Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 40 references

Practical roadmap to measurement-altered criticality in Rydberg arrays

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Projective measurements of a periodic subset of Rydberg atoms can controllably alter critical correlations, with the most dramatic post-selection sector occurring with O(10%) probability on O(100)-site chains.

desk verdict Solid roadmap for measurement-altered criticality in Rydberg arrays; the Ising results hold up, and the TCI intermediate-fixed-point claim needs more work before it is headline-ready. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.21963 v1 pith:BWHMIASR submitted 2025-06-27 quant-ph cond-mat.stat-mech

Stephen Naus , Yue Liu , Sara Murciano , Pablo Sala , Manuel Endres , Jason Alicea This is my paper
classification quant-phcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords measurement-alteredcriticalityRydbergarrayspost-selectionIsingtricriticalconformalfieldtheorydefectlineDMRG
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

Measurement-altered criticality, the phenomenon whereby gaining information about a quantum critical wavefunction changes its long-distance correlations, has been predicted theoretically but never seen in an experiment. This paper claims to close that gap with a practical scheme based on a single chain of laser-excited Rydberg atoms tuned to either the Ising or the tricritical Ising critical point. The scheme measures a periodic subset of atoms and post-selects on the outcomes; different patterns and outcomes act as different perturbations to the critical wavefunction, with the order-parameter scaling dimension $\Delta_\sigma$ changing from $1/8$ to $2$ at Ising criticality, and from $3/40$ to $2$, $3/2$, or near $3/5$ at tricritical Ising. The post-selection probability for the most dramatic outcome (all measured atoms in their ground states on every other site) is of order $10\%$ even for chains of roughly a hundred sites, so the experiment would need only extra runs, not new hardware. If correct, this makes measurement-altered criticality a near-term observable in existing Rydberg-array platforms.

What carries the argument

The central object is the defect-line action of Eq. (5), $S_\mathrm{meas}\sim\beta\int_x [a_\sigma\sigma(x,\tau=0)+a_\varepsilon\varepsilon(x,\tau=0)]$, which converts a measurement pattern into a local perturbation of the critical wavefunction. It is assembled from an operator dictionary, Eqs. (2), (3), (A1) and (A2), that writes microscopic Rydberg density operators $\hat n_j$ in terms of the CFT fields $\sigma$ (the charge-density-wave order parameter, odd under translation and reflection) and $\varepsilon$ (the thermal-type perturbation, even). The measured-site pattern decides whether $a_\sigma$, $a_\varepsilon$, or both are nonzero, and therefore which renormalization-group flow the post-measurement state follows; boundary-CFT fixed points then predict the new scaling dimensions that DMRG simulations extract from post-measurement correlators.

What would settle it

Measure post-measurement order-parameter correlations in an Ising-critical Rydberg chain after the $n_{2j}=0$ protocol: extracting a $\Delta_\sigma$ that drifts away from 2 with system size, or that depends on the measured-site density within a fixed symmetry sector, would falsify the defect-line prediction. At tricritical Ising, push the $n_{2j}=0$ outcome to larger blockade strength $V_1/\Omega$: the paper already reports that the extracted exponent exceeds the predicted $3/5$ as $L$ grows, so a systematic drift away from $3/5$ with increasing $V_1$ would rule out the intermediate-fixed-point assignment. An even more direct check is to compare post-selection probabilities with the reported decay lengths, such as $e^{-L/42}$ for $n_{2j}=0$ at Ising criticality, on a 100-site chain.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

