Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 73 references

O(5) multicriticality in the 3D two flavor SU(2) lattice gauge Higgs model

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The three-dimensional two-flavor SU(2) gauge Higgs model hosts a continuous O(5) multicritical point, and the paper reports the first Monte Carlo determination of its crossover exponent, y_{2,2} = 1.838(10).

desk verdict A careful lattice study that delivers the first Monte Carlo y2,2 at the O(5) multicritical point; the P4,4 worry raised in the stress-test does not land because that operator is generated only at O(v²) and is strongly irrelevant. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.03446 v3 pith:KVED5KE6 submitted 2025-05-06 hep-lat cond-mat.stat-mech

Claudio Bonati , Ivan Soler Calero This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-latcond-mat.stat-mech MSC 82B2781T2582B2081T13 PACS 11.15.Ha64.60.Fr75.10.Hk
keywords O(5)multicriticalitySU(2)latticegaugetheoryHiggsmodelLandau-Ginzburg-Wilsoncrossoverexponentfinite-sizescalingdeconfinedquantumcriticalityrenormalizationgroup
topics Yang-Mills Mass Gap
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

The paper argues that a three-dimensional lattice model in which SU(2) gauge fields are coupled to two fundamental scalar flavors exhibits a genuine multicritical point where two separate O(2) and O(3) critical lines meet and the global symmetry enlarges to O(5). This symmetry enlargement is normally impossible for generic systems because the O(5) multicritical point is unstable, but the SU(2) gauge symmetry prevents the relevant perturbation that would trigger the instability. The authors test the resulting Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson scaling predictions through Monte Carlo simulations, reporting the first Monte Carlo estimate of the crossover exponent y_{2,2} = 1.838(10), in agreement with epsilon-expansion results. If correct, this is the first evidence that multicritical phenomena in a gauge theory can be described by the standard gauge-invariant LGW multicritical theory.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson Hamiltonian with O(N₁)⊕O(N₂) symmetry, specialised to N₁=2, N₂=3. Its quartic interactions contain five candidate perturbations P_{m,l} classified by degree m and spin l under O(5); the spin-2 quadratic term P_{2,2} controls the crossover exponent y_{2,2} = 1/ν′, while the spin-4 term P_{4,4} is relevant and would destroy the O(5) bicritical point in generic systems. The SU(2) lattice model realizes only the gauge-invariant combination v P_{2,2} as its explicit breaking, and the gauge symmetry forbids the local operator that would generate P_{4,4}, so the free-energy scaling reduces to the standard bicritical form f_sing = $t^{{3ν}}$ f_mc(g₂ $t^{{−φ_T}}$). Numerically, the finite-size scaling variable X = (J−J*) $L^{{y_{2,0}}$} for v=0 and X = v $L^{{y_{2,2}}$} for v≠0 carries the analysis; extracting ν′ from the FSS of R_Q, R_Y, U_Q, and U_Y gives the quoted exponent.

