Topological states in the Hofstadter model on a honeycomb lattice

Igor N.Karnaukhov

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 30 references

Topological states in the Hofstadter model on a honeycomb lattice

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 This paper claims that the chiral edge modes of the honeycomb Hofstadter model reduce to generalized Kitaev chains, which yields the Hall conductance for any magnetic flux and a universal interaction threshold U>4Δ for destroying the…

desk verdict Original numerics but a self-contradictory core: the zero-Chern-number topological insulator with chiral edge modes cannot be right, and the key mappings are unproven. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09601 v1 pith:CRCMVTDU submitted 2019-08-26 cond-mat.str-el

Igor N.Karnaukhov This is my paper · ORCID

classification cond-mat.str-el PACS 73.22.Gk73.43.-f

keywords HofstadtermodelhoneycomblatticetopologicalinsulatorMajoranaedgestatesKitaevchainHallconductanceChernnumberHubbardinteraction

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 analyzes spinless fermions in the Hofstadter model on a honeycomb lattice with anisotropic hopping, where one hopping integral is tuned to t while the others are fixed. Its central claim is that the chiral gapless edge modes in each spectral gap are exactly captured by a generalized Kitaev chain of Majorana fermions, making the Hall conductance computable from the number of edge modes for both rational and irrational magnetic flux. At half-filling, the paper finds a quantum phase transition at $t_c=2^{\phi}$: for $t>t_c$ a topological gap opens and zero-energy Majorana states appear at the boundaries. Including weak on-site Coulomb repulsion $U$, the paper derives a stability criterion $U<4\Delta$, with $U>4\Delta$ destroying the topological insulating state. If true, this gives a parameter-free edge-mode counting scheme for Hall conductance and a simple universal condition for interaction-driven breakdown of topological order.

What carries the argument

The workhorse is the generalized Kitaev chain: a one-dimensional lattice of Majorana operators $\chi_n$, $\gamma_n$ with Hamiltonian $i\tau/2 \sum (\chi_n \gamma_{n+\delta} \pm \chi_{n+\delta}\gamma_n)$ for the two chiralities. Its ground state carries two free Majorana zero modes at the boundaries when $|U/\tau|<4$, with a topological transition at $|U/\tau|=4$. The paper uses this chain as an effective low-energy description of each gap in the 2D spectrum, interpreting $\tau(\delta)$ as an effective hopping between zig-zag $\xi$-chains separated by $\delta$; the integer $\delta$ is then read off as the number of chiral edge modes in the gap. In the interacting case, the on-site Hubbard term is converted into a local four-Majorana interaction, and the Mattis-Nam exact solution fixes the phase boundary at $\kappa=U/\tau=4$.

What would settle it

A direct numerical diagonalization of the full interacting honeycomb Hofstadter Hamiltonian on a strip at half-filling, for flux $\phi=1/4$, should show zero-energy Majorana boundary states persisting up to $U=4\Delta$ and disappearing for $U>4\Delta$; if the edge modes survive beyond that ratio, or vanish well below it, the Kitaev-chain reduction is wrong. The same calculation should also show the bulk gap at $\epsilon=0$ opening only for $t>2^{1/4}$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the author's own terms, the central result is that the low-energy physics inside each gap of the honeycomb Hofstadter spectrum forms an effective Kitaev chain: in the $t\to 0$ limit the energies of isolated zig-zag chains cross at discrete wave vectors, and tunneling between chains at distance $\delta$ generates a Majorana lattice with effective hopping $\tau(\delta)\simeq t^{\delta}$. For a gap at energy $\epsilon$, the number $\delta$ of gapless edge modes localized at a boundary sets the Hall conductance through the Diophantine equation $p C_\gamma = q s + \gamma$, the same counting law as on the square lattice. The paper further claims that at half-filling the isotropic point $t=1$ is gapless, while a gap opens for $t>2^{\phi}$, and that the resulting 2D topological insulator has zero Chern number but supports localized zero-energy Majorana states at the edges. When on-site Hubbard interaction is included, the effective Hamiltonian is diagonalized exactly through the Mattis-Nam chain, and the topological order survives only for $U<4\Delta$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each spectral gap of the 2D electron system is exactly described by a low-energy Kitaev chain of Majorana fermions, with the on-site Hubbard repulsion becoming the simple local four-Majorana term; if that reduction is not a controlled approximation, the derived $U>4\Delta$ criterion has no support.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Hall conductance can be assigned to every gap, including at irrational flux where the Brillouin zone and Berry curvature are not defined, by counting the number of edge modes $\delta$.
At half-filling for flux $\phi=1/q$, the spectrum develops a topological gap only for $t>2^{1/q}$; below that value the center of the spectrum remains gapless.
The 2D topological insulator at half-filling has vanishing Chern number yet supports protected zero-energy Majorana boundary states.
For a wide class of 2D topological insulators with short-range repulsion, the chiral edge modes are destroyed once the on-site interaction exceeds $U>4\Delta$, and are stable for $U<4\Delta$.
The sequence of gaps and their Hall conductances remain stable as $t$ is increased from 0 to 1, even though the actual gap widths change.

