Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 2 cited by

Anisotropic layer construction of anisotropic fracton models

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Stacking 2D toric-code layers with staggered couplings gives, in the strong-coupling limit, an exactly solvable anisotropic fracton model with lineon and planon excitations.

desk verdict A clean one-directional coupled-layer construction that reproduces the known anisotropic fracton model in the strong-coupling limit; the derivation is sound and the limitations are honestly stated, but finite-coupling stability and several generalizations remain unproven. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02257 v3 pith:42VLFBVB submitted 2019-08-06 cond-mat.str-el

Yohei Fuji This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-el
keywords fractontopologicalordercoupled-layerconstructionanisotropicmodellineonplanonanyoncondensationtoriccodedegenerateperturbationtheory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper claims that a simple stack of 2D toric-code layers, coupled by staggered XX and ZZ bonds, becomes, in the strong-coupling limit, an exactly solvable model of fracton topological order in three dimensions. In that limit the model is equivalent to the anisotropic fracton model of Shirley, Slagle, and Chen, with a ground-state degeneracy that grows subextensively with system size, $2^{2(L_y+L_z-1)}$ on a three-torus. The quasiparticles are not immobile fractons but lineons, which move along one axis, and planons, which are dipoles of lineons moving in two-dimensional planes. The paper further argues that the anisotropic mobility follows from anyon-pair condensation induced by the inter-layer couplings, and that the same construction works for Kitaev-honeycomb, $Z_N$, honeycomb toric-code, and doubled-semion layers.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coupled-layer Hamiltonian (18) together with its strong-coupling effective Hamiltonian (24). The effective qubits are formed by pairs of qubits on XX-coupled $x$-links (A sublattice) and ZZ-coupled $y$-links (B sublattice), which after squashing the bonds form a bcc lattice. The local terms of (24), $\tilde{A}_f$ and $\tilde{B}_f$, are products of four $\tilde{Z}$ operators on the corners of a $yz$ face and two $\tilde{X}$ operators on the ends of the perpendicular bond; the paper shows these terms commute pairwise, making the model exactly solvable. The physical mechanism carrying the argument is anyon-pair condensation: XX coupling condenses $ee$ pairs and ZZ coupling condenses $mm$ pairs between adjacent layers, and the pattern of which single anyons can pass through which condensates produces the directional mobility restrictions.

