REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 118 references
Edge-Edge Correlations without Edge-States: $\eta$-clustering State as Ground State of the Extended Attractive SU(3) Hubbard Chain
T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read In the large-attraction limit of a half-filled SU(3) Hubbard chain with two-body hopping, the eta-clustering state is the ground state exactly at the phase-separation/TLL boundary, and on an open chain it shows boundary off-diagonal…
desk verdict Solid strong-coupling analysis with a new ground-state identification at the PS/TLL boundary; the gapless-boundary caveat is real but minor. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The load-bearing object is the eta-clustering state $|\Phi^L_{L/2}\rangle=(\eta^\dagger)^{L/2}|0\rangle$, where $\eta^\dagger=\sum_j(-1)^j U_{j-1}\eta^\dagger_j$ and $\eta^\dagger_j=c^\dagger_{j,1}c^\dagger_{j,2}c^\dagger_{j,3}$; the factor $U_{j-1}$ is a Jordan-Wigner string that lets powers of $\eta^\dagger$ remain nonzero. The argument is carried by second-order degenerate perturbation theory in the strong-attraction limit: projecting onto sites that are either empty or triply occupied turns the Hamiltonian into the spin-1/2 XXZ chain with $J_x=6t_1t_2/U$ and $J_z=-3(t_1^2+t_2^2)/U+9V$, whose exactly known ground states then identify the eta-clustering state at $J_z=-|J_x|$.
What would settle it
A DMRG computation at $U=-10\,t_1$ along the $C_1$ path could falsify the claim: if the half-filling ground state at $t_2/t_1=0.04$ has overlap with $(\eta^\dagger)^{L/2}|0\rangle$ that tends to zero with system size, or if the end-to-end singlet correlation $|\langle\eta^\dagger_1\eta_L\rangle|$ decays with $L$ instead of staying finite, then the eta-clustering state is not the thermodynamic ground state at that point.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper's central claim is that, at half-filling and in the large-$|U|$ limit, the extended attractive SU(3) Hubbard chain with one-body hopping $t_1$, two-body hopping $-t_2$, on-site attraction $U<0$, and nearest-neighbor attraction $V<0$ is governed by an effective spin-1/2 XXZ chain with $J_x=6t_1t_2/U$ and $J_z=-3(t_1^2+t_2^2)/U+9V$. The ground-state phase diagram of that XXZ chain has three phases: phase separation for $J_z<-|J_x|$, a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid for $-|J_x|<J_z\le|J_x|$, and a charge density wave for $|J_x|<J_z$. Precisely at $J_z=-|J_x|$, the XXZ ground state is the fully polarized ferromagnet $(\hat S^+_{\rm tot})^{L/2}|\Downarrow\rangle$, which in the fermion language is the eta-clustering state $(\hat\eta^\dagger)^{L/2}|0\rangle$, built from three-fermion creation operators with a Jordan-Wigner string. On an open chain this state is gapless and has boundary off-diagonal long-range order: the end-to-end singlet correlation persists in the thermodynamic limit even though bulk correlations decay. DMRG for $U=-10t_1$ confirms the predicted location of the state and the surrounding phase boundaries.
Load-bearing premise
The central claim rests on the assumption that second-order degenerate perturbation theory in $1/U$ is quantitatively accurate for the finite parameters tested ($U=-10t_1$, $|t_2/t_1|\lesssim0.25$), so the low-energy space really consists only of empty and triply occupied sites and the effective couplings $J_x,J_z$ are the ones given.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- Along the PS/TLL boundary the ground state is exactly $(\eta^\dagger)^{L/2}|0\rangle$, so the eta-clustering state moves from being an excited scar-like eigenstate to being the ground state for experimentally moderate parameters ($|t_2/t_1|\sim0.04$, $|V/t_1|\sim0.036$ at $|U/t_1|=10$).
- On an open chain, this ground state has boundary off-diagonal long-range order: the end-to-end singlet correlation persists in the thermodynamic limit while bulk correlations decay exponentially.
- The extended model acquires a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid phase at half-filling, whereas the half-filled attractive SU(3) Hubbard chain without the two-body hopping and nearest-neighbor attraction has only a CDW ground state.
- The TLL-to-CDW transition is BKT-type and can be located numerically by level crossings caused by an emergent SU(2) symmetry; DMRG yields central charge $c\approx1.05$, consistent with a Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid.
- The persistence of bODLRO does not imply localized edge modes, and the paper leaves open whether the eta-clustering ground state should be classified as a gapless symmetry-protected topological phase.
Reading between the lines
- An extension the paper does not pursue is that the same effective-XXZ mechanism should place odd-$N$ eta-clustering states into the ground state of extended attractive SU($N$) Hubbard chains at half-filling for $N>3$, since their bulk correlations already decay and the edge-edge correlation is the robust feature.
- Because the paper notes that exact SU(3) flavor symmetry is not necessary in the large-$|U|$ limit, a cold-atom realization with slightly flavor-dependent hopping might still produce the eta-clustering ground state; a direct experimental test would be measuring the end-to-end three-fermion correlation function.