At its core, the paper establishes that a partial projective measurement of a critical Rydberg chain acts, at long wavelengths, as the insertion of a defect line at imaginary time $\tau=0$ in the Euclidean path integral of the underlying conformal field theory (CFT). The action of this line is $S_\mathrm{meas}\sim\beta\int_x [a_\sigma\sigma(x,\tau=0)+a_\varepsilon\varepsilon(x,\tau=0)]$, with $\sigma$ the charge-density-wave order-parameter field and $\varepsilon$ the thermal-type field; the coefficients $a_\sigma,a_\varepsilon$ are selected by the pattern of measured sites and post-selected outcomes. Because $\sigma$ is strongly relevant at both critical points, symmetry-breaking measurement sectors drive the post-measurement state to a boundary fixed point with $\Delta_\sigma=\Delta_\varepsilon=2$, whereas reflection-symmetric sectors that kill $a_\sigma$ produce weaker or continuously varying modifications. Using density-matrix renormalization group simulations on chains of up to 160 sites, the paper extracts post-measurement scaling dimensions that agree with these boundary-CFT predictions and reports that the target outcomes are not exponentially rare.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the physically realized projective limit is governed by the same local defect-line action with only $\sigma$ and $\varepsilon$ perturbations that the paper derives for weak measurements—a premise checked by DMRG rather than derived, so if additional relevant operators enter at strong measurement strength, the extracted scaling dimensions would not be universal and the protocol would not reach the advertised fixed points.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A Rydberg chain at Ising criticality with every other site measured and found in the ground state ($n_{2j}=0$) should show post-measurement order-parameter correlations with $\Delta_\sigma\approx 2$, a factor of 16 away from the unmeasured $1/8$.
  • The same experimental shots used to characterize the unmeasured critical state can be re-analyzed by averaging only over the target post-selection sectors, so the protocol's overhead is mostly additional runs rather than new measurement capabilities.
  • Post-selection probabilities for the most dramatic sectors remain near $10\%$ for $L\sim100$ sites, and the conditional probability for the next site to be in the ground state approaches unity as earlier sites are found in the ground state, so longer chains remain feasible.
  • At tricritical Ising criticality, different measured-site patterns select among the $\sigma$-driven fixed point ($\Delta_\sigma=2$), the $\varepsilon$-driven free-boundary fixed point ($\Delta_\sigma=3/2$), and possibly the intermediate partially-polarized fixed point ($\Delta_\sigma\approx3/5$).

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension, not pursued in the paper, is to apply the same measured-site-pattern rule to other universality classes realizable in Rydberg arrays, such as ladder critical points, where a different operator dictionary would select a different set of allowed perturbations.
  • The paper's blockade-enhanced probabilities suggest a design heuristic: favor target outcomes that leave the unmeasured subspace large, since each measured Rydberg excitation pins its neighbors to the ground state and reduces the probability of the whole sector.
  • A direct test of the $\beta\to\infty$ extrapolation would compare true projective measurements with weak measurements of variable strength on the same chain: if the extracted scaling dimensions interpolate smoothly to the projective values, the defect-line dictionary is confirmed; if not, additional strong-measurement operators enter.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an ancilla-free experimental protocol for realizing measurement-altered criticality in Rydberg atom chains. The authors consider critical ground states at the Ising and tricritical Ising (TCI) transitions, projectively measure a periodic subset of atoms, post-select on specified occupation patterns, and characterize the resulting post-measurement states through altered scaling dimensions extracted from order-parameter and energy correlations. Using DMRG simulations, they report Delta_sigma ≈ 2 for symmetry-breaking measurement outcomes at both critical points, n-dependent increases of Delta_sigma for the marginal epsilon perturbation at Ising criticality, Delta_sigma ≈ 3/2 for the epsilon-driven TCI fixed point, and tentative evidence that the high-probability outcome {n2j = 0} at the TCI point lies at or near the intermediate fixed point with Delta_sigma = 3/5. They also compute post-selection probabilities, finding O(10%) success for {n2j = 0} on chains of O(100) sites, and argue that the same measurement data can be reused with restricted post-processing averaging.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a concrete and low-overhead route to observing measurement-altered criticality in a state-of-the-art experimental platform. The numerical work is careful in several respects: DMRG results are checked for bond-dimension convergence, scaling dimensions are extracted using chord-distance fits appropriate for periodic boundary conditions, and the operator dictionary connecting lattice observables to CFT fields is made explicit. The predictions for the Ising sigma-driven fixed point and the TCI epsilon-driven fixed point are well supported by the presented data. The main significance gap concerns the TCI intermediate fixed point, which is tied to the high-probability outcome advertised as yielding the most dramatic consequences; that specific claim is not yet conclusively established by the numerics.

