Tensor renormalization group study of the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological $\theta$ term under L\"uscher's admissibility condition

Shinichiro Akiyama; Yoshinobu Kuramashi

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 22 references

Tensor renormalization group study of the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological $\theta$ term under L\"uscher's admissibility condition

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The tensor renormalization group resolves both the complex action and topological freezing problems and shows that Lüscher's admissibility condition places the field-theoretical θ-term transition almost exactly at θ = π.

desk verdict The epsilon=0.1 comparison is the only genuinely new result, and it currently rests on fixed TRG parameters with no convergence check; the rest is a competent summary of the authors' earlier work. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.15352 v1 pith:BKWKY36G submitted 2025-01-26 hep-lat

Shinichiro Akiyama , Yoshinobu Kuramashi This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-lat

keywords tensorrenormalizationgrouplatticegaugetheoryadmissibilityconditionthetatermU(1)gauge-Higgsmodeltopologicalfreezingcomplexactionproblemphasetransition

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

Monte Carlo simulations of lattice gauge theories with a topological $\theta$ term are blocked twice: the term makes the action complex, and Lüscher's admissibility condition makes topology change very slowly. This paper evaluates the path integral with the tensor renormalization group (TRG), which sidesteps both problems because it sums over configurations directly rather than sampling them. For the two-dimensional U(1) gauge-Higgs model, the paper finds that the field-theoretical definition of the $\theta$ term, whose transition point with the standard Wilson action deviates from $\theta=\pi$ at finite coupling, moves essentially to $\theta=\pi$ when the admissibility parameter $\epsilon$ is small. For the logarithmic definition, the transition sits at $\theta=\pi$ and the critical endpoint is $M_c = 2.9974765(14)$ with two-dimensional Ising critical behavior. If these results hold, the TRG opens a practical route to topological terms in lattice gauge theories that standard Monte Carlo cannot reach.

What carries the argument

Lüscher's admissibility condition restricts each plaquette $P_{\mu\nu}(n)$ to satisfy $\|1 - P_{\mu\nu}(n)\| < \epsilon$, and the associated gauge action is infinite outside that set, splitting configuration space into topological sectors. The tensor network machinery is the bond-weighted tensor renormalization group (BTRG), which coarse-grains the network built from Gauss–Legendre quadrature over link angles and Gauss–Laguerre quadrature over Higgs radial variables; the path integral is then a tensor contraction that includes every topological sector in one computation. The field-theoretical $\theta$ term enters as $S_\theta = i\theta/(2\pi)\sum_n \mathrm{Im}\,P_{12}(n)$, and the machinery's key role is showing how the truncation imposed by $\epsilon$ controls the lattice artifacts of that term.

What would settle it

Recompute the topological charge density and ground-state degeneracy with larger algorithmic parameters (for example, $D_{\rm BTRG}=240$ or $320$, and $K_g=K_h=30$) and with $\epsilon$ between $1$ and $0.1$; if the critical endpoint $M_c=2.9974765(14)$ or the location of the first-order transition at $\epsilon=0.1$ shifts beyond the quoted errors, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the TRG, applied to a tensor network built from Gauss quadrature, computes the full path integral of the U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a $\theta$ term under the admissibility condition, including all topological sectors, so neither the complex action problem nor the topological freezing problem appears. With the logarithmic $\theta$ term, the model has a first-order transition at $\theta=\pi$ for large enough mass, and tensor-network level spectroscopy locates the endpoint at $M_c=2.9974765(14)$, with combined scaling dimension $x_{\rm cmb}=3/16$ and central charge $c=0.50(7)$, indicating the two-dimensional Ising universality class. With the field-theoretical $\theta$ term, the paper claims a clear advantage of the admissible Lüscher action over the Wilson action: at $\beta=10$, $M=4$, the transition point moves from noticeably below $\theta=\pi$ for the Wilson action to almost exactly $\theta=\pi$ for $\epsilon=0.1$, and the two-fold ground-state degeneracy signals spontaneous $\mathbb{Z}_2$ breaking. The paper thereby argues that the admissibility condition restores the continuum topological interpretation for the field-theoretical definition at finite lattice spacing.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the finite algorithmic truncations ($K_g=K_h=20$ quadrature points and bond dimension $D_{\rm BTRG}=160$) are converged, since no systematic convergence check appears in this paper and the companion paper is cited instead.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