- The bODLRO-without-edge-modes picture predicts that boundary correlation functions, rather than local density of states or zero modes, are the experimental signature of this order, which could be sought in noise-correlation measurements on an open chain.
- At $t_1=0$ the model's fragmented sectors map to the XXC/XXZ chain, so exact integrability could supply dynamical correlation functions for the eta-clustering subspace that DMRG could then be benchmarked against.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript studies the extended attractive SU(3) Hubbard chain with one- and two-body hopping and nearest-neighbor attraction at half-filling. In the large-|U| limit it maps the low-energy subspace (empty and triply occupied sites) to an effective spin-1/2 XXZ chain, Eq. (18), with couplings Jx=6t1t2/U and Jz=-3(t1^2+t2^2)/U+9V, Eq. (19). From the XXZ phase diagram the authors identify PS, TLL, and CDW phases, and show that at the PS/TLL boundary Jz=-|Jx| the eta-clustering state, (η†)^{L/2}|0>, is the unique Sz=0 ground state of the effective model. They verify the phase boundaries and the eta-clustering signature with DMRG at U=-10t1 for L=16 chains, including entanglement entropy profiles, central-cut entropy, singlet correlations with boundary peaks, and level-spectroscopy detection of the BKT transition.
Significance. If the central claim survives scrutiny, the paper gives a clean, experimentally plausible mechanism for realizing eta-clustering states as ground states rather than high-energy scars, and it introduces a useful notion of boundary ODLRO that is distinct from localized edge modes. The analytic strong-coupling mapping is explicit and standard, the entanglement-entropy formula is checked against the exact analytic result, and the authors have made the data openly available. The main limitation is that the transfer of the exact result from the second-order effective model to the finite-U Hamiltonian is not fully controlled at the gapless boundary, and the numerical evidence at L=16 is suggestive but not conclusive on that point.
major comments (2)
- [III and Appendix A, Eq. (19)] The claim that the eta-clustering state is the ground state of the full Hamiltonian (1) follows by transferring the ferromagnetic-XXX result of the second-order effective XXZ chain to the original model, but this transfer is not controlled at the boundary Jz=-|Jx|. The effective model is gapless there, so there is no spectral gap protecting the degenerate maximal-spin multiplet against third- and higher-order terms in t1, t2, V over U. Such terms are generically present (e.g., three one-body hops generate a three-site hopping process at order t1^3/U^2), and they can split the multiplet and shift the PS/TLL boundary by an amount of order t1^3/U^2. The paper should either compute the leading higher-order corrections to Eq. (19), bound them, or present an independent argument that the eta-clustering state remains a ground state of the full model. Footnote [85] only says the state is 'expected' to remain a ground state under such perturbations, which is not sufficient for the paper's central claim.
- [IV.A, Figs. 5-7] The numerical verification at U=-10t1 and L=16 cannot by itself control the perturbation-theory issue. Near the gapless boundary the finite-size level spacing is of order t1/L, while the neglected third-order corrections are of order t1^3/U^2; for L=16 these numbers are comparable (about 0.06 versus 0.01), and for larger L the level spacing decreases further. I ask the authors to report the squared overlap between the DMRG ground state and the eta-clustering state, or at least an estimate of the energy splitting within the Sz=0 sector, as a function of L, and to check whether the peak position t_c(L) converges to the second-order prediction as L grows. This would directly test whether the 'hence' step from Eq. (19) to the original Hamiltonian is valid at the parameters used in the DMRG runs.
minor comments (6)
- [II.A] The text says that H_U and H_V represent 'on-site and next-nearest attractive interactions,' but H_V in Eq. (5) is a nearest-neighbor interaction; please correct this wording.
- [Eq. (11)] The first binomial coefficient in the displayed formula for the singlet correlation function is written with an index j that is undefined; it should presumably be the summation index l.
- [IV and Fig. 4] The paths C1, C2, and C3 are used throughout the numerical section but are not defined explicitly; please state the fixed parameter combinations (e.g., the value of VU/t1^2 and the relation between t2/t1 and V/t1 along each path) so the numerical choices are reproducible.
- [Fig. 5 caption] The label 'UV/t2 1 = 0.4' is cryptic and appears to mix notation; please write the fixed ratio in a consistent form such as VU/t1^2 and ensure it matches the value used for the analytic eta-clustering curve.
- [II.A, Eq. (3)] The two-particle operators ar c^\dagger_{j,\alpha} are introduced only in a sentence and use a bar that can be easily confused with the one-particle operators; a more distinct notation (e.g., d^\dagger_{j,\alpha}) would improve readability.