major comments (3)
  1. [Tricritical Ising section; Appendix B, Fig. B2] The claim that the {n2j = 0} outcome at the TCI point 'places the system at or very near the intermediate fixed point' with Delta_sigma = 3/5 is not supported by the data as presented. The extracted effective scaling dimension increases with system size and exceeds 3/5, and the authors attribute this to imperfect tuning arising from finite V1 = 1000 rather than demonstrating convergence to the predicted value. Because this outcome is one of the high-probability, 'most dramatic' cases emphasized in the abstract and discussion, the TCI portion of the central claim requires either a controlled finite-size and V1 extrapolation showing Delta_sigma -> 3/5, or a substantially softened claim that only intermediate-scale behavior is consistent with the vicinity of the intermediate fixed point.
  2. [Eqs. (4)-(5); Appendix B] The paper transfers the weak-measurement defect-line action Eq. (5), derived for beta << 1, to the projective limit beta -> infinity without a derivation; the identification is checked for several outcomes but not for the TCI intermediate fixed point. The observed drift of the extracted scaling dimension for {n2j = 0} could be a symptom of additional relevant operators or lattice corrections entering at strong measurement strength. A direct numerical test would be to fix L and follow the extracted Delta_sigma as a function of beta from the controlled small-beta regime to the projective limit, and separately to increase V1 (e.g., to 2000 or 4000) to verify that the projective-limit value approaches 3/5. Without such a test, the universality of the projective-limit protocol for this sector remains an assumption.
  3. [Appendix D, Table D1] The open-boundary-condition results for the TCI epsilon-driven fixed point deviate appreciably from the predicted Delta_sigma = 3/2: Table D1 reports 1.68(4), 1.63(1), and 1.529(7) for {n5j = 0}, {n3j = 0}, and {n4j, n4j+1 = 0}, respectively, with the text noting that power-law behavior is only observed at sufficiently large distances. Since the paper claims the protocol works with either open or periodic boundaries and emphasizes the practical one-point OBC probe, the finite-size and fitting-window dependence should be quantified, and the OBC claims should be qualified accordingly.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Footnote 1, Eq. (5)] The assumed sign of a_epsilon in Eq. (5) is stated without derivation or numerical check; a brief symmetry or microscopic argument explaining why the epsilon term opposes CDW order for all studied outcomes would remove a hidden assumption.
  2. [Table D1 caption] The caption notes that the quoted uncertainties are standard errors from linear regression and do not include finite-size or detuning errors. This caveat should also appear with the error bars in Figs. 2 and 3, since those figures present the fit errors as the apparent uncertainty.
  3. [Appendix B, Eq. (B1)] The statement that theta = 0 disallows sigma because of translation symmetry would be clearer if the text explicitly noted that cos(theta) sum_j n_j is translation-invariant and therefore maps only to the identity and epsilon, not to sigma.
  4. [Fig. B1] The axis labels and tick labels in Fig. B1 are difficult to read in the provided rendering; please ensure that all panel axes are legible and that the inset zoom is clearly labeled.
  5. [Main text, Fig. 2 caption] The notation '(Tx)p in odd' is terse; defining p explicitly as the period of the preserved translation subgroup would help readers connect the symmetry classification to the measurement patterns.
  6. [Appendix A, Eq. (A1)] The claim that Eq. (A1) yields sigma as the leading long-distance field for all considered outcome patterns is asserted rather than proven; a short symmetry argument explaining why the potentially relevant epsilon contamination is absent or subleading for the sigma-type protocols would strengthen the operator dictionary.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the boundary-CFT predictions are external, and the DMRG extractions are independent parameter-free checks; the only self-citation (Ref. 22) is re-verified in-house, while the TCI intermediate-fixed-point claim is an admitted evidence gap rather than a definitional reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The target values are external boundary-CFT results — Δσ=Δε=2 for the σ-driven fixed point (Cardy, Refs. 33–34), Δσ=3/2, Δε=2 for the ε-driven TCI fixed point (Fröjdh & Johannesson, Ref. 38), and Δσ=3/5 for the intermediate fixed point (Affleck, Ref. 39) — none derived from this paper's inputs. DMRG scaling dimensions come from power-law fits ('Scaling dimensions are extracted from power-law fits of two-point correlators or, with open boundaries, from the decay of one-point σ correlators away from edges [22]'); no parameter is tuned to reproduce the targets, and the pre-measurement checks anchor the operator dictionary independently ('Pre-measurement correlators simply return scaling dimensions in excellent agreement with those of the “pure” Ising CFT', with Δσ=0.125 vs 1/8 and 0.074 vs 3/40 in Fig. C2). The self-citation to Ref. 22 (overlapping authors Endres, Alicea) supplies the operator dictionary, curve-crossing Δc determination, and open-chain scaling form Eq. (D1), but these are re-verified internally and are externally anchored to pure CFT values, so the citation is transparent rather than load-bearing. The genuinely weak link is the TCI intermediate-fixed-point claim for {n2j=0}: the main text asserts 'Appendix B provides numerical evidence that simple outcomes with n2j = 0 place the system at or very near the intermediate fixed point,' while the appendix itself flags the drift: 'Scaling with system size, however, indicates that the scaling dimension extracted from our simulations exceeds the expected Δσ = 3/5 value as L increases—possibly stemming from imperfect tuning to the TCI point due to finite V1.' That is an admitted limitation (a correctness risk if the drift persists in the thermodynamic limit), not a circular reduction: 3/5 is an external value that no fit enforces. The footnoted sign assumption on aε ('We assume a sign of aε such that the ε term opposes CDW order, which is always the case for n’s that we have studied') is likewise an input, subsequently validated by the independent Δσ≈3/2 extraction for Rx-symmetric TCI outcomes. Score 2 reflects only the transparent group self-citation; the central claims carry independent numerical and external-CFT content.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The ledger is dominated by the imported CFT dictionary and the choice of post-measurement operators, which are the main assumptions the numerical interpretation rests on.

