pith. sign in

arxiv: 2411.14546 · v2 · submitted 2024-11-21 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas · quant-ph

Static impurity in a mesoscopic system of SU(N) fermionic matter-waves

Juan Polo , Wayne J. Chetcuti , Anna Minguzzi , Andreas Osterloh , Luigi Amico This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 17:02 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas quant-ph
keywords SU(N) fermionsmesoscopic ringstatic impurityartificial gauge fieldflux fractionalizationstrongly correlated systemsone-dimensional fermionsparticle current
0
0 comments X

The pith

In SU(N) fermion mesoscopic rings with a barrier, the energy spectrum and current arise from competition between single-particle tunneling and a high-stiffness spin-correlated state linked to flux quantum fractionalization.

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

The paper examines how a localized barrier affects strongly correlated repulsive SU(N) fermions in a one-dimensional mesoscopic ring under an artificial gauge field. It establishes that the system's behavior is determined by the rivalry between ordinary single-particle effects and the emergence of a robust spin-correlated state tied to fractionalization of the flux quantum. A sympathetic reader would care because this offers a way to understand and probe multi-component fermionic systems in effective magnetic fields, relevant to both fundamental impurity problems and potential experimental realizations in ultracold atoms.

Core claim

We find that the physics of the system is governed by the competition between effective single-particle process and the formation of a high-stiffness spin-correlated state associated to the phenomenon of fractionalization of the flux quantum characterizing the N-component fermionic system. Our findings provide a route to probe the response of SU(N) fermions to effective magnetic fields; at the same time, they hold significance for fundamental understanding of localized impurity problems.

What carries the argument

The competition between effective single-particle tunneling and the high-stiffness spin-correlated state from fractionalization of the flux quantum in the N-component system.

Load-bearing premise

The model assumes that the strongly correlated repulsive SU(N) fermions in one dimension under an artificial gauge field can be faithfully represented by a mesoscopic ring with a localized barrier whose only effect is to modulate tunneling and current, without additional microscopic details of the barrier or higher-dimensional corrections.

What would settle it

If measurements show that the current through the barrier remains unaffected by changes in N or interaction strength in the strongly correlated regime, or if no signatures of increased stiffness appear in the energy spectrum, the claim of dominance by the fractionalized spin-correlated state would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.14546 by Andreas Osterloh, Anna Minguzzi, Juan Polo, Luigi Amico, Wayne J. Chetcuti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Profiles of the energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) Current [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (Top panel) Maximum persistent current amplitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Maximum persistent current amplitude [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. schematic figure for the energy landscape [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We investigate the effects of a static impurity, modeled by a localized barrier, in a one-dimensional mesoscopic system comprised of strongly correlated repulsive SU($N$)-symmetric fermions. For a mesoscopic sized ring under the effect of an artificial gauge field, we analyze the energy spectrum, the particle density and the current flowing through the impurity at varying interaction strengths, barrier heights, and number of components. We find that the physics of the system is governed by the competition between effective single-particle process and the formation of a high-stiffness spin-correlated state associated to the phenomenon of fractionalization of the flux quantum characterizing the $N$-component fermionic system. Our findings provide a route to probe the response of SU($N$) fermions to effective magnetic fields; at the same time, they hold significance for fundamental understanding of localized impurity problems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies a static impurity modeled as a localized barrier in a one-dimensional mesoscopic ring of strongly correlated repulsive SU(N) fermions under an artificial gauge field. It examines the energy spectrum, particle density, and current as functions of interaction strength, barrier height, and N, concluding that the physics is controlled by competition between effective single-particle processes and a high-stiffness spin-correlated state tied to fractionalization of the flux quantum.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work supplies a concrete mesoscopic route to probe SU(N) fermion response to effective magnetic fields and advances understanding of localized impurities in multi-component 1D systems. The mesoscopic ring geometry with tunable gauge field is a positive feature for isolating fractionalization signatures.