- [IV.A, Eq. (20)] The central charge fit at t2/t1=0.2 reports c≈1.052 but does not give the bond dimension, the number of sweeps, or the fit residuals; please add these details so the reader can judge convergence.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the eta-clustering ground state follows from a derived effective XXZ Hamiltonian and is independently checked by DMRG, with the self-cited correlation formula acting as an external parameter-free lemma.
full rationale
The paper's central derivation is self-contained. The effective Hamiltonian, Eq. (18), and its couplings, Eq. (19), are obtained by explicit second-order degenerate perturbation theory in Appendix A, not by fitting to the target phase diagram or to the eta-clustering state. The statement that the eta-clustering state is the ground state at J_z = -|J_x| follows from the standard ferromagnetic ground state of the XXZ chain under the spin mapping S^+_tot = P eta^dag P, Eqs. (15)-(17); this is a direct derivation, not an input. The DMRG calculations in Sec. IV are independent numerical checks of the perturbative phase diagram, including the location of the eta-clustering ground state, the central charge of the TLL, and the singlet correlation function. The only notable reliance on prior work by the same authors is Eq. (11), the analytic singlet correlation formula for eta-clustering states taken from Ref. [21]. That result is parameter-free, derived from the definition of the state, and does not presuppose the Hamiltonian (1) or its ground state; it therefore constitutes independent support rather than a circular self-citation. The skeptic concern that higher-order terms in t1, t2, V over U could modify the finite-U ground state is a legitimate correctness or rigor risk, but it is not a circularity: the paper's second-order effective-model claim is clearly stated, and the transfer to finite U is an approximation whose accuracy is tested numerically, not an input secretly reused as an output.
Assumptions & free parameters
assumptions (4)
- domain assumption For large negative U, the low-energy subspace is spanned by configurations with 0 or 3 fermions per site.
- standard math Second-order degenerate perturbation theory gives the effective XXZ Hamiltonian exactly to order t^2/|U| (Appendix A).
- standard math The ground-state phase diagram of the spin-1/2 XXZ chain (PS/TLL/CDW) is known and correct (Ref [83]).
- standard math The eta-clustering states have the entanglement and correlation properties stated in Eqs. (9)-(11), taken from Ref [21].
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Edge-Edge Correlations without Edge-States: $\eta$-clustering State as Ground State of the Extended Attractive SU(3) Hubbard Chain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WGVIM4V5
@misc{pith2026241114724,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Edge-Edge Correlations without Edge-States: $\eta$-clustering State as Ground State of the Extended Attractive SU(3) Hubbard Chain},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WGVIM4V5}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.14724}
}
abstract
We explore the phase diagram of the extended attractive SU($3$) Hubbard chain with two-body hopping and nearest-neighbor attraction at half-filling. In the large on-site attraction limit, we identify three different phases: phase separation (PS), Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid (TLL), and charge density wave (CDW). Our analysis reveals that the $\eta$-clustering state, a three-component generalization of the $\eta$-pairing state, becomes the ground state at the boundary between the PS and TLL phases. On an open chain, this state exhibits an edge-edge correlation, which we call boundary off-diagonal long-range order (bODLRO). Using the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) method, we numerically study the phase diagram of the model with large but finite on-site interactions and find that the numerical results align with those obtained in the strong coupling limit.
Figures
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[85]
and ˆHV =V PL−1 j=1 P3 α,β=1 ˆnj,α − 1 2 ˆnj+1,β − 1 2
Note that these terms can be rewritten as ˆHU =U PL j=1 P 1≤α<β≤3 ˆnj,α − 1 2 ˆnj,β − 1 2 +const. and ˆHV =V PL−1 j=1 P3 α,β=1 ˆnj,α − 1 2 ˆnj+1,β − 1 2
-
[1]
This model can be regarded as an SU(3) generalization of the extended Hubbard model discussed in Ref
interactions with a potential uniform except at the boundaries [76]. This model can be regarded as an SU(3) generalization of the extended Hubbard model discussed in Ref. [67]. B. Symmetries of the Hamiltonian Let us first discuss the symmetries of the Hamilto- nian. First, the Hamiltonian has the U(3)= U(1)× SU(3) symmetry. To see this, we define the ope...
-
[2]
At this filling, the ground-state phase diagram of the XXZ Hamiltonian (18) exhibits three distinct phases [83]:
-
[3]
Ising ferromagnet with a domain wall in the middle ifJ z <−|J x|,
-
[4]
Tomonaga-Luttinger liquid (TLL) if−|J x|<|J z| ≤ |Jx|,
-
[5]
At the boundary between the Ising ferromagnetic and TLL phases (J z =−|J x|), the ground state is a ferro- magnet of the form ( ˆS+ tot)L/2 |⇓⟩
Ising antiferromagnet if|J x|< Jz. At the boundary between the Ising ferromagnetic and TLL phases (J z =−|J x|), the ground state is a ferro- magnet of the form ( ˆS+ tot)L/2 |⇓⟩. From the TLL into the Ising antiferromagnetic phase or vice versa, the transition is of BKT type. In the language of fermions, the above phases translate into the following phases:
-
[6]
Phase separation (PS) [84] ifJ z <−|J x|,
-
[7]
TLL if−|J x|<|J z| ≤ |Jx|,
Show all 118 references
-
[8]
Extreme Universe
Charge density wave (CDW) if|J x|< Jz. 5 | | FIG. 4. Phase diagram of the extended attractive SU(3) Hubbard chain with strong on-site attractive interaction at half-filling, obtained by perturbation theory. There are three extended regions: phase separation (PS) in blue, Tomon...
