Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 68 references

Many-Body Physics from Spin-Phonon Coupling in Rydberg Atom Arrays

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 Spin-phonon coupling stabilizes a new Z3-ordered phase in Rydberg arrays and damps quantum scars.

desk verdict A clean derivation of phonon-induced three-spin interactions, but the new Z3 phase claim needs finite-size support before I'd cite it. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.16751 v1 pith:SUGFWAOM submitted 2025-07-22 cond-mat.quant-gas quant-ph

Shuo Zhang , Langxuan Chen , Pengfei Zhang This is my paper
classification cond-mat.quant-gasquant-ph
keywords Rydbergatomarraysspin-phononcouplingthree-spininteractionsZ3symmetrybreakingquantummany-bodyscarsweakergodicityPXPmodelopticaltweezers
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 asks what changes when atoms in a Rydberg array are allowed to jiggle inside their optical tweezers instead of being treated as frozen spins. In the weak-driving limit, the atomic motion mediates an effective three-spin interaction, and that interaction stabilizes a new $\mathbb{Z}_3$ symmetry-breaking ground state of the form $|\!\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\cdots\rangle$ that does not exist when the atoms are frozen. The same spin-phonon coupling gradually destroys the nonthermal quantum many-body scar states associated with the $\mathbb{Z}_2$-ordered initial state, restoring ordinary quantum thermalization. If the claims hold, the motional degrees of freedom are not a minor correction but a tunable ingredient that reshapes both equilibrium order and dynamical thermalization in Rydberg simulators.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a unitary transformation $\hat U = \exp\!\left(i\sum_{j}\sum_{i\neq j}\frac{6C_6}{d^7(i-j)^7 m\omega^2}\,\hat n_i \hat n_j \hat p_{x,j}\right)$ that removes the leading spin-phonon coupling by shifting each atom's position by an amount set by all Rydberg occupancies. Applied to the spin-dependent van der Waals interaction, it generates multi-spin couplings; keeping the dominant nearest-neighbor terms and assuming small displacements yields the effective spin Hamiltonian (6), whose three-spin term $-\chi\,\Omega\,R_b^{12}\,\hat n_j(\hat n_{j-1}-\hat n_{j+1})^2$ is the object that stabilizes the new $\mathbb{Z}_3$ order. In the constrained subspace relevant near the polarized-to-$\mathbb{Z}_2$ transition, the model reduces to a kinetically constrained PXP-type spin chain (a chain in which a spin flip is allowed only if both neighbors are in the ground state) with a projector $\hat P$ forbidding neighboring ground-state atoms, plus the same three-spin term, which explains why the new phase appears exactly between the fully polarized and $\mathbb{Z}_2$ phases.