major comments (1)
  1. [Model and Hamiltonian description] The central claim that the physics is governed by competition between single-particle processes and a high-stiffness spin-correlated state (abstract) rests on the barrier being faithfully reducible to a single height parameter that only modulates tunneling and current. The manuscript provides no explicit verification that spin-dependent scattering channels or local potential corrections remain negligible across the scanned range of interaction strength, N, and barrier height; such channels could modify the stiffness and flux periodicity in the strong-coupling SU(N) regime.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of the work's significance and for the constructive comment on the impurity model. We address the point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Model and Hamiltonian description] The central claim that the physics is governed by competition between single-particle processes and a high-stiffness spin-correlated state (abstract) rests on the barrier being faithfully reducible to a single height parameter that only modulates tunneling and current. The manuscript provides no explicit verification that spin-dependent scattering channels or local potential corrections remain negligible across the scanned range of interaction strength, N, and barrier height; such channels could modify the stiffness and flux periodicity in the strong-coupling SU(N) regime.

    Authors: The impurity is introduced via a spin-independent localized barrier potential that is identical for every SU(N) component, as required by the symmetry of the full Hamiltonian. This symmetry directly eliminates spin-dependent scattering channels; any such channel would break the SU(N) invariance that is central to the model and to the flux-fractionalization physics under study. Local potential corrections beyond the barrier height are absent by construction of the Hamiltonian, which contains only the tunable barrier strength as the impurity parameter. Within this standard formulation the reduction to a single height parameter is faithful, and the competition between single-particle tunneling and the high-stiffness spin-correlated state follows directly. We therefore see no requirement for additional numerical verification of effects that are symmetry-forbidden. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained

full rationale

No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations appear in the abstract or model description that reduce any claimed prediction (energy spectrum, current, flux fractionalization) to an input by construction. The central statement that physics is governed by competition between single-particle processes and a high-stiffness spin-correlated state is presented as an outcome of the analysis rather than a definitional or fitted tautology. The barrier model is introduced as an assumption without evidence that it is justified only by prior self-work. Absent load-bearing self-citation chains or ansatz smuggling, the score remains 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; no explicit free parameters, invented entities, or non-standard axioms are stated. The model rests on the standard domain assumption that the system is faithfully described by one-dimensional SU(N) fermions with strong repulsion and a localized barrier.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Strongly correlated repulsive SU(N)-symmetric fermions in one dimension under artificial gauge field can be modeled as a mesoscopic ring with localized barrier.
    Stated directly in the abstract as the setup under investigation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5686 in / 1321 out tokens · 40505 ms · 2026-05-23T17:02:17.649584+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 91 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    3 0 0 . 2 0 . 4 0 . 6 0 . 8 1 {3, 6}

    work page

  2. [2]

    8 1 10− 2 10310− 1 100 101 102 I(φ ) φ U =/BC U =/BD/BC U =/BD/BL/BE I /D1/CP/DC /DF/BE/B8 /BI/DH /DF/BF/B8 /BF/DH /DF/BF/B8 /BI/DH I /D1/CP/DC /I /D1/CP/DC (λ = 0) U (a) (b) FIG. 2. (a) CurrentI(ϕ) versus fluxϕshowcasing the inter- play between the characteristic fractionalized sawtooth and a smoothened profile given by the presence of the impurity. (b) ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    B. L. Altshuler, P. A. Lee, and W. R. Webb,Mesoscopic phenomena in solids(Elsevier, 2012)

    work page 2012

  4. [4]

    G. L. Timp and R. E. Howard, IEEE Proc.79, 1188 (1991)

    work page 1991

  5. [5]

    Alloul, J

    H. Alloul, J. Bobroff, M. Gabay, and P. Hirschfeld, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 45 (2009)

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    Kolezhuk, S

    A. Kolezhuk, S. Sachdev, R. R. Biswas, and P. Chen, Phys. Rev. B74, 165114 (2006)

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    Kane and M

    C. Kane and M. P. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 1220 (1992)

    work page 1992

  8. [8]

    Kane and M

    C. Kane and M. P. Fisher, Physical Review B46, 15233 (1992)

    work page 1992

  9. [9]

    Von Delft and H

    J. Von Delft and H. Schoeller, Annalen der Physik510, 225 (1998)

    work page 1998

  10. [10]

    Saleur, inTopological aspects of low dimensional sys- tems: Session LXIX(Springer, 2002) p

    H. Saleur, inTopological aspects of low dimensional sys- tems: Session LXIX(Springer, 2002) p. 473

    work page 2002

  11. [11]

