Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 94 references

Preparation and observation of anomalous counterpropagating edge states in a periodically driven optical Raman lattice

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A momentum kick of $\pi$ perpendicular to the boundary selects counterpropagating edge states, enabling a protocol to observe the anomalous Floquet valley-Hall phase.

desk verdict The qy=π gap-selection rule is a genuinely new and well-supported protocol for preparing counterpropagating AFVH edge states; the disorder robustness section is under-specified but does not sink the paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13940 v3 pith:VTY7N3C7 submitted 2024-11-21 cond-mat.quant-gas quant-ph

Hongting Hou , Long Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gasquant-ph
keywords anomalousFloquetvalley-HallphasecounterpropagatingedgestatesopticalRamanlatticetopologicalphasesedge-statepreparationGaussianwavepacketlong-rangedisorderultracoldatoms
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

This paper establishes a preparation scheme for the counterpropagating edge states of the anomalous Floquet valley-Hall (AFVH) phase in a two-dimensional shaken optical Raman lattice. Using Gaussian wave-packet initial states, it shows that the internal spin state selects the edge-state branch, the initial momentum $q_x$ parallel to the boundary chooses the edge-state momentum, and an initial kick $q_y=\pi$ perpendicular to the boundary switches population from 0-gap to $\pi$-gap edge modes. The selection rule follows from the site-phase pattern of the analytical edge-state wave functions at the two outermost lattice sites. It then demonstrates numerically that the resulting counterpropagating edge transport survives long-range smooth disorder and finite interactions, providing a concrete protocol for future experiments.

What carries the argument

The argument runs through band-inversion surfaces (BISs), closed curves in momentum space where $h_{F,z}(k)=0$, and the effective static Hamiltonian $H_{\rm eff}^{(n)} = (h_z - n\omega/2)\sigma_z + (-1)^n J_n(4V_0/\omega)(h_x\sigma_x + h_y\sigma_y)$ assigned to the BIS of order $n$. This Hamiltonian replicates the static Chern model with renormalized parameters $\tilde{m}_z = m_z - n\omega/2$ and $\tilde{t}_{so} = (-1)^n J_n(4V_0/\omega) t_{so}$, so each BIS predicts one chiral edge mode in the corresponding quasienergy gap (BIS-boundary correspondence). The edge-state wave function takes the form $\phi_L(y) \propto \lambda_+^y - \lambda_-^y$ with $|\lambda_\pm|<1$, and its phase $\theta(y)$ at $y=1,2$ fixes the preparation rule: when $\theta(1)=\theta(2)$ no perpendicular kick is needed, and when $\theta(2)=-\theta(1)$ a $q_y=\pi$ kick is required. The same wave-function form, with parameters appropriate to $k_x=0$ and $k_x=\pi$, yields the four AFVH edge modes $L_3$ through $L_6$.