What would settle it

Compute the ground-state degeneracy and excitation gap of Hamiltonian (6) for periodic chains of length $N=16$, $20$, and $24$ at the same couplings used in Fig. 2; if the three-fold degenerate plateau and the gap minimum do not persist and sharpen with increasing $N$, the claimed $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase is a finite-size artifact. Experimentally, prepare a chain with the parameters quoted in the paper ($d=3\,\mu$m, $^{39}$K $35S$ Rydberg states, $\Omega=9.5$ kHz, $\omega=2\pi\times68$ kHz) and sweep the detuning: the new phase would appear as a plateau of three-fold degenerate period-three states between the fully polarized and $\mathbb{Z}_2$ phases, in a region where the frozen-atom model predicts a direct transition.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that spin-phonon coupling, induced by atomic vibrations in optical tweezers, generates effective three-spin interactions that change both the equilibrium and dynamical physics of a one-dimensional Rydberg atom array. Deriving an effective spin model via a unitary transformation that translates each atom according to the internal states of its neighbors, the authors find a term of the form $-\chi\,\Omega\,R_b^{12}\,\hat n_j(\hat n_{j-1}-\hat n_{j+1})^2$ that favors configurations where every Rydberg atom is flanked by one ground-state and one Rydberg atom. In thermal equilibrium and for weak Rabi coupling, this term produces a new $\mathbb{Z}_3$-ordered phase with fixed-point wavefunction $|\!\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\cdots\rangle$, which the authors show does not arise when the phonons are frozen out, and whose extent grows with the spin-phonon coupling strength $\chi$. In non-equilibrium dynamics, starting from the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ state $|\!\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow\cdots\rangle$, the same coupling suppresses the persistent oscillations and reduces the deviation of the long-time average from the thermal prediction, with the scar states approaching the thermal branch as $\chi$ increases.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that a new period-three ordered phase exists in the thermodynamic limit rests on exact numerical results for chains of only 12 sites, with no finite-size scaling showing the three-fold degeneracy persists as the chain grows longer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The new $\mathbb{Z}_3$ phase should be observable with current technology: for $d=3\,\mu$m, $^{39}$K $35S$ Rydberg states, $\Omega=9.5$ kHz and $\omega=2\pi\times68$ kHz, the paper estimates $\chi=0.001$ and $R_b=1.7$, placing the system inside the new phase.
  • Increasing the spin-phonon coupling $\chi$ widens the new phase, so the phase diagram can be tuned by adjusting trap frequency or lattice spacing rather than only by detuning and Rabi frequency.
  • Quantum many-body scars are not protected against spin-phonon coupling: with $\chi\simeq0.06$ the scar states nearly merge with the thermal branch, implying that motional degrees of freedom provide a controlled way to restore thermalization.
  • In the low-energy subspace the model is a PXP-type constrained chain with an added three-spin term, so the new phase fits within the family of $\mathbb{Z}_N$ orders already seen in Rydberg arrays, but with a distinct period-three pattern.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A useful next step would be to compute an order parameter and finite-size scaling for $N=16,20,24$ periodic chains to confirm that the three-fold degeneracy persists as $N$ grows.
  • The same unitary-transformation route could be applied with the phonons retained as dynamical degrees of freedom rather than integrated out, revealing whether polaronic dressing modifies the phase boundaries at stronger spin-phonon coupling.
  • An experimental probe would be to initialize the array in the proposed fixed-point state $|\!\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\cdots\rangle$ and measure its fidelity under time evolution, directly testing whether the three-spin term keeps it metastable.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a one-dimensional Rydberg atom array with atomic motion treated as quantum harmonic oscillators, deriving an effective spin model (Eq. (6)) via a unitary transformation that eliminates phonons to leading order. The effective model contains a phonon-induced three-spin interaction. Using exact diagonalization for N=12 periodic chains, the authors report a new Z3 symmetry-breaking phase with fixed-point wavefunction |↑↑↓↑...⟩ that they claim does not exist in the absence of spin-phonon coupling. They further study quench dynamics from a Z2 state and report that the three-spin coupling suppresses quantum many-body scar revivals, promoting thermalization. The paper closes with an experimental parameter estimate using 39K Rydberg atoms.

Significance. If the equilibrium claim holds, the paper identifies a concrete and experimentally accessible mechanism—atomic motion in optical tweezers—that changes the equilibrium phase diagram of Rydberg atom arrays. The effective-model derivation is transparent, parameter-free in the sense that no quantity is fitted to the reported numerics, and the predicted Z3 phase is falsifiable in current setups. The scar-suppression result is more incremental: it shows that a natural perturbation of the PXP-like model weakens scarring, which is qualitatively expected, but it is a useful quantitative addition. The main significance rests on the equilibrium Z3 phase, which is why the missing finite-size and χ=0 evidence is consequential.