2020
-
[9]
The calculations presented in this work have been performed as implemented in the TeNPy package [108]
DMRG calculations The Density Matrix Renormalization Group (DMRG) algorithm is a powerful variational numerical method for ground state searches of one-dimensional and quasi-one- dimensional systems [107]. The calculations presented in this work have been performed as implemen...
-
[10]
C. N. Yang,ηpairing and off-diagonal long-range order in a Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 2144 (1989)
1989
-
[11]
C. N. Yang, Concept of Off-Diagonal Long-Range Order and the Quantum Phases of Liquid He and of Supercon- ductors, Rev. Mod. Phys.34, 694 (1962)
1962
-
[12]
G. L. Sewell, Off-diagonal long-range order and the Meissner effect, J. Stat. Phys.61, 415 (1990)
1990
-
[13]
H. T. Nieh, G. Su, and B.-H. Zhao, Off-diagonal long- range order: Meissner effect and flux quantization, Phys. Rev. B51, 3760 (1995)
1995
-
[14]
Kitamura and H
S. Kitamura and H. Aoki,η-pairing superfluid in periodically-driven fermionic Hubbard model with strong attraction, Phys. Rev. B94, 174503 (2016)
2016
-
[15]
Kaneko, T
T. Kaneko, T. Shirakawa, S. Sorella, and S. Yunoki, PhotoinducedηPairing in the Hubbard Model, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 077002 (2019)
2019
-
[16]
Buˇ ca, J
B. Buˇ ca, J. Tindall, and D. Jaksch, Non-stationary co- herent quantum many-body dynamics through dissipa- tion, Nat. Commun.10, 1 (2019)
2019
-
[17]
Tindall, B
J. Tindall, B. Buˇ ca, J. R. Coulthard, and D. Jaksch, Heating-Induced Long-RangeηPairing in the Hubbard Model, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 030603 (2019)
2019
-
[18]
Li,η-pairing in correlated fermion models with spin- orbit coupling, Phys
K. Li,η-pairing in correlated fermion models with spin- orbit coupling, Phys. Rev. B102, 165150 (2020)
2020
-
[19]
Tsuji, M
N. Tsuji, M. Nakagawa, and M. Ueda, Tachyonic and Plasma Instabilities ofη-Pairing States Coupled to Elec- tromagnetic Fields, arXiv: 2103.01547 (2021)
2021 arXiv
-
[20]
Nakagawa, N
M. Nakagawa, N. Tsuji, N. Kawakami, and M. Ueda, ηPairing of Light-Emitting Fermions: Nonequilib- rium Pairing Mechanism at High Temperatures, arXiv: 2103.13624 (2021)
2021 arXiv
-
[21]
Moudgalya, B
S. Moudgalya, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Regnault, Quan- tum many-body scars and Hilbert space fragmentation: a review of exact results, Rep. Prog. Phys.85, 086501 (2022)
2022
-
[22]
Serbyn, D
M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papi´ c, Quantum many-body scars and weak breaking of ergodicity, Nat. Phys.17, 675 (2021)
2021
-
[23]
C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Ser- byn, and Z. Papi´ c, Weak ergodicity breaking from quan- tum many-body scars, Nat. Phys.14, 745 (2018)
2018
-
[24]
Chandran, T
A. Chandran, T. Iadecola, V. Khemani, and R. Moess- ner, Quantum many-body scars: A quasiparticle per- spective, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys.14, 443 (2023)
2023
-
[25]
D. K. Mark and O. I. Motrunich,η-pairing states as true scars in an extended Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B102, 075132 (2020)
2020
-
[26]
Moudgalya, N
S. Moudgalya, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig,η- pairing in Hubbard models: From spectrum generating algebras to quantum many-body scars, Phys. Rev. B 102, 085140 (2020)
2020
-
[27]
Pakrouski, P
K. Pakrouski, P. N. Pallegar, F. K. Popov, and I. R. Kle- banov, Many-Body Scars as a Group Invariant Sector of Hilbert Space, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 230602 (2020)
2020
-
[28]
Pakrouski, P
K. Pakrouski, P. N. Pallegar, F. K. Popov, and I. R. Klebanov, Group theoretic approach to many-body scar states in fermionic lattice models, arXiv: 2106.10300 (2021)
2021 arXiv
-
[29]
Zhai, Two generalizations ofηpairing in extended Hubbard models, Phys
H. Zhai, Two generalizations ofηpairing in extended Hubbard models, Phys. Rev. B71, 012512 (2005)
2005
-
[30]
Yoshida and H
H. Yoshida and H. Katsura, Exact eigenstates of ex- tended SU(N) Hubbard models: Generalization ofη- pairing states withN-particle off-diagonal long-range order, Phys. Rev. B105, 024520 (2022)
2022
-
