Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 92 references

Exotic phase transitions in spin ladders with discrete symmetries that emulate spin-1/2 bosons in two dimensions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A one-dimensional spin ladder with discrete symmetries can emulate two-dimensional spin-1/2 bosons and hosts exotic deconfined critical points.

desk verdict Solid exact-duality construction of spin-ladder phases; the headline c=3/2 transition is a clearly flagged but unproven expectation. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.17911 v1 pith:2TO7EW74 submitted 2024-12-23 cond-mat.str-el hep-thquant-ph

Bo Han , David F. Mross This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elhep-thquant-ph
keywords spinladderdeconfinedquantumcriticalityLieb-Schultz-MattisconstraintZ2gaugetheorypartonconstructionsymmetry-protectedtopologicalphasesKramers-Wannierdualitycentralcharge
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 argues that a carefully designed one-dimensional spin ladder—with two Z2 'charge' symmetries and one Z2 'spin' symmetry—can serve as a faithful stand-in for a two-dimensional system of spin-1/2 bosons at half-filling. It derives an exact duality that rewrites the ladder as a Z2 gauge theory of three partons (one chargon and two spinons), then uses this representation to build exactly solvable lattice models for eight distinct phases and to analyze the transitions between them. The paper's central prediction is that the transition between the zFM-I phase and the SPT-I phase, when translation symmetry is preserved, is a deconfined-type critical point with central charge $c = 3/2$, not the usual Ising or XY value. If correct, this would give a concrete one-dimensional laboratory for the kind of Landau-forbidden, deconfined quantum criticality originally discovered in two dimensions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is an exact lattice duality: repeated Kramers-Wannier transformations on each leg, followed by a charge-spin decomposition and a second duality on each domain-wall species, convert the two spin-1/2 chains into one chargon ($\tau_c$) and two spinon ($\tau_{n,\uparrow}$, $\tau_{n,\downarrow}$) partons coupled to a single emergent Z2 gauge field $\omega$. The operator dictionary expresses every local spin operator as a gauge-invariant product of parton operators and $\omega$, with the Z2 charge density reducing to the chargon density and the spin symmetry $g_z$ becoming the Z2 flux. For criticality, the paper bosonizes the parent Hamiltonian and uses the Ising disorder parameters $\mu_\pm$; the transition between zFM-I and SPT-I is analyzed as two coupled Ashkin-Teller systems, where the allowed product $\mu_{\uparrow,A} \mu_{\uparrow,B} \mu_{\downarrow,A} \mu_{\downarrow,B}$ slaves one Ising variable to the other three, yielding $c = 3/2$.

What would settle it

Numerically compute the central charge at the zFM-I to SPT-I transition in the translation-invariant model (the bosonized Hamiltonian of Eq. (86) or its lattice realization) by fitting the von Neumann entanglement entropy of a finite chain to $S = (c/3) \log L$; observing $c \approx 3/2$ would confirm the prediction, while $c = 1$ or $c = 2$ would falsify the slaving mechanism. Alternatively, check whether any additional symmetry-allowed coupling at the transition is relevant; a second relevant operator would move the fixed point off the $c = 3/2$ theory.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper discovers a one-dimensional emulator for two-dimensional spinful-boson physics: the ladder reproduces the charge and spin symmetries, the Lieb-Schultz-Mattis obstruction, and the pattern of topological defects of the 2D system. The exact parton duality shows that the microscopic spins are equivalent to three Z2 partons (chargon plus two spinons) coupled to a single Z2 gauge field, and the resulting gauge theory develops the same phases—insulators, condensates, and SPT states—as the corresponding chargon-spinon description of 2D bosons. The most concrete output is the prediction that the zFM-I to SPT-I transition has central charge $c = 3/2$ when lattice translation symmetry is kept, because the symmetry-allowed product of four Ising disorder operators locks one Ising degree of freedom to the other three; breaking translation symmetry explicitly reduces the transition to $c = 1$. The paper also maps the remaining transitions and shows how translation symmetry 'conventionalizes' the criticality.