What would settle it

Directly compute the exact Floquet eigenstates for the AFVH parameters $m_z=3t_0$, $\omega=4t_0$, $V_0=3t_0$, $t_{so}=0.5t_0$ on a cylinder and compare the phase difference $\theta(2)-\theta(1)$ of the $\pi$-gap edge modes at $k_x=0$ and $k_x=\pi$: the prediction is exactly $\pi$. A different phase difference for any of the four modes would invalidate the $q_y=\pi$ selection rule; likewise, measured edge-state population for $q_y=\pi$ should exceed the $q_y=0$ population for $\pi$-gap modes and vice versa for 0-gap modes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the hallmark edge modes of the AFVH phase—states that counterpropagate along the boundary inside each quasienergy gap despite zero bulk Chern numbers—can be selectively prepared and directly observed with ultracold atoms. For a straight edge, each left-edge mode is characterized by momentum $k_x$, quasienergy gap (0 or $\pi$), and internal spinor. The paper shows that a wave packet initialized near the boundary with the correct spinor and $q_x$ populates the desired mode, while $q_y=\pi$ acts as a gap switch: 0-gap edge-state wave functions are symmetric at the two boundary sites, $\pi$-gap ones antisymmetric, so the kick supplies the needed sign. The prediction is verified by calculating overlaps and real-space chiral wave-packet motion, and two such modes prepared together produce counterpropagating transport that remains stable under long-range disorder while decaying under on-site random disorder. This is presented as the theoretical foundation for observing the AFVH phase through its unique edge states rather than through quench dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The derivation assumes the approximate time-averaged description gives the correct phase pattern of the edge-state wave function at the two outermost lattice sites; the paper reports visible discrepancies from exact numerics farther into the bulk for the AFVH parameters, and if that pattern is wrong near the edge the $\pi$-kick selection rule fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Experimental observation of the AFVH phase can proceed by placing a Gaussian wave packet at the boundary, choosing spinor and $q_x$ for the desired mode, and applying $q_y=\pi$ only for $\pi$-gap modes.
  • Two wave packets prepared in opposite-chirality edge modes within the same gap will show counterpropagating motion along the edge, a signature distinct from a single chiral edge mode.
  • Long-range smooth disorder up to strength $W=t_0$ leaves the counterpropagating transport and return time nearly unchanged, while on-site random disorder of the same strength suppresses it, so disorder type can serve as a diagnostic of the edge-state character.
  • Finite spin-independent interactions preserve the edge-state stationary states up to a threshold interaction strength (the long-lifetime region), after which the Floquet edge modes become dynamically unstable.
  • The scheme uses techniques already demonstrated—programmable repulsive potentials for edges, optical tweezers for positioning, Raman pulses for spin preparation, and momentum kicks—so it is directly implementable.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: The $q_y=\pi$ rule is a parity test of the transverse edge wave function, so the same preparation protocol could be used in other multi-gap Floquet lattices to label edge modes by gap even when bulk invariants vanish.
  • Editorial inference: Because smooth disorder preserves the edge signal while on-site disorder destroys it, experimentalists could deliberately apply a smooth disorder landscape to suppress bulk contamination and isolate the counterpropagating edge contribution in imaging.
  • Editorial inference: The contrast between $q_y=0$ and $q_y=\pi$ population could offer a quantitative probe of the boundary phase of the edge-state wave function, directly measuring the approximation error the paper notes away from the boundary.
  • Editorial inference: Extending the straight-edge protocol to zigzag or shaped boundaries could test the predicted geometry dependence of AFVH edge modes, since the 0-gap counterpropagating modes can vanish on zigzag edges for $V_0>0.6\omega$.
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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies a two-dimensional shaken optical Raman lattice, Eq. (1), focusing on the anomalous Floquet valley-Hall (AFVH) phase in which counterpropagating edge modes appear in both the 0 and π quasienergy gaps. The authors model the atomic cloud as a Gaussian wave packet and derive analytical edge-state wave functions from the effective static Hamiltonian H_eff^(n) of Eq. (A8). Their central claim is that the initial momentum qx parallel to the boundary selects edge modes at different momenta, while the perpendicular momentum qy selects the gap (0 or π) through the symmetric/antisymmetric phase structure at the two boundary sites. They validate the selection rule with exact Floquet diagonalization and stroboscopic wave-packet dynamics (Figs. 3 and 5). They then simulate counterpropagating transport using an incoherent two-component density matrix and compare on-site random disorder with smooth long-range disorder, concluding that the transport is robust to the latter (Figs. 6-9). The appendices provide the BIS-based topological framework, analytical edge-state derivations, the dependence on wave-packet width, and a Gross-Pitaevskii stability analysis under interactions.