Reading between the lines

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

If the Kitaev-chain reduction is exact, the same $\delta$-counting should reproduce the Hofstadter butterfly's Chern numbers on other bipartite lattices, making the honeycomb result a special case of a broader Majorana-chain correspondence.
The $U=4\Delta$ threshold suggests a dimensionless universal bound for interaction stability of chiral topological insulators; it could be tested directly in cold-atom or photonic simulators by tuning $U/\Delta$ rather than relying on material-specific parameters.
Because the gap opens at $t_c=2^{\phi}$, a two-terminal conductance measurement on a honeycomb sample at half-filling, varying the anisotropic hopping $t$, should show a sharp transition at that flux-tuned critical value.
The fine structure of subbands at irrational flux, with edge-mode counts $\delta=2,5,8,11,3,\dots$, may be observable as a sequence of Hall plateaus at the corresponding fillings, providing an experimental fingerprint of the mapping.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Reading Karnaukhov's paper on honeycomb Hofstadter edge modes. What you should know: it has some original numerical spectra, but the headline claims do not hold up. The half-filling transition at t_c = 2^phi is internally inconsistent, and the interaction criterion rests on an asserted mapping.

What is actually new: the paper extends the author's earlier Kitaev-chain edge-mode picture to the honeycomb lattice with anisotropic hopping and calculates spectra for several rational and one irrational flux. Counting chiral edge modes in each gap to get the Hall conductance is a legitimate method in this geometry, and the gap-position formulas such as epsilon ~ 2 cos(pi delta phi/2) are checkable against the numerics. The fine structure for irrational flux is presented in enough detail to be reproduced. That is real work.

The soft spots are proportionally large. First, the central claim: a gapped 2D insulator with conserved charge and zero Chern number cannot have protected chiral edge modes. The bulk-boundary correspondence forbids it. The paper itself assigns Chern number 2 to the central subband, then later says the topological phase has Chern number and Hall conductance zero. That is not a subtle issue; it breaks the transition claim at t_c. Second, t_c = 2^(1/q) is presented as a result but is read off numerical spectra from Ref. [15], not derived. Third, the reduction of the interacting 2D model to the Mattis-Nam chain is asserted in a few sentences: the on-site Hubbard U becomes a local interaction in a 1D Majorana chain in Eq. (4) with no derivation. Without that mapping, the U > 4Delta criterion is unsupported. Fourth, calling the zero-energy boundary states Majorana is misleading because the Hamiltonian has no pairing term; these are zero modes of a complex-fermion system, expressible in a Majorana basis but not emergent Majorana quasiparticles.

This paper is for someone who wants numerical spectra of the anisotropic honeycomb Hofstadter model and is curious about edge-mode counting. The flaws are load-bearing, so the main conclusions should not be cited as established. I would send it to a serious referee if the aim is to have the numerics checked and the conceptual problems documented in a report; the referee would likely reject. If the journal wants only claims that are supported, desk rejection is also defensible.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the Hofstadter model on a honeycomb lattice with anisotropic nearest-neighbor hoppings (t_x = t, t_y = t_z = 1) in a stripe geometry, aiming to describe the chiral gapless edge modes in spectral gaps through a generalized Kitaev-chain formalism. It claims that this edge-mode description yields the Hall conductance for arbitrary rational and irrational magnetic fluxes, and that at half-filling a gap opens for t > t_c = 2^{1/q} (stated in the abstract as t_c = 2^φ), producing a '2D topological insulator state with zero Chern number' and zero-energy Majorana boundary states. For interacting electrons with on-site repulsion U, the paper further claims that the topological insulator is destroyed for U > 4Δ, based on the exact solution of the Mattis-Nam chain. The manuscript contains numerical spectra for rational and irrational fluxes, but the central analytic claims are presented heuristically.