What would settle it

Compute the exact ground-state degeneracy of Hamiltonian (18) on a small torus, e.g. $L_y=L_z=2$, at large but finite $h_{XX}$ and $h_{ZZ}$; if it deviates from $2^{2(L_y+L_z-1)}=64$, the strong-coupling description fails. Alternatively, check whether higher-order terms in the $1/h$ expansion break the commutativity of the effective Hamiltonian or split the degeneracy at a power of $1/h$ smaller than the linear system size.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the coupled-layer Hamiltonian (18), made of toric-code layers stacked along $z$ with alternating XX couplings on $x$-links and ZZ couplings on $y$-links, is driven by anyon condensation to a gapped phase whose strong-coupling fixed point is exactly solvable. Performing second-order degenerate perturbation theory in the strong-coupling limit $h_{XX},h_{ZZ}\to\infty$ yields the commuting-projector Hamiltonian (24) acting on effective qubits that live on a body-centered cubic lattice. This Hamiltonian and its excitations coincide with the anisotropic fracton model introduced by Shirley, Slagle, and Chen: lineons moving along the $x$ axis and planons formed by dipoles of lineons. The paper also establishes the ground-state degeneracy $2^{2(L_y+L_z-1)}$ on a three-torus and constructs the nonlocal logical operators, line-like and membrane-like, that protect it.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation rests on second-order degenerate perturbation theory in the strong-coupling limit, and the paper assumes that this expansion is controlled so that the exactly solvable commuting-projector phase survives for large but finite inter-layer couplings.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The anisotropic fracton model of Shirley, Slagle, and Chen can be built from a single stack of 2D toric codes, making the construction simpler than layer constructions that stack in all three directions and easier to realize in materials or simulators.
  • The anyon-condensation picture explains the restricted mobility: lineons and planons are what remain when single anyons can pass through one type of condensate but must pair up to move through the other.
  • The same scheme applied to $Z_N$ toric codes produces an exactly solvable anisotropic fracton model with ground-state degeneracy $N^{2(L_y+L_z-1)}$ on a torus.
  • Stacked Kitaev-honeycomb, honeycomb-lattice toric-code, and doubled-semion layers all yield variants of the anisotropic fracton model with the same subextensive degeneracy $2^{2(L_y+L_z-1)}$.
  • The coupled-layer picture gives a concrete handle on the phase diagram: the paper notes that the $Z_2$ transition relates to a stack of transverse Ising chains, offering a target for direct numerical study.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the construction is generic, then stacking any 2D topologically ordered phase in one direction and condensing bosonic anyon pairs between layers should produce anisotropic fracton order; this could be tested by repeating the derivation for chiral or fractional quantum Hall layers using coupled-wire analogues.
  • Because the model has no truly immobile fractons, it sits at the boundary between fracton and conventional topological order; one might interpolate between this model and the X-cube by adding couplings in the remaining directions and search for a direct transition.
  • The paper's discussion in Sec. V suggests a design rule: nontrivial anisotropic fracton order requires both $e$ and $m$ excitations to have one-dimensional paths through the condensates. This rule could be turned into a classification of all staggered coupling patterns on a given lattice, with the trivial patterns identified by the collapse to stacked 2D orders.
  • The exact solvability of the strong-coupling limit makes the model a clean testbed for studying how foliated fracton order responds to local perturbations, since any splitting of the subextensive degeneracy below the linear system size would signal a breakdown of the commuting-projector description.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a coupled-layer construction of anisotropic fracton models in three dimensions. The simplest model stacks two-dimensional toric codes in the z direction and couples adjacent layers with staggered XX (on x-links) and ZZ (on y-links) terms. In the strong-coupling limit hXX, hZZ → ∞, degenerate perturbation theory maps the model to a commuting-projector Hamiltonian that the author identifies with the anisotropic fracton model of Shirley, Slagle, and Chen. The paper derives the subextensive ground-state degeneracy 2^{2(Ly+Lz-1)} on a torus, describes lineon and planon excitations, and interprets the anisotropic mobility through anyon-pair condensation. It also extends the construction to layers of the Kitaev honeycomb model, Z_N toric codes, honeycomb-lattice toric codes, and doubled semion models.

Significance. The construction is significant because it obtains fracton topological order from a single stack of 2D topological orders, rather than the usual three-direction stacking, and it gives an explicit exactly solvable strong-coupling limit whose low-energy theory is a known commuting-projector fracton model. The anyon-condensation interpretation provides a physical picture for the anisotropic mobility. The paper's strengths include the concrete derivation of the effective Hamiltonian, the exact ground-state degeneracy count, the absence of fitted parameters, and the benchmark against Ref. [40]. The main limitations, acknowledged in Sec. V, are the lack of a finite-coupling stability proof and the conjectural nature of the phase-transition scenario.

minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III.B.1, Eqs. (30)-(32)] The text contains a sign typo in the counting of logical operators: 'Ly−Lz−1' should read 'Ly+Lz−1' in the three occurrences around Eqs. (30)-(32) and in the corresponding sentence.
  2. [Sec. III.B, Eq. (24)] The passage from the projection identities (22)-(23) to the effective Hamiltonian (24) is stated rather than derived; including the explicit second-order degenerate perturbation calculation, or an appendix, would make the central claim self-contained and easier to verify.
  3. [Sec. IV.A, Eq. (35)] The remark that 'we have only kept the first-order terms in J'_zz' is confusing because Eq. (35) also contains a second-order term in Jx and Jy; the authors should clarify the parameter regime and the sense in which Eq. (35) is unitarily equivalent to Eq. (18) under the transformation (36).
  4. [Sec. IV.D] For the doubled semion generalization, the modified cube terms ~Ac are only described pictorially; giving the explicit operator expressions would allow the reader to verify the commuting-projector property and the claimed ground-state degeneracy.
  5. [Introduction and Sec. V] The introduction states that the models 'undergo phase transitions from decoupled 2d topological phases to fracton topological phases,' but the analysis is confined to the strong-coupling limit; since Sec. V itself notes that the transition might be first order or accompanied by an intermediate phase, the wording should be softened to indicate that this is a conjecture.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the strong-coupling coupled-layer derivation is self-contained and the identification with Ref. [40] is an external benchmark, not an input.