What would settle it

A high-statistics simulation at J = J*(0) with v very close to zero and lattice sizes beyond L=64: if the Binder parameter U_Q or U_Y develops a double-peak histogram at the multicritical point, or if the finite-size scaling collapse using y_{2,2} = 1.838(10) degrades systematically with increasing L instead of improving, the continuous O(5) multicritical scenario would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the O(2)⊕O(3) multicritical point of the three-dimensional two-flavor SU(2) lattice gauge Higgs model is stable and continuous, with universal behavior described by the O(2)⊕O(3) Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson φ⁴ theory, despite the general instability of the O(5) fixed point. The RG flow does not generate the relevant spin-4 perturbation P_{4,4} that would otherwise drive the system away from the multicritical point, because the SU(2) gauge symmetry forbids the corresponding local gauge-invariant operator. The paper verifies the predicted finite-size scaling, finds critical values of Binder parameters and correlation-length ratios consistent with O(5) symmetry, and obtains y_{2,2} = 1.838(10) (ν′ = 0.544(3)). It also checks that varying the gauge self-coupling γ from 0 to 2 leaves the universal scaling curve unchanged, confirming that the gauge degrees of freedom remain non-critical and γ is irrelevant.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that the gauge fields never become critical and that the critical behavior is governed by the gauge-invariant local composite operators Q and Y, so the lattice model reduces to the standard LGW Hamiltonian with O(5) symmetry broken only by v P_{2,2}; the numerical check that γ is irrelevant is limited to one nonzero value, γ=2.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The O(2) and O(3) transition lines approach the v=0 axis tangentially, because the crossover exponent φ_T ≈ 1.429 exceeds 1.
  • Approaching the multicritical point along generic directions, the dominant scaling dimension is y_{2,2} ≈ 1.838, while along the v=0 line it is y_{2,0} = 1/ν ≈ 1.282.
  • Scaling corrections with exponent y_{2,2} − y_{2,0} ≈ 0.55 appear when g₂ ≠ 0, with no counterpart in the purely critical O(5) model.
  • The gauge self-coupling γ is irrelevant; the universal scaling curves for γ=0 and γ=2 converge to the same limit.
  • The results provide the first evidence that, in gauge theories, multicritical phenomena arising from the crossing of independent LGW transition lines can be described by the standard LGW multicritical theory.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the gauge-protection mechanism is generic, other gauge groups with suitable center and global symmetry structures may host stable enlarged-symmetry multicritical points that would be unstable in unganged models, and this lattice model could serve as a testbed for identifying them.
  • The paper's connection to deconfined quantum criticality suggests a concrete check for DQC models: look for a relevant perturbation that is forbidden by an emergent gauge symmetry; its absence could explain the pseudo-critical O(5)-like scaling observed in some quantum magnet models.
  • A direct extension would be to measure the subleading crossover exponent φ_Q = ν y_{4,4} by explicitly deforming the model with an operator that couples to P_{4,4}, if a gauge-invariant lattice realization exists; the theory predicts a value near 0.18.
  • Because the model is classical and finite-temperature while DQC models are quantum, the quantum-to-classical mapping may alter the scaling; verifying O(5) multicritical behavior in a (2+1)-dimensional quantum simulator would be a stronger test.
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

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the three-dimensional SU(2) lattice gauge-Higgs model with two fundamental scalar flavors, focusing on the multicritical point where the global O(2)⊕O(3) symmetry is expected to enlarge to O(5). The authors perform finite-size scaling analyses of the four RG-invariant quantities R_Q, R_Y, U_Q, and U_Y as functions of the quartic coupling v at fixed J=J*(γ), for lattice sizes L=8 to 64. They carry out both unbiased fits (leaving the critical coupling v_c free) and biased fits (fixing v_c=0 and the critical values to O(5) predictions), obtaining ν'=0.544(3), hence y2,2=1.838(10), which is the first Monte Carlo determination of this crossover exponent and agrees with the ε-expansion estimate. A comparison of γ=0 and γ=2 data supports the expected irrelevance of the gauge coupling. The paper concludes that the multicritical behavior is described by the O(2)⊕O(3) multicritical Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson theory and discusses implications for deconfined criticality.

Significance. If the result holds, this is a valuable and nontrivial numerical test: it provides the first Monte Carlo estimate of the spin-2 quadratic crossover exponent y2,2 and the first direct evidence that a multicritical point formed by two LGW transition lines in a gauge theory is described by the corresponding gauge-invariant multicritical LGW theory. The numerical analysis is careful and transparent: it uses several observables, combines unbiased and biased fits, checks that the fitted multicritical coupling v_c is zero, verifies that critical values agree with O(5) expectations, and includes an explicit, though limited, test of the irrelevance of γ. These cross-checks substantially strengthen the central claim, which has consequences for the interpretation of emergent O(5) behavior in models of deconfined quantum criticality.

minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III, after Eq. (21)] The sentence "In the RG flow of this model the term P4,4 ... is not present" is stated without justification. Since P4,4 is allowed by the exact O(2)⊕O(3) symmetry when v≠0, the statement should be qualified: what is needed for Eq. (22) is that P4,4 is not generated at linear order in v, because the v=0 fixed point is O(5)-symmetric and vP2,2 lies in a different O(5) representation; any O(v^2) component would be subleading in the asymptotic scaling. Please state this argument explicitly or cite the precise result from Ref. [31] that establishes it.
  2. [Sec. II, Eq. (13)] The identity in Eq. (13) appears to have a sign error in the constant term. For Φ=diag(1,0), one has Tr(Φ†Φ)^2=1 and Tr(Q^2)=1/2, so the correct relation is Tr(Φ†Φ)^2 = Tr(Q^2)+1/2, not Tr(Q^2)-1/2 (and correspondingly +1/2 on the right-hand side in terms of the φ components). This typo does not affect the physical conclusion because only the quadratic part is used, but it should be corrected.
  3. [References [19,20] and [23]] There are small reference typos: "Londo, UK" should be "London, UK" in Refs. [19,20], and Ref. [23] contains a duplicated year "(1999) (1999)".
  4. [Fig. 5 caption/legend] The legend of Fig. 5 appears to list L=24 twice and to omit L=12; please check that the legend correctly identifies the data sets.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the crossover exponent y_{2,2} is measured from Monte Carlo finite-size scaling data, not derived from the O(5) LGW input; the central claim is supported by independent lattice results.

full rationale

The paper's central quantitative result, y_{2,2}=1.838(10), is obtained by fitting the v-dependence of R_Q, R_Y, U_Q and U_Y at fixed J=J* using the finite-size scaling form X=v L^{1/nu'} (Eqs. (30)-(31)); this is a measurement from new simulations, not a restatement of the input LGW exponents. The multicritical coupling J*(0) is taken from prior work [61,62], but the paper cross-checks it with unbiased fits that yield v_c=0 (Table III), so the location of the multicritical point is not simply assumed. The universal O(5) values U* and R* used in the biased fits come from independent Monte Carlo data by Hasenbusch [52], and the unbiased fits do not require them. The one potentially load-bearing input is the assertion that the relevant operator P_{4,4} is absent from the RG flow (Sec. III: 'In the RG flow of this model the term P_{4,4} ... is not present'), which is imported from the authors' earlier work [31] rather than derived in this paper; however, it is a stated assumption of the LGW description, not a quantity defined in terms of y_{2,2}, and the numerical collapse together with the agreement with the epsilon-expansion estimate 1.832(8) provide external falsifiability. The scaling form Eq. (22) is not equivalent to its inputs by construction: if the form were incorrect, the fitted exponent would not be forced to match the independent epsilon-expansion value. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and the self-citations that appear are either cross-checked or non-load-bearing for the central measurement.

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

No ad hoc free parameters are introduced in this paper. The analysis relies on standard scaling assumptions and on prior determinations of the O(5) fixed point and of the multicritical coupling J*. These are external inputs, not fitted knobs introduced to force agreement.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The critical behavior of the lattice model is described by a Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson effective Hamiltonian with gauge-invariant local composite order parameters, with gauge fields non-critical.
    Invoked in Sec. III when mapping the lattice Hamiltonian to the O(5) LGW Hamiltonian, and in Sec. II classification of critical behaviors. If false, the FSS analysis would not measure LGW exponents.
  • domain assumption At the O(5) fixed point, the only relevant perturbations with O(2)⊕O(3) symmetry are P2,0 and P2,2, and the dangerous P4,4 operator is not generated in the SU(2) gauge model because of the gauge symmetry.
    This is the theoretical argument from Refs. [27,28,30,31] that the multicritical point is stable; the paper's interpretation depends on P4,4 being absent.
  • domain assumption The finite-size scaling form of RG invariant quantities near the multicritical point is M(J,v)=M(X) with X=(J-J*) L^{y2,0} for v=0 and X=v L^{y2,2} for v≠0, up to negligible scaling corrections.
    Equation (30) in Sec. IV B. Standard FSS ansatz; systematic errors from scaling corrections are explored but not fully controlled.
  • domain assumption The universal quantities of the O(5) fixed point (nu, omega, eta, R*, U*) are taken from Ref. [52] and used as anchors for biased fits.
    Table II and Eq. (35). These are external Monte Carlo results; the biased fits assume their accuracy.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of O(5) multicriticality in the 3D two flavor SU(2) lattice gauge Higgs model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KVED5KE6

@misc{pith2026250503446,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: O(5) multicriticality in the 3D two flavor SU(2) lattice gauge Higgs model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KVED5KE6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.03446}
}
abstract