All topological sectors are summed in a single TRG contraction, so no fixed-sector simulation or topological-charge update is needed under the admissibility condition.
For the logarithmic $\theta$ definition, the first-order transition occurs exactly at $\theta=\pi$ for $M \ge M_c$, and the critical endpoint $M_c = 2.9974765(14)$ is compatible with the dual-simulation result $M_c=2.989(2)$.
For the field-theoretical definition, shrinking the admissibility parameter $\epsilon$ pushes the transition point toward $\theta=\pi$ at finite $\beta$, demonstrating that the admissibility condition suppresses the lattice artifact of this discretization.
The tensor-network level spectroscopy and central-charge measurement ($c=0.50(7)$) establish that the endpoint is in the two-dimensional Ising universality class.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper leaves implicit that the same TRG strategy transfers to four-dimensional gauge theories, where the field-theoretical $\theta$ term is the standard lattice definition; the admissibility condition may serve as a general device to control its lattice artifacts.
A testable extension would be to map the critical endpoint for the field-theoretical $\theta$ term as a function of $\beta$ and $\epsilon$, which the paper announces will appear elsewhere; if the endpoint extrapolates to a universal value as $\epsilon\to 0$, that would strengthen the case that the field-theoretical definition becomes continuum-like.
The observed enhancement of finite-volume effects at smaller $\epsilon$ suggests a practical trade-off: smaller $\epsilon$ improves the $\theta$ periodicity but demands larger volumes, which TRG can afford because its cost grows only logarithmically with volume.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The piece worth your attention is the epsilon=0.1 comparison in Figs. 6 and 7: it claims that with a sufficiently small admissibility parameter, the field-theoretical theta term places the transition almost exactly at theta=pi. That is new and, if correct, a nice demonstration that Lüscher's action cures a lattice artifact for this definition of the topological term. The rest of the paper—the M_c determination, level spectroscopy, central charge—is a summary of the authors' companion paper (Ref. [14]), and it is consistent with independent Monte Carlo results.

The paper does several things well. The TRG setup is straightforward, and the Wilson-action results are directly compared with existing dual simulations. The qualitative trend (smaller epsilon moves the transition toward pi) is clearly visible and physically plausible. The M_c value 2.9974765(14) matches the dual Monte Carlo within errors, which gives confidence that the method is under control.

The soft spots are real, though none are fatal on their own. First, the epsilon=0.1 regime is exactly where the numerics need the most care, and no convergence checks are shown. The admissible shell is roughly |plaquette phase| < 0.1 rad, while a 20-point Gauss-Legendre quadrature on [-pi,pi] has node spacing around 0.3 rad near zero. A product quadrature may not resolve that narrow shell, and the bond truncation D=160 could also bias the result. The paper fixes these parameters and defers to the companion paper, but that companion paper does not cover this field-theoretical definition. So the central claim 'almost at theta=pi' is backed by a single parameter choice. The stress-test note lands on this, and I agree it is the load-bearing issue.

Second, the topological susceptibility plots show negative values, while Eq. (3.3) defines chi_Q = - (1/V) d^2 ln Z / dtheta^2, which should be positive (it is the variance of the topological charge). Either the plots follow a different sign convention or the definition in the text is missing a minus; either way, it needs fixing. Third, no error bars appear on any of the field-theoretical results, and no code or data are provided. For a proceedings contribution that is not unusual, but it makes independent verification harder.

