Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 57 references

Strongly tilted field induced fractional quantized-drift in non-interacting system

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single non-interacting particle in a tilted modulated lattice can drift a fraction of a lattice constant per cycle, with the fraction equal to the average Chern number of the bands it tunnels through.

desk verdict Plausible mechanism for non-interacting fractional quantized drift, but the central factorization in Eq. (B7) is unjustified and needs repair before this can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.06832 v1 pith:7LXT5YCF submitted 2025-09-08 cond-mat.quant-gas

Bo Zhu , Zhi Tan , Huilin Gong , Honghua Zhong , Xin-You Lü , Xiaoguang Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gas PACS 03.65.Vf67.85.-d
keywords fractionalquantizeddriftnon-interactingtopologicalsystemsLandau-ZenertunnelingRabioscillationsChernnumbertime-modulatedsuperlatticetilt-inducedtransportultracoldatomsinopticallattices
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

This paper claims that fractional quantized drift, typically associated with interacting topological systems, can occur in a completely non-interacting system: a quantum particle in a time-modulated optical superlattice subjected to a static tilt. When the tilt is weak, the particle remains in one band and its per-cycle drift is an integer Chern number; when the tilt is strong, Landau-Zener tunneling induces Rabi oscillations between several low-lying bands, and the one-cycle-averaged drift becomes a fraction equal to the arithmetic mean of those bands' Chern numbers. The authors demonstrate this with concrete examples producing fractional drifts of 1/3 and 1/2, controlled only by lattice periods and tilt strength. If correct, this would mean interactions are not required to produce fractional quantized responses, and the drift could serve as a direct, tunable topological marker.

What carries the argument

The key object is the reduced Chern number, defined as the ratio of the one-cycle-averaged drift displacement to the lattice period. The underlying mechanism couples a time-modulated superlattice (with periods d1 and d2) to a static gradient potential (tilt F). The tilt and modulation make the two-dimensional Brillouin-zone parameters (K_x, K_y) become time-dependent, so the instantaneous band structure sweeps out a 2D parameter space. Strong tilt drives Landau-Zener tunneling between nearly degenerate low-lying bands, producing Rabi oscillations whose time-averaged occupations equalize to 1/ξ. The central identity equating the averaged drift to the average Chern number is derived by factori

What would settle it

Compute the exact one-cycle displacement for the parameters of Fig. 2 using the full time-dependent wave packet without the factorization of Eq. (B7), but with equal average occupations enforced artificially (e.g., by post-processing the trajectory); if Δx(3T)/(3L) deviates measurably from (C_1+C_2+C_3)/3 = 1/3, the factorization is invalid. Alternatively, choose an initial quasimomentum k0 where F_n(k0, t) varies strongly within one period and check whether the drift remains 1/3; if it does not, the claimed k0-independence fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is captured by Eq. (7): the reduced Chern number C^red_sum = Δx(ξT)/(qLξ) equals (1/ξ) Σ_{n=1}^{ξ} C_n, where Δx(ξT) is the displacement of a wave packet after ξ periods of the time-modulated lattice, and C_n are the Chern numbers of the ξ bands involved in Landau-Zener tunneling. This holds when the average occupation probability of each participating band is equal, P̄_n = 1/ξ, a condition the authors verify numerically for strong tilt. For their representative parameters, weak tilt gives C^red_sum = -1 (integer drift), while strong tilt gives C^red_sum = (C_1 + C_2 + C_3)/3 = 1/3 (fractional drift). The paper further shows that by changing the lattice periods (e.g., d1=2/