Significance. If the results were correct, the paper would offer a practical edge-mode route to Hall conductances for arbitrary flux and a simple interaction-stability criterion, which would be of interest to the condensed-matter community. The numerical spectra for the anisotropic honeycomb Hofstadter model and the attempt to connect edge-mode counts to Chern numbers are potentially useful. However, the central claims rest on an unproven reduction of the two-dimensional model to decoupled one-dimensional Majorana chains, and the half-filling phase description contains an internal contradiction between zero Chern number and protected chiral edge modes. Because these issues affect the paper's main conclusions rather than mere presentation, the current manuscript does not provide a reliable basis for the claimed results.

major comments (4)

[Topological structure of the spectrum (half-filling, t_c)] The paper's central half-filling claim is internally inconsistent. For φ=1/4 the text assigns the central subbands a combined Chern number 2 via the sequence {1,1,-3,2,-3,1,1}, and then states for t>t_c that 'the Chern number and the Hall conductance are zero' while still calling the state a '2D topological insulator with zero Chern number' characterized by zero-energy Majorana boundary states. For the free-fermion Hamiltonian (1) with conserved U(1) charge, the net number of chiral edge modes crossing a gap is fixed by the difference of the Chern numbers of the bands below and above the gap; a gapped phase with C=0 cannot support protected chiral edge modes. The text provides no symmetry protection other than U(1) for the zero-energy boundary states, and Hamiltonian (1) contains no pairing term, so the identification of these states as Majorana modes is not justified. This contradiction invalidates the t_c=2^{1/q} transition as stated.
[The Hofstadter model of interacting electrons, Eq. (4)] The mapping from the 2D Hubbard-Hofstadter Hamiltonian to the Mattis-Nam chain is asserted rather than derived. The text projects onto 'two states of spinless fermions into the gaps with fixed wave vectors ±πδ/q' and then writes the effective Hamiltonian (4) with the local interaction -U/4 Σ_n γ_{n↑}χ_{n↑}γ_{n↓}χ_{n↓}; it invokes the exact solution of Mattis and Nam [13] without showing that the bulk degrees of freedom decouple or that the parameters τ(δ) exhaust the low-energy couplings. The criterion U>4Δ for destruction of the topological insulator follows entirely from this reduction, so as it stands the interacting-phase claim is unsupported.
[Topological structure of the spectrum, t_c paragraph] The critical value t_c=2^{1/q} is presented as a result of numerical spectra from Ref. [15] rather than as an analytic derivation: the text says 'From calculations of the spectra for an arbitrary rational flux φ=1/q it follows that t_c=2^{1/q} (numerical calculations ... were carried out in [15]).' If t_c is extracted from the same spectra whose topological character is being explained, the transition at exactly this value is a parameterization of numerical data. The paper needs either an independent derivation of t_c or an explicit disavowal that t_c=2^{1/q} is an analytic formula.
[The irrational flux φ=1/√8] The Hall conductances assigned to the fine structure of the low-energy subband are obtained by reading off δ, the 'total number of gapless edge modes localized at a boundary,' from the numerical spectra (δ=2,5,9,8,6,11,3,...). These δ values are then equated to Chern numbers without an independent computation of the bulk Chern numbers for the approximating rational fluxes. This makes the edge-mode counting circular as a derivation of the Hall conductance and does not establish the claim that the topological numbers are conserved under irrational flux.

minor comments (4)

