3, published August 2024, 2106.08587

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2106.08587 2021

  51. [51]

    Melendrez, B

    R. Melendrez, B. Mukherjee, M. Szyniszewski, C. J. Turner, A. Pal, and H. J. Changlani, arXiv 10.48550/arXiv.2501.14017 (2025), 2501.14017

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2501.14017 2025

  52. [52]

    Here we addition- ally refer to Refs

    See Supplemental Material, which includes details of proofs related to symmetric tensor scars (Appendix A), calculation of R´ enyi-2 entropy (Appendix B) and corre- lation functions (Appendix C), details on von Neumann entropy (Appendix D), and discussion on the stability against perturbations (Appendix E). Here we addition- ally refer to Refs. [71–73]

    work page

  53. [53]

    Sanada, Y

    K. Sanada, Y. Miao, and H. Katsura, Phys. Rev. B108, 155102 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    H. K. Kazuyuki Sanada, Yuan Miao, arXiv https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.01270 (2024), 2411.01270v1

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.01270 2024

  55. [55]

    Alet and N

    F. Alet and N. Laflorencie, C. R. Phys.19, 498 (2018)

    work page 2018

  56. [56]

    Vasseur, A

    R. Vasseur, A. C. Potter, Y.-Z. You, and A. W. W. Lud- wig, Phys. Rev. B100, 134203 (2019)

    work page 2019

  57. [57]

    Skinner, J

    B. Skinner, J. Ruhman, and A. Nahum, Phys. Rev. X9, 031009 (2019)

    work page 2019

  58. [58]

    Y. Li, X. Chen, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. B98, 205136 (2018)

    work page 2018

  59. [59]

    A. Chan, R. M. Nandkishore, M. Pretko, and G. Smith, Phys. Rev. B99, 224307 (2019)

    work page 2019

  60. [60]

    Szyniszewski, A

    M. Szyniszewski, A. Romito, and H. Schomerus, Phys. Rev. B100, 064204 (2019)

    work page 2019

  61. [61]

    Chitambar, D

    E. Chitambar, D. Leung, L. Manˇ cinska, M. Ozols, and A. Winter, Commun. Math. Phys.328, 303 (2014)

    work page 2014

  62. [62]

    D. A. Huse, R. Nandkishore, V. Oganesyan, A. Pal, and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. B88, 014206 (2013)

    work page 2013

  63. [63]

    Iadecola, M

    T. Iadecola, M. Schecter, and S. Xu, Phys. Rev. B100, 184312 (2019)

    work page 2019

  64. [64]

    Desaules, F

    J.-Y. Desaules, F. Pietracaprina, Z. Papi´ c, J. Goold, and S. Pappalardi, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 020601 (2022)

    work page 2022

  65. [65]

    Gotta, S

    L. Gotta, S. Moudgalya, and L. Mazza, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 190401 (2023)

    work page 2023

  66. [66]

    W. W. Ho, S. Choi, H. Pichler, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 040603 (2019)

    work page 2019

  67. [67]

    C. J. Turner, J.-Y. Desaules, K. Bull, and Z. Papi´ c, Phys. Rev. X11, 021021 (2021)

    work page 2021

  68. [68]

    I.-C. Chen, B. Burdick, Y. Yao, P. P. Orth, and T. Iadecola, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 043027 (2022)

    work page 2022

  69. [69]

    E. J. Gustafson, A. C. Y. Li, A. Khan, J. Kim, D. M. Kurkcuoglu, M. S. Alam, P. P. Orth, A. Rahmani, and T. Iadecola, Quantum7, 1171 (2023)

    work page 2023

  70. [70]

    Dong, J.-Y

    H. Dong, J.-Y. Desaules, Y. Gao, N. Wang, Z. Guo, J. Chen, Y. Zou, F. Jin, X. Zhu, P. Zhang, H. Li, Z. Wang, Q. Guo, J. Zhang, L. Ying, and Z. Papi´ c, Sci. Adv.9, 10.1126/sciadv.adj3822 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adj3822 2023

  71. [71]

    Bergholm and J

    V. Bergholm and J. D. Biamonte, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.44, 245304 (2011)

    work page 2011

  72. [72]

    Reuvers, Proc

    R. Reuvers, Proc. R. Soc. A.474, 20180023 (2018)

    work page 2018

  73. [73]

    Exact quantum many-body scars tunable from volume to area law

    C.-J. Lin, A. Chandran, and O. I. Motrunich, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033044 (2020). Supplemental material for “Exact quantum many-body scars tunable from volume to area law” Bhaskar Mukherjee, 1, 2 Christopher J. Turner, 2 Marcin Szyniszewski, 2, 3 and Arijeet Pal 2 1S. N. Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Block JD, Sector III, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700106,...

    work page 2020

  74. [74]

    (B1) This operation is similar to thereshapingof a vector into a matrix – however, unlike reshaping, it is a basis- independent operation and reveals the symmetry of the resulting algebra. We have,S (2) =−ln tr[ρ 2] whereρis the reduced den- sity matrix of the subsystemA, given by ρ= tr B(|Ψ⟩ ⟨Ψ|) = ΨΨ†.(B2) HereBrepresents the environment,|Ψ⟩and Ψ are re...

    work page

  75. [75]

    (B13) (multiplyinge −f(a)) is almost a constant (= 16/nX 3) arounda=n X /2

    We also note that the function in the integrand in Eq. (B13) (multiplyinge −f(a)) is almost a constant (= 16/nX 3) arounda=n X /2. This gives ||ρ||2 ≈ (nX!)4 2N N! 16eN e−f(a 0) (2π)3nX 3 Z nX 0 e− 1 2 (a−a0)2f ′′(a0)da ≈ (2πnX)2( nX e )4nX 2N √ 2πN( N e )N 16eN24nX nX −2nX (2π)3nX 3 √πnX 2 Erf[√nX] ≈ 4 πN ,(B15) where on the last line we have used Erf[x]...

    work page

  76. [76]

    perturbations

    + √ 2 ln(3−2 √ 2) + ln(6 + 4 √ 2)−2 lnN)/2, f ′′(k0) = (8 + 6 √ 2)/N, w(k0) = πN 5 464 + 328 √ 2 1/2 .(B31) which yields S(2) ≈Nln 2(2− √ 2) (3−2 √ 2) 1√ 2 (1 + √ 2) √ 2 ! + 1 2 lnN−0.06. (B32) We numerically calculateS (2) for the state (N− 1,0, N+ 1)/2 and fitting with the formS (2) =c 1N+ c2 lnN+c 3 yields (c 1, c2) = (0.15837,0.492) which are very clo...

    work page