Load-bearing premise

The $c = 3/2$ prediction rests on the unproven assertion that the symmetry-allowed product $\mu_{\uparrow,A} \mu_{\uparrow,B} \mu_{\downarrow,A} \mu_{\downarrow,B}$ is the only relevant coupling and that it 'slaves one Ising variable to the other three'; if the product instead pins the disorder fields in a different pattern, or if other couplings are equally relevant, the central charge would differ.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The ladder realizes all eight phases of the parton gauge theory—xFM, yFM, zFM, zFM-I, zFM-II, VBS, SPT-I, and SPT-II—with exactly solvable commuting Hamiltonians.
  • Transitions between chargon or spinon states are conventional Ising ($c = 1/2$) or XY ($c = 1$) transitions, while translation-enhanced transitions can reach $c = 1$ or $c = 3/2$.
  • Explicitly breaking translation symmetry in the Hamiltonian lowers the central charge: $c = 1$ transitions drop to $c = 1/2$, and the $c = 3/2$ transition drops to $c = 1$.
  • The symmetry and operator dictionary gives a direct translation between 2D boson observables (boson densities, hopping, spin-flip terms) and 1D ladder observables, so results in the ladder can be read as statements about the emulated 2D system.
  • The correspondence preserves Lieb-Schultz-Mattis constraints, so the same projective symmetry algebra that forces gaplessness or symmetry breaking in 2D appears in the 1D ladder, explaining why the critical points are deconfined.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the $c = 3/2$ prediction is directly testable by numerical entanglement scaling (e.g., von Neumann entropy $S \sim (c/3) \log L$) on the translation-invariant model of Section VI; a value close to $3/2$ would confirm the 'slaving' mechanism, and a different value would locate the breakdown of the heuristic.
  • Beyond the paper, the exact duality suggests a systematic construction: any 2D system with $U(1) \times U(1)$ symmetries and half-filling may have a 1D Z2-analog ladder obtained by replacing each U(1) by a Z2 leg and reading off the LSM anomaly; the paper only demonstrates this for spinful bosons, but the same route could yield emulators for exotic 2D fermion or dipole-symmetry models.
  • Beyond the paper, if the 3/2 criticality is real, it may be a one-dimensional instance of a deconfined critical point with emergent degrees of freedom, and the ladder could serve as a tractable setting for probing boundary or defect physics that is inaccessible in the 2D counterpart.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs a spin ladder whose discrete symmetries are chosen to emulate the charge and spin symmetries of two-dimensional spin-1/2 bosons at half-filling. After establishing a Lieb-Schultz-Mattis constraint and a symmetry/operator dictionary, the authors derive an exact lattice duality from the spins to a Z2 gauge theory with one chargon and two spinons. Using this representation, they build exactly solvable Hamiltonians for all eight phases in their catalogue, diagnose the phases by background-gauge-field response and partition functions, and analyze the phase transitions. The main quantitative prediction is that the translation-symmetry-enhanced transition between zFM-I and SPT-I (and its dual, transition 4) has central charge c=3/2, while explicit translation breaking reduces it to c=1.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a rare exactly solvable one-dimensional setting in which deconfined-type, Landau-forbidden transitions can be studied through an explicit parton-gauge-theory duality rather than by fitting. The exact duality in Section IV B, the solvable phase Hamiltonians in Section V, and the background-response characterization in Sections II-VI are substantial and are carried through without adjustable parameters. The phase catalogue includes nontrivial SPT states whose distinctness is confirmed by partition functions. The c=3/2 prediction, if substantiated, would be a novel and striking manifestation of an emergent enlarged symmetry at a one-dimensional incarnation of deconfined criticality. At present, however, that prediction rests on a heuristic slaving argument and is explicitly flagged by the authors as an expectation.