The sign issue and missing error bars are minor. The quadrature concern is not; it directly affects whether the epsilon=0.1 result is real. Still, the consistency with Ref. [22] for the Wilson action and the M_c consistency with Ref. [21] suggest the TRG machinery is working. I would send this to peer review: a referee can reasonably ask for a convergence study in K_g and D at epsilon=0.1, and that is a well-posed request rather than a request for a new paper.

Bottom line: if you work on TRG or theta terms, read this together with the companion paper. The new result is promising but provisional; do not quote the epsilon=0.1 transition location as settled until the convergence check appears.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This proceedings paper studies the two-dimensional U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological theta term under Lüscher's admissibility condition, using the tensor renormalization group (TRG). The authors construct a tensor network representation via Gauss-Legendre and Gauss-Laguerre quadratures, then contract the network with bond-weighted TRG. They compute the topological charge density, topological susceptibility, ground-state degeneracy, and transfer-matrix scaling dimensions. For the logarithmic theta term, they locate the critical endpoint at M_c=2.9974765(14) and report evidence for 2D Ising universality. For the field-theoretical theta term, they find that Lüscher's action moves the first-order transition point closer to theta=pi, and for epsilon=0.1 the transition lies almost exactly at theta=pi. The paper concludes that TRG simultaneously resolves the complex-action problem and the topological-freezing problem for this model.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper provides a useful demonstration that TRG can handle admissible lattice gauge theories with theta terms without suffering from the sign problem or topological freezing. The central quantitative claim, that the Lüscher action with small epsilon moves the field-theoretical theta-term transition to theta=pi, is a falsifiable prediction that can be checked by independent methods. Strengths of the paper include the absence of fitting parameters in the path-integral evaluation, the benchmarks against independent dual Monte Carlo results, the high-precision level-spectroscopy determination of the critical endpoint and central charge, and the explicit treatment of the topological-freezing problem. The main weakness is that the numerical convergence for the new epsilon=0.1 regime is not established within the paper, which makes the central claim dependent on an unverified choice of algorithmic parameters.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, Figs. 6 and 7] The central claim that the transition point for the field-theoretical theta term lies almost at theta=pi for epsilon=0.1 rests entirely on BTRG calculations at the fixed algorithmic parameters (K_g, K_h, D_BTRG) = (20, 20, 160). No convergence check or systematic error estimate is presented for this regime. The footnote in Section 3 defers the algorithmic parameter dependence of the critical endpoint to Ref. [14], but that reference concerns the logarithmic definition and does not cover the field-theoretical epsilon=0.1 observables. This matters because the admissible shell has width ||1-P|| < 0.1 while the 20-point Gauss-Legendre grid for the link angles has spacing of order 0.5 rad near zero; the product quadrature may not resolve the narrow shell, and the bond truncation at D_BTRG=160 may introduce additional bias. Please provide at least one convergence sequence in K_g, K_h, and D_BTRG for the epsilon=0.1 topological charge density and susceptibility, or give a quantitative estimate of the resulting systematic uncertainty in the extracted transition point.
[Section 3, Eq. (3.3) and Figs. 4-6] The topological susceptibility defined in Eq. (3.3) is the variance of the topological charge and is non-negative, but the plotted "Topological Susceptibility" curves in Figs. 4-6 are negative in the displayed range (for example, the inset of Fig. 4 reaches about -0.06 and the L=2^7 curve in Fig. 4 is negative around theta/pi=1). The equation and the figures are therefore inconsistent. Please correct the sign convention in one of them and confirm that the comparison with Ref. [22] is made for the same quantity.
[Section 2, Eq. (2.4) and Section 4] The paper does not discuss how the field-theoretical theta term (2.4) behaves under the admissibility condition. Since Im P(n) = sin(arg P(n)) approximates Im ln P(n) = arg P(n) up to corrections of order (arg P)^3, taking epsilon small makes the field-theoretical action approach the logarithmic definition (2.3). This provides a simple explanation for the near-pi transition at epsilon=0.1. To make the claimed "advantage of the admissibility condition" precise, the authors should state this relation and ideally compare the epsilon=0.1 field-theoretical results with a logarithmic-definition run at the same beta and M; otherwise the reader cannot tell whether the observed effect is specific to Lüscher's action or just a convergence of Eq. (2.4) to Eq. (2.3).