free parameters (2)
  • Critical detuning Delta_c (Ising, V2=0) = 0.66445 (in units of Omega)
    Determined numerically via curve crossing of <sigma_{L/2}> sin(pi/(L+2))^{-1/8} for open chains; used to prepare the critical state in all Ising DMRG runs.
  • Edge detuning shift for open chains = Delta -> Delta - V2 on first and last sites
    Applied to open-boundary TCI and Ising chains to give best agreement with boundary CFT predictions; a post-hoc protocol choice that affects extracted one-point exponents.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The Rydberg chain in the blockaded subspace is described by Eq. (1), with V1 dominating so no two neighboring atoms are simultaneously excited.
    This is the physical model for the proposed experiment; all numerical simulations implement it approximately with finite V1=100 or 1000.
  • domain assumption The operator-to-CFT dictionary in Eqs. (2) and (3) (from Ref. 22) remains valid for the critical chains and for the post-measurement operators defined in Appendix A.
    The extraction of scaling dimensions from lattice correlators relies on these mappings; the dictionary is cited from prior work by overlapping authors.
  • domain assumption The defect-line action Eq. (5), containing only local sigma and epsilon terms, describes the effect of the generalized measurement in Eq. (4), with subleading derivative terms neglected.
    This is the field-theoretic framework imported from Ref. 1; the paper does not derive it from the microscopic measurement.
  • ad hoc to paper For all studied outcomes, the coefficient a_epsilon has the sign such that the epsilon term opposes CDW order.
    Stated in a footnote; if the sign were opposite, the TCI fixed point reached by epsilon-preserving measurements would differ.
  • domain assumption The integrable-model TCI parameters (Delta/Omega)_TCI and (V2/Omega)_TCI, together with finite V1=1000, place the chain close enough to the TCI critical point for scaling analysis.
    Used to prepare the TCI ground state; the paper verifies pre-measurement exponents but notes finite V1 may cause drift.
  • ad hoc to paper The post-measurement operator definition in Eq. (A1) yields sigma as the leading long-distance field for all considered outcome patterns.
    The choice of Lambda^n_l is not unique; the paper relies on symmetry to eliminate epsilon, with a special oscillatory-term cancellation for the n3j,n3j+1 case.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Practical roadmap to measurement-altered criticality in Rydberg arrays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BWHMIASR