[31]
Nakagawa, H
M. Nakagawa, H. Katsura, and M. Ueda, Exact eigen- states of multicomponent Hubbard models: SU(N) magneticηpairing, weak ergodicity breaking, and par- tial integrability, arXiv:2205.07235 (2022)
2022 arXiv
-
[32]
Imai and N
S. Imai and N. Tsuji, A systematic framework to construct unconventional superconducting pairing scar states using multi-body interactions, arXiv:2404.02914 11 (2024)
2024 arXiv
-
[33]
A. Y. Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Phys. Usp.44, 131 (2001)
2001
-
[34]
Miao, H.-K
J.-J. Miao, H.-K. Jin, F.-C. Zhang, and Y. Zhou, Exact Solution for the Interacting Kitaev Chain at the Sym- metric Point, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 267701 (2017)
2017
-
[35]
Miao, H.-K
J.-J. Miao, H.-K. Jin, F.-C. Zhang, and Y. Zhou, Majo- rana zero modes and long range edge correlation in in- teracting Kitaev chains: analytic solutions and density- matrix-renormalization-group study, Scientific Reports 8, 488 (2018)
2018
-
[36]
Lang and H
N. Lang and H. P. B¨ uchler, Topological states in a mi- croscopic model of interacting fermions, Phys. Rev. B 92, 041118(R) (2015)
2015
-
[37]
Iemini, C
F. Iemini, C. Mora, and L. Mazza, Topological Phases of Parafermions: A Model with Exactly Solvable Ground States, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 170402 (2017)
2017
-
[38]
Weinberg and M
P. Weinberg and M. Bukov, QuSpin: a Python pack- age for dynamics and exact diagonalisation of quantum many body systems part I: spin chains, SciPost Phys. 2, 003 (2017)
2017
-
[39]
Weinberg and M
P. Weinberg and M. Bukov, QuSpin: a Python pack- age for dynamics and exact diagonalisation of quan- tum many body systems. Part II: bosons, fermions and higher spins, SciPost Phys.7, 020 (2019)
2019
-
[40]
E. R. I. Abraham, W. I. McAlexander, J. M. Gerton, R. G. Hulet, R. Cˆ ot´ e, and A. Dalgarno, Triplet s-wave resonance in 6Li collisions and scattering lengths of 6Li and 7Li, Phys. Rev. A55, R3299 (1997)
1997
-
[41]
Bartenstein, A
M. Bartenstein, A. Altmeyer, S. Riedl, R. Geursen, S. Jochim, C. Chin, J. H. Denschlag, R. Grimm, A. Si- moni, E. Tiesinga, C. J. Williams, and P. S. Julienne, Precise Determination of 6Li Cold Collision Parameters by Radio-Frequency Spectroscopy on Weakly Bound Molecules, Phy...
2005
-
[42]
Fukuhara, Y
T. Fukuhara, Y. Takasu, M. Kumakura, and Y. Taka- hashi, Degenerate Fermi Gases of Ytterbium, Phys. Rev. Lett.98, 030401 (2007)
2007
-
[43]
T. B. Ottenstein, T. Lompe, M. Kohnen, A. N. Wenz, and S. Jochim, Collisional Stability of a Three- Component Degenerate Fermi Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 203202 (2008)
2008
-
[44]
J. H. Huckans, J. R. Williams, E. L. Hazlett, R. W. Stites, and K. M. O’Hara, Three-Body Recombination in a Three-State Fermi Gas with Widely Tunable Inter- actions, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 165302 (2009)
2009
-
[45]
S. Taie, Y. Takasu, S. Sugawa, R. Yamazaki, T. Tsuji- moto, R. Murakami, and Y. Takahashi, Realization of a SU(2)×SU(6) System of Fermions in a Cold Atomic Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 190401 (2010)
2010
-
[46]
S. Taie, R. Yamazaki, S. Sugawa, and Y. Takahashi, An SU(6) Mott insulator of an atomic Fermi gas realized by large-spin Pomeranchuk cooling, Nat. Phys.8, 825 (2012)
2012
-
[47]
B. J. DeSalvo, M. Yan, P. G. Mickelson, Y. N. Mar- tinez de Escobar, and T. C. Killian, Degenerate Fermi Gas of 87Sr, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 030402 (2010)
2010
-
[48]
Lewenstein, A
M. Lewenstein, A. Sanpera, and V. Ahufinger,Ultracold Atoms in Optical Lattices: Simulating Quantum Many- Body Systems(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2012)
2012
-
[49]
Scazza, C
F. Scazza, C. Hofrichter, M. H¨ ofer, P. C. De Groot, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Observation of two-orbital spin- exchange interactions with ultracold SU(N)-symmetric fermions, Nat. Phys.10, 779 (2014)
2014
-
[50]
Zhang, M
X. Zhang, M. Bishof, S. L. Bromley, C. V. Kraus, M. S. Safronova, P. Zoller, A. M. Rey, and J. Ye, Spectro- scopic observation of SU(N)-symmetric interactions in Sr orbital magnetism, Science345, 1467 (2014)
2014
-
[51]