Significance. If the protocol works as described, it provides a concrete route to observe the hallmark counterpropagating edge states of the AFVH phase in a cold-atom experiment, directly extending the real-space edge-mode platform of Braun et al. A particular strength is that the qy selection rule is validated against exact Floquet numerics rather than only against the effective Hamiltonian, so it is not a fit to the analytical model; the key overlaps and dynamics are computed with full Floquet eigenstates. The manuscript also gives explicit experimental steps for spin preparation, momentum kicks, and imaging. However, the disorder-robustness part of the central claim is not quantitatively closed: the smooth-disorder potential has unspecified parameters and the statistical uncertainty of the 20-configuration averages is not reported. With those details supplied, the paper would be a solid contribution to the cold-atom Floquet topological matter literature.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. IV, Eq. (26)] The smooth-disorder potential V_sm(r) depends on the impurity number Nimp, the impurity positions r_l, and the range d, but none of these values are given in the main text, the figure captions, or the appendices. This is load-bearing because the claimed robustness is the central result of Sec. IV: for d comparable to the lattice constant, V_sm behaves like a sum of local random potentials and should suppress transport as V_rand does in Fig. 6, while for d comparable to the system size L=40 the potential is nearly uniform and cannot scatter the edge states, making the robustness trivial. Please state Nimp, d, and the sampling procedure for the impurity positions, and relate d to the edge-layer width yedge=4 and to L. In addition, only 20 disorder configurations are averaged in Figs. 6-9 and no error bars or realization-to-realization spread are shown; the flatness of R(t) in Figs. 8(c,d) and the constancy of t_R in Fig. 9 could conceal large fluctuations. Please provide error bars or a plot of individual realizations for the main disorder cases.
  2. [Sec. III.B.2 and Appendix A] The qy=π selection rule is derived from the effective Hamiltonian H_eff^(n) in Eq. (A8), which is constructed by Floquet perturbation theory, and Fig. 4 shows visible discrepancies between the analytical and numerical phase distributions θ(y), for example in panels (a), (d), (e), and (h). The authors state that agreement is strong within the near-boundary region y≤2, and Fig. 5 does confirm the rule by exact numerical overlaps and dynamics. Nevertheless, because the mechanism is presented as a general principle, I ask for a quantitative check: the complex overlap or the phase difference between the analytical and numerical edge-state wave functions restricted to the two leftmost sites y=1,2 for all four modes L3-L6, together with a continuous scan of Pedge as a function of qy between 0 and π. That would make the 'strong consistency' statement concrete and show that the deviations at larger y do not affect the proposed control mechanism.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Appendix D] The sentence 'Finally, we ewe assess the robustness' contains a typo and should read 'Finally, we also assess the robustness'.
  2. [Reference [10]] The title of Ref. [10] has 'Chem Number' and should be corrected to 'Chern Number'.
  3. [Fig. 4] The caption describes the top and bottom rows as analytical and numerical, but the figure itself has no row labels; please add labels such as 'Analytical' and 'Numerical' to the panels.
  4. [Eq. (8)] The notation δx,y for the two wave-packet widths is ambiguous; it would be clearer to write δ_x and δ_y explicitly in the Gaussian exponent.
  5. [Sec. IV] The text says the edge modes are 'immune to long-range disorder', while the abstract and conclusions say 'robust against long-range disorder'; please harmonize the strength of the claim.
  6. [Fig. 9] The x-axis labeling 'Random 0', 'Smooth 0' is unclear; please state explicitly whether the horizontal axis is the disorder strength W and denote the two curves by 'random' and 'smooth' in the legend.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the qy=π selection rule and disorder robustness are derived analytically and tested by exact Floquet numerics, not fitted or self-referential.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained. The edge-state preparation protocol follows from an analytical wave-function ansatz in Appendix B, whose parameters λ are obtained from the effective static Hamiltonian H_eff^(n) in Eq. (A8) via the substitutions Eqs. (A9)-(A10). The resulting phase rule, Eqs. (18)-(21), is a mathematical consequence of the two-site phase pattern of the analytical edge states, not an input fitted to the target overlaps. The numerical validation in Figs. 4-5 uses exact Floquet eigenstates and the full time-evolution operator U(T), neither of which depends on the effective-Hamiltonian approximation, so the 'prediction' of the qy=π kick requirement is checked independently rather than forced. The disorder-robustness claim is likewise supported by direct numerical simulation of the density-matrix evolution under Vrand(r) and Vsm(r), with no parameter fitted to the observed remnant density or return time. The citation of Ref. [45] for the BIS-boundary correspondence and for the prior prediction of immunity to long-range disorder is a self-citation, but it is not load-bearing in this paper: the same correspondence is used only as a heuristic starting point, and the specific claims are re-derived and verified by the paper's own exact numerics. The unspecified range d and impurity number in the long-range disorder model, and the absence of error bars, would be a completeness or rigor concern about the disorder study, but it is not a circularity. No equation reduces to another by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data; the model parameters (t0, tso, mz, V0, ω) are inherited from the experimental realization in [44], and the initial-state width δy is a tunable control. The central claim relies on the BIS-boundary correspondence and the effective subsystem Hamiltonian from the authors' prior theory [45,48] (domain assumptions), and on the Gaussian wave-packet ansatz for the initial state.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption BIS-boundary correspondence: each 0 or π BIS with nonzero winding corresponds to a chiral edge mode in the corresponding quasienergy gap.
    Used throughout Sec. II and Appendix A to assert the existence and properties of the four counterpropagating edge modes in the AFVH phase.
  • domain assumption The effective static Hamiltonian H_eff^(n) = (h_z - n ω/2) σ_z + (-1)^n J_n(4 V0/ω)(h_x σ_x + h_y σ_y) accurately describes driving-induced edge modes.
    Used in Sec. III.B and Appendix B to derive edge-state wave functions and the phase pattern that underlies the qy = π selection rule.
  • domain assumption The initial atomic cloud is well described by a Gaussian wave packet of the form of Eq. (8).
    State preparation and overlap calculations in Sec. III use this ansatz; the conclusions are shown to hold only for δy roughly between 0.7 and 1 (Appendix C).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Preparation and observation of anomalous counterpropagating edge states in a periodically driven optical Raman lattice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VTY7N3C7

@misc{pith2026241113940,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Preparation and observation of anomalous counterpropagating edge states in a periodically driven optical Raman lattice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VTY7N3C7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13940}
}
read the original abstract

Motivated by the recent observation of real-space edge modes with ultracold atoms [Braun et al., Nat. Phys. 20, 1306 (2024)], we investigate the preparation and detection of anomalous counterpropagating edge states -- a defining feature of the anomalous Floquet valley-Hall (AFVH) phase -- in a two-dimensional periodically driven optical Raman lattice. Modeling the atomic cloud with a Gaussian wave packet state, we explore, both analytically and numerically, how the population of edge modes depends on the initial-state parameters. In particular, we reveal that, in addition to the internal spin state, the initial momenta parallel and perpendicular to the boundary play essential roles: they independently control the selective population of edge states across distinct momenta and within separate quasienergy gaps. Furthermore, we examine the wave-packet dynamics of counterpropagating edge states and demonstrate that their characteristic motion is robust against long-range disorder. These results establish a theoretical framework for future experimental explorations of the AFVH phase and topological phenomena associated with its unique edge modes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13940 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Sketch diagram of the 2D Floquet topological model realized in a shaken optical Raman lattice. (b) Phase diagram as function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. A typical example of the density distribution of the initial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Edge-state preparation in the [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. Density distributions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Edge-state preparation in the AFVH phase. The population of the four left edge modes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Wave-packet dynamics of counterpropagating edge modes in the 0 gap [(a)-(e)] or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Wave-packet dynamics of counterpropagating edge modes in the 0 gap [(a)-(e)] or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Remnant density [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Return time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Probability of populating two edge modes [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Interaction-dependent stability of anomalous counterpropa [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Here, emz and ˜tso are the parameters of the effective Hamiltonian H(n) eff (k), as presented in Eq