minor comments (3)

[Section 2, after Eq. (2.3)] The word "grantees" should be "guarantees".
[Section 3, Figs. 4 and 6] The inset graphs do not have visible axis labels or legends; please add them or describe the inset content fully in the caption.
[Section 3, Fig. 6 caption] The caption lists two groups of lattice sizes without a single unified legend, making it hard to distinguish the L=2^3 through L=2^6 curves from the L=2^7 through L=2^10 curves; a single legend would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central results come from direct numerical path-integral evaluation with no fitted parameters, and the self-citations are methodological rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that under Lüscher's admissibility condition with sufficiently small epsilon the field-theoretical theta term produces a transition at theta = pi—is obtained by explicit tensor-network evaluation of the path integral (Eq. 2.5 with the action of Eqs. 1.2, 2.2, and 2.4). No parameter is fitted to force the transition location: the action parameters (beta, M, lambda, epsilon) are fixed, and the algorithmic parameters (K_g, K_h, D_BTRG) are set to (20,20,160) and not tuned to the output. The transition point is read off from the computed discontinuity in the topological charge density (Eq. 3.1), which is a genuine numerical result rather than a definitional identity. The paper does cite the authors' prior work Ref. [14] for the tensor-network representation and for algorithmic-parameter dependence, but this is a methodological citation, not an unverified premise: the method is validated against independent Monte Carlo results (Refs. [21,22] for the Wilson action and the dual simulation, and the critical endpoint M_c = 2.9974765(14) is compared with M_c = 2.989(2) of Ref. [21]). The field-theoretical definition's behavior as epsilon decreases is computed, not assumed; although one might expect Im P12 to approximate ln P12 for small plaquette phase, the paper does not use that equivalence as an input or fit. There is no step in which a predicted quantity reduces by construction to a fitted input or to a self-citation chain. The absence of convergence checks for the epsilon=0.1 regime is a numerical robustness concern, not a circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; the paper uses standard U(1) gauge fields, a Higgs field, and a theta term. The only hand-chosen numbers are the numerical truncation parameters (quadrature orders and bond dimension), which control the approximation but are not fitted to the target result. The remaining assumptions are standard domain assumptions about the validity of the lattice definitions and the established numerical methods used.

free parameters (2)

quadrature orders (K_g, K_h) = 20, 20
Number of Gauss-Legendre (link angle) and Gauss-Laguerre (Higgs radius) sampling points; controls how accurately the continuous path integral is discretized as a tensor network. The paper fixes these to (20,20) without a convergence analysis in this proceedings.
BTRG bond dimension D_BTRG = 160
Truncation dimension for the singular value decomposition in each coarse-graining step; controls the TRG approximation. Fixed to 160; convergence dependence is deferred to Ref. [14].

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Lüscher's admissibility condition (Eq. 1.1) with the modified gauge action (Eq. 1.2) preserves topological sectors and separates gauge fields into disconnected subspaces.
Invoked in the Introduction (Section 1) as the motivation for using this action; the topological structure of the model relies on this property from Ref. [1].
domain assumption The field-theoretical definition of the topological theta term (Eq. 2.4) is a valid lattice definition whose continuum limit gives the topological charge; it is expected to recover 2pi periodicity only in the continuum limit.
Section 2; this definition is used for the central comparison between Wilson and Lüscher actions. The paper assumes the continuum interpretation to hold for the finite-beta results.
domain assumption Tensor-network-based level spectroscopy (Refs [19,20]) and the ground-state degeneracy method (Ref [18]) correctly identify the critical endpoint and universality class.
Section 3; the determination of M_c = 2.9974765(14) and the 2D Ising identification rely on these methods as established tools.
ad hoc to paper The Gauss-Legendre and Gauss-Laguerre quadratures with finite orders, and the BTRG with finite bond dimension, provide a sufficiently accurate approximation to the path integral for the quantities computed.
Section 2 and 3; the paper fixes K_g=K_h=20 and D_BTRG=160 and defers algorithmic dependence to Ref. [14]. This is a working assumption that the numerical results are converged.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tensor renormalization group study of the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological $\theta$ term under L\"uscher's admissibility condition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BKWKY36G