[Abstract/Introduction] There are small typos: 'Hofstadler' should be 'Hofstadter' (Introduction and throughout), and 'power-low behavior' should be 'power-law behavior' (Introduction).
[Topological structure of the spectrum] Expressions such as '∆ = |t| + 0(t²)' and 'τ(1) ≃ t' should use the notation O(t²) and consistent symbols; the dimensionless constant in τ(1) is never defined.
[The Hofstadter model of interacting electrons] The transition from spinless fermions in the main model to spinful fermions in the interacting section is abrupt; the text says 'we will not consider this term' about Zeeman splitting but does not explicitly state whether spin degeneracy is included in Eq. (1) from the start. Please clarify.
[Topological structure of the spectrum, Fig. 2 caption] Figure 2's caption appears garbled ('1 1234 k1-k1k1-k1k1-k1k1'-type labels) and should be rewritten so that the numbered chains and the wave-vector labels are legible.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The half-filling transition and the arbitrary-flux Hall conductance are read off the same numerical spectra they are claimed to derive; the Kitaev-chain formalism supplies labels, not independent calculation.

fitted input called prediction [Section 'Topological structure of the spectrum', paragraph following Fig. 3]
"From calculations of the spectra for an arbitrary rational flux φ = 1/q it follows that tc = 2^{1/q} (numerical calculations of the spectra for different t were carried out in [15])."

The abstract presents t_c=2^φ as a central result ('At half-filling the gap in the center of the fermion spectrum opens for t>t_c=2^φ, a quantum phase transition ... is realized at t_c'). The body's only support is that the value 'follows' from numerical spectra in Ref. [15]; no derivation from the Kitaev-chain effective Hamiltonians (2)-(3) or from the Diophantine equations is given. The phase-transition threshold is therefore read off the same numerical data that the claimed derivation is supposed to predict, making the 'result' a parametrization of the input spectra rather than an independent calculation.
self definitional [Section 'The irrational flux φ = 1/√8', discussion of the fine structure of the low-energy subband]
"We have considered all possible gaps in the fine structure of the low energy subband when δ changes from 1 to 11. The topological properties of the fine structure of the subband are conserved with an increase in the value of t, therefore it is fair to expect that the Hall conductance of each subband is determined by these values of δ."

δ is defined earlier in the same section as 'the number of gapless edge modes localized at a boundary of the sample', obtained by counting modes in the numerically computed spectrum (Fig. 6). The paper's stated method is 'computing the Hall conductance using a different approach, calculating the total number of gapless edge modes in the gap [12]'. Thus the Hall conductance is, by construction, the same integer δ counted from the numerical levels; the 'calculation' does not independently derive the conductance but restates the numerical edge-mode count. The output is equivalent to the input by the adopted bulk-boundary counting rule.

full rationale

The paper's announced method is to compute Hall conductance by counting gapless edge modes in numerically obtained spectra, citing Ref. [12]. Consequently, the Chern numbers and conductances reported for rational and irrational flux are the numerical edge-mode counts, not independent predictions. The central half-filling threshold t_c=2^{1/q} is likewise imported from numerical calculations in Ref. [15] and presented as a derived phase transition; no analytic derivation connects the Kitaev-chain effective Hamiltonians (2)-(3) to this threshold. The 'generalized Kitaev chain' rewriting is an exact Majorana decomposition of the complex-fermion hoppings and does not by itself produce either the threshold or the conductance values. The U>4Δ criterion is taken from the Mattis-Nam exact solution through an asserted mapping to Eq. (4); this is a derivation gap and a correctness risk rather than a circular reduction, so it is not scored as a circular step here. The paper's statement that a gapped state with zero Chern number can support protected chiral edge modes is internally inconsistent, but that is a physical contradiction rather than a circularity. On balance, two central quantitative outputs are numerical inputs relabeled as analytical results, giving partial circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on an assumed reduction of a 2D interacting fermion model to a 1D solvable chain, plus a fitted critical hopping. These are the main unproven inputs.

free parameters (2)

t_c = 2^{1/q} for φ = 1/q
The critical hopping for the half-filling gap is inferred from numerical spectra in [15] and then presented as an analytic expression rather than derived.
τ(δ) = t^δ + O(t^{δ+1})
The effective tunneling between ξ-chains is set to match the numerically observed gap size, so it is a fitted parameter of the effective Kitaev chain model.

assumptions (3)

ad hoc to paper The low-energy sector of the 2D Hofstadter model in each gap reduces to decoupled Kitaev-type chains of Majorana modes.
Stated in the section 'Topological structure of the spectrum' and used to count edge modes; no derivation from the full lattice Hamiltonian is provided.
ad hoc to paper The interacting Hamiltonian (4) maps exactly onto the Mattis-Nam chain solvable model.
Invoked in the section 'The Hofstadter model of interacting electrons' to import the U/τ threshold of 4; the mapping is asserted, not proven.
domain assumption Numerical spectra with N < q approximate an irrational flux to within 1/N.
Used in the irrational flux section to justify computations at φ = 1/√8.