We numerically investigate the multicritical behavior of the three dimensional lattice system in which a SU(2) gauge field is coupled to two flavors of scalar fields transforming in the fundamental representation of the gauge group. In this system a multicritical point is present, where the global symmetry O(2)$\oplus$O(3) gets enlarged to O(5). Such a symmetry enlargement is hindered for generic systems by the instability of the O(5) multicritical point, but the SU(2) gauge symmetry prevents the appearance of the term triggering the instability. All the numerical results obtained in this lattice gauge model fully support the expectations coming from the O(2)$\oplus$O(3) multicritical Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson $\phi^4$ theory, and we discuss possible implications of these results for some models of deconfined quantum criticality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.03446 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Expected phase diagram of the SU(2) gauge model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Behavior of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. , and they show that practically no scaling correc￾tions are present. In the same plots we also report (as horizontal dashed lines) the FSS low temperature values of UQ and UY expected from O(3) and O(2) symmetry. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 RQ 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 UQ L=8 L=12 L=16 L=24 L=32 L=48 L=64 γ=0, J=2.68885 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 RY 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 U Y L=8 L=12 L=16 L=24 L=32 L=48 L=64 γ=0, J=2.68885 FIG. 3: Behavior of … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Universal scaling curve obtained by plotting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Finite size scaling curves of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages

  1. [52]

    Hasenbusch, Three-dimensional O(N)-invariant ϕ4 models at criticality forN≥ 4, Phys

    M. Hasenbusch, Three-dimensional O(N)-invariant ϕ4 models at criticality forN≥ 4, Phys. Rev. B 105, 054428 (2022)

    work page 2022

  2. [1]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics. Part I, (Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 1980)

    work page 1980

  3. [2]

    H. E. Stanley Introduction to Phase Transitions and crit- ical Phenomena, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1971)

    work page 1971

  4. [3]

    K. G. Wilson and J. Kogut, The renormalization group and the ϵ expansion, Phys. Rep. 12, 75 (1974)

    1974

  5. [4]

    M. E. Fisher, The renormalization group in the theory of critical behavior, Rev. Mod. Phys. 47, 543 (1975)

    1975

  6. [5]

    Pelissetto and E

    A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Critical Phenomena and Renormalization Group Theory, Phys. Rep. 368, 549 (2002)

    work page 2002

  7. [6]

    Zinn Justin Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phe- nomena, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2002)

    J. Zinn Justin Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phe- nomena, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2002)

    work page 2002

  8. [7]

    Liu and M

    K.-S. Liu and M. E. Fisher, Quantum lattice gas and the existence of a supersolid, J. Low Temp. Phys. 10, 655 (1972)

    work page 1972

Show all 73 references
  1. [8]

    M. E. Fisher and D. R. Nelson, Spin Flop, Supersolids, and Bicritical and Tetracritical Points, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 1350 (1974)

    1974

  2. [9]

    D. R. Nelson, J. M. Kosterlitz, and M. E. Fisher, Renormalization-Group Analysis of Bicritical and Tetra- critical Points Phys. Rev. Lett. 33, 813 (1974)

    1974

  3. [10]

    J. M. Kosterlitz, D. R. Nelson, and M. E. Fisher, Bicrit- ical and tetracritical points in anisotropic antiferromag- netic systems, Phys. Rev. B 13, 412 (1976)

    1976

  4. [11]

    A. D. Bruce and A. Aharony, Coupled order parameters, symmetry-breaking irrelevant scaling fields, and tetra- critical points, Phys. Rev. B 11, 478 (1975)

    1975

  5. [12]

    Domany and M

    E. Domany and M. E. Fisher, Equations of state for bi- critical points. III. Cubic anisotropy and tetracriticality, Phys. Rev. B 15, 3510 (1977)

    1977

  6. [13]

    L. M. Corliss, J. M. Hastings, W. Kunnmann, R. J. Be- gum, M. F. Collins, E. Gurewitz, and David Mukamel, Magnetic phase diagram and critical behavior of Fe 2As, Phys. Rev. B 25, 245 (1982)

    1982

  7. [14]

    Ben Al` ı Zinati, A

    R. Ben Al` ı Zinati, A. Codello and O. Zanusso, Multicrit- ical hypercubic models, JHEP 08, 060 (2021)

    2021

  8. [15]

    Blume, V

    M. Blume, V. J. Emery and R. B. Griffiths, Ising Model for the λ Transition and Phase Separation in He 3− He4 Mixtures Phys. Rev. A 4, 1071 (1971)