@misc{pith2026250115352,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tensor renormalization group study of the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological $\theta$ term under L\"uscher's admissibility condition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BKWKY36G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.15352}
}

read the original abstract

We investigate the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological term, employing L\"uscher's admissibility condition. The standard Monte Carlo simulation for this model is hindered not only by the complex action problem due to the topological term but also by the topological freezing problem originating from the admissibility condition. Resolving both obstacles simultaneously with the tensor renormalization group approach, we show the advantage of the admissibility condition in dealing with the topological term discretized with the so-called field-theoretical definition.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.15352 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Topological charge density as a function of 𝜃/𝜋 at 𝛽 = 3, 𝜖 = 1, and 𝜆 = 0.5 with 𝑀 = 2.99 (left), 𝑀 = 3.00 (right) at various lattice volumes. 2.990 2.991 2.992 2.993 2.994 2.995 2.996 2.997 2.998 2.999 3.000 M 1 2 Ground State Degeneracy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Ground state degeneracy at 𝜃 = 𝜋 as a function of 𝑀 at 𝑉 = 2 40 . 2.99740 2.99745 2.99750 2.99755 M 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 xcmb ( L ) L 2 = 220 L 2 = 221 L 2 = 222 L 2 = 223 L 2 = 224 L 2 = 225 L 2 = 226 L 2 = 227 L 2 = 228 L 2 = 229 L 2 = 230 3/16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Topological charge density (left) and topological susceptibility (right) as a function of 𝜃/𝜋 at 𝛽 = 10, 𝑀 = 4 with the standard Wilson gauge action at various lattice volumes. Dashed vertical lines denote 𝜃 = 𝜋. The inset graph is provided for the susceptibility in the smaller volumes. 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 θ/π -0.008 -0.006 -0.004 -0.002 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 Topological Charge Densit… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Topological charge density (left) and topological susceptibility (right) as a function of 𝜃/𝜋 at 𝛽 = 10, 𝑀 = 4 with the Lüscher gauge action (𝜖 = 1) at various lattice volumes. Dashed vertical lines denote 𝜃 = 𝜋. The graph scale is the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures…

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Topological charge density (left) and topological susceptibility (right) as a function of 𝜃/𝜋 at 𝛽 = 10, 𝑀 = 4 with the Lüscher gauge action (𝜖 = 0.1) at various lattice volumes. Dashed vertical lines denote 𝜃 = 𝜋. The inset graph is provided for the susceptibility in …

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Ground state degeneracy as a function of 𝜃/𝜋 at 𝛽 = 10, 𝑀 = 4 at 𝐿 = 2 5 . Each symbol denotes the result obtained by the Wilson gauge action, Lüscher gauge action with 𝜖 = 1, and 𝜖 = 0.1. Acknowledgments Numerical calculation for the present work was carried out with …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

[14]

Akiyama and Y

S. Akiyama and Y. Kuramashi,Tensor renormalization group study of (1 + 1)-dimensional U(1) gauge-Higgs model at𝜃 =𝜋 with Lüscher’s admissibility condition,JHEP 09 (2024) 086, [2407.10409]

arXiv 2024
[22]

Dual simulation of the 2-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological term