Load-bearing premise

The central result relies on the step where the time-varying occupation probability P_n(t) is pulled out of the integral with the Berry curvature F_n(t), treating them as effectively constant or uncorrelated; this approximation is least trustworthy near avoided crossings, where Landau-Zener tunneling actually happens, and the accompanying claim that the dispersion contribution integrates to exactly zero also rests on a periodic equilibrium assumption.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Fractional quantized drift can be realized in non-interacting ultracold atoms, removing the need for strong particle interactions or mean-field nonlinearity.
  • The tilt strength acts as a switch: below a threshold the drift is an integer Chern number, above it the drift becomes a fractional average, offering an experimentally controllable topological transport knob.
  • By adjusting the periods d1 and d2 of the superlattice, the denominator ξ of the fraction can be changed, allowing design of fractional drifts such as 1/3 and 1/2.
  • The measured drift provides a quantitative route to extract Chern numbers of multiple bands: the fractional value equals the average of the Chern numbers of all bands participating in Landau-Zener tunneling.
  • Because the effect persists for an arbitrary initial quasimomentum (under the stated adiabatic sampling condition), the drift is robust to band-structure details and initial-state preparation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One direct testable extension is to probe the crossover between the integer and fractional plateaus: the value of the drift in the transition region should reflect the incomplete Rabi oscillation averaging, which the paper does not characterize analytically.
  • The factorization assumption (Eq. B7) implies that if the occupation probabilities and Berry curvatures are engineered to be strongly correlated in time, the fractional quantization may break down even when the equal-occupation condition P̄_n = 1/ξ is satisfied; this is a regime not explored in the paper.
  • If this mechanism generalizes beyond the specific superlattice model, other driven non-interacting platforms (photonic waveguides, acoustic lattices) might display fractional quantized responses, potentially broadening the experimental landscape for topological metrology.
  • The equal-occupation condition is the essential ingredient; any perturbation that biases the Rabi oscillations (e.g., asymmetric coupling between bands) would shift the fractional value, making the plateau width in tilt strength a sensitive probe of the tunneling dynamics.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies a single noninteracting particle in a one-dimensional time-modulated superlattice with a constant tilt, maps the driven dynamics to a static two-dimensional Hamiltonian, and computes Chern numbers. It claims that for weak tilt the one-cycle drift is an integer equal to the Chern number of the occupied band, while for strong tilt Landau-Zener tunneling and Rabi oscillations among the lowest ξ bands produce equal average occupations and a fractional drift Δx(ξT)/(qLξ) = (1/ξ)∑_{n=1}^{ξ} C_n. Numerical wave-packet simulations are presented for a 1/3 drift (Fig. 2) and a 1/2 drift (Fig. 4), and the occupation probabilities are shown in Figs. 3 and 5. The paper concludes that this is a new non-interacting realization of fractional quantized response controlled by tilt strength.

Significance. If the central formula Eq. (7) were rigorously established, the result would be significant: it would show that fractional quantized drift can arise in a single-particle, non-interacting system via Landau-Zener mediated multi-band occupation, with the fraction determined by average Chern numbers. The numerical simulations are concrete and the Chern-number computation from the static two-dimensional Hamiltonian is standard. The direction and plateaus in Figs. 2(f) and 4(c) are cleanly demonstrated. However, the general claim is currently overreaching: the derivation of Eq. (7) contains an unjustified factorization of a time integral, an unproven cancellation of the dispersion term, and an equal-occupation input extracted from the same dynamics that are meant to be explained. These are not presentation issues; they are load-bearing for the paper's central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Appendix B, Eq. (B7); main-text Eq. (6)] The step ∫_0^{ξT} P_n(t) F_n(k0,t) dt = P̄_n(ξT) ∫_0^{ξT} F_n(k0,t) dt is not justified. Common periodicity of P_n and F_n makes each factor periodic, but it does not make their product average equal to the product of averages. The cross term ∫ (P_n - P̄_n)(F_n - F̄_n) dt is generically nonzero, and near avoided crossings P_n changes rapidly precisely where F_n is also nonuniform. Without an estimate showing this correlation term vanishes in the stated limit, Eq. (7) does not follow from the semiclassical equations. The numerical examples may still be consistent with the formula, but they do not prove the general factorization.
  2. [Main text, text before Eq. (6) and Eq. (5)] The paper asserts that the integral of the dispersion velocity term Σ_n P_n(t) ∂ε_n(k0,t)/∂k over the period T is exactly zero because the energy is periodic. This is only true if the occupation probabilities are constant (or have a special symmetry). For time-dependent P_n(t), the weighted integral is not zero in general; an integration by parts gives boundary terms plus ∫ Ṗ_n ε_n dt, and P_n is not proved to be T-periodic after non-adiabatic Landau-Zener transitions. This term is never computed in the manuscript, yet its exact cancellation is needed for Eq. (6).
  3. [Eq. (7) and Figs. 3(b), 5(c), 5(d)] The fractional value (1/ξ)Σ C_n relies on the input P̄_n(ξT)=1/ξ, which is read off from the numerical time evolution of the same wave packet whose drift is then predicted. The equal-occupation condition is not derived from the lattice parameters and tilt strength, nor is its basin of validity specified. Thus Eq. (7) is partly circular as a predictive formula: the fraction is an input obtained from the simulation, not an independent prediction. A complete argument should either derive P̄_n=1/ξ from the Landau-Zener dynamics or clearly state it as an additional empirical assumption, with the resulting statement limited to the parameter regime where the assumption holds.
  4. [Appendix C, Eqs. (C1)-(C3)] The proof that the one-period integral of the Berry curvature is independent of the initial quasi-momentum k0 is not sound. In Eq. (C1), shifting the integration variable and the momentum argument amounts to an identity of the form I(k)=I(k+Δk) after relabeling; it does not establish the claimed relation unless one already assumes the integral is independent of k. The Hamiltonian has two arguments, Kx=k-Ft and Ky=ωt, so the invariance of ∫_0^T F_n(k,t)dt under k shifts requires a careful statement about simultaneous shifts in k and t and about the periodicity in Ky. The argument as written does not provide that. Since the k0-independence is used to replace the k-integral in the Chern number by the time integral at a single k0, this gap also affects Eq. (B4) and hence Eq. (B9).
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 2 and caption] The text says weak tilt is shown in Figs. 2(a) and (c), and large tilt in Figs. 2(b) and (d); the caption assigns (a)/(b) to weak tilt and (c)/(d) to large tilt. Please correct the cross-reference.
  2. [Appendix B, Eq. (B2)] The relation F_n(Kx,Ky)=(1/ω)F_n(k,t) deserves a few more steps and a sign check, since it is central to converting the static Chern number into the time-integral formula. The notation ∂t H in the Berry-curvature expression should also be defined explicitly.
  3. [Throughout] There are typographical errors and slightly nonstandard phrasing: 'enegy' in the abstract, 'weal' before 'tilt strength', 'consisting' for 'consistent', and 'tapped' in the introduction. The authors should also explain why 'one-cycle-averaged' is used for the drift over ξT, since ξ can be larger than 1; this is potentially confusing.
  4. [Eqs. (B3)-(B4) and main text near Eq. (7)] The parameter q is introduced in Eq. (B3) and then set to q=1 in the main text. Since the section on Chern numbers uses both q and p, the precise integer relations (q=p, Tm/TF=p/q, etc.) should be stated more carefully to avoid ambiguity in the final formula.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Fractional-drift 'prediction' re-inserts the numerically observed equal occupation via an unjustified product-of-averages factorization in Eq. (B7).