full rationale

The central claim is that the coupled toric-code stack H0 + H1 in Eq. (18), in the strong-coupling limit hXX, hZZ -> infinity, yields the effective commuting-projector Hamiltonian in Eq. (24), which coincides with the anisotropic fracton model of Shirley, Slagle, and Chen [40]. I checked the derivation chain: the projection identities in Eqs. (22)-(23) are simple restrictions of the original Pauli operators to the low-energy subspace selected by the XX and ZZ bond terms, and the effective Hamiltonian (24) is obtained by a standard second-order degenerate perturbation expansion of H1. The operator content of Eq. (24) follows directly from the microscopic terms and the projection rules; it is not assumed or imported from Ref. [40]. The ground-state degeneracy 2^{2(Ly+Lz-1)} is then derived from the explicit constraints in Eqs. (26)-(27), and the logical operators are constructed explicitly in Eqs. (29)-(32). No parameter is fitted to any target result, and no load-bearing claim is justified solely by a self-citation. The one reference to the author's prior work, Ref. [84], appears only in the concluding remarks about possible coupled-wire generalizations and does not support any central result. The paper also explicitly acknowledges limitations, such as not determining the nature of the phase transitions in Sec. V; this is a scope limitation, not circularity. Overall, the derivation is self-contained, and the agreement with Ref. [40] is an independent consistency check rather than an input to the calculation.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The construction introduces no fitted parameters or new entities. It relies on standard assumptions: validity of strong-coupling perturbation theory, the anyon-condensation picture as a description of coupled layers, and known properties of Kitaev and string-net models.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Degenerate perturbation theory in the strong-coupling limit hXX,hZZ to infinity is controlled and yields the effective Hamiltonian (24).
    Invoked in Sec. III.B; no rigorous error bounds or stability proof is given, but the energy separation is assumed sufficient.
  • domain assumption The anyon condensation of e-e and m-m pairs between layers correctly explains quasiparticle mobility in the coupled-layer model.
    Used in Sec. III.C and IV.B as a heuristic interpretation; it is not derived directly from the lattice Hamiltonian.
  • standard math The Kitaev honeycomb model reduces to the 2D toric code in the strong Jz limit.
    Used in Sec. IV.A; follows from Kitaev's exact solution and the easy-axis limit.
  • standard math The doubled semion model is an exactly solvable commuting-projector model with bosonic excitations created by Z operators.
    Used in Sec. IV.D; relies on the Levin-Wen string-net construction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Anisotropic layer construction of anisotropic fracton models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/42VLFBVB

@misc{pith2026190802257,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Anisotropic layer construction of anisotropic fracton models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/42VLFBVB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02257}
}
abstract

We propose a coupled-layer construction of a class of fracton topological orders in three spatial dimensions, which is characterized by spatially anisotropic mobility of quasiparticle excitations constrained in subdimensional manifolds. The simplest model is obtained by stacking and coupling layers of the two-dimensional toric codes on the square lattice and can be exactly solved in the strong-coupling limit. The resulting fracton excitations are understood as a consequence of anyon pair condensation induced by the coupling between layers. We also present generalizations of the construction for layers of the Kitaev-honeycomb models, the $Z_N$ toric codes, and the toric codes and the doubled semion models on the honeycomb lattice.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02257 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Hamiltonian for the 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Coupling between two toric codes and the effective [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) Coupled-layer model from the 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Line-like operators [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Excitations created in the anisotropic fracton model. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (a) Slice of the stacked toric-code model within the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Coupled-layer model from the Kitaev honeycomb [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a) Coupled-layer model from the 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Subdimensional excitations in the coupled toric-code [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. (a) Local terms in the doubled semion model. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Patterns of anyon condensation that gives trivial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Electric Circuit Realizations of Fracton Physics

    cond-mat.str-el 2019-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Networks of capacitors connected by ideal transformers conserve dipole moment, making electric charge immobile like fractons, with a linear steady-state charge profile.