major comments (3)
  1. [Equilibrium Phases; Fig. 2] The central claim—that spin-phonon coupling produces a Z3 ↑↑↓ phase absent without it—is not established by the presented evidence. All ground-state degeneracy and gap data are for N=12 with periodic boundary conditions; there is no system-size dependence, no period-3 order parameter, and no finite-size scaling of the gap, so the threefold degeneracy could be a finite-size symmetry-sector crossing. Moreover, the χ=0 reference is not shown at the same parameters as the χ=0.001 panel. This matters because the χ=0 classical limit of Eq. (6) already contains an ↑↑↓ window: dropping the σ^x term gives E_{↑↑↓}/N = -(2/3)Δ + 0.334ΩR_b^6 and E_{Z2}/N = -(1/2)Δ + 0.0159ΩR_b^6, so ↑↑↓ is favored for 1.94R_b^6 ≲ Δ/Ω ≲ 2.03R_b^6 (for R_b=1.7, Δ/Ω ≈ 47–49). The paper must demonstrate that this window is absent in the quantum χ=0 model at finite Ω, or qualify the statement that the phase does not arise in the absence of spin-phonon coupling.
  2. [Model; paragraph after Eq. (5)] The sentence 'We have verified that increasing the cutoff in k does not affect the results presented in later sections' is unsupported because no such comparison is shown. Equation (4) contains a long-range tail with 1/k^7 envelope, while Eq. (6) keeps only k=±1 in the three-spin term. The convergence of the phase diagram in the cutoff K is therefore a quantitative question. Please provide a direct comparison—for example, ground-state degeneracy or gap for cutoffs K=1,2,3—for at least one representative parameter set, or remove the verification claim.
  3. [Non-equilibrium Dynamics; Fig. 3] The scar-suppression result is demonstrated only for N=12, one initial state, and one observable. The long-time average σ̄^z is not compared quantitatively with σ_th^z as a function of χ, and the spectral 'merging' of scar states with the thermal branch is assessed visually. To support the claim that spin-phonon coupling restores thermalization, please provide a quantitative metric—for example, |σ̄^z - σ_th^z| versus χ—and, if possible, a system-size dependence. Without these, the conclusion rests on a single small-system calculation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption does not specify the horizontal axis or the values of R_b used in each panel; please state explicitly what is plotted (presumably Δ/Ω) and the R_b value for each column.
  2. [Equilibrium Phases] There is a typo: 'detunning' should be 'detuning'.
  3. [Eq. (7)] The projector \hat P is described only verbally as excluding neighboring ground-state pairs; since the text invokes a spin reflection relative to the standard PXP constraint, please define the projector explicitly in spin notation to avoid ambiguity.
  4. [Experimental consideration] Condition (5) is quoted as requiring '≪ 1', but the numerical estimate given in the text is 0.15, which is only marginally small; please comment on the expected size of the neglected Uσ^xU† correction at this value.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the effective spin model is derived from a microscopic Hamiltonian by a parameter-free unitary transformation, and the new Z3 phase is identified by exact diagonalization rather than assumed or fitted.

full rationale

Derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The microscopic Hamiltonian (1) fixes the input; Eq. (2) is a controlled leading-order expansion in δr/d; the unitary transformation (3) follows the external method of Refs. [53-55] (not authored by the present paper's authors) and yields the multi-spin term in Eq. (4) with a definite coefficient; Eq. (6) follows by the stated small-overlap condition (5) and the k=±1 truncation, whose insensitivity is asserted ('We have verified that increasing the cutoff in k does not affect the results') though not shown. No parameter is fitted to any target result: χ and R_b are defined from microscopic quantities (χ ≡ 18Ω/(mω²d²), V(R_b) ≡ Ω), and the phase diagram is obtained by exact diagonalization of Eq. (6) at N=12 PBC for chosen parameter values. The new Z3 phase is identified from the ED ground-state degeneracy, the energy gap, and direct wavefunction analysis of the computed eigenstates, not imposed as an ansatz. The PXP-like Hamiltonian (7) is explicitly presented as an explanatory analogy after the fact ('our regime is related to the traditional PXP regime by a spin reflection'; 'it can also be captured by'; 'the new Z3 phase arises similarly'), so Eq. (7) is not the origin of the prediction and its construction does not feed back into the result. The statement that |↑↑↓↑···⟩ 'is favored by the three-spin interaction' is a consistency check on a phase already established by ED, and the χ=0 comparison supporting 'does not arise in the absence of spin-phonon coupling' is performed in the same ED framework, so any concern (e.g., a narrow χ=0 plateau at R_b≈1.7 or N=12 artifacts) is a quantitative correctness question rather than a constructional identity. Remaining weaknesses — N=12 with no finite-size scaling, no order parameter, and the unsupported k-cutoff verification — are correctness/robustness risks, not circularity. There is no load-bearing self-citation and no imported uniqueness theorem.