major comments (3)
  1. [VII C 2, Eqs. (86)-(88)] The central prediction c=3/2 for the zFM-I/SPT-I transition is not derived. The text reduces the transition to two decoupled Ashkin-Teller models of total central charge c=2, then states that δH_SPT-I corresponds to the allowed product μ↑A μ↑B μ↓A μ↓B of Ising disorder operators, and that this product 'slaves one Ising variable to the other three', giving c=3/2. Ising disorder operators are nonlocal twist fields; the claim that the product perturbation removes exactly one Ising degree of freedom is an RG-level assumption, not a consequence shown in the paper. The same relevant perturbation could instead confine all four fields, gap two linear combinations and leave c=1, or become irrelevant at the interacting fixed point. The K=1/√2 self-duality of Eqs. (86)-(87) identifies a candidate self-dual coupling but does not determine the infrared spectrum. To make the claim load-bearing, the authors should provide an RG/CFT argument for the fate of μ↑A μ↑B μ↓A μ↓B, or verify c=3/2 numerically (for example, with DMRG on the translation-invariant Hamiltonian of Section VI with the interchain couplings that stabilize SPT-I).
  2. [Appendix G, Eqs. (G8)-(G10)] The same unverified slaving assumption underlies transition 4: the text says 'Following similar analyses for Transition 2 ... we expect ... c=3/2' with no separate derivation for the product of four disorder operators in the dual representation. Since both c=3/2 claims in the paper depend on this single heuristic step, the paper's headline numerical prediction is currently unsupported. Please either upgrade the argument to a derivation, provide independent numerical evidence, or clearly downgrade the claim to a conjecture and mark it as such in the abstract and conclusions.
  3. [Section VII C 2, sentence on explicit translation breaking] The statement that explicit breaking of translation symmetry reduces the c=3/2 transition to c=1 is justified only by a reference to the lattice analysis in Section VII B. That section analyzes spinon transitions in chargon insulators (Eq. (75)) and does not explicitly analyze the bosonized zFM-I/SPT-I transition with a translation-breaking field. A short argument showing that the translation-breaking perturbation confines the two Ashkin-Teller models to a single XY-type transition would close this gap.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix G, Eq. (G6)] The word 'pruturbation' in the sentence introducing δH_SPT-II should be 'perturbation'.
  2. [Section VI 1, Eq. (66)] The displayed Hamiltonian is followed by the punctuation ',.'; this appears to be a typesetting artifact and should be corrected.
  3. [Section VII C] The phrase 'the dogma of LSM' is too informal for a journal article; consider replacing it with 'the constraints imposed by the Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorem'.
  4. [Table III] In the zFM-II row, the entry 'g↓x, Tx, g↓xTx' would be clearer with explicit set notation, for example {g↓x, Tx, g↓xTx}, to emphasize that the listed symmetries are individually broken.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the parton representation is derived by explicit lattice dualities, the phase catalogue is backed by exactly solvable models and exact response computations, and the c=3/2 expectation is a heuristic gap rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central derivations are self-contained. The parton/gauge-theory representation is obtained by explicit Kramers-Wannier duality transformations in Section IV B and Appendix D, not assumed or fitted. Phases are diagnosed by exact response computations of background Z2 gauge fields in Section V and by exactly solvable commuting Hamiltonians, so no parameter fitted to data is later relabeled as a prediction. The 2D-boson analogy is explicitly a designed correspondence (Section II and Table I), i.e., a modeling frame, not a claim that one system is derived from the other. Transition 1 (xFM to SPT-I) is solved by bosonization plus Majorana fermionization, and the Ashkin-Teller marginal-interaction argument is standard field theory. Transition 2's central charge c = 3/2 rests on the statement that the allowed product of four Ising disorder operators 'slaves one Ising variable to the other three' in Section VII C 2, which is an unproven RG heuristic. That makes the prediction fragile and possibly incorrect, but it is not circular: the claim is the conclusion of the argument, not an input, and no equation is exhibited that reduces to itself by construction. The paper does not rely on load-bearing self-citations, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data; all coupling constants are arbitrary positive constants. The central claims rely on standard theorems and one ad hoc heuristic assumption about Ising disorder operators.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorem for discrete symmetries (Appendix A)
    Used to argue that translation-invariant symmetric gapped states are impossible, leading to the requirement of defect proliferation and exotic transitions.
  • standard math Abelian bosonization identities for spin operators (Eq. 79)
    Used to derive the low-energy field theories of phase transitions.
  • standard math Ashkin-Teller model critical properties (Refs. [66,67])
    Used to infer central charges for coupled Ising models.
  • domain assumption 1D Z2 gauge fields reduce to boundary conditions, so mean-field treatment of partons is accurate (Section VII A)
    The paper assumes the dynamical gauge field does not modify criticality, allowing partons to be treated as microscopic.
  • ad hoc to paper The product of Ising disorder operators μ↑,A μ↑,B μ↓,A μ↓,B slaves one Ising variable, yielding c=3/2 (Section VII C 2)
    This is a heuristic argument presented without a derivation; it is load-bearing for the central c=3/2 claim.
invented entities (1)
  • chargon and spinon partons (τc, τn,↑, τn,↓)
    purpose: Exact reformulation of the spin ladder as a Z2 gauge theory
    Partons are emergent, confined degrees of freedom in 1D and do not correspond to independent physical particles. The decomposition is a mathematical tool, not a prediction of new matter.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Exotic phase transitions in spin ladders with discrete symmetries that emulate spin-1/2 bosons in two dimensions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2TO7EW74

@misc{pith2026241217911,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Exotic phase transitions in spin ladders with discrete symmetries that emulate spin-1/2 bosons in two dimensions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2TO7EW74}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.17911}
}
abstract