    Analytical study We first consider left edge states at kx = 0, with the wave- packet function along the y-direction taking the form ϕL(y) = 1 NL λy L+−λy L− , (13) where, according to Appendix B, λL± = emz− 2t0± q em2z− 4t0emz + 4˜t 2so 2(t0 +|˜tso|) , (14) and 0 < emz < 4t0. Here, emz and ˜tso are the parameters of the effective Hamiltonian H(n) eff (k),...

  2. [2]

    4(a)-(d) the an- alytical solutions for the density distribution|ϕL(y)|2 of the left edge states at kx = 0,π based on Eq

    Numerical demonstration To illustrate our analysis, we present in Fig. 4(a)-(d) the an- alytical solutions for the density distribution|ϕL(y)|2 of the left edge states at kx = 0,π based on Eq. (13), alongside the nu- merical results in Fig. 4(e)-(h), with the phase distributionθ(y) displayed in the insets. It is evident that the analytical and nu- merical...

    work page arXiv

  3. [3]

    M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, Colloquium: Topological insula- tors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 3045 (2010)

    2010

  4. [4]

    Qi and S.-C

    X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, Topological insulators and supercon- ductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1057 (2011)

    2011

  5. [5]

    Sato and Y

    M. Sato and Y . Ando, Topological superconductors: a review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 80, 076501 (2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    K ¨onig, S

    M. K ¨onig, S. Wiedmann, C. Br ¨une, A. Roth, H. Buhmann, L. W. Molenkamp, X.-L. Qi, and S.-C. Zhang, Quantum spin Hall insulator state in HgTe quantum wells, Science318, 766 (2007)

    2007

  7. [7]

    Hsieh, D

    D. Hsieh, D. Qian, L. Wray, Y . Xia, Y . S. Hor, R. J. Cava, and M. Z. Hasan, A topological Dirac insulator in a quantum spin Hall phase, Nature (London) 452, 970 (2008)

    2008

  8. [8]

    Y . Xia, D. Qian, D. Hsieh, L. Wray, A. Pal, H. Lin, A. Bansil, D. Grauer, Y . S. Hor, R. J. Cava, and M. Z. Hasan, Observation of a large-gap topological-insulator class with a single Dirac cone on the surface, Nat. Phys. 5, 398 (2009)

    2009

Show all 94 references
  1. [9]

    Chang, J

    C.-Z. Chang, J. Zhang, X. Feng, J. Shen, Z. Zhang, M. Guo, K. Li, Y . Ou, P. Wei, L.-L. Wang, Z.-Q. Ji, Y . Feng, S. Ji, X. Chen, J. Jia, X. Dai, Z. Fang, S.-C. Zhang, K. He, Y . Wang, L. Lu, X.-C. Ma, and Q.-K. Xue, Experimental observation of the quantum anomalous Hall e ffe...

    2013

  2. [10]

    S. Y . Xu, I. Belopolski, N. Alidoust, M. Neupane, G. Bian, C. L. Zhang, R. Sankar, G. Q. Chang, Z. J. Yuan, C. C. Lee, S. M. Huang, H. Zheng, J. Ma, D. S. Sanchez, B. K. Wang, A. Bansil, F. C. Chou, P. P. Shibayev, H. Lin, S. Jia, and M. Z. Hasan, Discovery of a Weyl fermion ...

    2015

  3. [11]

    B. Q. Lv, H. M. Weng, B. B. Fu, X. P. Wang, H. Miao, J. Ma, P. Richard, X. C. Huang, L. X. Zhao, G. F. Chen, Z. Fang, X. Dai, T. Qian, and H. Ding, Experimental Discovery of Weyl Semimetal TaAs, Phys. Rev. X5, 031013 (2015)

    2015

  4. [12]

    Hatsugai, Chem Number and Edge States in the Integer Quantum Hall Effect, Phys

    Y . Hatsugai, Chem Number and Edge States in the Integer Quantum Hall Effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3697 (1993)

    1993

  5. [13]

    Qi, Y .-S

    X.-L. Qi, Y .-S. Wu, and S.-C. Zhang, General theorem relating the bulk topological number to edge states in two-dimensional insulators, Phys. Rev. B 74, 045125 (2006)