  1. fitted input called prediction [Main text, paragraph after Fig. 3; Eq. (7)]
    "It is found that the average probability of occupying three lowest bands is equal after integer period 3T, that is ¯Pn(3T) = 1/3T R 3T 0 Pn(t)dt = 1/3, for n=1,2,3. Thus, according to the Eq.(7) and ξ=3, one can obtain Chern number Cred sum = ∆x(3T)/(3L) = (C1 + C2 + C3)/3 = 1/3, which means that the one-cycle-averaged drift displacement is fraction 1/3, consisting with the result of dynamic evolution in Fig.2(e)."

    The equal average occupation P̄_n=1/3 is not derived or independently predicted; it is read off from the same numerical wave-packet dynamics that also produce ∆x(3T). Inserting this measured input into Eq. (7) returns the fraction 1/3, so the 'prediction' of the fractional drift is the input value expressed in new notation. The Chern numbers are independently computed from the static Hamiltonian, but they do not supply the fraction 1/3; the equal-occupation input does. The numerical agreement therefore verifies the self-consistency of the measured occupations with the measured drift, rather than providing a parameter-free derivation of the fractional response.

  2. other [Appendix B, Eq. (B7); mirrored in main-text Eq. (6)]
    "∆x(ξT) = P∞ n=1 R ξT 0 Pn(t)Fn(k0, t)dt = P∞ n=1 1 ξT R ξT 0 Pn(t)dt R ξT 0 Fn(k0, t)dt = P∞ n=1 ¯Pn(ξT) R ξT 0 Fn(k0, t)dt"

    This step replaces the time average of the product P_n(t)F_n(k0,t) by the product of the time averages, citing only the common period ξT. Common periodicity does not remove the correlation (P_n−P̄_n)(F_n−F̄_n); P_n varies strongly through Rabi/Landau-Zener transitions exactly where F_n is nonuniform. The equality is thus an extra zero-correlation assumption, and it is the step that builds the P̄_n-weighted average of Chern numbers into the drift before Eq. (7) is stated. The subsequent derivation therefore does not supply independent content beyond this factorization; the final formula is effectively assumed at this point.