We introduce a spin ladder with discrete symmetries designed to emulate a two-dimensional spin-1/2 boson system at half-filling. Using global properties, such as the structure of topological defects, we establish a correspondence between the two systems and construct a dictionary of symmetries and operators. In particular, translation invariance leads to Lieb-Schultz-Mattis constraints for both systems, resulting in exotic deconfined quantum critical points. Subsequently, we study the spin ladder in detail. An exact duality transformation maps it onto a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge theory of three partons, analogous to the U(1) gauge theory of chargons and spinons in two-dimensional spin-1/2 boson systems. With the mapping between spins and partons, we construct exactly solvable models for all pertinent symmetry-breaking phases and analyze their transitions. We further make connections between our exact analysis and conventional parton gauge theories.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.17911 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Distinct VBS states for the spin ladder. Without cou [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Duality transformations from local spins to partons. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Adding weak interchain couplings Hint = JintX r σ z ↑,rσ z ↑,r+1σ z ↓,rσ z ↓,r+1 (69) reduces the degeneracy from four to two and stabilizes the SPT-I phase with spontaneously broken translation symmetry. Symmetrizing the Hamiltonian of the SPT-II state H = HCC + HSPT yields H′ = −JC X r,λ=↑,↓ σ z λ,rσ z λ,r+1 − JS X r,λ=↑,↓ σ z λ,rσ z λ,r+1σ y −λ,rσ y −λ,r+1. (70) Here, JC > JS realizes the zFM-I, and JS > JC the y… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Translation-symmetry enhanced phase transitions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    In this case, the induced response of the dynamical gauge field ω is trivial

    Chargon insulators When the chargons are gapped, Z2 charge fluctuations are frozen, leading to a charge insulator. In this case, the induced response of the dynamical gauge field ω is trivial. A specific interaction that leads to a chargon insulator in the atomic limit is HCI = −U X r τ x c,r , (38) which does not contain couplings to the background field...

  2. [2]

    An interaction realizing a chargon condensate is HCC = −V X r even τ z c,rΩz C↑,˜rωz ˜r τ z c,r+1 + τ z c,r−1Ωz C↓,˜r−1τ z c,r

    Chargon condensates Condensation of τ z c , which is charged under ω charge, leads to a Higgs phase with a Meissner response, i.e., flux expulsion. An interaction realizing a chargon condensate is HCC = −V X r even τ z c,rΩz C↑,˜rωz ˜r τ z c,r+1 + τ z c,r−1Ωz C↓,˜r−1τ z c,r . (41) Loosely, chargon condensation can be expressed as ⟨τ z c,r⟩ ̸= 0. More prec...

  3. [3]

    A simple interaction that leads to an atomic spinon insulator is HSI = −JSI X r Ωz S,˜r−1τ x n,r

    Spinon insulators When the spinons form a conventional (non- topological) insulator, the induced response of the gauge field ω is trivial. A simple interaction that leads to an atomic spinon insulator is HSI = −JSI X r Ωz S,˜r−1τ x n,r . (44) Similar to the chargon insulator, integrating out the spinons amounts to setting τ x n,r = Ω z S,˜r−1. By insertin...

  4. [4]

    A simple interaction that results in condensation of spinons on the even sub- lattice is H even SC = −J even SC X r even τ z n,rΩz C↑,˜rΩz C↓,˜rωz ˜r τ z n,r+2

    Spinon condensates When at least one of the two spinons condenses, the gauge field ω is in a Higgs phase. A simple interaction that results in condensation of spinons on the even sub- lattice is H even SC = −J even SC X r even τ z n,rΩz C↑,˜rΩz C↓,˜rωz ˜r τ z n,r+2 . (47) Integrating out the spinons as we did for chargon con- densates leads to the constra...

  5. [5]

    Spinon SPT states When the spinons form an SPT state protected by the Z2 × Z2 Charge symmetries, the gauge flux of ω is tied to each of the conserved charges g↑ x and g↓ x. To obtain this topological response explicitly, we place the spinons into the canonical cluster state with Hamiltonian [57] HSPT = −JSPT X r even (τ z n,rΩz C↑,˜rΩz C↓,˜rΩz S,˜rωz ˜r τ...

  6. [6]

    Consequently, Spin symmetry gz is spontaneously 11 broken

    x-Ferromagnet When the chargons and both spinons form insulators, the resulting constraints (39) and (46) imply ΦS = 1, i.e., a Meissner response for the Z2 Spin background gauge field. Consequently, Spin symmetry gz is spontaneously 11 broken. The two ground states are the eigenstates of the unconstrained dynamical gauge flux Φ ω = ±1. Their de- generacy...

  7. [7]

    Combining the constraints (39) and (52), we obtain a Meissner response Φ ′ S = 1, which implies broken g′ z

    y-Ferromagnet When the chargons form insulators, another possibility for spinons is the SPT state. Combining the constraints (39) and (52), we obtain a Meissner response Φ ′ S = 1, which implies broken g′ z. As a result, all Charge and Spin symmetries g↑ x, g↓ x, and gz are broken individually, and any product of two of them is conserved; see Eq. (53). In...

  8. [8]

    The chargon re- sponse does not impose any additional constraints

    z-Ferromagnet When the chargons are insulating and both spinons condense, the induced spinon response (49) implies spon- taneously broken g↑ x, g↓ x symmetries. The chargon re- sponse does not impose any additional constraints. Con- sequently, all other symmetries are preserved, in partic- ular the product g↑ xg↓ x. In the local spin representation, the H...