    2006

  6. [14]

    R. S. K. Mong and V . Shivamoggi, Edge states and the bulk- boundary correspondence in Dirac Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. B 83, 125109 (2011)

    2011

  7. [15]

    A. M. Essin and V . Gurarie, Bulk-boundary correspondence of topological insulators from their respective Green’s functions, Phys. Rev. B 84, 125132 (2011)

    2011

  8. [16]

    M. S. Rudner, N. H. Lindner, E. Berg, and M. Levin, Anoma- lous Edge States and the Bulk-Edge Correspondence for Pe- riodically Driven Two-Dimensional Systems, Phys. Rev. X 3, 031005 (2013)

    2013

  9. [17]

    Nathan and M

    F. Nathan and M. S. Rudner, Topological singularities and the general classification of Floquet-Bloch systems, New J. Phys. 17, 125014 (2015)

    2015

  10. [18]

    Kitagawa, E

    T. Kitagawa, E. Berg, M. Rudner, and E. Demler, Topological characterization of periodically driven quantum systems, Phys. Rev. B 82, 235114 (2010)

    2010

  11. [19]

    Carpentier, P

    D. Carpentier, P. Delplace, M. Fruchart, and K. Gawedzki, Topological Index for Periodically Driven Time-Reversal In- variant 2D Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 106806 (2015)

    2015

  12. [20]

    Fruchart, Complex classes of periodically driven topological lattice systems, Phys

    M. Fruchart, Complex classes of periodically driven topological lattice systems, Phys. Rev. B 93, 115429 (2016)

    2016

  13. [21]

    Roy and F

    R. Roy and F. Harper, Periodic table for Floquet topological insulators, Phys. Rev. B 96, 155118 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    S. Yao, Z. Yan, and Z. Wang, Topological invariants of Floquet systems: General formulation, special properties, and Floquet topological defects, Phys. Rev. B 96, 195303 (2017)

    2017

  15. [23]

    Morimoto, H

    T. Morimoto, H. C. Po, and A. Vishwanath Floquet topologi- cal phases protected by time glide symmetry, Phys. Rev. B 95, 195155 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Huang, Topological invariants for anomalous Floquet higher-order topological insulators

    B. Huang, Topological invariants for anomalous Floquet higher-order topological insulators. Front. Phys. 18, 13601 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    A. K. Ghosh, T. Nag, and A. Saha, Generation of higher-order topological insulators using periodic driving, J. Phys.: Con- dens. Matter 36 093001 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Goldman, J

    N. Goldman, J. C. Budich, and P. Zoller, Topological quantum matter with ultracold gases in optical lattices, Nat. Phys. 12, 639 (2016)

    2016

  19. [27]

    Zhang, Y .-Q

    D.-W. Zhang, Y .-Q. Zhu, Y . X. Zhao, H. Yan, S.-L. Zhu, Topo- logical quantum matter with cold atoms, Adv. Phys. 67, 253 (2018)

    2018

  20. [28]

    N. R. Cooper, J. Dalibard, and I. B. Spielman, Topological bands for ultracold atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015005 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    Sch ¨afer, T

    F. Sch ¨afer, T. Fukuhara, S. Sugawa, Y . Takasu, and Y . Taka- hashi, Tools for quantum simulation with ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Nat. Rev. Phys. 2, 411 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Atala, M

    M. Atala, M. Aidelsburger, J. T. Barreiro, D. Abanin, T. Kita- gawa, E. Demler, and I. Bloch, Direct measurement of the Zak phase in topological Bloch bands, Nat. Phys. 9, 795 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    B. Song, L. Zhang, C. He, T. F. J. Poon, E. Hajiyev, S. Zhang, X.-J. Liu, and G.-B. Jo, Observation of symmetry-protected topological band with ultracold fermions, Sci. Adv.4, eaao4748 (2018)

    2018

  24. [32]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Pare- des, and I. Bloch, Realization of the Hofstadter Hamiltonian with Ultracold Atoms in Optical Lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  25. [33]

    Miyake, G

    H. Miyake, G. A. Siviloglou, C. J. Kennedy, W. C. Burton, and W. Ketterle, Realizing the Harper Hamiltonian with LaserAs- sisted Tunneling in Optical Lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 185302 (2013)

    2013

  26. [34]

    Jotzu, M

    G. Jotzu, M. Messer, R. Desbuquois, M. Lebrat, T. Uehlinger, D. Greif, and T. Esslinger, Experimental realization of the topo- logical Haldane model with ultracold fermions, Nature (Lon- don) 515, 237 (2014)

    2014

  27. [35]

    Aidelsburger, M

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Lohse, C. Schweizer, M. Atala, J. T. Bar- reiro, S. Nascimb`ene, N. R. Cooper, I. Bloch, and N. Goldman, 14 Measuring the Chern number of Hofstadter bands with ultra- cold bosonic atoms, Nat. Phys. 11, 162 (2015)