@misc{pith2026250621963,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Practical roadmap to measurement-altered criticality in Rydberg arrays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BWHMIASR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.21963}
}
read the original abstract

Weak measurements have been predicted to dramatically alter universal properties of quantum critical wavefunctions, though experimental validation remains an open problem. Here we devise a practical scheme for realizing measurement-altered criticality in a chain of Rydberg atoms tuned to Ising and tricritical Ising phase transitions. In particular, we show that projectively measuring a periodic subset of atoms alters quantum critical correlations in distinct ways that one can control via the choice of measured sites and the measurement outcomes. While our protocol relies on post-selection, the measurement outcomes yielding the most dramatic consequences occur with surprisingly large probabilities: O(10%) with chains featuring O(100) sites. Characterizing the proposed post-measurement states requires only an adjustment in the post-process averaging of outcomes used to characterize unmeasured critical states, resulting in minimal additional experimental overhead for demonstrating measurement-altered criticality.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.21963 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. J. Garratt, Z. Weinstein, and E. Altman, Phys. Rev. X 13, 021026 (2023)

    2023

  2. [2]

    X. Sun, H. Yao, and S.-K. Jian, New critical states in- duced by measurement (2023), arXiv:2301.11337 [quant- ph]

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Ashida, S

    Y. Ashida, S. Furukawa, and M. Oshikawa, System- environment entanglement phase transitions (2023), arXiv:2311.16343 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Weinstein, R

    Z. Weinstein, R. Sajith, E. Altman, and S. J. Garratt, Phys. Rev. B 107, 245132 (2023)

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Z. Yang, D. Mao, and C.-M. Jian, Phys. Rev. B 108, 165120 (2023)

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Murciano, P

    S. Murciano, P. Sala, Y. Liu, R. S. K. Mong, and J. Al- icea, Phys. Rev. X 13, 041042 (2023)

    2023

  7. [7]

    Enhanced Entanglement in the Measurement-Altered Quantum Ising Chain

    A. Paviglianiti, X. Turkeshi, M. Schir` o, and A. Silva, Enhanced Entanglement in the Measurement-Altered Quantum Ising Chain (2023), arXiv:2310.02686 [quant- ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    R. A. Patil and A. W. W. Ludwig, Highly complex novel critical behavior from the intrinsic randomness of quan- tum mechanical measurements on critical ground states – a controlled renormalization group analysis (2024), arXiv:2409.02107 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    J. Y. Lee, C.-M. Jian, and C. Xu, PRX Quantum 4, 030317 (2023)

    2023

  2. [10]

    Tang and X

    Q. Tang and X. Wen, A critical state under weak mea- surement is not critical (2024), arXiv:2411.13705 [cond- mat.stat-mech]. 6

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Y. Liu, S. Murciano, D. F. Mross, and J. Alicea, Bound- ary transitions from a single round of measurements on gapless quantum states (2024), arXiv:2412.07830 [quant- ph]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Y. Zou, S. Sang, and T. H. Hsieh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 250403 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    P. Sala, S. Murciano, Y. Liu, and J. Alicea, PRX Quan- tum 5, 030307 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Eckstein, B

    F. Eckstein, B. Han, S. Trebst, and G.-Y. Zhu, PRX Quantum 5, 040313 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Hoshino, M

    M. Hoshino, M. Oshikawa, and Y. Ashida, Phys. Rev. B 111, 155143 (2025), arXiv:2406.12377 [quant-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Nahum and J

    A. Nahum and J. L. Jacobsen, Bayesian critical points in classical lattice models (2025), arXiv:2504.01264 [cond- mat.stat-mech]

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    P¨ utz, S

    M. P¨ utz, S. J. Garratt, H. Nishimori, S. Trebst, and G.-Y. Zhu, Learning transitions in classical Ising mod- els and deformed toric codes (2025), arXiv:2504.12385 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    S. J. Garratt and E. Altman, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2305.20092 (2023), arXiv:2305.20092 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Fendley, K