full rationale

The paper is self-contained in important respects: the Chern numbers are computed independently from the static Hamiltonian (A7)/(B1), and the wave-packet dynamics are obtained directly from the Schrödinger equation. There is no load-bearing self-citation or imported uniqueness theorem. The circular content is narrower but real. In Eq. (6)/(B7), the product P_n(t)F_n(k0,t) is approximated as P̄_n(ξT)∫F_n(k0,t)dt; this is not a consequence of the stated periodicity, but an additional zero-correlation assumption. Given that factorization, the fractional value in Eq. (7) is fixed by the average occupations P̄_n. Those occupations are then taken from the same numerics that produce Δx (Figs. 3b and 5), so the agreement Δx(3T)/(3L)=1/3 is partly the input re-expressed. The Chern numbers are independent and determine the direction and combination, but they do not predict the 1/3 equal-occupation condition. The cancellation of the dispersion term is also asserted from periodicity without evaluating ∫P_n ∂ε_n/∂k dt. Overall this is partial circularity: one measured input (equal occupations) is effectively relabeled as a prediction, while the independent Chern-number content prevents the paper from being fully circular. Score 5.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central formula rests on three ingredients: (i) independently computed Chern numbers of the static 2D model, (ii) the numerically observed equal occupations P_bar_n = 1/xi, and (iii) an uncontrolled factorization of the time integral of P_n F_n. Ingredient (i) is externally grounded; ingredients (ii) and (iii) are supplied by the paper itself, the second as a numerical fit and the third as an unproved approximation, which is why the derivation of Eq. (7) is not fully self-contained.

free parameters (5)
  • tilt strength F = F=0.12 (integer plateau), F=1.8 (1/3 plateau)
    Control parameter scanned numerically; the plateau thresholds and edges in Fig. 2(f) are read off the numerics, not derived from the theory.
  • number of bands xi involved in Landau-Zener tunneling = xi=3 (d1=1/2, d2=2/3), xi=2 (d1=2/3, d2=1)
    Inferred post hoc from which band gaps are small and from the numerically observed equal-occupation sets; the theory gives no rule for xi.
  • lattice depths and periods (tau1, tau2, d1, d2) = tau1=tau2=25; d1=1/2, d2=2/3 and d1=2/3, d2=1
    Hand-chosen to realize band structures with the desired small gaps and Chern-number sums; the fractions 1/3 and 1/2 are designed by these choices.
  • modulation frequency omega = omega=0.01 (1/3 case), omega=0.005 (1/2 case)
    Chosen small to satisfy omega << 1 and to set the T_m/T_F ratio entering the uniform-sampling assumption and the Landau-Zener adiabatic parameter.
  • equal occupation P_bar_n = 1/xi = 1/3 in Fig. 2 case; 1/2 in Fig. 4 case
    Numerically observed (Figs. 3(b) and 5) and asserted as the input to Eq. (7); not derived from the dynamics. This is the load-bearing numerical input.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Semiclassical group velocity v_g = sum_n P_n(t)(d eps_n/dk + F_n(k,t)) and displacement dx(tau) = integral v_g dt (Eqs. 5-6).
    Standard wave-packet dynamics in band theory; invoked without proof in the main text before Eq. (5).
  • domain assumption The driven tilted 1D system maps to a static 2D Hamiltonian on a torus via Kx = k - F t, Ky = omega t, with conventional band Chern numbers (Eq. 4, Appendix B).
    Standard Thouless-pump mapping; valid only when the trajectory samples the torus as assumed, formalized by T_m/T_F -> 0 or much greater than 1.
  • domain assumption The integral of Berry curvature over one period, integral_0^T F_n(k0,t) dt, is independent of the initial quasi-momentum k0 when T_m/T_F -> 0 or much greater than 1 (Appendix C).
    Used to drop the k-integral in Eq. (B4). The Appendix C argument is informal and valid only in the extreme ratio limits.
  • ad hoc to paper Factorization of the time integral: integral P_n(t) F_n(k0,t) dt = P_bar_n integral F_n(k0,t) dt (Eq. B7).
    Unjustified for Rabi-oscillating P_n(t); no correlation estimate is given. This step is load-bearing for the central formula.
  • ad hoc to paper Equal long-time occupations P_bar_n(xi T) = 1/xi for the xi involved bands.
    Observed numerically (Figs. 3 and 5), not derived; the fractional result depends on it.
invented entities (1)
  • reduced Chern number C^red_sum
    purpose: New bookkeeping quantity that encodes the fractional drift as (1/xi) sum C_n; not a new physical object.
    Defined in Eq. (7)/B9 from the drift and xi; its only handle is the drift it purports to compute, so it carries no independent falsifiable content.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Strongly tilted field induced fractional quantized-drift in non-interacting system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7LXT5YCF