  2. Sorting topological stabilizer models in three dimensions

    quant-ph 2019-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    New bulk commutation diagnostics coarsely sort translation invariant 3D stabilizer codes into TQFT, foliated type-I, fractal type-I, or type-II topological order.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [66]

    Fractons from Polarons and Hole-Doped Antiferromagnets: Microscopic Models and Realization,

    J. Sous and M. Pretko, “Fractons from Polarons and Hole-Doped Antiferromagnets: Microscopic Models and Realization,” arXiv:1904.08424

    arXiv 1904

  2. [40]

    A. Prem, S. Vijay, Y.-Z. Chou, M. Pretko, and R. M. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. B 98, 165140 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [1]

    Ground-state degeneracy 6

  4. [2]

    isotropic

    Subdimensional excitations 7 C. Anyon condensation picture 7 IV. Generalization 8 A. Kitaev-honeycomb model 8 B. ZN toric code 9 C. Toric code on the honeycomb lattice 10 D. Doubled semion model 12 V. Conclusion and discussion 12 Acknowledgment 13 References 13 I. INTRODUCTION A peculiar phenomenon in strongly interacting many- body quantum systems is the...

    arXiv 1908

  5. [3]

    membrane-like

    Ground-state degeneracy As any two operators from ~Af and ~Bf commute, the effective Hamiltonian (24) is exactly solvable. Since~A2 f = ~B2 f = 1, the ground state is given by a simultaneous eigenstate of ~Af and ~Bf whose eigenvalues are all +1. Similarly to the toric code, there can be constraints that make certain products of the operators ~Af and ~Bf t...

  6. [4]

    lineons” or “planons

    Subdimensional excitations The subextensive ground-state degeneracy computed above is a consequence of deconfined excitations re- stricted in lower-dimensional subspaces of the 3 d space. Since the local terms in the Hamiltonian, ~Af and ~Bf, have eigenvalues +1 in the ground state, excited states are obtained by flipping some of the eigenvalues by acting a...

  7. [5]

    Wen, Nat

    X.-G. Wen, Nat. Sci. Rev. 3, 68 (2016)

    2016

  8. [6]

    Hamma, P

    A. Hamma, P. Zanardi, and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 72, 035307 (2005)

    2005

Show all 89 references
  1. [7]

    Wang and M

    C. Wang and M. Levin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 080403 (2014). 14

    2014

  2. [8]

    Jiang, A

    S. Jiang, A. Mesaros, and Y. Ran, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031048 (2014)

    2014

  3. [9]

    Lin and M

    C.-H. Lin and M. Levin, Phys. Rev. B 92, 035115 (2015)

    2015

  4. [10]

    J. C. Wang and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 91, 035134 (2015)

    2015

  5. [11]

    Vijay, J

    S. Vijay, J. Haah, and L. Fu, Phys. Rev. B 94, 235157 (2016)

    2016

  6. [12]

    Chamon, Phys

    C. Chamon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 040402 (2005)

    2005

  7. [13]

    Bravyi, B

    S. Bravyi, B. Leemhuis, and B. M. Terhal, Ann. Phys. 326, 839 (2011)

    2011

  8. [14]

    Haah, Phys

    J. Haah, Phys. Rev. A 83, 042330 (2011)

    2011

  9. [15]

    Yoshida, Phys

    B. Yoshida, Phys. Rev. B 88, 125122 (2013)

    2013

  10. [16]