    2015

  28. [36]

    Z. Wu, L. Zhang, W. Sun, X. Xu, B. Wang, S. Ji, Y . Deng, S. Chen, X. Liu, and J.-W. Pan, Realization of two-dimensional spin-orbit coupling for Bose-Einstein condensates, Science, 354, 83 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    Sun, B.-Z

    W. Sun, B.-Z. Wang, X.-T. Xu, C.-R. Yi, L. Zhang, Z. Wu, Y . Deng, X.-J. Liu, S. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, Highly Controllable and Robust 2D Spin-Orbit Coupling for Quantum Gases, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 150401 (2018)

    2018

  30. [38]

    Liang, Y .-D

    M.-C. Liang, Y .-D. Wei, L. Zhang, X.-J. Wang, H. Zhang, W.-W. Wang, W. Qi, X.-J. Liu, and X. Zhang, Realization of Qi-Wu-Zhang model in spin-orbit-coupled ultracold fermions, Phys. Rev. Research 5, L012006 (2023)

    2023

  31. [39]

    B. Song, C. He, S. Niu, L. Zhang, Z. Ren, X.-J. Liu, and G.-B. Jo, Observation of nodal-line semimetal with ultracold fermions in an optical lattice, Nat. Phys. 15, 911 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    Z. Wang, X. Cheng, B. Wang, J. Zhang, Y . Lu, C. Yi, S. Niu, Y . Deng, X. Liu, S. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, Realization of an ideal Weyl semimetal band in a quantum gas with 3D spin-orbit cou- pling, Science, 372, 271. (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in periodically driven optical lattices, Rev

    A. Eckardt, Colloquium: Atomic quantum gases in periodically driven optical lattices, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 011004 (2017)

    2017

  34. [42]

    M. S. Rudner and N. H. Lindner, Band structure engineering and non-equilibrium dynamics in Floquet topological insula- tors. Nat. Rev. Phys. 2, 229 (2020)

    2020

  35. [43]

    Weitenberg and J

    C. Weitenberg and J. Simonet, Tailoring quantum gases by Flo- quet engineering, Nat. Phys. 17, 1342 (2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    Wintersperger, C

    K. Wintersperger, C. Braun, F. N. ¨Unal, A. Eckardt, M. D. Lib- erto, N. Goldman, I. Bloch and M. Aidelsburger, Realization of an anomalous Floquet topological system with ultracold atoms, Nat. Phys. 16, 1058 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    M. Lu, G. H. Reid , A. R. Fritsch , A. M. Pi ˜neiro, and I. B. Spielman, Floquet Engineering Topological Dirac Bands, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 040402 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Zhang, C.-R

    J.-Y . Zhang, C.-R. Yi, L. Zhang, R.-H. Jiao, K.-Y . Shi, H. Yuan, W. Zhang, X.-J. Liu, S. Chen, and J.-W. Pan, Tuning Anoma- lous Floquet Topological Bands with Ultracold Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 043201 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    Zhang and X.-J

    L. Zhang and X.-J. Liu, Unconventional Floquet Topological Phases from Quantum Engineering of Band-Inversion Surfaces, PRX Quantum 3, 040312 (2022)

    2022

  40. [48]

    Lababidi, I

    M. Lababidi, I. I. Satija, and E. Zhao, Counter-propagating Edge Modes and Topological Phases of a Kicked Quantum Hall System, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 026805 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    M. Umer, R. W. Bomantara, and J. Gong, Counterpropagating edge states in Floquet topological insulating phases Phys. Rev. B 101, 235438 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    Zhang, L

    L. Zhang, L. Zhang, and X.-J. Liu, Unified Theory to Charac- terize Floquet Topological Phases by Quench Dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 183001 (2020)

    2020

  43. [51]

    T. D. Stanescu, V . Galitski, J. Y . Vaishnav, C. W. Clark, and S. D. Sarma, Topological insulators and metals in atomic optical lattices, Phys. Rev. A 79, 053639 (2009)

    2009

  44. [52]

    T. D. Stanescu, V . Galitski, and S. D. Sarma, Topological states in two-dimensional optical lattices, Phys. Rev. A 82, 013608 (2010)

    2010

  45. [53]

    Buchhold, D

    M. Buchhold, D. Cocks, and W. Hofstetter, E ffects of smooth boundaries on topological edge modes in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. A 85, 063614 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    Goldman, J

    N. Goldman, J. Beugnon, and F. Gerbier, Detecting Chiral Edge States in the Hofstadter Optical Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 255303 (2012)

    2012

  47. [55]

    Goldman, J

    N. Goldman, J. Dalibard, A. Dauphin, F. Gerbier, M. Lewen- stein, P. Zoller, and I. B. Spielman, Direct imaging of topolog- ical edge states in cold-atom systems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 6736 (2013)

    2013

  48. [56]

    M. D. Reichl and E. J. Mueller, Floquet edge states with ultra- cold atoms, Phys. Rev. A 89, 063628 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    Goldman, G