@misc{pith2026250906832,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Strongly tilted field induced fractional quantized-drift in non-interacting system},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7LXT5YCF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.06832}
}
read the original abstract

Fractional quantized response appears to be a distinctive characteristic in interacting topological systems. Here, we discover a novel phenomenon of tilt-induced fractional quantize drift in non-interacting system constructed by a time-modulated superlattice subjected to a external time-independent gradient potential. Depending on the tilt strength, Rabi oscillations between adjacent lowest enegy bands caused by Landau-Zener tunneling, can induce that the one-cycle-averaged drift displacement is fraction, which is relate to the ratio of the sum of Chern numbers of multiple bands to the number of energy bands involved in Landau Zener tunneling. As representative examples, we construct fractional (1/3, 1/2) quantize drift only via adjusting period of lattice. The numerical simulations allow us to consider a realistic setup amenable of an experimental realization. Our findings will expand the research implications of both fractional quantize response and topological materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.06832 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) The complete two-dimensional energy band in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Tilt-induced integral and fractional quantized-drift in a time-modulated superlattice with a gradient potential. (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a) and (b) The corresponding occupation probabil [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The average occupation probability P¯n(t) as a func￾tion of time for different tilt strengths. (a) and (c) The su￾perlattice potential has fractional drift 1/3. (b) and (d) The superlattice potential has fractional drift 1/2. The other pa￾rameters are chosen as τ1 = τ2…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Two- dimensional magnetotransport in the extreme quantum limit,

    D. C. Tsui, H. L. Stormer, and A. C. Gossard, “Two- dimensional magnetotransport in the extreme quantum limit,” Phys. Rev. Lett.48, 1559 (1982)

    work page 1982

  2. [2]

    Anomalous quantum hall effect: an in- compressible quantum fluid with fractionally charged ex- citations,

    R. B. Laughlin, “Anomalous quantum hall effect: an in- compressible quantum fluid with fractionally charged ex- citations,” Phys. Rev. Lett.50, 1395 (1983)

    work page 1983

  3. [3]

    Fractional quantization of the hall effect: A hierarchy of incompressible quantum fluid states,

    F. D. M. Haldane, “Fractional quantization of the hall effect: A hierarchy of incompressible quantum fluid states,” Phys. Rev, Lett.51, 605 (1983)

    work page 1983

  4. [4]

    Composite-fermion approach for the frac- tional quantum hall effect,

    J. K. Jain, “Composite-fermion approach for the frac- tional quantum hall effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 199 (1989)

    work page 1989

  5. [5]

    Interferometric measurements of many- body topological invariants using mobile impurities,

    F. Grusdt, N. Y. Yao, D. Abanin, M. Fleischhauer, and E. Demler, “Interferometric measurements of many- body topological invariants using mobile impurities,” Nat. Commun.7, 11994 (2016)

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    Time-of-flight measurements as a possible method to observe anyonic statistics,

    R. O. Umucalılar, E. Macaluso, T. Comparin, and I. Carusotto, “Time-of-flight measurements as a possible method to observe anyonic statistics,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 230403 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Charge and statistics of lattice quasiholes from density measure- ments: A tree tensor network study,

    E. Macaluso, T. Comparin, R. O. Umucalılar, M. Ger- ster, S. Montangero, M. Rizzi, and I. Carusotto, “Charge and statistics of lattice quasiholes from density measure- ments: A tree tensor network study,” Phys. Rev. Res.2, 013145 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Detecting fractional chern insulators through circular dichroism,

    C. Repellin and N. Goldman, “Detecting fractional chern insulators through circular dichroism,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 166801 (2019)

    work page 2019

Show all 57 references
  1. [9]

    Equivalence of the resonating-valence-bond and fractional quantum hall states,

    V. Kalmeyer and R. B. Laughlin, “Equivalence of the resonating-valence-bond and fractional quantum hall states,” Phys. Rev. Lett.59, 2095 (1987)

  2. [10]