Show all 92 references
  1. [9]

    The induced responses (39), (45) and (48) imply a Meissner response for the dynamical gauge field but do not constrain any background fluxes

    Valence bond solid A fourth phase arises when the chargon and the τn,odd spinons form insulators while τn,even spinons condense (the opposite choice for the spinons is related by trans- lation symmetry). The induced responses (39), (45) and (48) imply a Meissner response for t...

  2. [10]

    Both the trivial in- sulator and the cluster state of spinons carry a topolog- ical response, Eqs

    Topological states (SPT-I and SPT-II) When the chargons condense, the dynamical gauge field is in a Higgs phase, and the spinons are promoted to physical variables, see Table VII. Both the trivial in- sulator and the cluster state of spinons carry a topolog- ical response, Eqs...

  3. [11]

    As in Section V B 5, the condensation of chargons leads to a Higgs phase of the gauge field ω

    Additional z-Ferromagnets (zFM-I and zFM-II) The final two possibilities are given by a chargon con- densate while one or both spinons also condense. As in Section V B 5, the condensation of chargons leads to a Higgs phase of the gauge field ω. When both species of spinons con...

  4. [12]

    (62) results in H ′ VBS = −J x VBS X r Sx r Sx r+1 − J z VBS X r Sz r Sz r+1., (66) which realizes the xFM for J x VBS > Jz VBS and the zFM for J x VBS < Jz VBS

    Valence bond solid Symmetrizing the Hamiltonian in Eq. (62) results in H ′ VBS = −J x VBS X r Sx r Sx r+1 − J z VBS X r Sz r Sz r+1., (66) which realizes the xFM for J x VBS > Jz VBS and the zFM for J x VBS < Jz VBS. At the critical point J x VBS = J z VBS, the Hamiltonian des...

  5. [13]

    Topological states (SPT-I and SPT-II) Symmetrizing the parent Hamiltonian of the SPT-I state, H = HCC + HSI, yields H ′ = X r,λ=↑,↓ (−V σz λ,rσz λ,r+1 − JSIσx λ,rσx λ,r+1), (68) which is identical to two copies of Eq. (66). Taking V > JSI leads to the zFM-I phase, while taking...

  6. [14]

    (73) The σz operators on the lower legs are conserved quan- tities and satisfy σz ↓,rσz ↓,r+1 = 1 in the ground state

    zFM-II Symmetrizing the Hamiltonian of the zFM-II state, H = HCC + H even SC + H odd SI , leads to H ′ = −V X r,λ=↑,↓ σz λ,rσz λ,r+1 − J odd SI X r σx ↑,rσx ↑,r+1 − J even SC X r σz ↑,rσz ↑,r+1σz ↓,rσz ↓,r+1. (73) The σz operators on the lower legs are conserved quan- tities a...

  7. [15]

    4 connects thexFM phase (chargon insulator, spinon insulator) to the SPT-I phase (chargon condensate, spinon insulator)

    Transition between xFM and SPT-I Transition 1 in Fig. 4 connects thexFM phase (chargon insulator, spinon insulator) to the SPT-I phase (chargon condensate, spinon insulator). Both phases can be ac- cessed by perturbing the gapless parent Hamiltonian Hp = − X r,λ=↑,↓ (σz λ,rσz ...

  8. [16]

    4 connects the zFM-I phase (char- gon condensate, spinon double condensate) and the SPT- I phase (chargon condensate, spinon insulator)

    Transition between zFM-I and SPT-I Transition 2 in Fig. 4 connects the zFM-I phase (char- gon condensate, spinon double condensate) and the SPT- I phase (chargon condensate, spinon insulator). Both phases can be accessed by perturbing the gapless par- ent Hamiltonian of Eq. (7...

  9. [17]

    L. D. Landau, On the theory of phase transitions, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 7, 19 (1937)

    1937

  10. [18]

    Senthil, A

    T. Senthil, A. Vishwanath, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, and M. P. A. Fisher, Deconfined Quantum Critical Points, Science 303, 1490 (2004)

    2004

  11. [19]

    Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical points: A review, in 50 Years of the Renormalization Group , Chap

    T. Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical points: A review, in 50 Years of the Renormalization Group , Chap. 14, pp. 169–195

  12. [20]

    Senthil, L

    T. Senthil, L. Balents, S. Sachdev, A. Vishwanath, and M. P. A. Fisher, Quantum criticality beyond the landau- ginzburg-wilson paradigm, Phys. Rev. B 70, 144407 25 (2004)

    2004

  13. [21]

    Levin and T

    M. Levin and T. Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical- ity and n´ eel order via dimer disorder, Phys. Rev. B 70, 220403 (2004)

    2004

  14. [22]

    A. W. Sandvik, Evidence for deconfined quantum criti- cality in a two-dimensional heisenberg model with four- spin interactions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 227202 (2007)