C. Gattringer, T. Kloiber and M. Müller-Preussker,Dual simulation of the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological term, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 114508, [1508.00681]. 10

work page Pith review arXiv 2015
[21]

Gattringer, D

C. Gattringer, D. Göschl and T. Sulejmanpasic,Dual simulation of the 2d U(1) gauge Higgs model attopologicalangle 𝜃 =𝜋: Criticalendpoint behavior,Nucl.Phys. B 935(2018)344, [1807.07793]

arXiv 2018
[1]

Lüscher,Abelian chiral gauge theories on the lattice with exact gauge invariance, Nucl

M. Lüscher,Abelian chiral gauge theories on the lattice with exact gauge invariance, Nucl. Phys. B549 (1999) 295, [hep-lat/9811032]

arXiv 1999
[2]

admissibility

H. Fukaya and T. Onogi,Lattice study of the massive Schwinger model with theta term under Lüscher’s “admissibility" condition,Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 074503, [hep-lat/0305004]. 8 TRG study of the2𝑑 lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model Shinichiro Akiyama

arXiv 2003
[3]

Theta vacuum effects on the chiral condensation and the eta^prime meson correlators in the two-flavor massive QED_2 on the lattice

H. Fukaya and T. Onogi,Theta vacuum effects on the chiral condensation and the eta-prime meson correlators in the two flavor massive QED(2) on the lattice, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 054508, [hep-lat/0403024]

work page Pith review arXiv 2004
[4]

Exploring Topology Conserving Gauge Actions for Lattice QCD

W. Bietenholz, K. Jansen, K. I. Nagai, S. Necco, L. Scorzato and S. Shcheredin,Exploring topology conserving gauge actions for lattice QCD,JHEP 03(2006) 017, [hep-lat/0511016]

work page Pith review arXiv 2006
[5]

Bietenholz, C

W. Bietenholz, C. Czaban, A. Dromard, U. Gerber, C. P. Hofmann, H. Mejía-Díaz et al., Interpreting Numerical Measurements in Fixed Topological Sectors, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 114516, [1603.05630]

arXiv 2016

Show all 22 references

[6]

Shimizu and Y

Y. Shimizu and Y. Kuramashi,Critical behavior of the lattice Schwinger model with a topological term at𝜃 =𝜋 using the Grassmann tensor renormalization group, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 074503, [1408.0897]

2014 arXiv
[7]

Kawauchi and S

H. Kawauchi and S. Takeda,Tensor renormalization group analysis of CP(𝑁-1) model,Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 114503, [1603.09455]

2016 arXiv
[8]

Kawauchi and S

H. Kawauchi and S. Takeda,Loop-TNR analysis of CP(1) model with theta term, EPJ Web Conf. 175 (2018) 11015, [1710.09804]

2018 arXiv
[9]

Kuramashi and Y

Y. Kuramashi and Y. Yoshimura,Tensor renormalization group study of two-dimensional U(1) lattice gauge theory with a𝜃 term, JHEP 04(2020) 089, [1911.06480]

2020 arXiv
[10]

N. Butt, S. Catterall, Y. Meurice, R. Sakai and J. Unmuth-Yockey,Tensor network formulation of the massless Schwinger model with staggered fermions, Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) 094509, [1911.01285]

2020 arXiv
[11]

Hirasawa, A

M. Hirasawa, A. Matsumoto, J. Nishimura and A. Yosprakob,Tensor renormalization group and the volume independence in 2D U(N) and SU(N) gauge theories, JHEP 12(2021) 011, [2110.05800]

2021 arXiv
[12]

Nakayama, L

K. Nakayama, L. Funcke, K. Jansen, Y.-J. Kao and S. Kühn,Phase structure of the CP(1) model in the presence of a topological𝜃-term,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 054507, [2107.14220]

2022 arXiv
[13]

Kanno, S

H. Kanno, S. Akiyama, K. Murakami and S. Takeda,Grassmann Tensor Renormalization Group for𝑁𝑓 = 2 massive Schwinger model with a𝜃 term, 2412.08959
[15]