    Bosonic fractional quantum hall states on a finite cylin- der,

    P. Rosson, M. Lubasch, M. Kiffner, and D. Jaksch, “Bosonic fractional quantum hall states on a finite cylin- der,” Phys. Rev. A99, 033603 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Fractional quantum hall effect of hard-core bosons in topological flat bands,

    Y. F. Wang, Z. C. Gu, C. D. Gong, and D. N. Sheng, “Fractional quantum hall effect of hard-core bosons in topological flat bands,” Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 146803 (2011)

    2011

  4. [12]

    Generic wave-function description of fractional quantum anomalous hall states and fractional topological insulators,

    X. L. Qi, “Generic wave-function description of fractional quantum anomalous hall states and fractional topological insulators,” Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 126803 (2011)

    2011

  5. [13]

    Theory of phonon spectroscopy in the fractional quantum hall regime,

    K. A. Benedict, R. K. Hills, and C. J. Mellor, “Theory of phonon spectroscopy in the fractional quantum hall regime,” Phys. Rev. B60, 10984 (1999)

    1999

  6. [14]

    Magneto-roton theory of collective excitations in the fractional quantum hall effect,

    S. M. Girvin, A. H. MacDonald, and P. M. Platzman, “Magneto-roton theory of collective excitations in the fractional quantum hall effect,” Phys. Rev. B33, 2481 (1986)

    1986

  7. [15]

    Fractional quantum hall effect in a periodic potential,

    A. Kol and N. Read, “Fractional quantum hall effect in a periodic potential,” Phys. Rev. B48, 8890 (1993)

    1993

  8. [16]

    Fractional quantum hall effect in optical lattices,

    M. Hafezi, A. S. Sørensen, E. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, “Fractional quantum hall effect in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. A76, 023613 (2007)

    2007

  9. [17]

    Fractional quantum Hall states of atoms in optical lattices,

    A. S. Sorensen, E. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, “Fractional quantum Hall states of atoms in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 086803 (2005)

    2005

  10. [18]

    Frac- tional quantum hall physics in topological flat bands,

    S. A. Parameswaran, R. Roy, and S. L. Sondhi, “Frac- tional quantum hall physics in topological flat bands,” C. R. Phys.14, 816–839 (2013)

    2013

  11. [19]

    Topological flat band models and fractional chern insulators,

    E. J. Bergholtz and Z. Liu, “Topological flat band models and fractional chern insulators,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. B27, 1330017 (2013). 6

    2013

  12. [20]

    Fate of fractional quantum hall states in open quan- tum systems: Characterization of correlated topological states for the full liouvillian,

    T. Yoshida, K. Kudo, H. Katsura, and Y. Hatsugai, “Fate of fractional quantum hall states in open quan- tum systems: Characterization of correlated topological states for the full liouvillian,” Phys. Rev. Res.2, 033428 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    Nonlinear optics in the frac- tional quantum hall regime,

    P. Kn¨ uppel, S. Ravets, M. Kroner, S. F¨ alt, W. Wegschei- der, and A. Imamoglu, “Nonlinear optics in the frac- tional quantum hall regime,” Nature572, 91–94 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    Observation of laughlin states made of light,

    L. W. Clark, N. Schine, C. Baum, N. Y. Jia, and J. Si- mon, “Observation of laughlin states made of light,” Na- ture582, 41–45 (2020)

    2020

  15. [23]

    Chiral ground-state currents of interacting photons in a synthetic magnetic field,

    P. Roushan, C. Neill, A. Megrant, Y. Chen, R. Bab- bush, R. Barends, B. Campbell, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth,et al., “Chiral ground-state currents of interacting photons in a synthetic magnetic field,” Nat. Phys.13, 146–151 (2017)

    2017

  16. [24]

    Engineering topological many-body materi- als in microwave cavity arrays,

    B. M. Anderson, R. Ma, C. Owens, D. I. Schuster, and J. Simon, “Engineering topological many-body materi- als in microwave cavity arrays,” Phys. Rev. X6, 041043 (2016)

    2016

  17. [25]

    Creating, probing, and manipulating frac- tionally charged excitations of fractional chern insulators in optical lattices,

    M. Raˇ ci¯ unas, F. N. ¨Unal, E. Anisimovas, and A. Eckardt, “Creating, probing, and manipulating frac- tionally charged excitations of fractional chern insulators in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. A98, 063621 (2018)

    2018

  18. [26]

    Realization of the Hofstadter Hamiltonian with ultracold atoms in optical lattices,