    N. Goldman, G. Jotzu, M. Messer, F. G¨org, R. Desbuquois, and T. Esslinger, Creating topological interfaces and detecting chi- ral edge modes in a two-dimensional optical lattice, Phys. Rev. A 94, 043611 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    Leder, C

    M. Leder, C. Grossert, L. Sitta, M. Genske, A. Rosch, and M. Weitz, Real-space imaging of a topologically protected edge state with ultracold atoms in an amplitude-chirped optical lat- tice, Nat. Commun. 7, 13112 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    M. F. Mart´ınez and F. N. ¨Unal, Wave-packet dynamics and edge transport in anomalous Floquet topological phases, Phys. Rev. A 108, 063314 (2023)

    2023

  52. [60]

    B. Wang, M. Aidelsburger, J. Dalibard, A. Eckardt, and N. Goldman, Cold-Atom Elevator: From Edge-State Injection to the Preparation of Fractional Chern Insulators, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 163402 (2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    Braun, R

    C. Braun, R. Saint-Jalm, A. Hesse, J. Arceri, I. Bloch, and M. Aidelsburger, Real-space detection and manipulation of topo- logical edge modes with ultracold atoms, Nat. Phys. 20, 1306 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    Mancini, G

    M. Mancini, G. Pagano, G. Cappellini, L. Livi, M. Rider, J. Catani, C. Sias, P. Zoller, M. Inguscio, M. Dalmonte, and L. Fallani, Observation of chiral edge states with neutral fermions in synthetic Hall ribbons, Science 349, 1510 (2015)

    2015

  55. [63]

    B. K. Stuhl, H.-I. Lu, L. M. Aycock, D. Genkina, and I. B. Spielman, Visualizing edge states with an atomic Bose gas in the quantum Hall regime, Science 349, 1514 (2015)

    2015

  56. [64]

    Chalopin, T

    T. Chalopin, T. Satoor, A. Evrard, V . Makhalov, J. Dalibard, R. Lopes, and S. Nascimbene, Probing chiral edge dynamics and bulk topology of a synthetic Hall system, Nat. Phys. 16, 1017 (2020)

    2020

  57. [65]

    Liu, Z.-X

    X.-J. Liu, Z.-X. Liu, and M. Cheng, Manipulating Topological Edge Spins in a One-Dimensional Optical Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 076401 (2013)

    2013

  58. [66]

    X.-J. Liu, K. T. Law, and T. K. Ng, Realization of 2D Spin- Orbit Interaction and Exotic Topological Orders in Cold Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 086401 (2014)

    2014

  59. [67]

    Liu, Z.-X

    X.-J. Liu, Z.-X. Liu, K. T. Law, W. V . Liu, and T. K. Ng, Chiral topological orders in an optical Raman lattice, New J. Phys. 18 035004 (2016)

    2016

  60. [68]

    Zhang, Y

    D.-W. Zhang, Y . X. Zhao, R.-B. Liu, Z.-Y . Xue, S.-L. Zhu, and Z. D. Wang, Quantum simulation of exoticPT -invariant topo- logical nodal loop bands with ultracold atoms in an optical lat- tice, Phys. Rev. A 93, 043617 (2016)

    2016

  61. [69]

    Lang, S.-L

    L.-J. Lang, S.-L. Zhang, and Q. Zhou, Nodal Brillouin-zone boundary from folding a Chern insulator, Phys. Rev. A 95, 053615 (2017)

    2017

  62. [70]

    Zhang and Q

    S.-L. Zhang and Q. Zhou, Two-leg Su-Schrie ffer-Heeger chain with glide reflection symmetry, Phys. Rev. A 95, 061601(R) (2017)

    2017

  63. [71]

    Wang, Y .-H

    B.-Z. Wang, Y .-H. Lu, W. Sun, S. Chen, Y . Deng, and X.-J. Liu, Dirac-, Rashba-, and Weyl-type spin-orbit couplings: Toward experimental realization in ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. A 97, 011605(R) (2018)

    2018

  64. [72]

    Yang, L.-M

    Y .-B. Yang, L.-M. Duan, and Y . Xu, Continuously tunable topo- logical pump in high-dimensional cold atomic gases, Phys. Rev. B 98, 165128 (2018)

    2018

  65. [73]

    Liu, T.-S

    H. Liu, T.-S. Xiong, W. Zhang, and J.-H. An, Floquet engineer- ing of exotic topological phases in systems of cold atoms, Phys. 15 Rev. A 100, 023622 (2019)

    2019

  66. [74]

    Zheng, Z

    Z. Zheng, Z. Lin, D.-W. Zhang, S.-L. Zhu, and Z. D. Wang, Chi- ral magnetic e ffect in three-dimensional optical lattices, Phys. Rev. Research 1, 033102 (2019)

    2019

  67. [75]

    Y . Wang, L. Zhang, S. Niu, D. Yu, and X.-J. Liu, Realization and Detection of Nonergodic Critical Phases in an Optical Ra- man Lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 073204 (2020)