M. A. Cazalilla and A. M. Rey, Ultracold Fermi gases with emergent SU(N) symmetry, Rep. Prog. Phys.77, 124401 (2014)
2014
-
[52]
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, A one-dimensional liquid of fermions with tunable spin, Nat. Phys.10, 198 (2014)
2014
-
[53]
Hofrichter, L
C. Hofrichter, L. Riegger, F. Scazza, M. H¨ ofer, D. R. Fernandes, I. Bloch, and S. F¨ olling, Direct Probing of the Mott Crossover in the SU(N) Fermi-Hubbard Model, Phys. Rev. X6, 021030 (2016)
2016
-
[54]
Capponi, G
S. Capponi, G. Roux, P. Lecheminant, P. Azaria, E. Boulat, and S. R. White, Molecular superfluid phase in systems of one-dimensional multicomponent fermionic cold atoms, Phys. Rev. A77, 013624 (2008)
2008
-
[55]
Lecheminant, E
P. Lecheminant, E. Boulat, and P. Azaria, Confine- ment and Superfluidity in One-Dimensional Degener- ate Fermionic Cold Atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 240402 (2005)
2005
-
[56]
Capponi, G
S. Capponi, G. Roux, P. Azaria, E. Boulat, and P. Lecheminant, Confinement versus deconfinement of Cooper pairs in one-dimensional spin-3/2 fermionic cold atoms, Phys. Rev. B75, 100503 (2007)
2007
-
[57]
G. Roux, S. Capponi, P. Lecheminant, and P. Azaria, Spin 3/2 fermions with attractive interactions in a one- dimensional optical lattice: phase diagrams, entangle- ment entropy, and the effect of the trap, Eur. Phys. J. B68, 293 (2009)
2009
-
[58]
M. O. Soldini, M. H. Fischer, and T. Neupert, Charge- 4esuperconductivity in a Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B109, 214509 (2024)
2024
-
[59]
E. V. Herland, E. Babaev, and A. Sudbø, Phase transi- tions in a three dimensionalU(1)×U(1) lattice london superconductor: Metallic superfluid and charge-4esu- perconducting states, Phys. Rev. B82, 134511 (2010)
2010
-
[60]
Jiang, Z.-X
Y.-F. Jiang, Z.-X. Li, S. A. Kivelson, and H. Yao, Charge-4esuperconductors: A Majorana quantum Monte Carlo study, Phys. Rev. B95, 241103 (2017)
2017
-
[61]
R. M. Fernandes and L. Fu, Charge-4eSuperconduc- tivity from Multicomponent Nematic Pairing: Applica- tion to Twisted Bilayer Graphene, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 047001 (2021)
2021
-
[62]
K. G. Nazaryan and L. Fu, Magnonic superconductivity (2024), arXiv:2403.14756 [cond-mat.supr-con]
2024 arXiv
-
[63]
V. N. Efimov, WEAKLY BOUND STATES OF THREE RESONANTLY INTERACTING PARTI- CLES., Yadern. Fiz. , 1080 (1970)
1970
-
[64]
Efimov, Energy levels arising from resonant two-body forces in a three-body system, Physics Letters B33, 563 (1970)
V. Efimov, Energy levels arising from resonant two-body forces in a three-body system, Physics Letters B33, 563 (1970)
1970
-
[65]
Naidon and S
P. Naidon and S. Endo, Efimov physics: a review, Re- ports on Progress in Physics80, 056001 (2017)
2017
-
[66]
Niemann and H.-W
P. Niemann and H.-W. Hammer, Pauli-blocking ef- fects and cooper triples in three-component fermi gases, Phys. Rev. A86, 013628 (2012)
2012
-
[67]
Tajima, S
H. Tajima, S. Tsutsui, T. M. Doi, and K. Iida, Cooper Triples in Attractive SU(3) Fermions with an Asymp- totic Freedom, arXiv: 2012.03627 (2020)
2020 arXiv
-
[68]
Akagami, H
S. Akagami, H. Tajima, and K. Iida, Condensation of Cooper triples, Phys. Rev. A104, L041302 (2021). 12
2021
-
[69]
Tajima, S
H. Tajima, S. Tsutsui, T. M. Doi, and K. Iida, Three- body crossover from a Cooper triple to a bound trimer state in three-component fermi gases near a triatomic resonance, Phys. Rev. A104, 053328 (2021)
2021
-
[70]
P´ erez-Romero, R
A. P´ erez-Romero, R. Franco, and J. Silva-Valencia, Phase diagram of the SU(3) Fermi–Hubbard model with next-neighbor interactions, The European Physi- cal Journal B94, 229 (2021)
2021
-
[71]
K. A. Penson and M. Kolb, Real-space pairing in fermion systems, Phys. Rev. B33, 1663 (1986)
1986
-
[72]
Affleck and J
I. Affleck and J. B. Marston, Field-theory analysis of a short-range pairing model, J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 21, 2511 (1988)
1988
-
[73]
Hui and S
A. Hui and S. Doniach, Penson-Kolb-Hubbard model: A study of the competition between single-particle and pair hopping in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B48, 2063 (1993)
1993
-
[74]
Arrachea, E