    Giamarchi,Quantum physics in one dimension, Vol

    T. Giamarchi,Quantum physics in one dimension, Vol. 121 (Clarendon Press, 2003)

    work page 2003

  12. [12]

    Rylands and N

    C. Rylands and N. Andrei, Phys. Rev. B94, 115142 (2016)

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    Manju, K

    P. Manju, K. Hardman, M. Sooriyabandara, P. Wigley, J. Close, N. Robins, M. Hush, and S. Szigeti, Physical Review A98, 053629 (2018)

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    L´ eger, J

    S. L´ eger, J. Puertas-Mart´ ınez, K. Bharadwaj, R. Das- sonneville, J. Delaforce, F. Foroughi, V. Milchakov, L. Planat, O. Buisson, C. Naud,et al., Nat. Comm.10, 5259 (2019)

    work page 2019

  15. [15]

    Puertas Mart´ ınez, S

    J. Puertas Mart´ ınez, S. L´ eger, N. Gheeraert, R. Dasson- neville, L. Planat, F. Foroughi, Y. Krupko, O. Buisson, C. Naud, W. Hasch-Guichard, S. Florense, I. Snyman, and N. Roch, New Phys. J. Q. Inf.5, 19 (2019)

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Kuzmin, N

    R. Kuzmin, N. Grabon, N. Mehta, A. Burshtein, M. Goldstein, M. Houzet, L. I. Glazman, and V. E. Manucharyan, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 197701 (2021)

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Mistakidis and A

    S. Mistakidis and A. Volosniev,Physics of Impurities in Quantum Gases(MDPI, 2022)

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    L´ eger, T

    S. L´ eger, T. S´ epulcre, D. Fraudet, O. Buisson, C. Naud, W. Hasch-Guichard, S. Florens, I. Snyman, D. M. Basko, and N. Roch, SciPost Phys.14, 130 (2023)

    work page 2023

  19. [19]

    Nadeem, M

    M. Nadeem, M. S. Fuhrer, and X. Wang, Nature Rev. Phys.5, 558 (2023)

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    Hriscu and Y

    A. Hriscu and Y. V. Nazarov, Phys. Rev. B83, 174511 (2011)

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    Trahms, L

    M. Trahms, L. Melischek, J. F. Steiner, B. Mahendru, I. Tamir, N. Bogdanoff, O. Peters, G. Reecht, C. B. Winkelmann, F. von Oppen,et al., Nature615, 628 (2023)

    work page 2023

  22. [22]

    C. Ryu, P. W. Blackburn, A. A. Blinova, and M. G. Boshier, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 205301 (2013)

    work page 2013

  23. [23]

    Aghamalyan, M

    D. Aghamalyan, M. Cominotti, M. Rizzi, D. Rossini, F. Hekking, A. Minguzzi, L.-C. Kwek, and L. Amico, New J. Phys.17, 045023 (2015)

    work page 2015

  24. [24]

    Valtolina, A

    G. Valtolina, A. Burchianti, A. Amico, E. Neri, K. Xhani, J. A. Seman, A. Trombettoni, A. Smerzi, M. Zaccanti, M. Inguscio, and G. Roati, Science350, 1505 (2015)

    work page 2015

  25. [25]

    V. P. Singh, J. Polo, L. Mathey, and L. Amico, Physical Review Letters133, 093401 (2024)

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    C. Ryu, E. C. Samson, and M. G. Boshier, Nat. Comm. 11(2020), 10.1038/s41467-020-17185-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17185-6 2020

  27. [27]

    Double-target BEC atomtronic rotation sensor,

    O. Adeniji, C. Henry, S. Thomas, R. C. Sapp, A. Goyal, C. W. Clark, and M. Edwards, “Double-target BEC atomtronic rotation sensor,” (2024), arXiv:2411.06585 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Godun, M

    R. Godun, M. d’Arcy, G. Summy, and K. Burnett, Con- temp. Phys.42, 77 (2001)

    work page 2001

  29. [29]

    S. A. Haine, New J. Phys.20, 033009 (2018). 6

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    O. J. Wales, A. Rakonjac, T. P. Billam, J. L. Helm, S. A. Gardiner, and S. L. Cornish, Communications Physics 3, 51 (2020)