invented entities (1)

Majorana zero energy states at the boundaries of a 2D normal (non-superconducting) fermion system
purpose: Characterize the topological gap at half filling
The paper represents boundary modes using Majorana operators in an effective 1D chain, but the original Hamiltonian is a spinless fermion model without particle-hole symmetry; no experimental handle is given.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Topological states in the Hofstadter model on a honeycomb lattice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CRCMVTDU

@misc{pith2026190809601,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Topological states in the Hofstadter model on a honeycomb lattice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CRCMVTDU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09601}
}

abstract

e provide a detailed analysis of a topological structure of a fermion spectrum in the Hofstadter model with different hopping integrals along the $x,y,z$-links ($t_x=t, t_y=t_z=1$), defined on a honeycomb lattice. We have shown that the chiral gapless edge modes are described in the framework of the generalized Kitaev chain formalism, which makes it possible to calculate the Hall conductance of subbands for different filling and an arbitrary magnetic flux $\phi$. At half-filling the gap in the center of the fermion spectrum opens for $t>t_c=2^{\phi}$, a quantum phase transition in the 2D-topological insulator state is realized at $t_c$. The phase state is characterized by zero energy Majorana states localized at the boundaries. Taking into account the on-site Coulomb repulsion $U$ (where $U<<1$), the criterion for the stability of a topological insulator state is calculated at $t<<1$, $t \sim U$. Thus, in the case of $ U > 4\Delta $, the topological insulator state, which is determined by chiral gapless edge modes in the gap $\Delta$, is destroyed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.09601 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. (Color online) Energy levels calculated on a cylinder [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. (Color online) Phase diagram defined in the coordi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Energies of fermions (shifted by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Energy levels calculated on a cylinder [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

[15]

I.I.Satija, Topology and self-similarity of the Hofstadter butterﬂy, arXiv:1408.1006 [cond-mat.dis-nn] (2014)

work page Pith review arXiv 2014
[13]

Chiral Majorana fermion liquid, J.Phys.Commun., 1 (2017), 051001

I.N.Karnaukhov, Chern insulator with large Chern num- bers. Chiral Majorana fermion liquid, J.Phys.Commun., 1 (2017), 051001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2399- 6528/aa9541

doi:10.1088/2399- 2017
[1]

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.14.2239

D.Hofstadter, Energy levels and wave functions of Bloch electrons in rational and irrational mag- netic ﬁelds, Phys.Rev.B, 14 (1976), 2239-2249. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.14.2239

doi:10.1103/physrevb.14.2239 1976
[2]

These gaps are formed due to the hoppings of fermions between the next-nearest neighbor ξ-chains (see in Fig.2). The structure of the eﬀective Hamiltonian, which deﬁnes the states of fermions in the gaps is the same, it is deter- mined as sum of two chains, deﬁned on even and odd lattice sites H(ϵ) = iτ(2) 2 N−2∑ n=1 χnγn+2 + iτ(2) 2 N−3∑ n=2 χnγn+2, H(−ϵ...

work page
[3]

Taking into account that ∑ l(nn,l;↑− 1 2)(nn,j;↓− 1

work page
[4]

Numeri- cal calculations of the fermion spectrum, obtained for a stripe geometry (see in Fig.1), are shown in Fig.2

This case cor- responds to a simple butterﬂy landscape in which the Chern number is diﬀerent for diﬀerent gaps. Numeri- cal calculations of the fermion spectrum, obtained for a stripe geometry (see in Fig.1), are shown in Fig.2. 3 FIG. 3. (Color online) Phase diagram deﬁned in the coordi- nates q,t for half-ﬁlling (anisotropic hopping integral t, mag- net...

work page
[5]

= 1 N ∑ km(n,k ;↑)m(n,−k;↓), where m(n,k ;σ) =∑ l(nn,l;σ− 1

work page
[6]

exp(ikl), we obtain 1 N ∑ km(n, 2k0(n− 1);↑)m(n, 2k0(n− 1);↓) = − 1 4γn;↑χn:↑γn;↓χn:↓, here m(n, 2k0(n−1);σ) =nn;σ(ϵ)− 1

work page

Show all 30 references

[7]