L. Arrachea, E. R. Gagliano, and A. A. Aligia, Ground- state phase diagram of an extended Hubbard chain with correlated hopping at half-filling, Phys. Rev. B55, 1173 (1997)
1997
-
[75]
G. I. Japaridze, A. P. Kampf, M. Sekania, P. Kakashvili, and P. Brune,η-pairing superconductivity in the Hub- bard chain with pair hopping, Phys. Rev. B65, 014518 (2001)
2001
-
[76]
Dutta, M
O. Dutta, M. Gajda, P. Hauke, M. Lewenstein, D.-S. L¨ uhmann, B. A. Malomed, T. Sowi´ nski, and J. Za- krzewski, Non-standard Hubbard models in optical lat- tices: a review, Rep. Prog. Phys.78, 066001 (2015)
2015
-
[77]
J. Sous, M. Chakraborty, R. V. Krems, and M. Berciu, Light Bipolarons Stabilized by Peierls Electron-Phonon Coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 247001 (2018)
2018
-
[78]
M. M. M¨ oller, C. P. J. Adolphs, and M. Berciu, Magnon- mediated attraction between two holes doped in a cuo 2 layer, Phys. Rev. B100, 165118 (2019)
2019
-
[79]
Sous and M
J. Sous and M. Pretko, Fractons from polarons, Phys. Rev. B102, 214437 (2020)
2020
-
[80]
Gotta, L
L. Gotta, L. Mazza, P. Simon, and G. Roux, Two-fluid coexistence and phase separation in a one-dimensional model with pair hopping and density interactions, Phys. Rev. B104, 094521 (2021)
2021
-
[81]
J. Zhao, K. Ueda, and X. Wang, Insulating charge den- sity wave for a half-filled SU(N) Hubbard model with an attractive on-site interaction in one dimension, J. Phys. Jpn.76, 114711 (2007)
2007
-
[82]
Nonne, P
H. Nonne, P. Lecheminant, S. Capponi, G. Roux, and E. Boulat, Competing orders in one-dimensional half-filled multicomponent fermionic cold atoms: The Haldane-charge conjecture, Phys. Rev. B84, 125123 (2011)
2011
-
[83]
Capponi, P
S. Capponi, P. Lecheminant, and K. Totsuka, Phases of one-dimensional SU(N) cold atomic Fermi gases—From molecular Luttinger liquids to topological phases, Ann. Phys.367, 50 (2016)
2016
-
[84]
Note that this transformation does not change the signs of the other parameters of the model
Without loss of generality, we can assume thatt 1 ≥0; if t1 <0, we can change its sign by flipping the sign of ˆcj,α at every other site, i.e., ˆcj,α →(−1) j ˆcj,α. Note that this transformation does not change the signs of the other parameters of the model
-
[86]
Thisη-operator generalizes the one introduced in Ref. [1]. In the SU(2) Hubbard model, theη-operator is defined as ˆ˜η† 2 = PL j=1(−1)j ˆc† j,1ˆc† j,2. One might naively attempt to generalize it to the SU(3) case by defining ˆ˜η† 3 = PL j=1(−1)j ˆη† j , but this approach fails...
-
[87]
Vafek, N
O. Vafek, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Entan- glement of Exact Excited Eigenstates of the Hubbard Model in Arbitrary Dimension, SciPost Phys.3, 043 (2017)
2017
-
[88]
Vedral, High-temperature macroscopic entangle- ment, New J
V. Vedral, High-temperature macroscopic entangle- ment, New J. Phys.6, 102 (2004)
2004
-
[89]
Fan and S
H. Fan and S. Lloyd, Entanglement and off-diagonal long-range order of anη-pairing state, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.38, 5285 (2005)
2005
-
[90]
Efetov and A
K. Efetov and A. Larkin, Correlation functions in one- dimensional systems with a strong interaction, Soviet Phys. JETP42, 390 (1975)
1975
-
[91]
V. J. Emery, Theory of the quasi-one-dimensional elec- tron gas with strong ”on-site” interactions, Phys. Rev. B14, 2989 (1976)
1976
-
[92]
Giamarchi,Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Oxford University Press, 2003)
T. Giamarchi,Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Oxford University Press, 2003)
2003
-
[93]
Here, phase separation refers to a state in which par- ticles tend to aggregate due to attractive interactions, resulting in two distinct regions: one particle-rich and the other particle-poor
-
[94]
For example, theη-clustering state is a ground state of local Hamiltonians ˆhj,j+1 = 1 2 (ˆη† j ˆηj+1 + h.c.)− 1 9 (ˆnj − 3 2 )(ˆnj+1 − 3 2 ) [21]
This ground state is stable against certain types of perturbations. For example, theη-clustering state is a ground state of local Hamiltonians ˆhj,j+1 = 1 2 (ˆη† j ˆηj+1 + h.c.)− 1 9 (ˆnj − 3 2 )(ˆnj+1 − 3 2 ) [21]. Thus, even if we add ˆhj,j+1 terms to our Hamiltonian,η-clust...