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    Naldesi, J

    P. Naldesi, J. Polo, P. D. Drummond, V. Dunjko, L. Am- ico, A. Minguzzi, and M. Olshanii, SciPost Physics15, 187 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Sonderhouse, C

    L. Sonderhouse, C. Sanner, R. B. Hutson, A. Goban, T. Bilitewski, L. Yan, W. R. Milner, A. M. Rey, and J. Ye, Nature Physics16, 1216 (2020)

    work page 2020

  33. [33]

    On the bethe ansatz soluble degenerate hubbard model,

    H. Frahm and A. Schadschneider, “On the bethe ansatz soluble degenerate hubbard model,” inThe Hubbard Model: Its Physics and Mathematical Physics, edited by D. Baeriswyl, D. K. Campbell, J. M. P. Carmelo, F. Guinea, and E. Louis (Springer US, Boston, MA,

    work page

  34. [34]

    A. V. Gorshkov, M. Hermele, V. Gurarie, C. Xu, P. S. Julienne, J. Ye, P. Zoller, E. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and A. M. Rey, Nature Physics6, 289 (2010)

    work page 2010

  35. [35]

    M. A. Cazalilla and A. M. Rey, Reports on Progress in Physics77, 124401 (2014)

    work page 2014

  36. [36]

    Capponi, P

    S. Capponi, P. Lecheminant, and K. Totsuka, Annals of Physics367, 50 (2016)

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    Cominotti, D

    M. Cominotti, D. Rossini, M. Rizzi, F. Hekking, and A. Minguzzi, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 025301 (2014)

    work page 2014

  38. [38]

    J. Polo, P. Naldesi, A. Minguzzi, and L. Amico, Q. Sci. Tech.7, 015015 (2021)

    work page 2021

  39. [39]

    W. J. Chetcuti, T. Haug, L.-C. Kwek, and L. Amico, SciPost Physics12, 33 (2022)

    work page 2022

  40. [41]

    O. I. Pˆ at ¸u and D. V. Averin, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 096801 (2022)

    work page 2022

  41. [42]

    Andrei, K

    N. Andrei, K. Furuya, and J. H. Lowenstein, Reviews of Modern Physics55, 331 (1983)

    work page 1983

  42. [43]

    S. Taie, R. Yamazaki, S. Sugawa, and Y. Takahashi, Nature Physics8, 825 (2012)

    work page 2012

  43. [44]

    Pagano, M

    G. Pagano, M. Mancini, G. Cappellini, P. Lombardi, F. Sch¨ afer, H. Hu, X.-J. Liu, J. Catani, C. Sias, M. In- guscio, and L. Fallani, Nature Physics10, 198 (2014)

    work page 2014

  44. [45]

    Scazza, C

    F. Scazza, C. Hofrichter, M. H¨ ofer, P. De Groot, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Nature Physics10, 779 (2014)

    work page 2014

  45. [46]

    Hofrichter, L

    C. Hofrichter, L. Riegger, F. Scazza, M. H¨ ofer, D. R. Fernandes, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Phys. Rev. X6, 021030 (2016)

    work page 2016

  46. [47]

    S. Taie, E. Ibarra-Garc´ ıa-Padilla, N. Nishizawa, Y. Takasu, Y. Kuno, H.-T. Wei, R. T. Scalettar, K. R. A. Hazzard, and Y. Takahashi, Nature Physics (2022), 10.1038/s41567-022-01725-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01725-6 2022

  47. [48]

    Mukherjee, J

    B. Mukherjee, J. M. Hutson, and K. R. A. Hazzard, New Journal of Physics27, 013013 (2025)

    work page 2025

  48. [49]

    Mukherjee and J

    B. Mukherjee and J. M. Hutson, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 013099 (2025)

    work page 2025

  49. [50]

    Sutherland, Phys

    B. Sutherland, Phys. Rev. Lett.20, 98 (1968)

    work page 1968

  50. [51]

    W. J. Chetcuti, J. Polo, A. Osterloh, P. Castorina, and L. Amico, Comm. Phys.6(2023), 10.1038/s42005-023- 01256-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-023- 2023

  51. [52]

    Peierls, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik80, 763 (1933)