    2007

  15. [23]

    Jiang and O

    S. Jiang and O. Motrunich, Ising ferromagnet to valence bond solid transition in a one-dimensional spin chain: Analogies to deconfined quantum critical points, Phys. Rev. B 99, 075103 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    Zhang and M

    C. Zhang and M. Levin, Exactly solvable model for a deconfined quantum critical point in 1d, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 026801 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Roberts, S

    B. Roberts, S. Jiang, and O. I. Motrunich, Deconfined quantum critical point in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B 99, 165143 (2019)

    2019

  18. [26]

    Huang, D.-C

    R.-Z. Huang, D.-C. Lu, Y.-Z. You, Z. Y. Meng, and T. Xi- ang, Emergent symmetry and conserved current at a one- dimensional incarnation of deconfined quantum critical point, Phys. Rev. B 100, 125137 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Mudry, A

    C. Mudry, A. Furusaki, T. Morimoto, and T. Hikihara, Quantum phase transitions beyond landau-ginzburg the- ory in one-dimensional space revisited, Phys. Rev. B 99, 205153 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    E. Lieb, T. Schultz, and D. Mattis, Two soluble models of an antiferromagnetic chain, Annals of Physics 16, 407 (1961)

    1961

  21. [29]

    Oshikawa, Commensurability, excitation gap, and topology in quantum many-particle systems on a peri- odic lattice, Phys

    M. Oshikawa, Commensurability, excitation gap, and topology in quantum many-particle systems on a peri- odic lattice, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 1535 (2000)

    2000

  22. [30]

    M. B. Hastings, Lieb-schultz-mattis in higher dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 69, 104431 (2004)

    2004

  23. [31]

    Watanabe, H

    H. Watanabe, H. C. Po, A. Vishwanath, and M. Zale- tel, Filling constraints for spin-orbit coupled insulators in symmorphic and nonsymmorphic crystals, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 112, 14551 (2015)

    2015

  24. [32]

    H. C. Po, H. Watanabe, C.-M. Jian, and M. P. Zale- tel, Lattice homotopy constraints on phases of quantum magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 127202 (2017)

    2017

  25. [33]

    Y.-M. Lu, Y. Ran, and M. Oshikawa, Filling-enforced constraint on the quantized hall conductivity on a peri- odic lattice, Annals of Physics 413, 168060 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Lu, Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorems for symmetry- protected topological phases, Annals of Physics 470, 169806 (2024)

    Y.-M. Lu, Lieb-Schultz-Mattis theorems for symmetry- protected topological phases, Annals of Physics 470, 169806 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    X. Yang, S. Jiang, A. Vishwanath, and Y. Ran, Dy- onic lieb-schultz-mattis theorem and symmetry protected topological phases in decorated dimer models, Phys. Rev. B 98, 125120 (2018)

    2018

  28. [36]

    M. A. Metlitski and R. Thorngren, Intrinsic and emer- gent anomalies at deconfined critical points, Phys. Rev. B 98, 085140 (2018)

    2018

  29. [37]

    Cheng and N

    M. Cheng and N. Seiberg, Lieb-Schultz-Mattis, Lut- tinger, and ’t Hooft - anomaly matching in lattice sys- tems, SciPost Phys. 15, 051 (2023)

    2023

  30. [38]

    G. Y. Cho, C.-T. Hsieh, and S. Ryu, Anomaly mani- festation of lieb-schultz-mattis theorem and topological phases, Phys. Rev. B 96, 195105 (2017)

    2017

  31. [39]

    Yao, C.-T

    Y. Yao, C.-T. Hsieh, and M. Oshikawa, Anomaly match- ing and symmetry-protected critical phases in su(n) spin systems in 1+1 dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 180201 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    Seiberg, S

    N. Seiberg, S. Seifnashri, and S.-H. Shao, Non-invertible symmetries and LSM-type constraints on a tensor prod- uct Hilbert space, SciPost Phys. 16, 154 (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Yao and M

    Y. Yao and M. Oshikawa, Twisted boundary condition and lieb-schultz-mattis ingappability for discrete symme- tries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 217201 (2021)

    2021

  34. [42]

    Mudry, A

    ¨Omer Mert Aksoy, C. Mudry, A. Furusaki, and A. Tiwari, Lieb-Schultz-Mattis anomalies and web of dualities in- duced by gauging in quantum spin chains, SciPost Phys. 16, 022 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    Cheng, Fermionic lieb-schultz-mattis theorems and weak symmetry-protected phases, Phys

    M. Cheng, Fermionic lieb-schultz-mattis theorems and weak symmetry-protected phases, Phys. Rev. B 99, 075143 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    C.-M. Jian, Z. Bi, and C. Xu, Lieb-schultz-mattis theo- rem and its generalizations from the perspective of the symmetry-protected topological phase, Phys. Rev. B 97, 054412 (2018)