    M. Aidelsburger, M. Atala, M. Lohse, J. T. Barreiro, B. Paredes, and I. Bloch, “Realization of the Hofstadter Hamiltonian with ultracold atoms in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  19. [27]

    Reaching fractional quan- tum hall states with optical flux lattices,

    N. R. Cooper and J. Dalibard, “Reaching fractional quan- tum hall states with optical flux lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 185301 (2013)

    2013

  20. [28]

    Realization of fractional chern insulators in the thin-torus limit with ultracold bosons,

    F. Grusdt and M. H¨ oning, “Realization of fractional chern insulators in the thin-torus limit with ultracold bosons,” Phys. Rev. A90, 053623 (2014)

    2014

  21. [29]

    Realizing and adiabatically preparing bosonic integer and fractional quantum hall states in op- tical lattices,

    Y. C. He, F. Grusdt, A. Kaufman, M. Greiner, and A. Vishwanath, “Realizing and adiabatically preparing bosonic integer and fractional quantum hall states in op- tical lattices,” Phys. Rev. B96, 201103 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Phase transitions and adi- abatic preparation of a fractional chern insulator in a bo- son cold-atom model,

    J. Motruk and F. Pollmann, “Phase transitions and adi- abatic preparation of a fractional chern insulator in a bo- son cold-atom model,” Phys. Rev. B96, 165107 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    Creat- ing a bosonic fractional quantum hall state by pairing fermions,

    C. Repellin, T. Yefsah, and A. Sterdyniak, “Creat- ing a bosonic fractional quantum hall state by pairing fermions,” Phys. Rev. B96, 161111 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    Bosonic frac- tional quantum hall states in driven optical lattices,

    A. Hudomal, N. Regnault, and I. Vasi´ c, “Bosonic frac- tional quantum hall states in driven optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. A100, 053624 (2019)

    2019

  25. [33]

    High-field fractional quan- tum hall effect in optical lattices,

    R. N. Palmer and D. Jaksch, “High-field fractional quan- tum hall effect in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 180407 (2006)

    2006

  26. [34]

    Edge excitations of bosonic fractional quantum hall phases in optical lattices,

    J. A. Kj¨ all and J. E. Moore, “Edge excitations of bosonic fractional quantum hall phases in optical lattices,” Phys. Rev. B85, 235137 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    Edge excitations in fractional chern insulators,

    W. W. Luo, W. C. Chen, Y. F. Wang, and C. D. Gong, “Edge excitations in fractional chern insulators,” Phys. Rev. B88, 161109 (2013)

    2013

  28. [36]

    Topological fractional pumping with alkaline-earth-like atoms in synthetic lattices,

    L. Taddia, E. Cornfeld, D. Rossini, L. Mazza, E. Sela, and R. Fazio, “Topological fractional pumping with alkaline-earth-like atoms in synthetic lattices,” Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 230402 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    Charge excitation dynamics in bosonic fractional chern insulators,

    X. Y. Dong, J. Grushin, A. G .and Motruk, and F. Poll- mann, “Charge excitation dynamics in bosonic fractional chern insulators,” Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 086401 (2018)

    2018

  30. [38]

    Topological quantum matter with ultracold gases in optical lattices,

    N. Goldman, J. C. Budich, and P. Zoller, “Topological quantum matter with ultracold gases in optical lattices,” Nat. Phys.12, 639–645 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    Topo- logical bands for ultracold atoms,

    N. R. Cooper, J. Dalibard, and I. B. Spielman, “Topo- logical bands for ultracold atoms,” Rev. Mod. Phys.91, 015005 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    Observation of a symmetry-protected topological phase of interacting bosons with rydberg atoms,

    S. De L´ es´ eleuc, V. Lienhard, P. Scholl, D. Barredo, S. Weber, N. Lang, H. P. B¨ uchler, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, “Observation of a symmetry-protected topological phase of interacting bosons with rydberg atoms,” Science365, 775–780 (2019)

    2019

  33. [41]

    Experimentally accessible scheme for a fractional chern insulator in rydberg atoms,

    S. Weber, R. Bai, N. Makki, J. M¨ ogerle, T. Lahaye, A. Browaeys, M. Daghofer, N. Lang, and H. P. B¨ uchler, “Experimentally accessible scheme for a fractional chern insulator in rydberg atoms,” PRX Quantum3, 030302 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Fractional chern insulator with rydberg-dressed neutral atoms,