    R. Peierls, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik80, 763 (1933)

    work page 1933

  52. [53]

    Amico, M

    L. Amico, M. Boshier, G. Birkl, A. Minguzzi, C. Miniatura, L.-C. Kwek, D. Aghamalyan, V. Ahufinger, D. Anderson, and e. a. Andrei, AVS Q. Sci.3, 039201 (2021)

    work page 2021

  53. [54]

    K. C. Wright, R. B. Blakestad, C. J. Lobb, W. D. Phillips, and G. K. Campbell, Physical Review Letters 110, 025302 (2013)

    work page 2013

  54. [56]

    Dephasing and Non-Dephasing Colli- sions in Nanostructures,

    A. J. Leggett, “Dephasing and Non-Dephasing Colli- sions in Nanostructures,” inGranular Nanoelectronics (Springer US, Boston, MA, 1991) p. 297

    work page 1991

  55. [57]

    On account of this, such behaviour is different than that of bosons, even the ones with attractive interactions where fractionalization is present

    work page

  56. [58]

    Osterloh, J

    A. Osterloh, J. Polo, W. J. Chetcuti, and L. Amico, SciPost Physics15, 006 (2023)

    work page 2023

  57. [59]

    Pecci, G

    G. Pecci, G. Aupetit-Diallo, M. Albert, P. Vignolo, and A. Minguzzi, Comptes Rendus Physique24, 1 (2023)

    work page 2023

  58. [60]

    How- ever, for someNthe different representations can share the sames

    Note that the SU(N) representation can be different, which would generally be indicated by a differents. How- ever, for someNthe different representations can share the sames

    work page

  59. [61]

    Ogata and H

    M. Ogata and H. Shiba, Physical Review B41, 2326 (1990)

    work page 1990

  60. [62]

    In this case, the density at the impurity site coincides with that of a bosonic system of the sameN p

    The barrier is the least effective versus interactions at Np =N. In this case, the density at the impurity site coincides with that of a bosonic system of the sameN p. Such a behaviour reflects the lack of a meaningful Pauli exclusion principle in the system

    work page

  61. [63]

    Litvinov, P

    A. Litvinov, P. Bataille, E. Mar´ echal, P. Pedri, O. Gor- ceix, M. Robert-De-Saint-Vincent, and B. Laburthe- Tolra, Physical Review A104, 033309 (2021)

    work page 2021

  62. [64]

    W. J. Chetcuti, A. Osterloh, L. Amico, and J. Polo, SciPost Phys.15, 181 (2023)

    work page 2023

  63. [65]

    Botzung and P

    T. Botzung and P. Nataf, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 153001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  64. [66]

    Weichselbaum, SciPost Phys

    A. Weichselbaum, SciPost Phys. Codebases , 40 (2024)

    work page 2024

  65. [67]

    Seidel and D.-H

    A. Seidel and D.-H. Lee, Phys. Rev. B71, 045113 (2005)

    work page 2005

  66. [68]

    F. V. Kusmartsev, JETP Letters60, 639 (1994)

    work page 1994

  67. [69]

    A. O. Gogolin, A. A. Nersesyan, and A. M. Tsvelik, Bosonization and strongly correlated systems(Cambridge university press, 2004)

    work page 2004

  68. [70]

    Amaricci, A

    A. Amaricci, A. Richaud, M. Capone, N. D. Oppong, and F. Scazza, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.14630 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  69. [71]

    Amico, D

    L. Amico, D. Anderson, M. Boshier, J.-P. Brantut, L.-C. Kwek, A. Minguzzi, and W. von Klitzing, Reviews of Modern Physics94, 041001 (2022)

    work page 2022

  70. [72]

    J. Polo, W. J. Chetcuti, E. C. Domanti, P. Kitson, A. Os- terloh, F. Perciavalle, V. P. Singh, and L. Amico, Q. Sci. Tech.9, 030501 (2024)

    work page 2024

  71. [73]

    Ettore Majorana

    P. Naldesi, J. Polo, V. Dunjko, H. Perrin, M. Olshanii, L. Amico, and A. Minguzzi, SciPost Physics12, 138 (2022). Supplemental Material for: Static impurity in a mesoscopic system of SU( N ) fermionic matter-waves Juan Polo, 1 Wayne J. Chetcuti, 1 Anna Minguzzi, 2 Andreas Osterloh, 1 and Luigi Amico 1, 3, 4 1Quantum Research Center, Technology Innovation ...