    2018

  37. [45]

    H. A. Kramers and G. H. Wannier, Statistics of the two-dimensional ferromagnet. part i, Phys. Rev. 60, 252 (1941)

    1941

  38. [46]

    M. E. Peskin, Mandelstam ’t Hooft Duality in Abelian Lattice Models, Annals Phys. 113, 122 (1978)

    1978

  39. [47]

    Dasgupta and B

    C. Dasgupta and B. I. Halperin, Phase transition in a lattice model of superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1556 (1981)

    1981

  40. [48]

    Karch, D

    A. Karch, D. Tong, and C. Turner, A web of 2d dualities: Z 2 gauge fields and Arf invariants, SciPost Physics 7, 007 (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    A. J. Niemi and G. W. Semenoff, Axial-anomaly-induced fermion fractionization and effective gauge-theory actions in odd-dimensional space-times, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 2077 (1983)

    1983

  42. [50]

    A. N. Redlich, Parity violation and gauge noninvariance of the effective gauge field action in three dimensions, Phys. Rev. D 29, 2366 (1984)

    1984

  43. [51]

    Witten, Fermion path integrals and topological phases, Rev

    E. Witten, Fermion path integrals and topological phases, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035001 (2016)

    2016

  44. [52]

    Witten, The “parity” anomaly on an unorientable manifold, Phys

    E. Witten, The “parity” anomaly on an unorientable manifold, Phys. Rev. B 94, 195150 (2016)

    2016

  45. [53]

    C´ ordova, D

    C. C´ ordova, D. S. Freed, H. T. Lam, and N. Seiberg, Anomalies in the space of coupling constants and their dynamical applications I, SciPost Phys. 8, 001 (2020)

    2020

  46. [54]

    Seiberg, T

    N. Seiberg, T. Senthil, C. Wang, and E. Witten, A duality web in 2 + 1 dimensions and condensed matter physics, Annals of Physics 374, 395 (2016)

    2016

  47. [55]

    Karch and D

    A. Karch and D. Tong, Particle-vortex duality from 3d bosonization, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031043 (2016)

    2016

  48. [56]

    Boninsegni, Phase separation in mixtures of hard core bosons, Phys

    M. Boninsegni, Phase separation in mixtures of hard core bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 087201 (2001)

    2001

  49. [57]

    W. S. Cole, S. Zhang, A. Paramekanti, and N. Trivedi, Bose-hubbard models with synthetic spin-orbit coupling: Mott insulators, spin textures, and superfluidity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 085302 (2012)

    2012

  50. [58]

    Witten, Constraints on Supersymmetry Breaking, Nucl

    E. Witten, Constraints on Supersymmetry Breaking, Nucl. Phys. B 202, 253 (1982)

    1982

  51. [59]

    Shiozaki, H

    K. Shiozaki, H. Shapourian, and S. Ryu, Many-body topological invariants in fermionic symmetry-protected topological phases: Cases of point group symmetries, Phys. Rev. B 95, 205139 (2017)

    2017

  52. [60]

    Huang and S

    Z.-M. Huang and S. Diehl, Mixed state topological or- der parameters for symmetry protected fermion matter, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2401.10993 (2024). 26

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Read and S

    N. Read and S. Sachdev, Valence-bond and spin-peierls ground states of low-dimensional quantum antiferromag- nets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1694 (1989)

    1989

  54. [62]

    Affleck, T

    I. Affleck, T. Kennedy, E. H. Lieb, and H. Tasaki, Rig- orous results on valence-bond ground states in antiferro- magnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 59, 799 (1987)

    1987

  55. [63]

    Gu and X.-G

    Z.-C. Gu and X.-G. Wen, Tensor-entanglement-filtering renormalization approach and symmetry-protected topo- logical order, Phys. Rev. B 80, 155131 (2009)

    2009

  56. [64]

    Senthil, Symmetry-Protected Topological Phases of Quantum Matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 299 (2015)

    T. Senthil, Symmetry-Protected Topological Phases of Quantum Matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 299 (2015)

    2015

  57. [65]

    Dijkgraaf, C

    R. Dijkgraaf, C. Vafa, E. P. Verlinde, and H. L. Ver- linde, The Operator Algebra of Orbifold Models, Com- mun. Math. Phys. 123, 485 (1989)

    1989

  58. [66]

    Without loss of generality, all the coupling constants in this paper are taken to be positive

  59. [67]

    Senthil and M

    T. Senthil and M. P. A. Fisher, Z2 gauge theory of electron fractionalization in strongly correlated systems, Phys. Rev. B 62, 7850 (2000)

    2000

  60. [68]

