Parton Mean-Field Theory of a Rydberg Quantum Spin Liquid induced by Density-Dependent Peierls Phases

Benno Bock; Michael Fleischhauer; Simon Ohler

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Parton Mean-Field Theory of a Rydberg Quantum Spin Liquid induced by Density-Dependent Peierls Phases

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A parameter-free parton mean-field solution places the Rydberg model's ground state in a chiral spin liquid class and reproduces exact diagonalization results.

desk verdict A useful self-consistent parton derivation for the Rydberg CSL model, but the converged solution violates its own spin-symmetry condition, leaving the PSG classification unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23409 v1 pith:R2AXBU5G submitted 2025-05-29 cond-mat.quant-gas

Benno Bock , Simon Ohler , Michael Fleischhauer This is my paper

classification cond-mat.quant-gas

keywords Rydbergatomsquantumspinliquidchiralpartonmean-fieldtheoryprojectivesymmetrygroupdensity-dependentPeierlsphasehoneycomblatticeGutzwillerprojection

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 aims to show that the Rydberg Hamiltonian on a honeycomb lattice with density-dependent Peierls phases has a chiral spin liquid ground state, by deriving the spin-liquid wavefunction from first principles rather than by fitting ansatz parameters to numerics. The authors fermionize the hard-core boson model, perform a parton mean-field decoupling, and solve the resulting self-consistency equations analytically in momentum space. The self-consistent solution yields hopping amplitudes $V = v \sigma_0$ and $W/v \approx -0.26(1+i) \sigma_0$ at $g=0.7$, which places it in the same projective symmetry group class as the previously fitted ansatz. Its Gutzwiller-projected ground state shows large overlap with exact diagonalization states for $0.4 \lesssim g \lesssim 0.9$ and exhibits a twofold topological degeneracy on the torus, the hallmark of a chiral spin liquid.

What carries the argument

The central object is the fermionic parton representation of the hard-core boson operators, with spinon operators $f_{i,\alpha}$ replacing the bosons; the mean-field decoupling of the sixth-order term leaves hopping amplitudes $\chi_{1,\alpha}$ (nearest neighbor) and $\chi_{2,\alpha}$ (next-nearest neighbor) to be determined. The self-consistency equations (16) and (17) express these amplitudes as Brillouin-zone integrals over the lower-band eigenvector components $(a(k), c(k))$ and the lattice phase factors $\varphi_1(k)$, $\varphi_2(k)$, evaluated for both spin species independently. The Gutzwiller projection then maps the parton ground state back to the physical bosonic Hilbert space. This machinery is what converts the microscopic Hamiltonian into the concrete prediction $V = v \sigma_0$, $W/v \approx -0.26(1+i) \sigma_0$.

What would settle it

Compute the energy landscape of the mean-field Hamiltonian over the full space of complex $\chi_{1,\uparrow}$, $\chi_{1,\downarrow}$, $\chi_{2,\uparrow}$, $\chi_{2,\downarrow}$ (relaxing the spin-symmetry condition) and check whether the reported fixed point is the global minimum; alternatively, test spin-rotation invariance of the Gutzwiller-projected ground state by evaluating the static spin-structure factor $S(k)$ for residual magnetic order, or run ED on larger clusters (e.g., 36 sites) to see if the twofold degeneracy persists and matches the parton prediction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the self-consistent parton mean-field solution of the Rydberg Hamiltonian (1), obtained without any fitting to numerics, produces hopping amplitudes $V = v \sigma_0$ and $W/v \approx -0.26(1+i) \sigma_0$ at $g=0.7$ (eq. 20), placing it in PSG ansatz class 1 of Ref. [19]. The Gutzwiller-projected ground state of this mean-field Hamiltonian has large overlap with exact-diagonalization ground states in the window $0.4 \lesssim g \lesssim 0.9$, and shows a twofold topological degeneracy under twisted boundary conditions that ED could not resolve. The paper presents these results as evidence that the model hosts a chiral spin liquid, and as a microscopic derivation of the previously ad-hoc PSG ansatz.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the self-consistently converged mean-field fixed point is the physically correct ground state; the paper notes the spin-symmetry condition (19) from the projective construction, but its reported solution (real $\chi_1 = -0.238$ with $\chi_{1,\uparrow} = \chi_{1,\downarrow}$) is incompatible with that condition, which would require purely imaginary $\chi_1$, and the paper does not prove this fixed point is the global saddle point nor explain the discrepancy.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The self-consistent mean-field solution places the Hamiltonian in PSG ansatz class 1 of Ref. [19] without any fitting, giving a microscopic origin to the previously ad-hoc hopping amplitudes.
The twofold topological degeneracy on the torus, which exact diagonalization could not resolve, emerges naturally in the parton description and is a hallmark of a chiral spin liquid.
The overlap with exact-diagonalization ground states is large for $0.4 \lesssim g \lesssim 0.9$, indicating that the projected parton wavefunction captures the physics of the frustrated regime.
Because the self-consistent solution is computed analytically in momentum space, the approach applies to arbitrary system sizes and can access the thermodynamic limit.