    Vijay, J

    S. Vijay, J. Haah, and L. Fu, Phys. Rev. B 92, 235136 (2015)

    2015

  11. [17]

    D. J. Williamson, Phys. Rev. B 94, 155128 (2016)

    2016

  12. [18]

    G. B. Hal´ asz, T. H. Hsieh, and L. Balents, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 257202 (2017)

    2017

  13. [19]

    H. Ma, E. Lake, X. Chen, and M. Hermele, Phys. Rev. B 95, 245126 (2017)

    2017

  14. [20]

    Petrova and N

    O. Petrova and N. Regnault, Phys. Rev. B 96, 224429 (2017)

    2017

  15. [21]

    A. Prem, J. Haah, and R. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. B 95, 155133 (2017)

    2017

  16. [22]

    Pretko, Phys

    M. Pretko, Phys. Rev. B 95, 115139 (2017)

    2017

  17. [23]

    Pretko, Phys

    M. Pretko, Phys. Rev. B 96, 035119 (2017)

    2017

  18. [24]

    Pretko, Phys

    M. Pretko, Phys. Rev. B 96, 125151 (2017)

    2017

  19. [25]

    Slagle and Y

    K. Slagle and Y. B. Kim, Phys. Rev. B96, 165106 (2017)

    2017

  20. [26]

    Slagle and Y

    K. Slagle and Y. B. Kim, Phys. Rev. B96, 195139 (2017)

    2017

  21. [27]

    T. H. Hsieh and G. B. Hal´ asz, Phys. Rev. B 96, 165105 (2017)

    2017

  22. [28]

    Isotropic Layer Construction and Phase Dia- gram for Fracton Topological Phases,

    S. Vijay, “Isotropic Layer Construction and Phase Dia- gram for Fracton Topological Phases,” arXiv:1701.00762

    arXiv

  23. [29]

    A Generalization of Non-Abelian Anyons in Three Dimensions,

    S. Vijay and L. Fu, “A Generalization of Non-Abelian Anyons in Three Dimensions,” arXiv:1706.07070

    arXiv

  24. [30]

    Shi and Y.-M

    B. Shi and Y.-M. Lu, Phys. Rev. B 97, 144106 (2018)

    2018

  25. [31]

    Generalized U(1) Gauge Field Theories and Fractal Dynamics,

    D. Bulmash and M. Barkeshli, “Generalized U(1) Gauge Field Theories and Fractal Dynamics,” (), arXiv:1806.01855

    arXiv

  26. [32]

    Bulmash and M

    D. Bulmash and M. Barkeshli, Phys. Rev. B 97, 235112 (2018)

    2018

  27. [33]

    Devakul, S

    T. Devakul, S. A. Parameswaran, and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. B 97, 041110 (2018)

    2018

  28. [34]

    Towards classification of Fracton phases: the multipole algebra,

    A. Gromov, “Towards classification of Fracton phases: the multipole algebra,” arXiv:1812.05104

    arXiv

  29. [35]

    H. Ma, A. T. Schmitz, S. A. Parameswaran, M. Hermele, and R. M. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. B 97, 125101 (2018)

    2018

  30. [36]

    H. Ma, M. Hermele, and X. Chen, Phys. Rev. B 98, 035111 (2018)

    2018

  31. [37]

    H. He, Y. Zheng, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Phys. Rev. B 97, 125102 (2018)

    2018

  32. [38]

    Pai and M

    S. Pai and M. Pretko, Phys. Rev. B 97, 235102 (2018)

    2018

  33. [39]

    A. Prem, M. Pretko, and R. M. Nandkishore, Phys. Rev. B 97, 085116 (2018)

    2018

  34. [41]

    Pretko and L

    M. Pretko and L. Radzihovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 195301 (2018)

    2018

  35. [42]

    Pretko and L

    M. Pretko and L. Radzihovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 235301 (2018)

    2018

  36. [43]