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

No parameters are fitted to the target results. The model is derived from the microscopic spin-phonon Hamiltonian, with experimental parameters (Ω, Δ, ω, d, C6) taken from prior literature. The stated approximations are listed as axioms.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The trapping frequency is independent of the internal state, achievable with a magic-wavelength optical trap.
    Stated in the Model section: 'We assume that the trapping frequency is independent of the internal state, which can be achieved by operating the trapping laser at the magic wavelength'. This makes the harmonic oscillator state-independent.
  • domain assumption Atomic displacement is small compared to the lattice spacing, allowing expansion of the van der Waals interaction to leading order in δx/d.
    Justifies expansion in Eq. (2). The paper later quantifies max(δx/d) ~ 6C6/(mω^2d^8) << 1 as the validity condition.
  • domain assumption Atomic displacement is small compared to the harmonic oscillator length, so the Rabi term is not renormalized by the unitary transformation.
    This is the key approximation leading to the spin-only model (6). The paper states the condition in Eq. (5). For the proposed experimental parameters, the ratio is estimated at 0.15, which is marginal.
  • ad hoc to paper The phonon-mediated interaction is dominated by nearest-neighbor (k = ±1) terms; larger k can be truncated.
    The paper says 'We have verified that increasing the cutoff in k does not affect the results', but shows no evidence. The 1/k^7 decay makes this plausible, but it is unproven.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Many-Body Physics from Spin-Phonon Coupling in Rydberg Atom Arrays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SUGFWAOM

@misc{pith2026250716751,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Many-Body Physics from Spin-Phonon Coupling in Rydberg Atom Arrays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SUGFWAOM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.16751}
}
abstract

The rapid advancement of quantum science and technology has established Rydberg atom arrays as a premier platform for exploring quantum many-body physics with exceptional precision and controllability. Traditionally, each atom is modeled as a spin degree of freedom with its spatial motion effectively frozen. This simplification has facilitated the discovery of a rich variety of novel equilibrium and non-equilibrium phases, including $\mathbb{Z}_{\text{N}}$ symmetry-breaking orders and quantum scars. In this work, we investigate the consequences of incorporating atomic vibrations in optical tweezers, which give rise to spin-phonon coupling. For systems in thermal equilibrium, we find that this coupling leads to a new symmetry-breaking phase in the weak driving limit, as a result of induced three-spin interactions. Furthermore, we show that the violation of quantum thermalization in $\mathbb{Z}_2$-ordered states is suppressed when spin-phonon coupling is introduced. Our results are readily testable in state-of-the-art Rydberg atom array experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.16751 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. We present a schematic of the model considered in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. We present numerical results for the ground-state properties of the Hamiltonian ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. We present numerical results on the dynamical properties of the Hamiltonian ( [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

68 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    rTeIsXJBhHJLuQOz0MDCbezLRro=

    The Hamiltonian now becomes: ˆH = NX j=1 Ω 2 ˆU ˆσx j ˆU † − ∆ˆnj + ˆp2 j 2m + 1 2 mω2δˆr2 j ! + X i<j C6 ˆni ˆnj d6(j − i)6 − NX j=1 18C 2 6 d14mω2 ˆnj X k̸=0 ˆnj+k k7 !2 , (4) The last term represents multi-spin interactions gener- ated by the spin-phonon coupling. To further simplify the model, we introduce two ad- ditional approximations. First, we as...

    work page

  2. [2]