    1971

  9. [16]

    R. B. Griffiths, Proposal for Notation at Tricritical Points Phys. Rev. B 7, 545 (1973)

    1973

  10. [17]

    F. J. Wegner and E. K. Riedel, Logarithmic Corrections to the Molecular-Field Behavior of Critical and Tricritical Systems Phys. Rev. B 7, 248 (1973)

    1973

  11. [18]

    M. J. Stephen, E. Abrahams and J. P. Straley Loga- rithmic corrections to the mean-field theory of tricritical points Phys. Rev. B 12, 256 (1975)

    1975

  12. [19]

    Lawrie, S

    D. Lawrie, S. Sarbach, Theory of Tricritical Points, in C. Domb, J. L. Lebowitz, Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena Vol. 9 (Academic Press, Londo, UK, 1984)

    1984

  13. [20]

    C. M. Knobler, R. L. Scott, Multicritical Points in Fluid Mixtures: Experimental Studies in C. Domb, J. L. Lebowitz, Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena Vol. 9 (Academic Press, Londo, UK, 1984). 10

    1984

  14. [21]

    Zhang, A Unified Theory Based on SO(5) Symme- try of Superconductivity and Antiferromagnetism, Sci- ence 275 1089 (1997)

    S.-C. Zhang, A Unified Theory Based on SO(5) Symme- try of Superconductivity and Antiferromagnetism, Sci- ence 275 1089 (1997)

    1997

  15. [22]

    Arrigoni, W

    E. Arrigoni, W. Hanke, Renormalized SO(5) Symmetry in Ladders with Next-Nearest-Neighbor Hopping, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2115 (1999)

    1999

  16. [23]

    Zhang, J.-P

    S.-C. Zhang, J.-P. Hu, E. Arrigoni, W. Hanke, A. Auer- bach, Projected SO(5) models, Phys. Rev. B 60 (1999) (1999)

    1999

  17. [24]

    Arrigoni, W

    E. Arrigoni, W. Hanke, Critical properties of projected SO(5) models at finite temperatures, Phys. Rev. B 62, 11770 (2000)

    2000

  18. [25]

    Demler, W

    E. Demler, W. Hanke, S.-C. Zhang, SO(5) theory of anti- ferromagnetism and superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76 909 (2004)

    2004

  19. [26]

    Bicritical and Tetracritical Phenomena and Scaling Properties of the SO(5) Theory

    A. Aharony, Comment on “Bicritical and Tetracritical Phenomena and Scaling Properties of the SO(5) Theory”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 059703 (2002)

    2002

  20. [27]

    Bicritical and Tetracritical Phenomena and Scal- ing Properties of the SO(5) Theory

    P. Calabrese, A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Comment on “Bicritical and Tetracritical Phenomena and Scal- ing Properties of the SO(5) Theory”, [arXiv:cond- mat/0203533 [cond-mat]]

  21. [28]

    Calabrese, A

    P. Calabrese, A. Pelissetto, and E. Vicari, Multicriti- cal behavior of O(n1)⊕ O(n2)-symmetric systems, Phys. Rev. B 67, 054505 (2003)

    2003

  22. [29]

    Pelissetto, E

    A. Pelissetto, E. Vicari, Interacting N-vector order pa- rameters with O(N) symmetry, Condensed Matter Phys. 8, 87 (2005)

    2005

  23. [30]

    Hasenbusch, A

    M. Hasenbusch, A. Pelissetto, and E. Vicari, Instability of the O(5) critical behavior in the SO(5) theory of high- Tc superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 72, 014532 (2005)

    2005

  24. [31]

    Bonati, A

    C. Bonati, A. Franchi, A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Phase diagram and Higgs phases of three-dimensional lattice SU(Nc) gauge theories with multiparameter scalar po- tentials, Phys. Rev. E 104, 064111 (2021)

    2021

  25. [32]

    Fradkin Field Theories of Condensed Matter Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2013)

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

    2013

  26. [33]

    Moessner, J

    R. Moessner, J. E. Moore Topological Phases of Matter (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2021)

    2021

  27. [34]

    Wen, Quantum field theory of many-body systems: from the origin of sound to an origin of light and elec- trons, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2004)