    A. T. Schmitz, H. Ma, R. M. Nandkishore, and S. A. Parameswaran, Phys. Rev. B 97, 134426 (2018)

    2018

  37. [44]

    Fractional excita- tions in foliated fracton phases,

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, and X. Chen, “Fractional excita- tions in foliated fracton phases,” (), arXiv:1806.08625

    arXiv

  38. [45]

    Shirley, K

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, Z. Wang, and X. Chen, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031051 (2018)

    2018

  39. [46]

    Slagle and Y

    K. Slagle and Y. B. Kim, Phys. Rev. B97, 165106 (2018)

    2018

  40. [47]

    Fractonic Matter in Symmetry-Enriched U(1) Gauge Theory,

    D. J. Williamson, Z. Bi, and M. Cheng, “Fractonic Matter in Symmetry-Enriched U(1) Gauge Theory,” arXiv:1809.10275

    arXiv

  41. [48]

    Symmetric Fracton Matter: Twisted and Enriched,

    Y. You, T. Devakul, F. J. Burnell, and S. L. Sondhi, “Symmetric Fracton Matter: Twisted and Enriched,” (), arXiv:1805.09800

    arXiv

  42. [49]

    Higher or- der topological superconductors as generators of quan- tum codes,

    Y. You, D. Litinski, and F. von Oppen, “Higher or- der topological superconductors as generators of quan- tum codes,” (), arXiv:1810.10556

    arXiv

  43. [50]

    Majorana Quantum Lego, a Route Towards Fracton Matter,

    Y. You and F. von Oppen, “Majorana Quantum Lego, a Route Towards Fracton Matter,” arXiv:1812.06091

    arXiv

  44. [51]

    Bulmash and T

    D. Bulmash and T. Iadecola, Phys. Rev. B 99, 125132 (2019)

    2019

  45. [52]

    Gauging fractons: im- mobile non-Abelian quasiparticles, fractals, and position- dependent degeneracies,

    D. Bulmash and M. Barkeshli, “Gauging fractons: im- mobile non-Abelian quasiparticles, fractals, and position- dependent degeneracies,” (), arXiv:1905.05771

    1905 arXiv

  46. [53]

    A. Dua, D. J. Williamson, J. Haah, and M. Cheng, Phys. Rev. B 99, 245135 (2019)

    2019

  47. [54]

    Gromov, Phys

    A. Gromov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 076403 (2019)

    2019

  48. [55]

    Yan, Phys

    H. Yan, Phys. Rev. B 99, 155126 (2019)

    2019

  49. [56]

    Hyperbolic Fracton Model, Subsystem Symme- try, and Holography II: The Dual Eight-Vertex Model,

    H. Yan, “Hyperbolic Fracton Model, Subsystem Symme- try, and Holography II: The Dual Eight-Vertex Model,” arXiv:1906.02305

    1906 arXiv

  50. [57]

    H. Song, A. Prem, S.-J. Huang, and M. A. Martin- Delgado, Phys. Rev. B 99, 155118 (2019)

    2019

  51. [58]

    Generalized Haah Codes and Fracton Models,

    K. T. Tian and Z. Wang, “Generalized Haah Codes and Fracton Models,” arXiv:1902.04543

    1902 arXiv

  52. [59]

    Fracton fusion and statistics,

    S. Pai and M. Hermele, “Fracton fusion and statistics,” arXiv:1903.11625

    1903 arXiv

  53. [60]

    Prem, S.-J

    A. Prem, S.-J. Huang, H. Song, and M. Hermele, Phys. Rev. X 9, 021010 (2019)

    2019

  54. [61]

    Gauging permuta- tion symmetries as a route to non-Abelian fractons,

    A. Prem and D. J. Williamson, “Gauging permuta- tion symmetries as a route to non-Abelian fractons,” arXiv:1905.06309

    1905 arXiv

  55. [62]

    Shirley, K

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, and X. Chen, Phys. Rev. B 99, 115123 (2019)

    2019

  56. [63]

    Shirley, K

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, and X. Chen, SciPost Phys. 6, 41 (2019)