    We study the quench dynamics of the system start- ing from a Z2 initial state, |Ψ(0)⟩ = |↑↓↑↓ · · ·⟩. Evolving this state under the Hamiltonian (6) to time t, we compute the long-time average of the observable ⟨ˆσz i ⟩ as ¯σz i = lim T →∞ lim t0→∞ 1 T Z t0+T t0 ⟨Ψ(t)|ˆσz i |Ψ(t)⟩dt, (8) where |Ψ(t)⟩ = e−i ˆHt |Ψ(0)⟩. We compare this with the thermal equil...

    work page

  3. [3]

    We also compute the bipartite entanglement en- tropy of the eigenstates |En⟩ for a subsystem v consisting of Nv = 6 contiguous sites. Specif- ically, we partition the full system into v ∪ ¯v and calculate the von Neumann entropy Sv = 5 −Trv (ρv ln ρv) where the reduced density matrix is given by ρv = Tr ¯v|En⟩⟨En|. We plot the re- lation between the eigen...

    work page

  4. [4]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics (Pergamon Press, 1958)

    work page 1958

  5. [5]

    Wen, Colloquium: Zoo of quantum-topological phases of matter, Rev

    X.-G. Wen, Colloquium: Zoo of quantum-topological phases of matter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 041004 (2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    C.-K. Chiu, J. C. Y. Teo, A. P. Schnyder, and S. Ryu, Classification of topological quantum matter with sym- metries, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035005 (2016)

    2016

  7. [7]

    J. M. Deutsch, Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system, Phys. Rev. A 43, 2046 (1991)

    1991

  8. [8]

    Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys

    M. Srednicki, Chaos and quantum thermalization, Phys. Rev. E 50, 888 (1994). 6

    work page 1994

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Rigol, V

    M. Rigol, V. Dunjko, and M. Olshanii, Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum systems, Nature 452, 854 (2008), arXiv:0708.1324 [cond-mat.stat- mech]

    2008 arXiv

  2. [10]

    D’Alessio, Y

    L. D’Alessio, Y. Kafri, A. Polkovnikov, and M. Rigol, From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics, Adv. Phys. 65, 239 (2016), arXiv:1509.06411 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2016 arXiv

  3. [11]

    D. A. Abanin, E. Altman, I. Bloch, and M. Serbyn, Col- loquium: Many-body localization, thermalization, and entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 021001 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    Alet and N

    F. Alet and N. Laflorencie, Many-body localization: An introduction and selected topics, Comptes Ren- dus Physique 19, 498 (2018), arXiv:1711.03145 [cond- mat.str-el]

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Altman and R

    E. Altman and R. Vosk, Universal Dynamics and Renor- malization in Many-Body-Localized Systems, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 383 (2015), arXiv:1408.2834 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Nandkishore and D

    R. Nandkishore and D. A. Huse, Many body localiza- tion and thermalization in quantum statistical mechan- ics, Ann. Rev. Condensed Matter Phys. 6, 15 (2015), arXiv:1404.0686 [cond-mat.stat-mech]

    2015 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Serbyn, Z

    M. Serbyn, Z. Papi´ c, and D. A. Abanin, Local Con- servation Laws and the Structure of the Many-Body Localized States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 127201 (2013), arXiv:1305.5554 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    2013 arXiv

  8. [16]

    D. A. Huse, R. Nandkishore, and V. Oganesyan, Phe- nomenology of fully many-body-localized systems, Phys- ical Review B 90, 10.1103/physrevb.90.174202 (2014)

    2014 doi

  9. [17]

    Vosk and E

    R. Vosk and E. Altman, Many-Body Localization in One Dimension as a Dynamical Renormalization Group Fixed Point, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 067204 (2013), arXiv:1205.0026 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Schreiber, S

    M. Schreiber, S. S. Hodgman, P. Bordia, H. P. L¨ uschen, M. H. Fischer, R. Vosk, E. Altman, U. Schneider, and I. Bloch, Observation of many-body localization of inter- acting fermions in a quasirandom optical lattice, Science 349, 842 (2015), arXiv:1501.05661 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    J.-y. Choi, S. Hild, J. Zeiher, P. Schauß, A. Rubio- Abadal, T. Yefsah, V. Khemani, D. A. Huse, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Exploring the many-body localization transition in two dimensions, Science 352, 1547 (2016), arXiv:1604.04178 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2016 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Smith, A