Adachi, T

D. Adachi, T. Okubo and S. Todo,Bond-weighted tensor renormalization group,Phys. Rev. B 105 (Feb, 2022) L060402, [2011.01679]

2022 arXiv
[16]

Levin and C

M. Levin and C. P. Nave,Tensor renormalization group approach to two-dimensional classical lattice models, Phys. Rev. Lett.99(2007) 120601, [cond-mat/0611687]. 9 TRG study of the2𝑑 lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model Shinichiro Akiyama

2007 arXiv
[17]

Komargodski, A

Z. Komargodski, A. Sharon, R. Thorngren and X. Zhou,Comments on Abelian Higgs Models and Persistent Order,SciPost Phys.6 (2019) 003, [1705.04786]

2019 arXiv
[18]

Gu and X.-G

Z.-C. Gu and X.-G. Wen,Tensor-entanglement-filtering renormalization approach and symmetry-protected topological order,Phys. Rev. B80(2009) 155131

2009
[19]

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 spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. B104 (2021) 165132, [2105.11460]

2021 arXiv
[20]

Ueda and M

A. Ueda and M. Oshikawa,Finite-size and finite bond dimension effects of tensor network renormalization, Phys. Rev. B108 (2023) 024413

2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [14]

Akiyama and Y

S. Akiyama and Y. Kuramashi,Tensor renormalization group study of (1 + 1)-dimensional U(1) gauge-Higgs model at𝜃 =𝜋 with Lüscher’s admissibility condition,JHEP 09 (2024) 086, [2407.10409]

arXiv 2024

[2] [22]

Dual simulation of the 2-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological term

C. Gattringer, T. Kloiber and M. Müller-Preussker,Dual simulation of the two-dimensional lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model with a topological term, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 114508, [1508.00681]. 10

work page Pith review arXiv 2015

[3] [21]

Gattringer, D

C. Gattringer, D. Göschl and T. Sulejmanpasic,Dual simulation of the 2d U(1) gauge Higgs model attopologicalangle 𝜃 =𝜋: Criticalendpoint behavior,Nucl.Phys. B 935(2018)344, [1807.07793]

arXiv 2018

[4] [1]

Lüscher,Abelian chiral gauge theories on the lattice with exact gauge invariance, Nucl

M. Lüscher,Abelian chiral gauge theories on the lattice with exact gauge invariance, Nucl. Phys. B549 (1999) 295, [hep-lat/9811032]

arXiv 1999

[5] [2]

admissibility

H. Fukaya and T. Onogi,Lattice study of the massive Schwinger model with theta term under Lüscher’s “admissibility" condition,Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 074503, [hep-lat/0305004]. 8 TRG study of the2𝑑 lattice U(1) gauge-Higgs model Shinichiro Akiyama

arXiv 2003

[6] [3]

Theta vacuum effects on the chiral condensation and the eta^prime meson correlators in the two-flavor massive QED_2 on the lattice

H. Fukaya and T. Onogi,Theta vacuum effects on the chiral condensation and the eta-prime meson correlators in the two flavor massive QED(2) on the lattice, Phys. Rev. D70 (2004) 054508, [hep-lat/0403024]

work page Pith review arXiv 2004

[7] [4]

Exploring Topology Conserving Gauge Actions for Lattice QCD

W. Bietenholz, K. Jansen, K. I. Nagai, S. Necco, L. Scorzato and S. Shcheredin,Exploring topology conserving gauge actions for lattice QCD,JHEP 03(2006) 017, [hep-lat/0511016]

work page Pith review arXiv 2006

[8] [5]

Bietenholz, C

W. Bietenholz, C. Czaban, A. Dromard, U. Gerber, C. P. Hofmann, H. Mejía-Díaz et al., Interpreting Numerical Measurements in Fixed Topological Sectors, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 114516, [1603.05630]

arXiv 2016