    Y. Zhao and X. F. Shi, “Fractional chern insulator with rydberg-dressed neutral atoms,” Phys. Rev. A108, 053107 (2023)

    2023

  35. [43]

    Fractional chern insulators of few bosons in a box: Hall plateaus from center-of-mass drifts and density profiles,

    C. Repellin, J. Leonard, and N. Goldman, “Fractional chern insulators of few bosons in a box: Hall plateaus from center-of-mass drifts and density profiles,” Phys. Rev. A102, 063316 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    Detecting fractional Chern insula- tors in optical lattices through quantized displacement,

    J. Motruk and I. Na, “Detecting fractional Chern insula- tors in optical lattices through quantized displacement,” Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 236401 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    Quantized fractional thouless pumping of soli- tons,

    M. J¨ urgensen, S. Mukherjee, C. J¨ org, and M. C. Rechts- man, “Quantized fractional thouless pumping of soli- tons,” Nat. Phys.19, 420–426 (2023)

    2023

  38. [46]

    Nonlinear thouless pumping: solitons and transport breakdown,

    Q. D. Fu, P. Wang, Y. V. Kartashov, V. V. Konotop, and F. W. Ye, “Nonlinear thouless pumping: solitons and transport breakdown,” Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 154101 (2022)

    2022

  39. [47]

    Two-dimensional nonlinear thouless pumping of matter waves,

    Q. D. Fu, P. Wang, Y. V. Kartashov, V. V. Konotop, and F. W. Ye, “Two-dimensional nonlinear thouless pumping of matter waves,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 183901 (2022)

    2022

  40. [48]

    Nonlinearity-induced thouless pumping of solitons,

    Y. L. Tao, J. H. Wang, and Y. Xu, “Nonlinearity-induced thouless pumping of solitons,” arXiv:2409.19515 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Nonlinearity- induced fractional thouless pumping of solitons,

    Y. L. Tao, Y. P. Zhang, and Y. Xu, “Nonlinearity- induced fractional thouless pumping of solitons,” arXiv:2502.06131 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Quantum theory of fractional topological pumping of lattice solitons,

    J. Bohm, H. Gerlitz, C. Jorg, and M. Fleischhauer, “Quantum theory of fractional topological pumping of lattice solitons,” arXiv:2506.00090 (2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    Dynamical control of matter-wave tunneling in periodic potentials,

    H. Lignier, C. Sias, D. Ciampini, Y. Singh, A. Zen- esini, O. Morsch, and E. Arimondo, “Dynamical control of matter-wave tunneling in periodic potentials,” Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 220403 (2007)

    2007

  44. [52]

    C., sias, o., morsch, d. ciampini, and e. arimondo,

    A Zenesini and H Lignier, “C., sias, o., morsch, d. ciampini, and e. arimondo,” Laser Phys.20, 1182–1189 (2010)

    2010

  45. [53]

    Dynamics of bose- einstein condensates in optical lattices,

    O. Morsch and M. Oberthaler, “Dynamics of bose- einstein condensates in optical lattices,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 179 (2006)

    2006

  46. [54]

    Optically induced lensing effect on a bose-einstein condensate expanding in a moving lattice,

    L. Fallani, F. S. Cataliotti, J. Catani, C. Fort, M. Mod- ugno, M. Zawada, and M. Inguscio, “Optically induced lensing effect on a bose-einstein condensate expanding in a moving lattice,” Phys. Rev. Lett.91, 240405 (2003)

    2003

  47. [55]

    Geometrical pumping with a Bose-Einstein condensate,

    H. I Lu, M. Schemmer, L. M. Aycock, D. Genkina, S. Sugawa, and I. B. Spielman, “Geometrical pumping with a Bose-Einstein condensate,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 200402 (2016)

    2016

  48. [56]

    Landau- Zener-St¨ uckelberg interferometry,

    S. N. Shevchenko, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, “Landau- Zener-St¨ uckelberg interferometry,” Phys. Rep.492, 1 7 (2010)

    2010

  49. [57]

    Nonlinear Bloch-Zener oscillations for Bose-Einstein condensates in a Lieb optical lattice,

    P. He and Z. Li, “Nonlinear Bloch-Zener oscillations for Bose-Einstein condensates in a Lieb optical lattice,” N. J. Phys.22(2020). Appendix A: The Hamiltonian in momentum space For the system without tilt (V 1(x) = 0), the Schr¨ odinger equation satisfied by the instantaneous...

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.