    J. Smith, A. Lee, P. Richerme, B. Neyenhuis, P. W. Hess, P. Hauke, M. Heyl, D. A. Huse, and C. Mon- roe, Many-body localization in a quantum simulator with programmable random disorder, Nature Physics 12, 907 (2016), arXiv:1508.07026 [quant-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  13. [21]

    C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´ c, Quantum scarred eigenstates in a Rydberg atom chain: Entanglement, breakdown of thermalization, and stability to perturbations, Phys. Rev. B 98, 155134 (2018)

    2018

  14. [22]

    C. J. Turner, A. A. Michailidis, D. A. Abanin, M. Serbyn, and Z. Papi´ c, Weak ergodicity breaking from quantum many-body scars, Nature Physics 14, 745–749 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    W. W. Ho, S. Choi, H. Pichler, and M. D. Lukin, Pe- riodic orbits, entanglement, and quantum many-body scars in constrained models: Matrix product state ap- proach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 040603 (2019)

    2019

  16. [24]

    S. Choi, C. J. Turner, H. Pichler, W. W. Ho, A. A. Michailidis, Z. Papi´ c, M. Serbyn, M. D. Lukin, and D. A. Abanin, Emergent su(2) dynamics and perfect quantum many-body scars, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 220603 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    F. M. Surace, P. P. Mazza, G. Giudici, A. Lerose, A. Gambassi, and M. Dalmonte, Lattice gauge theories and string dynamics in rydberg atom quantum simula- tors, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021041 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    C. J. Turner, J.-Y. Desaules, K. Bull, and Z. Papi´ c, Cor- respondence principle for many-body scars in ultracold rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. X 11, 021021 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    Serbyn, D

    M. Serbyn, D. A. Abanin, and Z. Papi´ c, Quantum many- body scars and weak breaking of ergodicity, Nature Phys. 17, 675 (2021), arXiv:2011.09486 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Moudgalya, S

    S. Moudgalya, S. Rachel, B. A. Bernevig, and N. Reg- nault, Exact excited states of nonintegrable models, Phys. Rev. B 98, 235155 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Bull, J.-Y

    K. Bull, J.-Y. Desaules, and Z. Papi´ c, Quantum scars as embeddings of weakly broken lie algebra representations, Phys. Rev. B 101, 165139 (2020)

    2020

  22. [30]

    Lin and O

    C.-J. Lin and O. I. Motrunich, Exact Quantum Many- Body Scar States in the Rydberg-Blockaded Atom Chain, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 173401 (2019), arXiv:1810.00888 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2019 arXiv

  23. [31]

    D. K. Mark, C.-J. Lin, and O. I. Motrunich, Exact eigen- states in the Lesanovsky model, proximity to integrabil- ity and the PXP model, and approximate scar states, Phys. Rev. B 101, 094308 (2020), arXiv:1911.11305 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2020 arXiv

  24. [32]

    D. K. Mark, C.-J. Lin, and O. I. Motrunich, Unified structure for exact towers of scar states in the Affleck- Kennedy-Lieb-Tasaki and other models, Phys. Rev. B 101, 195131 (2020)

    2020

  25. [33]

    C.-J. Lin, A. Chandran, and O. I. Motrunich, Slow ther- malization of exact quantum many-body scar states un- der perturbations, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033044 (2020), arXiv:1910.07669 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [34]

    D. K. Mark and O. I. Motrunich, η -pairing states as true scars in an extended Hubbard model, Phys. Rev. B 102, 075132 (2020), arXiv:2004.13800 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2020 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Pan and H

    L. Pan and H. Zhai, Composite spin approach to the blockade effect in rydberg atom arrays, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L032037 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Cheng and H

    Y. Cheng and H. Zhai, Emergent U(1) lattice gauge the- ory in Rydberg atom arrays, Nature Rev. Phys. 6, 566 (2024), arXiv:2401.07708 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Saffman, T