    2019

  57. [64]

    Twisted foliated fracton phases,

    W. Shirley, K. Slagle, and X. Chen, “Twisted foliated fracton phases,” (), arXiv:1907.09048

    1907 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Slagle, D

    K. Slagle, D. Aasen, and D. Williamson, SciPost Phys. 6, 43 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    Foliated fracton order in the Majorana checkerboard model,

    T. Wang, W. Shirley, and X. Chen, “Foliated fracton order in the Majorana checkerboard model,” arXiv:1904.01111

    1904 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Fractonic Chern-Simons and BF theories,

    Y. You, T. Devakul, S. L. Sondhi, and F. J. Bur- nell, “Fractonic Chern-Simons and BF theories,” (), arXiv:1904.11530

    1904 arXiv

  61. [69]

    R. M. Nandkishore and M. Hermele, Ann. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 10, 295 (2019)

    2019

  62. [70]

    fractons

    As a remark, while our models do not possess “fractons” as strictly immobile excitations, we abuse “fracton mod- els” or “fracton topological orders” to emphasize that the corresponding models are still distinguished from the conventional topological orders or their decoulpled stacks

  63. [71]

    Kitaev, Ann

    A. Kitaev, Ann. Phys. 303, 2 (2003). 15

    2003

  64. [72]

    F. A. Bais and J. K. Slingerland, Phys. Rev. B79, 045316 (2009)

    2009

  65. [73]

    I. S. Eli¨ ens, J. C. Romers, and F. A. Bais, Phys. Rev. B 90, 195130 (2014)

    2014

  66. [74]

    Kong, Nucl

    L. Kong, Nucl. Phys. B 886, 436 (2014)

    2014

  67. [75]

    Neupert, H

    T. Neupert, H. He, C. von Keyserlingk, G. Sierra, and B. A. Bernevig, Phys. Rev. B 93, 115103 (2016)

    2016

  68. [76]

    Burnell, Ann

    F. Burnell, Ann. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 9, 307 (2018)

    2018

  69. [77]

    Trebst, P

    S. Trebst, P. Werner, M. Troyer, K. Shtengel, and C. Nayak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 070602 (2007)

    2007

  70. [78]

    Vidal, S

    J. Vidal, S. Dusuel, and K. P. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. B 79, 033109 (2009)

    2009

  71. [79]

    I. S. Tupitsyn, A. Kitaev, N. V. Prokof’ev, and P. C. E. Stamp, Phys. Rev. B 82, 085114 (2010)

    2010

  72. [80]

    Dusuel, M

    S. Dusuel, M. Kamfor, R. Or´ us, K. P. Schmidt, and J. Vidal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 107203 (2011)

    2011

  73. [81]

    F. Wu, Y. Deng, and N. Prokof’ev, Phys. Rev. B 85, 195104 (2012)

    2012

  74. [82]

    Schuler, S

    M. Schuler, S. Whitsitt, L.-P. Henry, S. Sachdev, and A. M. L¨ auchli, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 210401 (2016)

    2016

  75. [83]

    Kitaev, Ann

    A. Kitaev, Ann. Phys. 321, 2 (2006)

    2006

  76. [84]

    M. A. Levin and X.-G. Wen, Phys. Rev. B 71, 045110 (2005)

    2005

  77. [85]

    Jackeli and G

    G. Jackeli and G. Khaliullin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 017205 (2009)

    2009

  78. [86]

    Chaloupka, G

    J. Chaloupka, G. Jackeli, and G. Khaliullin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 027204 (2010)

    2010

  79. [87]

    Jian and X.-L

    C.-M. Jian and X.-L. Qi, Phys. Rev. X 4, 041043 (2014)

    2014

  80. [88]

    Fuji and A

    Y. Fuji and A. Furusaki, Phys. Rev. B 99, 241107 (2019)

    2019

  81. [89]

    Iadecola, T

    T. Iadecola, T. Neupert, C. Chamon, and C. Mudry, Phys. Rev. B 99, 245138 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.