Reading between the lines

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

The reported solution violates the spin-symmetry condition (19) that it is supposed to satisfy ($\chi_1$ real rather than purely imaginary), so the spin-rotation invariance of the resulting chiral spin liquid remains an open question that the paper does not resolve.
A natural next test would be to compute the topological entanglement entropy or modular matrices from the projected parton wavefunction, which would confirm the topological order independently of the degeneracy count.
The self-consistent method could be extended to other lattice geometries or to finite doping to see whether the chiral spin liquid survives away from half filling.

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

Dear colleague,

The headline is twofold: this paper does something genuinely useful and something genuinely shaky. The useful part is deriving the parton mean-field parameters for the Rydberg honeycomb model of Ref. [18] self-consistently from the microscopic Hamiltonian, rather than fitting them as in Ref. [19]. That is a real step forward, and the resulting overlap with ED wavefunctions in g ∈ [0.4, 0.9] is a credible check. The twofold degeneracy on a torus, while not conclusive, is a new observation that small-cluster ED could not provide.

The shaky part is an internal contradiction at the center of the argument. Sec. III states the spin-symmetry condition eχ↑ = −eχ†↓ (Eq. 19), correctly translated from Wen's χ↑ = χ↓, and uses it to initialize the ↓ correlations. The self-consistency loop is then run independently for the two species and converges to eχ1,↑ = eχ1,↓ = −0.238, both real. That satisfies Eq. (19) only if χ is zero or purely imaginary. The paper calls the convergence "remarkable" but never notes the conflict. This matters because the next step—identifying V = vσ0 and W/v ≈ −0.26(1+i)σ0 with ansatz class 1 of Ref. [19]—relies on the PSG classification, which assumes the symmetry encoded in Eq. (19). If the true solution breaks that symmetry, the classification may not apply, and the degeneracy claim does not follow. The authors need to explain why the symmetry condition is not required, or show that a corrected calculation still lands in the same universality class.

Other issues are secondary. The degeneracy test via overlap-matrix eigenvalues "zero up to 10^-2" is loose; a system-size or robustness check would help. No code or data, so reproducibility is limited. The uniqueness of the saddle point is asserted rather than proved, but that is common in this literature and not a major flaw. To give credit where it is earned: the ED overlap and spin-chirality comparisons are appropriate evidence, honestly presented, and the authors explicitly note that their mean-field cannot predict phase transitions.

This paper is for people working on parton mean-field descriptions of spin liquids and on Rydberg-based quantum simulators. It deserves a serious referee: the method is a genuine contribution and the open problem is important. But the referee should be instructed to focus on the Eq. (19) discrepancy; if it is not resolved, the central classification claim should not stand.

My recommendation: send to peer review with that red flag clearly raised.

Best.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a fermionic parton mean-field theory for Rydberg excitations on a honeycomb lattice with nearest-neighbor hopping and density-dependent, complex next-nearest-neighbor hopping. Starting from the microscopic hard-core boson Hamiltonian, the authors decouple the interaction in terms of spinon hopping amplitudes, solve the resulting mean-field equations self-consistently, and obtain real nearest-neighbor and complex next-nearest-neighbor spinon hoppings without fitting to numerics. They identify these amplitudes with PSG ansatz class 1 of Ref. [19], report large Gutzwiller-projected wavefunction overlaps with exact-diagonalization ground states in the interval 0.4 ≲ g ≲ 0.9, and claim a twofold topological degeneracy under twisted boundary conditions as evidence for a chiral spin liquid. The central difficulty is that the reported converged solution appears incompatible with the spin-symmetry condition Eq. (19) used to initialize the iteration, and the degeneracy evidence is supported only by a loose numerical tolerance.