    M. Saffman, T. G. Walker, and K. Mølmer, Quantum information with rydberg atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 2313 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Weimer, M

    H. Weimer, M. M¨ uller, I. Lesanovsky, P. Zoller, and H. P. B¨ uchler, A Rydberg quantum simulator, Nature Physics 6, 382 (2010), arXiv:0907.1657 [quant-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Labuhn, D

    H. Labuhn, D. Barredo, S. Ravets, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, T. Macr ` ı, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Tunable two- dimensional arrays of single rydberg atoms for realizing quantum ising models, Nature 534, 667–670 (2016)

    2016

  32. [40]

    Bernien et al., Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature 551, 579 (2017), arXiv:1707.04344 [quant-ph]

    H. Bernien et al., Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator, Nature 551, 579 (2017), arXiv:1707.04344 [quant-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Browaeys and T

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms, Nature Physics 16, 132 (2020), arXiv:2002.07413 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Ebadi et al., Quantum phases of matter on a 256- atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature 595, 227 (2021), arXiv:2012.12281 [quant-ph]

    S. Ebadi et al., Quantum phases of matter on a 256- atom programmable quantum simulator, Nature 595, 227 (2021), arXiv:2012.12281 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Scholl et al., Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromag- nets with hundreds of Rydberg atoms, Nature 595, 233 7 (2021), arXiv:2012.12268 [quant-ph]

    P. Scholl et al., Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromag- nets with hundreds of Rydberg atoms, Nature 595, 233 7 (2021), arXiv:2012.12268 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [44]

    X. Wu, X. Liang, Y. Tian, F. Yang, C. Chen, Y.-C. Liu, M. K. Tey, and L. You, A concise review of Rydberg atom based quantum computation and quantum simula- tion, Chin. Phys. B 30, 020305 (2021), arXiv:2012.10614 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Semeghini et al., Probing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simulator, Science 374, abi8794 (2021), arXiv:2104.04119 [quant-ph]

    G. Semeghini et al., Probing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simulator, Science 374, abi8794 (2021), arXiv:2104.04119 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    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

  39. [47]

    Bluvstein, A

    D. Bluvstein, A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Se- meghini, S. Ebadi, T. T. Wang, A. A. Michailidis, N. Maskara, W. W. Ho, S. Choi, M. Serbyn, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Controlling quantum many- body dynamics in driven rydberg atom arrays, Science 371, 135...

    2021

  40. [48]

    Morgado and S

    M. Morgado and S. Whitlock, Quantum simulation and computing with Rydberg-interacting qubits, A VS Quan- tum Sci. 3, 023501 (2021), arXiv:2011.03031 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Bluvstein et al., A quantum processor based on co- herent transport of entangled atom arrays, Nature 604, 451 (2022), arXiv:2112.03923 [quant-ph]

    D. Bluvstein et al., A quantum processor based on co- herent transport of entangled atom arrays, Nature 604, 451 (2022), arXiv:2112.03923 [quant-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    S. Ma, G. Liu, P. Peng, B. Zhang, S. Jandura, J. Claes, A. P. Burgers, G. Pupillo, S. Puri, and J. D. Thomp- son, High-fidelity gates and mid-circuit erasure con- version in an atomic qubit, Nature 622, 279 (2023), arXiv:2305.05493 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Scholl, A

    P. Scholl, A. L. Shaw, R. B.-S. Tsai, R. Finkelstein, J. Choi, and M. Endres, Erasure conversion in a high- fidelity Rydberg quantum simulator, Nature 622, 273 (2023), arXiv:2305.03406 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Singh, C

    K. Singh, C. E. Bradley, S. Anand, V. Ramesh, R. White, and H. Bernien, Mid-circuit correction of correlated phase errors using an array of spectator qubits, Science 380, ade5337 (2023), arXiv:2208.11716 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Bluvstein et al., Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays, Nature 626, 58 (2024), arXiv:2312.03982 [quant-ph]