    P. Fendley, K. Sengupta, and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. B 69, 075106 (2004)

    2004

  12. [20]

    Bernien, S

    H. Bernien, S. Schwartz, A. Keesling, H. Levine, A. Om- ran, H. Pichler, S. Choi, A. S. Zibrov, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Nature 551, 579–584 (2017)

    2017

  13. [21]

    Keesling, A

    A. Keesling, A. Omran, H. Levine, H. Bernien, H. Pich- ler, S. Choi, R. Samajdar, S. Schwartz, P. Silvi, S. Sachdev, P. Zoller, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Nature 568, 207–211 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Slagle, D

    K. Slagle, D. Aasen, H. Pichler, R. S. K. Mong, P. Fend- ley, X. Chen, M. Endres, and J. Alicea, Phys. Rev. B 104, 235109 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Scholl, A

    P. Scholl, A. L. Shaw, R. B.-S. Tsai, R. Finkelstein, J. Choi, and M. Endres, Nature 622, 273–278 (2023)

    2023

  16. [24]

    F. Fang, K. Wang, V. S. Liu, Y. Wang, R. Cimmino, J. Wei, M. Bintz, A. Parr, J. Kemp, K.-K. Ni, and N. Y. Yao, Probing critical phenomena in open quantum sys- tems using atom arrays (2024), arXiv:2402.15376 [quant- ph]

    2024

  17. [25]

    Whitsitt, R

    S. Whitsitt, R. Samajdar, and S. Sachdev, Physical Re- view. B 98, 10.1103/physrevb.98.205118 (2018)

    2018 doi

  18. [26]

    Chepiga and F

    N. Chepiga and F. Mila, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 017205 (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Chepiga and F

    N. Chepiga and F. Mila, Nature Communications 12, 10.1038/s41467-020-20641-y (2021)

    2021 doi

  20. [28]

    Samajdar, S

    R. Samajdar, S. Choi, H. Pichler, M. D. Lukin, and S. Sachdev, Phys. Rev. A 98, 023614 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Chepiga, Physical Review Letters 132, 10.1103/phys- revlett.132.076505 (2024)

    N. Chepiga, Physical Review Letters 132, 10.1103/phys- revlett.132.076505 (2024)

    2024 doi

  22. [30]

    Zhang, S

    J. Zhang, S. H. Cant´ u, F. Liu, A. Bylinskii, B. Braver- man, F. Huber, J. Amato-Grill, A. Lukin, N. Gemelke, A. Keesling, et al. , Nature Communications 16, 712 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Soto and N

    J. Soto and N. Chepiga, Numerical investigation of quan- tum phases and phase transitions in a two-leg lad- der of rydberg atoms (2025), arXiv:2411.05494 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Supplemental material

  25. [33]

    J. L. Cardy, Nucl. Phys. B 240, 514 (1984)

    1984

  26. [34]

    J. L. Cardy, Nucl. Phys. B 324, 581 (1989)

    1989

  27. [35]

    Cabra and C

    D. Cabra and C. Na´ o, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 09, 2017 (1994)

    1994

  28. [36]

    Na´ o n and M

    C. Na´ o n and M. Trobo, J. Stat. Mech. 2011, P02021 (2011)

    2011

  29. [37]

    Di Francesco, P

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. Senechal,Conformal Field Theory (1997)

    1997

  30. [38]

    Fr¨ ojdh and H

    P. Fr¨ ojdh and H. Johannesson, Nucl. Phys. B 366, 429 (1991)

    1991

  31. [39]

    Affleck, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Gen- eral 33, 6473–6479 (2000)

    I. Affleck, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Gen- eral 33, 6473–6479 (2000)

    2000

  32. [40]

    Hauschild and F

    J. Hauschild and F. Pollmann, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes , 5 (2018), code available from https://github.com/ tenpy/tenpy, arXiv:1805.00055. 7 APPENDIX A: POST-MEASUREMENT σ AND ε DICTIONAR Y The post-measurement states we consider (characterized by post-selected outcomes n) alw...

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.