Significance. If the self-consistent construction is valid, the paper would provide a parameter-free, microscopic parton mean-field description of a chiral spin liquid in a Rydberg platform, with explicit analytical expressions for the spinon hoppings and testable predictions for chirality, spin correlations, and wavefunction overlaps. This would be a valuable step beyond the variational PSG fitting of Ref. [19]. The absence of any fitted parameters and the direct connection to the microscopic Hamiltonian are genuine strengths, as is the reproduction of ED spin-chirality and overlap data without tuning. However, the symmetry inconsistency identified in the manuscript undermines the PSG classification and the associated spin-rotation invariance, and the topological-degeneracy test is not yet quantitative enough to support the central claim. The paper's significance is therefore conditional on resolving these load-bearing issues.

major comments (3)

[Sec. III, Eq. (19) and Fig. 2] The text states the spin-symmetry condition eχ↑ = −eχ†↓ and initializes the ↓ correlations with it, but the self-consistent iteration is then run independently for ↑ and ↓ and is reported to converge to eχ1,↑ = eχ1,↓ = −0.238 and eχ2,↑ = eχ2,↓ = 0.019 + i0.280. These values are incompatible with Eq. (19): for real nonzero eχ1, Eq. (19) requires eχ1,↑ = −eχ1,↓, not equality, and for eχ2 it requires eχ2,↑ = −(eχ2,↓)*, which for eχ2,↑ = eχ2,↓ = 0.019 + i0.280 is 0.019 + i0.280 = −0.019 + i0.280, a contradiction. Since Eq. (19) is the link to Wen's spin-liquid construction and to the PSG classification of Ref. [19], the converged fixed point does not, as written, satisfy the symmetry structure used to classify it. The authors need to derive a corrected symmetry condition for their independent-↑/↓ decoupling or prove that the equal-spin fixed point is nevertheless the physical saddle point, e.g., by showing it is invariant under the projective symmetry group of the original Hamiltonian.
[Sec. IV, ground-state degeneracy discussion] The twofold topological degeneracy is inferred from two zero eigenvalues of the 4×4 overlap matrix 'up to a tolerance of 10^-2', but no scale is given for this tolerance. The relevant test is whether the two small eigenvalues are separated from the nonzero eigenvalues by a clear gap, and how this separation behaves with system size. A tolerance of 10^-2 could be comparable to typical overlap magnitudes on the 24-site lattices used in the ED comparison. The claim of topological degeneracy requires either a quantitative eigenvalue hierarchy or finite-size scaling of the overlap matrix; as it stands, the evidence is not robust enough to support the central CSL conclusion.
[Sec. III, iteration scheme and closure] The self-consistency loop is initialized with random values in (0,1), but the paper provides no basin-of-attraction study, no demonstration that the iteration converges to a unique fixed point independent of the starting values, and no comparison of the free energy of the converged solution with other possible fixed points. The conclusion states that 'the self-consistent solution yields a unique mean-field Hamiltonian', but that uniqueness is not established. If multiple fixed points exist with comparable energies, the physical selection rule must be given. This is load-bearing because the PSG assignment and the subsequent CSL interpretation rely on the converged solution being the correct physical saddle point.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. III, Eq. (5)] The antisymmetric tensor εαβ is used without definition; please specify its orientation and explain more concretely why setting η=0 is exact within the half-filled particle-number-conserved subspace, beyond the brief statement given.
[Sec. IV, Fig. 5] The caption mentions 'different lattice shapes', but the specific shapes, sizes, and boundary conditions are not listed. Please identify the finite lattices used for the ED and mean-field overlaps, since the text notes that phase-transition points depend heavily on the ED cluster shape.
[Sec. IV, Eq. (21)] The overlap formula uses a single |ψ_ED⟩, but the text discusses ED ground states in the context of degeneracy; please clarify whether the ED ground state is numerically degenerate and how the overlap is computed in that case.
[Sec. II, model Hamiltonian] The sentence 'The mean-field approximation to Hamiltonian (1), obtained by replacing the number operators by their expectation value at half filling' could be misinterpreted, since the self-consistent calculation later keeps the density-dependent phase fluctuations beyond the simple replacement; please rephrase to distinguish this initial illustration from the full parton treatment.
[General] The paper would benefit from a short statement on reproducibility, e.g., whether the self-consistent iteration and the twisted-boundary-condition diagonalization are implemented in publicly available code; this is not required but would strengthen confidence in the numerical claims.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: mean-field parameters are self-consistently computed from the microscopic model, and the PSG/ED comparisons are independent checks.