We used that the spec- trum is periodic with the period k0. Taking into account the interaction term, we deﬁne an eﬀective low-energy Hamiltonian Heff =iτ(δ) 2 ∑ σ N−δ∑ n=1 γn;σχn+δ;σ−U 4 ∑ n γn;↑χn;↑γn;↓χn;↓, (4) whereδ denotes also the number of the chains of electrons with ...
[8]

https://doi.org/10.1088/0022- 3719/18/22/004

I.Dana, Y.Avron and J.Zak, Quantised Hall conduc- tance in a perfect crystal, J.Phys.C: Solid State Phys., 18 (1985), L679-684. https://doi.org/10.1088/0022- 3719/18/22/004

1985 doi
[9]

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-014-0992-0

A.Agazzi, J.-P.Eckmann and G.M.Grafm, The colored Hofstadter butterﬂy for the honey- comb lattice, J.Stat.Phys., 156 (2014), 417-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-014-0992-0

2014 doi
[10]

https://doi.org/10.1088/1751- 8113/47/18/185202

J.E.Avron, O.Kenneth and G,Yehoshua, A study of the ambiguity in the solutions to the Diophantine equation for Chern numbers, J.Phys.A: Math.Theor., 47 (2014), 185202. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751- 8113/47/18/185202

2014 doi
[11]

72, (1994), 1890-1893

P.B.Wiegmann and A.V.Zabrodin, Bethe- ansatz for the Bloch electron in magnetic ﬁeld, Phys.Rev.Lett. 72, (1994), 1890-1893. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.1890

1994 doi
[12]

Wu, Explicit solu- tions of the Bethe ansatz equations for Bloch electrons in a magmnetic ﬁeld, Phys.Rev.Lett

Y.Hatsugai, M.Kohmoto and Y.-S. Wu, Explicit solu- tions of the Bethe ansatz equations for Bloch electrons in a magmnetic ﬁeld, Phys.Rev.Lett. , 73 (1994), 1134-1137. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.1134

1994 doi
[14]

G.G.Naumis, Topological map of the Hofstadter but- terﬂy: Fine structure of Chern numbers and Van Hove singularities, Phys. Lett A. 380 (2016), 1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2016.03.022

2016 doi
[16]

https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/45/39/395305

M.Eliashvili, G.I.Japaridze and G.Tsitsishvili, The quantum group, Harper equation and the struc- ture of Bloch eigenstates on a honeycomb lat- tice, J.Phys.A:Math.Theor., 45 (2012), 395305. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/45/39/395305

2012 doi
[17]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2017.04.014

I.N.Karnaukhov, Spontaneous breaking of time- reversal symmetry in topological insulators, Physics Letters A, 381 (2017), 1967-1970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2017.04.014

2017 doi
[18]

J.C.Avila, H.Schulz-Baldes and C.Villegas- Blas,Topological invariants of edge states for periodic two-dimensional models, Math. Phys. Anal. Geom. , 16 (2013), 137-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11040-012- 9123-9

2013 doi
[19]

J.Math.Phys., 13 (1972), 1185-1189

D.C.Mattis and S.B.Nam, Exactly soluble model of in- teracting electrons. J.Math.Phys., 13 (1972), 1185-1189. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1666120

1972 doi
[20]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005

A.Yu.Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and beyond, Annals of Physics, 321 (2006), 2-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2005.10.005

2006 doi
[21]

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.78.235322

M.Sato, D.Tobe and M.Kohmoto, Hall conduc- tance, topological quantum phase transition, and the Diophantine equation on the honey- comb lattice, Phys.Rev.B, 78 (2008), 235322. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.78.235322

2008 doi
[22]

https://doi.org/10.1070/1063-7869/44/10S/S29

A.Yu.Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Phys.- Usp., 44 (2001), 131-136. https://doi.org/10.1070/1063-7869/44/10S/S29

2001 doi
[23]

I.N.Karnaukhov, Edge modes in the Hofstadter model of interacting electrons, Europhysics Letters, 124 (2018), 37002. https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/124/37002, see also C.Malciu, L.Mazza, and C.Mora, 4 π and 8π dual Josephson eﬀects induced by symmetry defects , arXiv:1901.0...