    work page 2022

  72. [74]

    3 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5 0 . 6 0 . 7 0 . 8 0 . 9 1 {N, N p, λ, N s} U = 00. 0 nimp − nimp(φ = 0) φ {2, 2, 1. 0, 7} {2, 4, 1. 0, 7} {2, 6, 1. 0, 7} {3, 3, 1. 0, 7} {3, 6, 1. 0, 7} − 0. 016 − 0. 014 − 0. 012 − 0. 01 − 0. 008 − 0. 006 − 0. 004 − 0. 002 0

    work page

  73. [75]

    002 0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5 0 . 6 0 . 7 0 . 8 0 . 9 1 {N, N p, λ, N s} nimp − nimp(φ = 0) φ {2, 2, 1. 0, 7} {2, 4, 1. 0, 7} {2, 6, 1. 0, 7} {3, 3, 1. 0, 7} {3, 6, 1. 0, 7} (a) ( b) FIG. 4. Density at the site of the impurity as a function of the flux. Depiction of the density at the barrier site nimp for fixed barrier strength λ/t= 1 as a function o...

    work page

  74. [76]

    03 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 U = 1 λ = 1U = 1 λ = 1 ⟨nA L/2nB j ⟩ j /BX/D2/CT/D6/CV/DD /AT/D9/DC − 0. 02 − 0. 01 0

    work page

  75. [77]

    03 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 U = 1024 λ = 1 ⟨nA L/2nB j ⟩ j /BX/D2/CT/D6/CV/DD /AT/D9/DC (a) ( b) FIG. 5. Density-density correlations in presence of an impurity. The intensity of the color indicated the value of the flux φ/φ0∈(0, 1), darkest indicating 0. (a) U/t = 1 and (b) U/t = 1024. Results obtained with exact diagonalization for N = 2, Np = 2, Ns = 15. 9 4 ...

    work page

  76. [78]

    8 10−2 10310−1 100 101 102 10−2 10310−1 100 101 102 10−2 10310−1 100 101 102 {N, N p} λ = 1. 0 Ns = 8 I /D1/CP/DC /I /D1/CP/DC (λ = 0, U = 0) /DF/BE/B8 /BE/DH /DF/BF/B8 /BF/DH I /D1/CP/DC /I /D1/CP/DC (λ = 0) U/t /DF/BE/B8 /BE/DH /DF/BE/B8 /BG/DH /DF/BE/B8 /BI/DH U/t /DF/BE/B8 /BI/DH /DF/BF/B8 /BI/DH U/t (a) ( b) ( c) FIG. 9. (Top panel) Maximum persisten...

    work page

  77. [79]

    0 Ns = 8 Imax /DF/BU/B8 /BF/DH /DF/BU/B8 /BI/DH Imax/I max(λ = 0) U FIG

    8 10−2 10−1 100 101 102 103 {N, N p} λ = 1. 0 Ns = 8 Imax /DF/BU/B8 /BF/DH /DF/BU/B8 /BI/DH Imax/I max(λ = 0) U FIG. 10. Maximum persistent current amplitude Imax as a function of interactionU/t in the presence of a barrier with strength λ/t= 1 (solid lines) for bosons with 3 and 6 particles. The dotted lines depict the amplitude in the absence of a barri...

    work page

  78. [80]

    Del Pace, K

    G. Del Pace, K. Xhani, A. Muzi Falconi, M. Fedrizzi, N. Grani, D. Hernandez Rajkov, M. Inguscio, F. Scazza, W. J. Kwon, and G. Roati, Phys. Rev. X 12, 041037 (2022)

    work page 2022

  79. [81]

    Persistent currents in ultracold gases,

    J. Polo, W. J. Chetcuti, T. Haug, A. Minguzzi, K. Wright, and L. Amico, “Persistent currents in ultracold gases,” (2024), arXiv:2410.17318 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2024

  80. [82]

    W. J. Chetcuti, A. Osterloh, L. Amico, and J. Polo, SciPost Phys. 15, 181 (2023)

    work page 2023

Showing first 80 references.