    X.-G. Wen, Quantum field theory of many-body systems: from the origin of sound to an origin of light and elec- trons, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2004)

    2004

  28. [35]

    Sachdev, Topological order, emergent gauge fields, and Fermi surface reconstruction, Rep

    S. Sachdev, Topological order, emergent gauge fields, and Fermi surface reconstruction, Rep. Prog. Phys. 82, 014001 (2019)

    2019

  29. [36]

    Bonati, A

    C. Bonati, A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Three-dimensional Abelian and non-Abelian gauge Higgs theories, Phys. Rept. 1133, 1 (2025)

    2025

  30. [37]

    A. M. Somoza, P. Serna and A. Nahum, Self-Dual Criti- cality in Three-Dimensional Z2 Gauge Theory with Mat- ter, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041008 (2021)

    2021

  31. [38]

    Bonati, A

    C. Bonati, A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Multicritical point of the three-dimensional Z2 gauge Higgs model, Phys. Rev. B 105, 165138 (2022)

    2022

  32. [39]

    Oppenheim, M

    L. Oppenheim, M. Koch-Janusz, S. Gazit and Z. Ringel, Machine learning the operator content of the critical self- dual Ising-Higgs lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043322 (2024)

    2024

  33. [40]

    Bonati, A

    C. Bonati, A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Comment on ”Ma- chine Learning the Operator Content of the Critical Self- Dual Ising-Higgs Gauge Model” [arXiv:2401.10563 [cond- mat.stat-mech]]

    arXiv

  34. [41]

    Senthil, A

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

    2004

  35. [42]

    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 (2004)

    2004

  36. [43]

    Levin and T

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

    2004

  37. [44]

    Tanaka, X

    A. Tanaka, X. Hu, Many-Body Spin Berry Phases Emerg- ing from the π-Flux State: Competition between Anti- ferromagnetism and the Valence-Bond-Solid State, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 036402 (2005)

    2005

  38. [45]

    Senthil, M

    T. Senthil, M. P. A. Fisher, Competing orders, non-linear sigma models, and topological terms in quantum mag- nets, Phys. Rev. B 74, 064405 (2006)

    2006

  39. [46]

    Nahum, J

    A. Nahum, J. T. Chalker, P. Serna, M. Ortu˜ no, A. M. Somoza, Deconfined Quantum Criticality, Scaling Viola- tions, and Classical Loop Models, Phys. Rev. X5, 041048 (2015)

    2015

  40. [47]

    Nahum, P

    A. Nahum, P. Serna, J. T. Chalker, M. Ortu˜ no, A. M. So- moza, Emergent SO(5) Symmetry at the N´ eel to Valence- Bond-Solid Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 267203 (2015)

    2015

  41. [48]

    Takahashi, A

    J. Takahashi, A. W. Sandvik, Valence-bond solids, ves- tigial order, and emergent SO(5) symmetry in a two- dimensional quantum magnet, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033459 (2020)

    2020

  42. [49]

    Z. Zhou, L. Hu, W. Zhu, Y.-C. He, SO(5) Deconfined Phase Transition under the Fuzzy-Sphere Microscope: Approximate Conformal Symmetry, Pseudo-Criticality, and Operator Spectrum, Phys. Rev. X14, 021044 (2024)

    2024

  43. [50]

    Z. Deng, L. Liu, W. Guo, H.-q. Lin, Diagnosing SO(5) Symmetry and First-Order Transition in the J− Q3 Model via Entanglement Entropy Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 100402 (2024)

    2024

  44. [51]

    D’Emidio, A

    J. D’Emidio, A. W. Sandvik, Entanglement entropy and deconfined criticality: emergent SO(5) symmetry and proper lattice bipartition Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 166702 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    F. J. Jiang, M. Nyfeler, S. Chandrasekharan, and U. J. Wiese, From an antiferromagnet to a valence bond solid: evidence for a first-order phase transition J. Stat. Mech. (2008) P02009

    2008

  46. [54]

    A. W. Sandvik, Continuous Quantum Phase Transition between an Antiferromagnet and a Valence-Bond Solid in Two Dimensions: Evidence for Logarithmic Corrections to Scaling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 177201 (2010)

    2010

  47. [55]