    2020

  68. [76]

    J. Hou, H. Hu, and C. Zhang, Topological phases in pseudospin- 1 Fermi gases with two-dimensional spin-orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. A 101, 053613 (2020)

    2020

  69. [77]

    Lu, B.-Z

    Y .-H. Lu, B.-Z. Wang, X.-J. Liu, Ideal Weyl semimetal with 3D spin-orbit coupled ultracold quantum gas, Sci. Bull. 65, 2080 (2020)

    2020

  70. [78]

    Wang, J.-H

    B.-B. Wang, J.-H. Zhang, C. Shan, F. Mei, and S. Jia, Topolog- ical nodal chains in optical lattices, Phys. Rev. A 103, 033316 (2021)

    2021

  71. [79]

    Wang, Mobility edges and critical regions in a periodically kicked incommensurate optical Raman lattice, Phys

    Y . Wang, Mobility edges and critical regions in a periodically kicked incommensurate optical Raman lattice, Phys. Rev. A 106, 053312 (2022)

    2022

  72. [80]

    Ziegler, E

    L. Ziegler, E. Tirrito, M. Lewenstein, S. Hands, and A. Bermudez, Correlated Chern insulators in two-dimensional Ra- man lattices: A cold-atom regularization of strongly coupled four-Fermi field theories, Phys. Rev. Research 4, L042012 (2022)

    2022

  73. [81]

    Li and W

    H. Li and W. Yi, Dissipative two-dimensional Raman lattice, Phys. Rev. A 107, 013306 (2023)

    2023

  74. [82]

    Zhou, T.-H

    X.-C. Zhou, T.-H. Yang, Z.-Y . Wang, X.-J. Liu, Non-Abelian dynamical gauge field and topological superfluids in optical Ra- man lattice, arXiv:2309.12923

    arXiv

  75. [83]

    E. Zhao, Z. Wang, C. He, T. F. J. Poon, K. K. Pak, Y .-J. Liu, P. Ren, X.-J. Liu, and G.-B. Jo, Two-dimensional non-Hermitian skin effect in an ultracold Fermi gas, arXiv:2311.07931

  76. [84]

    Zhang, W.-W

    H. Zhang, W.-W. Wang, C. Qiao, L. Zhang, M.-C. Liang, R. Wu, X.-J. Wang, X.-J. Liu, and X. Zhang, Topological spin- orbit-coupled fermions beyond rotating wave approximation, Sci. Bull. 69 747 (2024)

    2024

  77. [85]

    Wang, J.-X

    J.-T. Wang, J.-X. Liu, H.-T. Ding, and P. He, Proposal for imple- menting Stiefel-Whitney insulators in an optical Raman lattice, Phys. Rev. A 109, 053314 (2024)

    2024

  78. [86]

    Gross and W

    C. Gross and W. S. Bakr, Quantum gas microscopy for single atom and spin detection, Nat. Phys. 17, 1316 (2021)

    2021

  79. [87]

    J. E. Lye, L. Fallani, M. Modugno, D. S. Wiersma, C. Fort, and M. Inguscio, Bose-Einstein Condensate in a Random Potential, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 070401 (2005)

    2005

  80. [88]

    J.-Y . Choi, S. Hild, J. Zeiher, P. Schauß, A. Rubio-Abadal, T. Yefsah, V . Khemani, D. A. Huse, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Exploring the many-body localization transition in two dimen- sions, Science 352, 1547 (2016)

    2016

  81. [89]

    D. H. White, T. A. Haase, D. J. Brown, M. D. Hoogerland, M. S. Najafabadi, J. L. Helm, C. Gies, D. Schumayer, and D. A. W. Hutchinson, Observation of two-dimensional Anderson localisation of ultracold atoms, Nat. Commun.11, 4942 (2020)

    2020

  82. [90]

    Zhang, L

    L. Zhang, L. Zhang, S. Niu, and X.-J. Liu, Dynamical clas- sification of topological quantum phases, Sci. Bull. 63, 1385 (2018)

    2018

  83. [91]

    Zhang, L

    L. Zhang, L. Zhang, and X.-J. Liu, Dynamical detection of topological charges, Phys. Rev. A 99, 053606 (2019)

    2019

  84. [92]

    Zhang, L

    L. Zhang, L. Zhang, and X.-J. Liu, Characterizing topological phases by quantum quenches: A general theory, Phys. Rev. A 100, 063624 (2019)

    2019

  85. [93]

    Wang and L

    B.-B. Wang and L. Zhang, Characterizing Floquet topological phases by quench dynamics: A multiple-subsystem approach, Phys. Rev. A 109, 023303 (2024)

    2024

  86. [94]

    Mochizuki, K

    K. Mochizuki, K. Mizuta, and N. Kawakami, Fate of topologi- cal edge states in disordered periodically driven nonlinear sys- tems, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 043112 (2021)

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.