2018 arXiv
[24]

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.205111

I.Dana, Topologically universal spectral hierarchies of quasiperiodic systems, Phys.Rev.B 89 (2014) 205111. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.205111

2014 doi
[25]

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97.075137

G.Amit and I.Dana, Topological phase transitions from Harper to Fibonacci crystals, Phys.Rev.B, 97 (2018), 075137. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.97.075137

2018 doi
[26]

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979206035448

B.A.Bernevig, T.L.Hughes, S.-C.Zhang, H.-D.Chen and C.Wu, Band collapse and the quantum Hall eﬀect in graphene, Int.J.Mod.Phys.B, 20 (2006), 3257-3278. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979206035448

2006 doi
[27]

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04233

K.S.Novoselov, A.K.Geim, S.V.Morozov, D.Jiang, M.I.Katsnelson, I.V.Grigorieva, S.V.Dubonos and A.A.Firsov, Two-dimensional gas of massless Dirac fermions in graphene, Nature, 438 (2005), 197-200. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04233

2005 doi
[28]

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04235 8

Y.Zhang, Y.W.Tan, H.L.Stormer and P.Y.Kim, Exper- imental observation of the quantum Hall eﬀect and Berry’s phase in graphene, Nature, 438 (2005), 201-204. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04235 8

2005 doi
[29]

95 (2005), 146801

V.P.Gusynin and S.G.Sharapov, Uncon- ventional integer quantum Hall eﬀect in graphene, Phys.Rev.Lett. 95 (2005), 146801. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.146801

2005 doi
[30]

Y.Hatsuda, Perturbative/nonperturbative as- pects of Bloch electrons in a honeycomb lattice, arXiv:1712.04012v2 [hep-th] (2018)

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [15]

I.I.Satija, Topology and self-similarity of the Hofstadter butterﬂy, arXiv:1408.1006 [cond-mat.dis-nn] (2014)

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

[2] [13]

Chiral Majorana fermion liquid, J.Phys.Commun., 1 (2017), 051001

I.N.Karnaukhov, Chern insulator with large Chern num- bers. Chiral Majorana fermion liquid, J.Phys.Commun., 1 (2017), 051001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2399- 6528/aa9541

doi:10.1088/2399- 2017

[3] [1]

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.14.2239

D.Hofstadter, Energy levels and wave functions of Bloch electrons in rational and irrational mag- netic ﬁelds, Phys.Rev.B, 14 (1976), 2239-2249. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.14.2239

doi:10.1103/physrevb.14.2239 1976

[4] [2]

These gaps are formed due to the hoppings of fermions between the next-nearest neighbor ξ-chains (see in Fig.2). The structure of the eﬀective Hamiltonian, which deﬁnes the states of fermions in the gaps is the same, it is deter- mined as sum of two chains, deﬁned on even and odd lattice sites H(ϵ) = iτ(2) 2 N−2∑ n=1 χnγn+2 + iτ(2) 2 N−3∑ n=2 χnγn+2, H(−ϵ...

work page

[5] [3]

Taking into account that ∑ l(nn,l;↑− 1 2)(nn,j;↓− 1

work page

[6] [4]

Numeri- cal calculations of the fermion spectrum, obtained for a stripe geometry (see in Fig.1), are shown in Fig.2

This case cor- responds to a simple butterﬂy landscape in which the Chern number is diﬀerent for diﬀerent gaps. Numeri- cal calculations of the fermion spectrum, obtained for a stripe geometry (see in Fig.1), are shown in Fig.2. 3 FIG. 3. (Color online) Phase diagram deﬁned in the coordi- nates q,t for half-ﬁlling (anisotropic hopping integral t, mag- net...

work page

[7] [5]

= 1 N ∑ km(n,k ;↑)m(n,−k;↓), where m(n,k ;σ) =∑ l(nn,l;σ− 1

work page

[8] [6]

exp(ikl), we obtain 1 N ∑ km(n, 2k0(n− 1);↑)m(n, 2k0(n− 1);↓) = − 1 4γn;↑χn:↑γn;↓χn:↓, here m(n, 2k0(n−1);σ) =nn;σ(ϵ)− 1

work page