full rationale

The central claim—that the self-consistent parton mean-field solution yields V = v·σ0 and W/v ≈ −0.26(1+i)σ0 and lies in PSG class 1 of Ref. [19]—is not circular. The parameters χ are fixed by the self-consistency equations (13)–(14), which are derived from the microscopic Hamiltonian (1); they are not adjusted to match exact diagonalization. The ED overlap (Eq. 21) and spin chirality (Eq. 22) are genuine benchmarks against an independent numerical method. The PSG classification is taken from an external group (Ref. [19], not the present authors), and the twofold degeneracy is computed from the resulting mean-field wavefunctions rather than assumed. The paper does cite prior work by its own authors ([18], [23]–[25]) for the input Hamiltonian and earlier indications of a CSL, but that is not load-bearing for the new derivation because the Hamiltonian is stated explicitly and the new evidence is self-consistently generated. A separate correctness caveat exists: the converged solution eχ1↑ = eχ1↓ = −0.238 appears incompatible with the spin-symmetry condition Eq. (19) (which would require eχ↑ = −eχ†↓), and the paper neither resolves this nor proves that the fixed point is the global saddle point; this is a consistency concern, not a circular reduction, because the fixed point is not constructed to satisfy Eq. (19) and the PSG/ED comparisons are external checks.

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

The analysis introduces no fitted free parameters: g is a Hamiltonian parameter, and the chi values are self-consistently determined. No new physical entities are proposed; the spinon fermions are a standard mathematical tool in the parton construction, and the paper postulates no new particle, mediator, force, dimension, or conserved quantity. The central assumptions are the mean-field truncation (eta=0, NN/NNN hops) and the standard but unproven logic that Gutzwiller projection of the self-consistent state gives a faithful spin liquid; the apparent mismatch between eq. (19) and the converged solution is a specific unaddressed assumption.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The hard-core boson model Eq. (1) accurately describes the Rydberg array; its parameters J, g, and the Peierls phase follow from adiabatic elimination of the |+> state.
Inherited from Ref. [18]; the paper does not re-derive the microscopic mapping, only cites it.
domain assumption In the fermionic parton representation, the ground state at half boson filling corresponds to double half filling of spinons; expectation values of pairing (eta) vanish, and only NN/NNN hopping chi are kept.
Standard in Wen's projective construction, but the truncation to NN/NNN hopping and setting eta=0 are uncontrolled approximations that the paper does not systematically justify.
ad hoc to paper The spin-symmetry relation chi_up = chi_down (and hence echi_up = -echi_dagger_down) from Wen's construction holds for the physical solution.
The paper uses eq. (19) to initialize the iteration but the converged solution does not satisfy it; the assumption that this relation is not required at the fixed point is unstated and potentially inconsistent.
domain assumption The self-consistent iteration converges to the physical saddle point and the Gutzwiller projection preserves the topological (CSL) character of the mean-field state.
This is the standard parton mean-field logic, but no proof of convergence to a global solution or of the projection's effect on topology is provided.
domain assumption The projective symmetry group classification of Ref. [19] correctly enumerates the possible spin-liquid ansaetze for this model; membership in ansatz class no. 1 is sufficient to certify CSL character.
Relied on to translate the self-consistent solution into a CSL claim; the paper does not independently justify the completeness of this classification for the present model.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Parton Mean-Field Theory of a Rydberg Quantum Spin Liquid induced by Density-Dependent Peierls Phases." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R2AXBU5G

@misc{pith2026250523409,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Parton Mean-Field Theory of a Rydberg Quantum Spin Liquid induced by Density-Dependent Peierls Phases},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R2AXBU5G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23409}
}

read the original abstract

We derive a parton mean-field Hamiltonian for Rydberg excitations on a honeycomb lattice with nearest and density-dependent, complex next-nearest neighbor hopping. Numerical results obtained from exact diagonalization of small systems have given indications for a ground state that is a chiral spin liquid (CSL) [Phys.Rev.Res. 5, 013157 (2023)]. Here we provide further evidence for this. Calculating the ground-state wavefunction self-consistently, we show that the mean-field Hamiltonian fulfills the requirements for a CSL ground state, resulting from a projected symmetry group classification and verify the expected twofold topological degeneracy on a torus. Furthermore we find very good overlap with the ground-state wavefunctions obtained by exact diagonalization of the original Hamiltonian.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23409 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: Self consistent solutions of (real) NN- ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: Spectrum of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (4 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: Modified from [19]: PSG classification of par [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: Spin chirality, eq. (22), as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: Overlap of parton mean-field and ED [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7: (a) In-plane spin-correlation, eq. (23), from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages

[18]

Ohler, M

S. Ohler, M. Kiefer-Emmanouilidis, and M. Fleischhauer, Quantum spin liquids of rydberg excitations in a hon- eycomb lattice induced by density-dependent peierls phases, Physical Review Research 5, 013157 (2023)

work page 2023
[19]

P. S. Tarabunga, G. Giudici, T. Chanda, and M. Dal- monte, Classification and emergence of quantum spin liq- uids in chiral rydberg models, Physical Review B 108, 075118 (2023)

work page 2023
[1]

P. W. Anderson, Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of insulator?, Materials Research Bulletin 8, 153 (1973)

work page 1973
[2]

P. W. Anderson, The resonating valence bond state in La 2CuO4 and superconductivity, Science 235, 1196 (1987)

1987
[3]

Knolle and R

J. Knolle and R. Moessner, A field guide to spin liq- uids, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 10, 451 (2019)

work page 2019
[4]

Savary and L

L. Savary and L. Balents, Quantum spin liquids: a re- view, Reports on Progress in Physics 80, 016502 (2016)

2016
[5]

Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond, Annals of Physics 321, 2 (2006), January Special Issue

A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond, Annals of Physics 321, 2 (2006), January Special Issue

work page 2006
[6]

Fu, Exact chiral-spin-liquid state in a kitaev-type spin model, Physical Review B 100, 195131 (2019)

J. Fu, Exact chiral-spin-liquid state in a kitaev-type spin model, Physical Review B 100, 195131 (2019)

work page 2019

Show all 30 references

[7]

Ben-Zion, D

D. Ben-Zion, D. Das, and J. McGreevy, Exactly solv- able models of spin liquids with spinons, and of three- dimensional topological paramagnets, Physical Review B 93, 155147 (2016)

2016
[8]

Mila, Quantum spin liquids, European Journal of Physics 21, 499 (2000)

F. Mila, Quantum spin liquids, European Journal of Physics 21, 499 (2000)

2000
[9]

P. A. Lee, An end to the drought of quantum spin liquids, Science 321, 1306 (2008)

2008
[10]

Broholm, R

C. Broholm, R. J. Cava, S. Kivelson, D. Nocera, M. Nor- man, and T. Senthil, Quantum spin liquids, Science 367, eaay0668 (2020)

2020
[11]

Gohlke, G

M. Gohlke, G. Wachtel, Y. Yamaji, F. Pollmann, and Y. B. Kim, Quantum spin liquid signatures in kitaev- like frustrated magnets, Physical Review B 97, 075126 (2018)

2018
[12]

J. Liu, L. Yuan, X. Li, B. Li, K. Zhao, H. Liao, and Y. Li, Gapless spin liquid behavior in a kagome heisenberg an- tiferromagnet with randomly distributed hexagons of al- ternate bonds, Physical Review B 105, 024418 (2022)

2022
[13]

Coldea, D

R. Coldea, D. Tennant, A. Tsvelik, and Z. Tylczynski, Experimental realization of a 2d fractional quantum spin liquid, Physical review letters 86, 1335 (2001)

2001
[14]

Shen, Y.-D

Y. Shen, Y.-D. Li, H. Wo, Y. Li, S. Shen, B. Pan, Q. Wang, H. Walker, P. Steffens, M. Boehm, et al., Ev- 7 idence for a spinon fermi surface in a triangular-lattice quantum-spin-liquid candidate, Nature 540, 559 (2016)

2016
[15]

Semeghini, H

G. Semeghini, H. Levine, A. Keesling, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, D. Bluvstein, R. Verresen, H. Pichler, M. Kali- nowski, R. Samajdar, A. Omran, S. Sachdev, A. Vish- wanath, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Prob- ing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simul...