    D. Bluvstein et al., Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays, Nature 626, 58 (2024), arXiv:2312.03982 [quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Zhang, H

    T. Zhang, H. Wang, W. Zhang, Y. Wang, A. Du, Z. Li, Y. Wu, C. Li, J. Hu, H. Zhai, and W. Chen, Observa- tion of near-critical kibble-zurek scaling in rydberg atom arrays (2025), arXiv:2505.07930 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2025 arXiv

  47. [55]

    P lodzie´ n, T

    M. P lodzie´ n, T. Sowi´ nski, and S. Kokkelmans, Simulat- ing polaron biophysics with rydberg atoms, Scientific Re- ports 8, 10.1038/s41598-018-27232-4 (2018)

    2018 doi

  48. [56]

    P. P. Mazza, R. Schmidt, and I. Lesanovsky, Vibrational dressing in kinetically constrained rydberg spin systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 033602 (2020)

    2020

  49. [57]

    Magoni, P

    M. Magoni, P. P. Mazza, and I. Lesanovsky, Phonon dressing of a facilitated one-dimensional Rydberg lattice gas, SciPost Phys. Core 5, 041 (2022), arXiv:2104.11160 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Magoni, R

    M. Magoni, R. Joshi, and I. Lesanovsky, Molecular dy- namics in rydberg tweezer arrays: Spin-phonon entangle- ment and jahn-teller effect, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 093002 (2023)

    2023

  51. [59]

    H. A. Jahn and E. Teller, Stability of Polyatomic Molecules in Degenerate Electronic States. I. Orbital De- generacy, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Se- ries A 161, 220 (1937)

    1937

  52. [60]

    H. A. Jahn, Stability of polyatomic molecules in degen- erate electronic states ii-spin degeneracy, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series a - Mathematical and Physical Sciences 164, 117 (1938)

    1938

  53. [61]

    Zhang, F

    S. Zhang, F. Robicheaux, and M. Saffman, Magic- wavelength optical traps for rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. A 84, 043408 (2011)

    2011

  54. [62]

    Lampen, H

    J. Lampen, H. Nguyen, L. Li, P. R. Berman, and A. Kuzmich, Long-lived coherence between ground and rydberg levels in a magic-wavelength lattice, Phys. Rev. A 98, 033411 (2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    Barredo, V

    D. Barredo, V. Lienhard, P. Scholl, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, T. Boulier, A. Browaeys, and T. Lahaye, Three- dimensional trapping of individual rydberg atoms in pon- deromotive bottle beam traps, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 023201 (2020)

    2020

  56. [64]

    I. S. Madjarov, J. P. Covey, A. L. Shaw, J. Choi, A. Kale, A. Cooper, H. Pichler, V. Schkolnik, J. R. Williams, and M. Endres, High-fidelity entanglement and detection of alkaline-earth Rydberg atoms, Nature Phys. 16, 857 (2020)

    2020

  57. [65]

    J. T. Wilson, S. Saskin, Y. Meng, S. Ma, R. Dilip, A. P. Burgers, and J. D. Thompson, Trapping alkaline earth rydberg atoms optical tweezer arrays, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 033201 (2022)

    2022

  58. [66]

    Z. Yao, L. Pan, S. Liu, and H. Zhai, Quantum many- body scars and quantum criticality, Phys. Rev. B 105, 125123 (2022)

    2022

  59. [67]

    Zhang, D

    S.-Y. Zhang, D. Yuan, T. Iadecola, S. Xu, and D.-L. Deng, Extracting quantum many-body scarred eigen- states with matrix product states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 020402 (2023)

    2023

  60. [68]

    ˇSibali´ c, J

    N. ˇSibali´ c, J. D. Pritchard, C. S. Adams, and K. J. Weatherill, ARC: An open-source library for calculating properties of alkali Rydberg atoms, Computer Physics Communications 220, 319 (2017), arXiv:1612.05529 [physics.atom-ph]

    2017 arXiv

Pith tools

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