    Banerjee, K

    A. Banerjee, K. Damle, and F. Alet, Impurity spin tex- ture at a deconfined quantum critical point Phys. Rev. B 82, 155139 (2010)

    2010

  48. [56]

    R. K. Kaul, Quantum criticality in SU(3) and SU(4) an- tiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. B 84, 054407 (2011)

    2011

  49. [57]

    K. Chen, Y. Huang, Y. Deng, A. B. Kuklov, N. V. Prokofev, and B. V. Svistunov, Deconfined Criticality Flow in the Heisenberg Model with Ring-Exchange In- teractions Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 185701 (2013)

    2013

  50. [58]

    Harada, T

    K. Harada, T. Suzuki, T. Okubo, H. Matsuo, J. Lou, H. Watanabe, S. Todo, and N. Kawashima, Possibility of deconfined criticality in SU(N) Heisenberg models at small N, Phys. Rev. B 88, 220408 (2013)

    2013

  51. [59]

    Bonati, A.Pelissetto, I

    C. Bonati, A.Pelissetto, I. Soler Calero and E. Vicari, 11 Charged critical behavior and nonperturbative contin- uum limit of three-dimensional lattice SU(Nc) gauge Higgs models, Phys. Rev. D 110, 094504 (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    K. G. Wilson, Confinement of quarks, Phys. Rev. D 10, 2445 (1974)

    1974

  53. [61]

    Bonati, A

    C. Bonati, A. Pelissetto, and E. Vicari, Phase Diagram, Symmetry Breaking, and Critical Behavior of Three- Dimensional Lattice Multiflavor Scalar Chromodynam- ics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 232002 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    Bonati, A

    C. Bonati, A. Pelissetto, and E. Vicari, Three- dimensional lattice multiflavor scalar chromodynamics: Interplay between global and gauge symmetries, Phys. Rev. D 101, 034505 (2020)

    2020

  55. [63]

    Simon Representations of Finite and Compact Groups (American Mathematical Society, Providence, 1996)

    B. Simon Representations of Finite and Compact Groups (American Mathematical Society, Providence, 1996)

    1996

  56. [64]

    F. J. Wegner Critical Exponents in Isotropic Spin Sys- tems, Phys. Rev. B 6, 1891 (1972)

    1972

  57. [65]

    Calabrese, A

    P. Calabrese, A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Critical struc- ture factors of bilinear fields in O(N) vector models, Phys. Rev. E 65, 046115 (2002)

    2002

  58. [66]

    A. D. Kennedy and B. J. Pendleton, Improved Heat Bath Method for Monte Carlo Calculations in Lattice Gauge Theories, Phys. Lett. B 156, 393 (1985)

    1985

  59. [67]

    Creutz, Overrelaxation and Monte Carlo Simulation, Phys

    M. Creutz, Overrelaxation and Monte Carlo Simulation, Phys. Rev. D 36, 515 (1987)

    1987

  60. [68]

    Metropolis, A

    N. Metropolis, A. W. Rosenbluth, M. N. Rosenbluth, A. H. Teller, and E. Teller, Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines, J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1087 (1953)

    1953

  61. [69]

    M. S. S. Challa, D. P. Landau, and K. Binder, Finite- size effects at temperature-driven first-order transitions Phys. Rev. B 34, 1841 (1986)

    1986

  62. [70]

    Vollmayr, J

    K. Vollmayr, J. D. Reger, M. Scheucher, and K. Binder, Finite size effects at thermally-driven first order phase transitions: A phenomenological theory of the order pa- rameter distribution Z. Phys. B 91 113 (1993)

    1993

  63. [71]

    Calabrese, P

    P. Calabrese, P. Parruccini, A. Pelissetto, and E. Vi- cari, Critical behavior of O(2)⊗O(N)-symmetric models, Phys. Rev. B 70, 174439 (2004)

    2004

  64. [72]

    Pelissetto and E

    A. Pelissetto and E. Vicari, Three-dimensional ferromag- netic CPN−1 models, Phys. Rev. E 100, 022122 (2019)

    2019

  65. [73]

    Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical points: a review, [arXiv:2306.12638 [cond-mat.str-el]]

    T. Senthil, Deconfined quantum critical points: a review, [arXiv:2306.12638 [cond-mat.str-el]]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.