2021
[16]

Giudici, M

G. Giudici, M. D. Lukin, and H. Pichler, Dynamical preparation of quantum spin liquids in rydberg atom ar- rays, Physical Review Letters 129, 090401 (2022)

2022
[17]

Chen, B.-Z

Y.-H. Chen, B.-Z. Wang, T.-F. J. Poon, X.-C. Zhou, Z.- X. Liu, and X.-J. Liu, Proposal for realization and detec- tion of kitaev quantum spin liquid with rydberg atoms, Physical Review Research 6, L042054 (2024)

2024
[20]

Bieri, C

S. Bieri, C. Lhuillier, and L. Messio, Projective symmetry group classification of chiral spin liquids, Phys. Rev. B 93, 094437 (2016)

2016
[21]

Wen, Quantum orders and symmetric spin liquids, Phys

X.-G. Wen, Quantum orders and symmetric spin liquids, Phys. Rev. B 65, 165113 (2002)

2002
[22]

Wen, Quantum order: a quantum entanglement of many particles, Physics Letters A 300, 175 (2002)

X.-G. Wen, Quantum order: a quantum entanglement of many particles, Physics Letters A 300, 175 (2002)

2002
[23]

Lienhard, P

V. Lienhard, P. Scholl, S. Weber, D. Barredo, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, R. Bai, N. Lang, M. Fleischhauer, H. P. B¨ uchler, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Realization of a density-dependent peierls phase in a synthetic, spin- orbit coupled Rydberg system, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021031 (2020)

2020
[24]

Weber, S

S. Weber, S. De L´ es´ eleuc, V. Lienhard, D. Barredo, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, and H. P. B¨ uchler, Topolog- ically protected edge states in small Rydberg systems, Quantum Science and Technology 3, 044001 (2018)

2018
[25]

Ohler, M

S. Ohler, M. Kiefer-Emmanouilidis, A. Browaeys, H. P. B¨ uchler, and M. Fleischhauer, Self-generated quantum gauge fields in arrays of Rydberg atoms, New J. Phys. 24, 023017 (2022)

2022
[26]

Wen, Topological orders in rigid states, Interna- tional Journal of Modern Physics B 4, 239 (1990)

X.-G. Wen, Topological orders in rigid states, Interna- tional Journal of Modern Physics B 4, 239 (1990)

1990
[27]

Baskaran, Z

G. Baskaran, Z. Zou, and P. Anderson, The resonating valence bond state and high-tc superconductivity — a mean field theory, Solid State Communications 63, 973 (1987)

1987
[28]

Reuther, S.-P

J. Reuther, S.-P. Lee, and J. Alicea, Classification of spin liquids on the square lattice with strong spin-orbit cou- pling, Phys. Rev. B 90, 174417 (2014)

2014
[29]

Silvi, D

P. Silvi, D. Rossini, R. Fazio, G. E. Santoro, and V. Gio- vannetti, Matrix Product State Representation for Slater Determinants and Configuration Interaction States, In- ternational Journal of Modern Physics B 27, 1345029 (2013), arXiv:1205.4154 [quant-ph]

2013 arXiv
[30]

Mei and X.-G

J.-W. Mei and X.-G. Wen, Modular matrices from univer- sal wave-function overlaps in gutzwiller-projected parton wave functions, Phys. Rev. B 91, 125123 (2015)

2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [18]

Ohler, M

S. Ohler, M. Kiefer-Emmanouilidis, and M. Fleischhauer, Quantum spin liquids of rydberg excitations in a hon- eycomb lattice induced by density-dependent peierls phases, Physical Review Research 5, 013157 (2023)

work page 2023

[2] [19]

P. S. Tarabunga, G. Giudici, T. Chanda, and M. Dal- monte, Classification and emergence of quantum spin liq- uids in chiral rydberg models, Physical Review B 108, 075118 (2023)

work page 2023

[3] [1]

P. W. Anderson, Resonating valence bonds: A new kind of insulator?, Materials Research Bulletin 8, 153 (1973)

work page 1973

[4] [2]

P. W. Anderson, The resonating valence bond state in La 2CuO4 and superconductivity, Science 235, 1196 (1987)

1987

[5] [3]

Knolle and R

J. Knolle and R. Moessner, A field guide to spin liq- uids, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 10, 451 (2019)

work page 2019

[6] [4]

Savary and L

L. Savary and L. Balents, Quantum spin liquids: a re- view, Reports on Progress in Physics 80, 016502 (2016)

2016

[7] [5]

Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond, Annals of Physics 321, 2 (2006), January Special Issue

A. Kitaev, Anyons in an exactly solved model and be- yond, Annals of Physics 321, 2 (2006), January Special Issue

work page 2006

[8] [6]

Fu, Exact chiral-spin-liquid state in a kitaev-type spin model, Physical Review B 100, 195131 (2019)

J. Fu, Exact chiral-spin-liquid state in a kitaev-type spin model, Physical Review B 100, 195131 (2019)

work page 2019