-
[95]
P. Sala, T. Rakovszky, R. Verresen, M. Knap, and F. Pollmann, Ergodicity Breaking Arising from Hilbert Space Fragmentation in Dipole-Conserving Hamiltoni- ans, Phys. Rev. X10, 011047 (2020)
2020
-
[96]
Khemani, M
V. Khemani, M. Hermele, and R. Nandkishore, Local- ization from Hilbert space shattering: From theory to physical realizations, Phys. Rev. B101, 174204 (2020)
2020
-
[97]
Zadnik and M
L. Zadnik and M. Fagotti, The Folded Spin-1/2 XXZ Model: I. Diagonalisation, Jamming, and Ground State Properties, SciPost Phys. Core4, 010 (2021)
2021
-
[98]
Pozsgay, T
B. Pozsgay, T. Gombor, A. Hutsalyuk, Y. Jiang, L. Pristy´ ak, and E. Vernier, Integrable spin chain with Hilbert space fragmentation and solvable real-time dy- namics, Phys. Rev. E104, 044106 (2021)
2021
-
[99]
Moudgalya, A
S. Moudgalya, A. Prem, R. Nandkishore, N. Regnault, and B. A. Bernevig, Thermalization and its absence within Krylov subspaces of a constrained Hamiltonian (2021) pp. 147–209, arXiv:1910.14048 [cond-mat]
2021 arXiv
-
[100]
Maassarani, The XXC models, Phys
Z. Maassarani, The XXC models, Phys. Lett. A244, 160 (1998)
1998
-
[101]
Arnaudon and Z
D. Arnaudon and Z. Maassarani, Integrable open boundary conditions for XXC models, J. High Energy Phys.1998(10), 024
1998
-
[102]
Zhang and G
Z. Zhang and G. Mussardo, Hidden Bethe states in a partially integrable model, Phys. Rev. B106, 134420 (2022). 13
2022
-
[103]
Matsui, Exactly solvable subspaces of nonintegrable spin chains with boundaries and quasiparticle interac- tions, Phys
C. Matsui, Exactly solvable subspaces of nonintegrable spin chains with boundaries and quasiparticle interac- tions, Phys. Rev. B109, 104307 (2024)
2024
-
[104]
Matsui and N
C. Matsui and N. Tsuji, Boundary dissipative spin chains with partial solvability inherited from system Hamiltonians (2024), arXiv:2409.03208 [cond-mat.stat- mech]
2024 arXiv
-
[105]
Laflorencie, E
N. Laflorencie, E. S. Sørensen, M.-S. Chang, and I. Af- fleck, Boundary effects in the critical scaling of entan- glement entropy in 1D systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 100603 (2006)
2006
-
[106]
D’Emidio, M
J. D’Emidio, M. S. Block, and R. K. Kaul, R´ enyi en- tanglement entropy of critical SU(n) spin chains, Phys. Rev. B92, 054411 (2015)
2015
-
[107]
P. Kim, H. Katsura, N. Trivedi, and J. H. Han, Entan- glement and corner hamiltonian spectra of integrable open spin chains, Phys. Rev. B94, 195110 (2016)
2016
-
[108]
Calabrese and J
P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, Entanglement Entropy and Quantum Field Theory, J. Stat. Mech.: Theor. Exp. 2004, P06002 (2004)
2004
-
[109]
Nomura and K
K. Nomura and K. Okamoto, Critical properties ofS= 1/2 antiferromagnetic XXZ chain with next-nearest- neighbour interactions, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.27, 5773 (1994)
1994
-
[110]
Ueda and M
A. Ueda and M. Oshikawa, Resolving the Berezinskii- Kosterlitz-Thouless transition in the two-dimensional XY model with tensor-network-based level spec- troscopy, Phys. Rev. B104, 165132 (2021)
2021
-
[111]
Bernien, S
H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Probing many- body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Na- ture551, 579 (2017)
2017
-
[112]
G.-X. Su, H. Sun, A. Hudomal, J.-Y. Desaules, Z.-Y. Zhou, B. Yang, J. C. Halimeh, Z.-S. Yuan, Z. Papi´ c, and J.-W. Pan, Observation of many-body scarring in a Bose-Hubbard quantum simulator, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 023010 (2023)
2023
-
[113]
Theη-operatorsηandη † relate each eigenmode, but they are not localized at the edges
If the particle number is not fixed, the ground state becomesL-fold degenerate due to the emergent SU(2) symmetry in the effective XXZ model with|J x|=|J z|. Theη-operatorsηandη † relate each eigenmode, but they are not localized at the edges
-
[114]
Scaffidi, D
T. Scaffidi, D. E. Parker, and R. Vasseur, Gapless symmetry-protected topological order, Phys. Rev. X7, 041048 (2017)
2017
-
[115]
Edge-Edge Correlations without Edge-States:η- clustering State as Ground State of the Extended At- tractive SU(3) Hubbard Chain
H. Yoshida, N. Heinsdorf, and H. Katsura, Data of “Edge-Edge Correlations without Edge-States:η- clustering State as Ground State of the Extended At- tractive SU(3) Hubbard Chain”, Zenodo 10.5281/zen- odo.14682000 (2024)
2024 doi
-
[116]
S. R. White, Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. B48, 10345 (1993)
1993
-
[117]
Hauschild and F
J. Hauschild and F. Pollmann, Efficient numerical simu- lations with Tensor Networks: Tensor Network Python (TeNPy), SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 5 (2018)
2018
-
[118]
Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Ann
U. Schollw¨ ock, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Ann. Phys. 326, 96 (2011)
2011
Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.