    Fradkin, Field Theories of Condensed Matter Physics , 2nd ed

    E. Fradkin, Field Theories of Condensed Matter Physics , 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2013)

    2013

  61. [69]

    Sachdev, Quantum Phases of Matter (Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2023)

    S. Sachdev, Quantum Phases of Matter (Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2023)

    2023

  62. [70]

    P. A. Lee, N. Nagaosa, and X.-G. Wen, Doping a mott in- sulator: Physics of high-temperature superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 17 (2006)

    2006

  63. [71]

    Chen, Z.-C

    X. Chen, Z.-C. Gu, Z.-X. Liu, and X.-G. Wen, Symmetry protected topological orders and the group cohomology of their symmetry group, Phys. Rev. B 87, 155114 (2013)

    2013

  64. [72]

    W. Son, L. Amico, and V. Vedral, Topological order in 1D Cluster state protected by symmetry, Quantum In- formation Processing 11, 1961 (2012)

    2012

  65. [73]

    Raussendorf and H

    R. Raussendorf and H. J. Briegel, A one-way quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5188 (2001)

    2001

  66. [74]

    C. K. Majumdar and D. K. Ghosh, On Next-Nearest- Neighbor Interaction in Linear Chain. I, Journal of Math- ematical Physics 10, 1388 (1969)

    1969

  67. [75]

    Verresen, R

    R. Verresen, R. Moessner, and F. Pollmann, One- dimensional symmetry protected topological phases and their transitions, Phys. Rev. B 96, 165124 (2017)

    2017

  68. [76]

    Di Francesco, P

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. Senechal,Conformal Field Theory (Springer, New York, 1999)

    1999

  69. [77]

    Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Ox- ford University Press, 2003)

    T. Giamarchi, Quantum Physics in One Dimension (Ox- ford University Press, 2003)

    2003

  70. [78]

    Stone, Bosonization (World Scientific, 1994)

    M. Stone, Bosonization (World Scientific, 1994)

    1994

  71. [79]

    Shankar, Bosonization: How to make it work for you in condensed matter, Acta Phys

    R. Shankar, Bosonization: How to make it work for you in condensed matter, Acta Phys. Polon. B 26, 1835 (1995)

    1995

  72. [80]

    A. O. Gogolin, A. A. Nersesian, and A. M. Tsvelik, Bosonization and strongly correlated systems (2004)

    2004

  73. [81]

    Lecheminant, A

    P. Lecheminant, A. O. Gogolin, and A. A. Nersesyan, Criticality in self-dual sine-Gordon models, Nuclear Physics B 639, 502 (2002)

    2002

  74. [82]

    Ashkin and E

    J. Ashkin and E. Teller, Statistics of two-dimensional lat- tices with four components, Phys. Rev. 64, 178 (1943)

    1943

  75. [83]

    P. H. Ginsparg, APPLIED CONFORMAL FIELD THE- ORY, in Les Houches Summer School in Theoretical Physics: Fields, Strings, Critical Phenomena (1988) arXiv:hep-th/9108028

    1988 arXiv

  76. [84]

    H. Pan, F. Wu, and S. Das Sarma, Quantum phase di- agram of a moir´ e-hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 102, 201104 (2020)

    2020

  77. [85]

    Seiberg and S.-H

    N. Seiberg and S.-H. Shao, Exotic symmetries, duality, and fractons in 2+1-dimensional quantum field theory, SciPost Phys. 10, 027 (2021)

    2021

  78. [86]

    McGreevy, Generalized Symmetries in Condensed Matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 57 (2023)

    J. McGreevy, Generalized Symmetries in Condensed Matter, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics14, 57 (2023)

    2023

  79. [87]

    Shao, What’s Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetries, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2308.00747 (2023)

    S.-H. Shao, What’s Done Cannot Be Undone: TASI Lectures on Non-Invertible Symmetries, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2308.00747 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  80. [88]

    E. Lake, M. Hermele, and T. Senthil, Dipolar bose- hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 106, 064511 (2022)

    2022

  81. [89]

    M. P. A. Fisher, P. B. Weichman, G. Grinstein, and D. S. Fisher, Boson localization and the superfluid-insulator transition, Phys. Rev. B 40, 546 (1989)

    1989

  82. [90]

    Lake, H.-Y

    E. Lake, H.-Y. Lee, J. H. Han, and T. Senthil, Dipole condensates in tilted bose-hubbard chains, Phys. Rev. B 107, 195132 (2023)

    2023

  83. [91]

    Seifnashri and S.-H

    S. Seifnashri and S.-H. Shao, Cluster state as a noninvert- ible symmetry-protected topological phase, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 116601 (2024)

    2024

  84. [92]

    Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Phys

    A. Kitaev, Unpaired Majorana fermions in quantum wires, Phys. Usp. 44, 131 (2001)

    2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.